Re: [AMC-list] Mid-Engine AMX

[adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)]

" From: Ken Ames <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx>
" 
" IIRC the Toronado axle was a '425' - a front-wheel drive version of the Turbo
" 400. Eldorado probably the same.

yup, and definitely the same; the eldo was a reskin of the toro
platform.  and as big as these cars were, they still had 2/3 of their
weight on the front end...

there was a 2nd gen ca. '80 +/-, th325, in both 3sp and 4sp versions,
with lockup.  biggest engine was an olds 403.

" Quoting tom jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>:
" 
" > On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 16:17, Armand Eshleman <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
" > 
" > > Oldsmobile toronado transaxle mated to a V-8 works pretty good I
" > > understand....
" > >
" > Yeah, but they're boat anchors. Two boat anchors! HUGE! HEAVY! And automatic
" > only I think. Apparently tough though and well done.
" > 
" > No V8's for me, so 200hp capacity would be enough. Something furrin' might
" > work better, there's not much post-war driveline innovation in the U.S. up
" > til recently (blasphemy? give me examples besides: corvair, f85, toronado,
" > eagle, ... vette is recent)

'65 is recent?  that's when the vette got 4-wheel vented disks; '63
for irs.  vettes also had that bizarre rochester mech fi setup, since
the late '50s.  i wonder if it inspired bosch k-jet later?

what did the f85 get?  it was a sister to the 'vair, skylark, and
tempest, but the poncho got the 'vair transaxle, swing axles and all.
and a slant 4 that was 1/2 a 389.  btw these were afaik gm's first
unibody.

there wasn't much innovation in detroit because it didn't sell.  the
vette was and is a 'halo' car, not needed to be profitable in its own
right, but every other innovation of the '50s/'60s faded away and was
gone by the mid '80s; 'conventional' cars sold as well and were more
profitable to make.  there's been innovation since then, in reaction
to regulations and foreign competition - in other words, forced.

" > Some friends & I talked about eagle front in the rear, but that has it's own
" > problems (eg. reversed rotation for starters).

what's wrong with turning the diff around?  it's just a conventional
dana 30.

" > Trivia for you: said friends and I could come up with no mid-engine, FRONT
" > drive cars, at all. Except the Dymaxion, and that doesn't really count.

there isn't much point.  and wasn't the dymaxion just a [prewar] ford
v8 chassis running backwards?  not one of fuller's better ideas...  he
was -not- an engineer.
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                       and think what none thought
_______________________________________________
AMC-list mailing list
AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com