Re: [Amc-list] Vibration in '63 American 440-H

[Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Yeah, a flurry all right.
> Makes me want to go try and talk Clyde Tewell out of his 62 [or is it 63?] 440H car...
> Man, last time I saw it, it was to die for.
> Mint 9K on the clock, has the perfect White with red trim, red interior too.
> 196 ohv, auto with console and column shift.
> 
> It doubtlessly needs a complete mechanical lube and inspection. Might smoke and use a tad of oil too.
> It froze in the 80's while in storage and my dad had to take the head off to free it. It had some pitting if I recall but ran OK after free'd up.
> 
> Should would make sweet little attention getter around these parts I'm sure...
> I don't believe it has seen rain in about 40 years. His mother-in-law stopped driving it a year or two after she got it and passed away in the early 70's. 
>    Heck, I'm not sure it was ever even titled!

Wow, that would be worth getting. What's with these things lately?

Even if the upper trunnions were toast and the tank full of goo and 
needed a valve job, that's a quick fix-up to a top-notch car! The auto 
would make it somewhat slow though.


I tell ya, though I drive mine all over, I've been very easy on it until 
recently, pretty much babying it since I got it running, you know, 
unknown bottom end, "new" car filled with unknowns... but in the last 
month, I've been pushing it hard(er) and it just freakin' goes and goes. 
Part of it was having to learn how to drive it, I'm surprised how long 
that took.

I would tell anyone now -- get one over the hump of deferred 
maintenance/repairs (new suspension, good motor, clean gas tank, etc) 
and you can easily rely on it for modern daily driving. But you put four 
people in it, and OK, it's slow. Then it's gotta work!

I'm revving to 3500 before upshift (was keeping it to 3000), shifting 
faster, and pushing through traffic more. It's not fast, but it's 
actually pretty nimble -- the way it's geared it's weakest in the first 
to second gear range, right where all the little Hondas are winding up 
into 2nd or 3rd the 195.6+T96 is strugging to get into the "power" (sic) 
band. But once you're above 2000 in 2nd it's fine. And it's surprisingly 
fine in top gear at 50 - 70 -- push that button on the shifter and it 
passes just fine, and torque at 2500 in 3+OD is adequate especially with 
enough spark!

The car has GREAT balance, meaning as a system, a package, it's pretty 
much a GREAT car. The transmission is definitely the weakest point, a 4- 
or 5-speed would wake this thing up, but would be a shame to lose the 
Twin Stick.

The 9x2.5 Gremlin brakes are fine and confidence-instilling. Discs would 
be nicer.

The unequal A-arms make for typical positive camber in turns (to 
understeer and get you to slow the hell down) but I have some Hornet or 
something front anti-roll bar I think I'll try to fit. That would make a 
huge change I think.

I'm 6 foot 4, and I have to snake my feet under the pedals, but once I'm 
in there, I can drive all day, it's as comfortable that way as the 63 
Classic, though I can about touch the other door.


I think people are afraid of this engine, it's pretty gutless if you 
live with V8s or 258's but it pulls great. The head-torque thing is so 
stupidly easy and quick it's not even a problem. Frank suggests every 
two years, but I'm driving about 10K miles a year (8000+ since Nov07) so 
I'll do it twice a year.

It's an old-fashioned motor, it's always got a mist of oil in the engine 
compartment somehow. Nothing serious. OK mine's fairly old, but still, 
the filler tube is the old fashioned breather type, and they made it 24" 
tall for a reason. It's got PCV, not road draft.
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list