Re: [Amc-list] Amc-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 65 CHRYSLER SALE
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Amc-list] Amc-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 65 CHRYSLER SALE
- From: Joe <jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
HMMMMM...Maybe it is a fair turn of events...since Chrysler treated AMC so crappy in 87-88??? Hate to see another American company go away though!! But..They DID treat AMC like crapola to be disposed of! Remember? TOOOO may Jap Crap companies already!! I USED to work for a Jap car factory (Mitsubishi)till they flushed 1300 of us four years ago! Joe
--- On Wed, 10/22/08, amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx <amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx <amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Amc-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 65
> To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 6:21 PM
> Send Amc-list mailing list submissions to
> amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> amc-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> specific
> than "Re: Contents of Amc-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: 7 Main Bearing engine into 62 Classic (Bruce
> Griffis)
> 2. Yahoo! News Story - Chrysler may be sold in pieces
> to other
> companies - Yahoo! News (j gray)
> 3. Re: Yahoo! News Story - Chrysler may be sold in
> pieces to
> other companies - Yahoo! News (Bruce Griffis)
> 4. Re: 7 Main Bearing engine into 62 Classic (Sandwich
> Maker)
> 5. Converter seal? (Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> 6. Re: 7 Main Bearing engine into 62 Classic (Tom
> Jennings)
> 7. Re: Yahoo! News Story - Chrysler may be sold in
> pieces to
> other companies - Yahoo! News (Tom Jennings)
> 8. Re: Converter seal? (Joe Fulton)
> 9. Re: 7 Main Bearing engine into 62 Classic (Tom
> Jennings)
> 10. Re: 7 Main Bearing engine into 62 Classic (Tom
> Jennings)
> 11. Re: Converter seal? (Tom Jennings)
> 12. Re: 7 Main Bearing engine into 62 Classic
> (Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> 13. Re: Converter seal? (Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> 14. Topic changed to: Pics and video of smoky Rambler
> (Bruce Griffis)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:01:29 -0400
> From: "Bruce Griffis"
> <bruce.griffis@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 7 Main Bearing engine into 62
> Classic
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> <a72582d20810220801y6009a205g13b613c278aef18@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> If you were a little closer, and I was a little more
> mechanically
> inclined, I'd consider jumping on that! I already have
> a '65 water
> pump for the 232 to sneak that puppy in my American.
>
> I'll try replacing the head gasket one more time and
> not put so much
> Permatex Copper tube goo on it. I'm thinking I did a
> poor job on the
> headgasket and that is part of my problems (exhaust is blue
> from oil,
> but also has a HECK of a lot of condensation in it. Not
> sure if I got
> a problem with rings and headgasket, or just one, or just
> the other.
>
> Anyway - good running 232! Very cool. So - poster looking
> for the 232
> - grab it! If I can't fix my 196, I might go on a 232,
> 258, 4.0 hunt.
>
>
> 2008/10/22 <Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > I'd love to know why, comcrap truncates these
> things when they come back to me?
> > All for only $45 a month for broadband....
> >
> > Anyway, if the message did not come thru to others
> complete.
> > I was offering up the 69 232 from My american.
> > about 76K on it, ran great. free for the taking!
> > Just need to check it to make sure it is not siezed
> and drag it out.
> > When I get to it on my own it will be parted out as
> I'm not storing it complete anymore.
> > Good engine, or was, come save it.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: 22 Oct 2008 07:58:25 -0700
> From: j gray <jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Amc-list] Yahoo! News Story - Chrysler may be
> sold in pieces
> to other companies - Yahoo! News
> To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID:
> <20081022150143.24A3D53800D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> j gray (jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx) has sent you a news article.
> (Email address has not been verified.)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Personal message:
>
>
>
> Chrysler may be sold in pieces to other companies - Yahoo!
> News
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081022/ap_on_bi_ge/chrysler
>
> ============================================================
> Yahoo! News
> http://news.yahoo.com/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:13:09 -0400
> From: "Bruce Griffis"
> <bruce.griffis@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] Yahoo! News Story - Chrysler may be
> sold in
> pieces to other companies - Yahoo! News
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> <a72582d20810220813l1036dee1h2c47f6661a02f41e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I thought Chrysler already had a deal with Nissan to
> manufacture the
> Titan. A merger of Chrysler and GM would probably mean no
> more Dodge
> and Chrysler products. There is just too much overlap. A
> merger with
> Nissan/Renault might mean some Chrysler and Dodge products
> could
> survive. Either way, I think Jeep would continue.
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:58 AM, j gray
> <jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > j gray (jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx) has sent you a news
> article.
> > (Email address has not been verified.)
