Re: [Amc-list] WHat year 258's get water intake? Real world advantage?

[tom jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

re: the intake heating tube

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Frank Swygert <farna@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Flow? Remember, you did the calcs as to how much a 196 would flow... not much!
> My feeling is that it was removed from the 2V model because it would block too much flow.

I don't know how many 1bbl 195.6 OHVs even GOT the heating tube. Joe's
got one, but the '61 doesn't; and the junk motor I just picked up
doesn't. THe one from the 63 Classic I got from U-Pull-It doesn't. The
cover plate isn't drilled for it (the flat bosses are there).

Maybe it was part of some "heavy duty" package or something.

I still wonder how it was plumbed up. Joe, I forget the history of
yours, was it the original engine for your car? And if so how's the
heated intake plumbed into the waterpump etc?

As far as warm-up goes, OK I'm in Los ANgeles but I can tell you this:
under 1 mile of street driving (30 mph) and I can detect warmth out of
the heater. It's fully warmed up (190F) in 5 minutes (a mile or two).
The 232-powered Classic, takes 5 minutes just to feel any heat at all,
and twice that to fully warm up.

It may be that the 195.6OHV is simply a "bad design" and all that
waste heat collects in the head where the heater gets it, and the 232,
it goes into turning the crank. But it's nicer to drive on a chilly
morning :-)

New cars like little HOndas I think have a booster electric heater for
that reason.


-- 
All your arguments are invalid.
Enjoy your unstable system.
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list