Re: [AMC-list] 64 Classic engine swap Frank, Tom?

[tom jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

I did that very same swap, too, but in a '63. Used a 64 crossmember, a 232,
and originally onto a T-96+OD. I had to drill the 64 x-member to move the
mounts fore or aft 1" (I forget, but it was quite obvious) and tril sheet
metal to dropt he radiator down.

I can recall no trans linkage issues, but it's been 21, 22 years, ...

I stripped teeth off first cresting a SUPER steep hil in San Francisco. Put
the little air cooled BW auto in there, it's still in there.



On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 06:27, Frank Swygert <farna@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>  From what you said about the way it shifts, I bet they ran out of
>> adjustment on the 2-3 rod and thought that pushing it "a bit futher into
>> gear" would solve some of the problem. Apparently it did help for a while,
>> but then the extension could have been recent compared to when it was
>> parked.
>>
>
> If there isn't a lot of slop between the two shift arms on the shifter I'm
> with you -- the shift rails are messed up in the trans, or the lack of a
> detent ball is the culprit. It's more likely that ball, as that holds the
> shifter arm in place. I bet they just lengthened the linkage so it would
> push the arm further past where the detent would have held it, and the arm
> would more than likely stay in place at that angle. The missing detent ball
> says a lot! If the trans had been rebuilt and they lost that ball, thus
> leaving it out, you might be able to replace it and have a good trans.
> Something to look at after you swap the known good one in.
> ----------
> Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 16:07:42 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Joe Fulton <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Some previous owner of my 64 Classic swapped a 232 into it instead of the
> 195.6 it came with.  The engine mounts are suppored by a piece of 2x4
> channel steel on each side.  For some reason, the P.O. felt the need to
> modify one of the transmission shift rods (T96 tranny).  He welded an
> extension onto one of the rods (2-3 rod I think).  The other rod is not
> modified. I'm just curious about why he would have done it.  Did the
> geometry of the shifter versus the tranny change that much?
>  --
> Frank Swygert
> Publisher, "American Motors Cars" Magazine (AMC)
> For all AMC enthusiasts
> http://farna.home.att.net/AMC.html
> (free download available!)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMC-list mailing list
> AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com
>



-- 
All of your arguments are invalid.
Enjoy your unstable system.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.amc-list.com/pipermail/amc-list-amc-list.com/attachments/20090526/5e93b849/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
AMC-list mailing list
AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com