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Personal message:
> >
> >
> >
> > Chrysler may be sold in pieces to other companies -
> Yahoo! News
> >
> >
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081022/ap_on_bi_ge/chrysler
> >
> >
> ============================================================
> > Yahoo! News
> > http://news.yahoo.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Amc-list mailing list
> > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:22:50 -0400 (EDT)
> From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 7 Main Bearing engine into 62
> Classic
> To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID:
> <200810221522.m9MFMoA02078@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> " From: "oldcars@xxxxxxxxx"
> <oldcars@xxxxxxxxx>
> "
> " After having a good look at things, I have come to
> think that I might want
> " to use the 1967 199 instead of the later 232.
> "
> " The 1967 199 should bolt up to the 1962 bell
> housing, which means I can
> " retain the rear mounts as are already in place.
>
> iirc dowel pins are smaller on the 199/232/258 than the
> 196, so you'll
> need to come up with some little bushings to index the bell
> properly.
> not tough, just a detail to get right.
>
> " I imagine I would have to use the 1967 starter
> " I should be able to use the 1962 flywheel and clutch
> internals...or would I
> " need to use the 1967 flywheel?
>
> from what i've heard, the flywheels are the same except
> the later one
> has a 10.5" clutch pattern as well as the 9" one.
>
> 9" clutch parts are the same, well up into the
> '70s.
>
> if you're shopping for a clutch, i still think 10"
> hd is the way to
> go since parts price is similar; perfection hytest p/n --
> rcf446 disk
> ca1525 b&b pp, '9"' bolt pattern
> ca1864 b&b pp, 10.5" bolt pattern
> ca1897 dia pp, 10.5" bolt pattern
> all go with the stock 9" clutch throwout bearing.
>
> partsamerica lists them all, though only by part, not
> applications.
> this doesn't guarantee availability even though they
> have prices...
> i've used the ca1864 on a '66 american. pedal
> travel is long, near
> the limit, so initial adjustment has to be just right. btw
> it really
> has to be an 1864 or direct match 10" pp; a 10.5"
> will not clear the
> late-'60s bell.
>
> pedal travel should not be a problem with the 1897;
> diaphragm types
> have a flatter 'spring curve' - more clamping force
> with less pedal
> pressure - so the need for travel to get leverage isn't
> there. also,
> lower diaphragm profile shouldn't have clearance
> problems even if it
> is a 10.5" size.
>
> " Now, as far as the transmission itself goes, the top
> bolts and the bearing
> " retainer look to be in the exact same location on
> both transmissions.
> " The difference is in the lower 2 bolts.
> " It looks like the lower holes from the 62 would line
> up on the outside of
> " the transmission case of the 67.
>
> this sounds like the reverse of what i'd heard, that
> the lower holes
> were moved down when the rear mounts moved from the bell to
> the
> tailshaft. before, the tranny was hanging off the bell;
> after, the
> tranny is half supporting the engine - principally through
> the lower
> bolts.
>
> if you're right, is there enough thickness on the bell
> to drill for
> the '67 lower bolts?
>
> " If it became necessary to make a plate which would
> bolt to all 6 holes (top
> " 2 bolts would bolt through the plate, the plate
> would bolt to the bottom 2
> " holes on the bellhousing, and to the bottom holes
> (ears)on the
> " transmission.
> " How thick could I get away with making such a plate?
>
> i'd be concerned about moving the bearing retainer back
> from its
> indexing hole on the bell. this is the primary way the
> tranny is
> lined up with the crank.
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Andrew Hay the genius
> nature
> internet rambler is to see what
> all have seen
> adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and think what
> none thought
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:47:08 +0000
> From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Amc-list] Converter seal?
> To: AMC-DelMarVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (AMC-DelMarVA:
> yahoogroups.com),
> amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx (AMC List)
> Message-ID:
> <102220081547.28565.48FF4AFC00033FE300006F952215568884CDCBCD0A0C079D9F059D0E03@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> The following BCA/National numbers are supposed to be
> Converter seals for a Borg in a 65 Ambassador
> 6988H Flash-o-matic
> 480479H Shift-Command
>
> How do I know for sure without yanking the converter which
> one I truly need?
>
> I have lined up a 4 day weekend before election day and am
> hoping to complete the wleding of the front of the
> Ambassador. Really hoping that I can drop the 327 or even
> the 287 engine in it soon. I need some room to work!
>
> I want to pop a new converter seal in the trans before I do
> this.
> I have no idea as to if the trans will function. Goal/hope
> is that I can get the engine of choice to run! The I can
> stop pushing it in and out of the shop! I don't much
> care if it does not run or move well at this point!
> I'll probably use the 287 to see if it is indeed any
> good. Then pull it and sell it later when the car is
> complete
>
> I need to get something done to the convertible. I want to
> move it outside and use the space for the American.
> If I get one gen I V-8 out of the way it will be a good
> thing! Be a better thing if I can move the conv farther from
> the garage under it's own power !!!
>
> --
> Mark Price
> Morgantown, WV
> 1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
> 2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrac II
> " I realize that death is inevitable.
> I just don't want to be around when it happens! "
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:03:05 -0700
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 7 Main Bearing engine into 62
> Classic
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <48FF4EB9.3050909@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > I'd think you could get away with about 3/8"
> max on the spacer.
> > That all depends on pilot length and clutch disc
> design.
> > I have in my car a pilot bushing that is setup to stay
> rearward.
> > I got a bushing that had the right internal dimension
> for the trans and a larger external dimension.
> > I had the external turned in a lathe to form a lip
> about a 1/4" on one side. Then tapped it in till it
> seated against the lip. I used bearing loctite.
>
>
> Ooh clever. What problem were you solving? Spacer plate or
> short trans
> shaft?
>
>
> > You can usually find pilots bearing of different
> diameters and lengths by scrounging from different years and
> makes.
>
> If oyu can find an auto parts store with an old-fashioned
> Dorman parts
> selection, they have selections of pilot bearings by size.
>
> There is also MSCdirect.com, industrial catalog (request a
> paper
> catalog: it's 3000 pages!!!!) they have oillite
> sintered bronze bushings
> by size...
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:04:45 -0700
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] Yahoo! News Story - Chrysler may be
> sold in
> pieces to other companies - Yahoo! News
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <48FF4F1D.3060703@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> j gray wrote:
> > Chrysler may be sold in pieces to other companies -
> Yahoo! News
> >
> >
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081022/ap_on_bi_ge/chrysler
>
> Gee, this has never happened before....!
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:15:00 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Joe Fulton <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] Converter seal?
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> <341331.24038.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I don't know ....Flashomatic sounds a lot like the old
> Bass-o-matic on Saturday Night Live. I can still picture
> that fish getting pureed. I think I'd go with the Shift
> Command.
>
> Pull the convertor out and see. If it will hurt your
> should, ask you wife to do it. :)
>
> Joe Fulton
>
>
> --- On Wed, 10/22/08, Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [Amc-list] Converter seal?
> > To: "AMC-DelMarVA: yahoogroups.com"
> <AMC-DelMarVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "AMC List"
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 8:47 AM
> > The following BCA/National numbers are supposed to be
> > Converter seals for a Borg in a 65 Ambassador
> > 6988H Flash-o-matic
> > 480479H Shift-Command
> >
> > How do I know for sure without yanking the converter
> which
> > one I truly need?
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:20:38 -0700
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 7 Main Bearing engine into 62
> Classic
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <48FF52D6.6070806@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Bruce Griffis wrote:
>
> > I'll try replacing the head gasket one more time
> and not put so much
> > Permatex Copper tube goo on it. I'm thinking I did
> a poor job on the
> > headgasket and that is part of my problems (exhaust is
> blue from oil,
> > but also has a HECK of a lot of condensation in it.
> Not sure if I got
> > a problem with rings and headgasket, or just one, or
> just the other.
>
> Oh you;ll get it to go.
>
> Get a box of 100 single-edged razor blades (you don't
> need that many;
> but having a box of 100 you wont be stingy with them) and
> get the entire
> block deck surface clean to metal. If it's dark grey or
> black, that's
> old gasket or goo (or corrosion). Scrape it off!
>
> YOu'll probably get a slight ring of shiny metal around
> each bolt hole.
> THat's block metal pulling up due to torque. It's
> normal if it's slight
> (not good, just normal :-)
>
> DO the same to the head, but that shoudl be easy if you
> just had the
> head redone. If it's not perfect, make it so. YOu
> don't want metal
> filings in the engine, but lightly and carefully running a
> fine file
> over the deck, then head surface, will reveal high spots
> (like if the
> head klunked into the block during assembly, etc). I have a
> short piece
> of broken file that I use for stuff like this, you can keep
> rags around
> it. Better to risk a bit of steel shaving than carborundum
> from sand
> paper. Paper's not flat either.
>
> Solvent on CLEAN, LAUNDERED rags, wipe the sealing surfaces
> until the
> rags are almost clean. Then I don't even touch the
> surface. Smokey
> Yunick said: 'no engine ever died from being too
> clean' and though he
> meant internals, it applies everywhere there's an
> intentional seal or
> mating surface.
>
>
> If you are REALLY paranoid, you could set the head on the
> block before
> you put any good or gaskets on, gently. It should slide
> smoothly, not
> rock in any direction (like zero, none, not paper width)
> and not have
> klunky corners to catch on anything.
>
> You need gasket goo (Permatex Copper or something old
> fashioned) but
> hardly any at all. Very thin coat on all four surfaces. You
> should be
> able to see through it. It's hard to get really even
> but you shoudl get
> close. It should be dry/tacky (15 minutes is fine).
>
> When you set the head on that final time, don't slide
> it. That'll mess
> up your nicely applied goo. This is tough, that head is
> heavy and it's
> in a deep engine compartment! But you have helpful kids!
>
>
> If one of our engine experts says otherwise, believe them
> over me for sure!
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:30:48 -0700
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 7 Main Bearing engine into 62
> Classic
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <48FF5538.1080100@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Sandwich Maker wrote:
>
> > " The 1967 199 should bolt up to the 1962 bell
> housing, which means I can
> > " retain the rear mounts as are already in place.
> >
> > iirc dowel pins are smaller on the 199/232/258 than
> the 196, so you'll
> > need to come up with some little bushings to index the
> bell properly.
> > not tough, just a detail to get right.
>
> Its' been a loooong time, but I bolted a 1970 232 to a
> 1963 T-96. The
> T-96 was original, mated to a 195.6 at the factory.
>
>
> > " I should be able to use the 1962 flywheel and
> clutch internals...or would I
> > " need to use the 1967 flywheel?
> >
> > from what i've heard, the flywheels are the same
> except the later one
> > has a 10.5" clutch pattern as well as the 9"
> one.
> >
> > 9" clutch parts are the same, well up into the
> '70s.
>
> I have two flywheels, one drilled only for an 8"
> clutch (1963 American),
> the other for only a 9" clutch (1969 232, I forget
> car). Same OD and
> teeth so the same starter would work if it bolts to the
> block in the
> same place. Both fit onto a 1959 195.6OHV, so with some
> confidence I'd
> say that the 1962 flywheel will bolt onto ANY Nash six
> (172, 184, 195.6
> flat or ohv) or any AMC six up through 1971! The flywheel
> center portion
> that bolts to the crank is the Nash pattern, AMC kept it up
> through 71.
>
> (Actually, the 72-up six crank butt looks the same... is
> it? Not that
> it's of practical knowledge...)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:47:39 -0700
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] Converter seal?
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <48FF592B.6030803@xxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > The following BCA/National numbers are supposed to be
> Converter seals for a Borg in a 65 Ambassador
> > 6988H Flash-o-matic
> > 480479H Shift-Command
> >
> > How do I know for sure without yanking the converter
> which one I truly need?
>
> Buy 'em all and return the unused!
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:59:54 +0000
> From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 7 Main Bearing engine into 62
> Classic
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> <102220081659.17954.48FF5C0A0004D59A000046222216549976CDCBCD0A0C079D9F059D0E03@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> What ever you do.
> Do NOT use one of the scotchbrite pads on a drill or
> diegrinder to clean gasket surfaces!
> They will remove metal!
> 100% of the time.
> I very carefully used one years ago on a head. Then decided
> I did not fully trust my work and took it to have it
> resurfaced. I stood and watched the process. I could not
> believe how crooked the face of that head was!
> I have never used one of those scotchbrite pads again!
> Save them for body work!
>
> --
> Mark Price
> Morgantown, WV
> 1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
> 2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrac II
> " I realize that death is inevitable.
> I just don't want to be around when it happens! "
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> > Bruce Griffis wrote:
> >
> > > I'll try replacing the head gasket one more
> time and not put so much
> > > Permatex Copper tube goo on it. I'm thinking
> I did a poor job on the
> > > headgasket and that is part of my problems
> (exhaust is blue from oil,
> > > but also has a HECK of a lot of condensation in
> it. Not sure if I got
> > > a problem with rings and headgasket, or just one,
> or just the other.
> >
> > Oh you;ll get it to go.
> >
> > Get a box of 100 single-edged razor blades (you
> don't need that many;
> > but having a box of 100 you wont be stingy with them)
> and get the entire
> > block deck surface clean to metal. If it's dark
> grey or black, that's
> > old gasket or goo (or corrosion). Scrape it off!
> >
> > YOu'll probably get a slight ring of shiny metal
> around each bolt hole.
> > THat's block metal pulling up due to torque.
> It's normal if it's slight
> > (not good, just normal :-)
> >
> > DO the same to the head, but that shoudl be easy if
> you just had the
> > head redone. If it's not perfect, make it so. YOu
> don't want metal
> > filings in the engine, but lightly and carefully
> running a fine file
> > over the deck, then head surface, will reveal high
> spots (like if the
> > head klunked into the block during assembly, etc). I
> have a short piece
> > of broken file that I use for stuff like this, you can
> keep rags around
> > it. Better to risk a bit of steel shaving than
> carborundum from sand
> > paper. Paper's not flat either.
> >
> > Solvent on CLEAN, LAUNDERED rags, wipe the sealing
> surfaces until the
> > rags are almost clean. Then I don't even touch the
> surface. Smokey
> > Yunick said: 'no engine ever died from being too
> clean' and though he
> > meant internals, it applies everywhere there's an
> intentional seal or
> > mating surface.
> >
> >
> > If you are REALLY paranoid, you could set the head on
> the block before
> > you put any good or gaskets on, gently. It should
> slide smoothly, not
> > rock in any direction (like zero, none, not paper
> width) and not have
> > klunky corners to catch on anything.
> >
> > You need gasket goo (Permatex Copper or something old
> fashioned) but
> > hardly any at all. Very thin coat on all four
> surfaces. You should be
> > able to see through it. It's hard to get really
> even but you shoudl get
> > close. It should be dry/tacky (15 minutes is fine).
> >
> > When you set the head on that final time, don't
> slide it. That'll mess
> > up your nicely applied goo. This is tough, that head
> is heavy and it's
> > in a deep engine compartment! But you have helpful
> kids!
> >
> >
> > If one of our engine experts says otherwise, believe
> them over me for sure!
> > _______________________________________________
> > Amc-list mailing list
> > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:01:49 +0000
> From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] Converter seal?
> To: piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx, "AMC/Rambler
> owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> <102220081701.23961.48FF5C7D000D873200005D992216549976CDCBCD0A0C079D9F059D0E03@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Yeah, I was just hoping someone would know.
> It's in the shop now, but i have to remove the piece of
> angle iron I have supporting the trans to pull the
> convertor.
>
> Rats... I'd buy both, but I know me. I'd never
> send the one that did not work back!
>
> --
> Mark Price
> Morgantown, WV
> 1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
> 2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrac II
> " I realize that death is inevitable.
> I just don't want to be around when it happens! "
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Joe Fulton <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > I don't know ....Flashomatic sounds a lot like the
> old Bass-o-matic on Saturday
> > Night Live. I can still picture that fish getting
> pureed. I think I'd go with
> > the Shift Command.
> >
> > Pull the convertor out and see. If it will hurt your
> should, ask you wife to do
> > it. :)
> >
> > Joe Fulton
> >
> >
> > --- On Wed, 10/22/08, Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: [Amc-list] Converter seal?
> > > To: "AMC-DelMarVA: yahoogroups.com"
> <AMC-DelMarVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "AMC List"
> > <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 8:47 AM
> > > The following BCA/National numbers are supposed
> to be
> > > Converter seals for a Borg in a 65 Ambassador
> > > 6988H Flash-o-matic
> > > 480479H Shift-Command
> > >
> > > How do I know for sure without yanking the
> converter which
> > > one I truly need?
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Amc-list mailing list
> > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:21:15 -0400
> From: "Bruce Griffis"
> <bruce.griffis@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Amc-list] Topic changed to: Pics and video of
> smoky Rambler
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> <a72582d20810221021y6a65af5cy3432f7cff6257950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Thanks Tom and Mark for the info.
>
> A short clip of the smoky car is here:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdrlBP1qbGA
>
> Pictures are here:
> http://picasaweb.google.com/bruce.griffis/SmokingRambler#
>
>
> The plume of steam coming out of the #1 cylinder when I
> pulled the
> plug kind of tells the story (can't see the plume in
> the pictures,
> though). Definately leaking water into the #1 cylinder. The
> other
> plugs look kind of dark for only having been in use for
> maybe 15-20
> minutes (or a little longer, but not much). Looks like I
> need to
> re-address the carb again.
>
> The smoke is kind of acrid and stays with you (cough,
> cough, wheeze,
> wheeze). A lot of white, but a definate blue-ish hue to it.
> Oil might
> be coming in the #1 cylinder as well (that was the wet,
> oily plug).
> Hoping it is just the headgasket and my thick application
> of goo.
> Anyway, will make some calls for a new headgasket.
>
> Do you guys recommend Permatex Copper in a tube, or the
> Copper spray?
> Is it easier to get a good, even coating with the spray (if
> I can find
> it)?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
>
>
> End of Amc-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 65
> ****************************************
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
Back to the Home of the AMC Gremlin