I think the motors work on revs rather than torque (unless turbo charged) They are quite heavy and not very economical. -----Original Message----- From: AMC-list [mailto:amc-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Johnohsee Sent: Sunday, 15 February 2015 10:37 AM To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [AMC-list] AMC-list Digest, Vol 71, Issue 16 Just curious- has anyone seen/heard of/tried dumping a rotary engine into a pacer to see if it would've been an adequate power plant? John O'C > On Feb 14, 2015, at 15:00, amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Send AMC-list mailing list submissions to > amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > You can reach the person managing the list at > amc-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of AMC-list digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. LPG/CNG vs. Gasoline (farna@xxxxxxxxxxx) > 2. Re: 78 amc amx undergoing restoration (Armand Eshleman) > 3. Re: 78 amc amx undergoing restoration (Sandwich Maker) > 4. Re: LPG in AMC's was RE: AMC-list Digest, Vol 71, Issue 14 > (Sandwich Maker) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 08:12:41 -0700 > From: farna@xxxxxxxxxxx > To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [AMC-list] LPG/CNG vs. Gasoline > Message-ID: > <e670676db97cbd77c3af601f37b335fd.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 > > Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:42:09 -0800 > From: Jim Blair <carnuck@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: amc <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [AMC-list] 4 barrel intake for a 290 > > I keep hearing that yet the most I see is about 10% difference. Less > than that on a higher compression engine unless your LPG is cut with > Butane. E85 runs 20-30% lower economy. > > From: Ken Ames <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Rambler AMC, Nash, Jeep and family" <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [AMC-list] 4 barrel intake for a 290 > > > But don't you have to use more gallons of LPG compared to gasoline to > go the same distance? > Or am I thinking of a different fuel? > > Ken > ========================================== > > In a dual fuel configuration you'll burn more LPG than gasoline by > volume to produce the same power/go the same distance. There aren't as > many BTUs in LPG as in the same volume of gasoline. CNG (compressed > natural gas) is a bit more than LPG, but much harder to store and > needs a heavier vessel to carry a comparable amount (of LPG). > According to an alternative fuels chart > (http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf), 1 gallon > of LPG has 73% of the energy of 1 gallon of gasoline, so in the same > engine (dual fuel setup) you should expect to burn ~27% more LPG for > the same power/distance. I've heard it being in the 20-25% range -- > depends on vehicle and driving habits as well as load. For ease of > math figure 25% more. LPG is usually cheaper than gasoline, but it has > to be at least 25% cheaper to equal costs. Right now gasoline is at a > five year low, average about $2.20 in the US (national average). LPG > is actually a bit higher at $2.36 (national average) from what I can > find. That's for residential heating, not road fuel, which would be a > bit more. Typically LPG goes down with gasoline since it's a > by-product of gasoline, but in the middle of heating season it's a bit > higher due to demand (less demand for gasoline is driving those prices > down... for now!). So at the moment LPG conversions don't make sense, but that's not likely to last long. For comparisons, E85 has about the same 20-25% less power as LPG. > > You can regain that 20-25% loss on a pure propane (or E85) build. > Propane is 105 octane, E85 is 100-105 (depends on season -- ethanol is > reduced to 70-75% in cold winter areas, brought back up to 85% in warm weather). > Since premium gasoline is 93-94, you can build an engine to run at > least one whole point of compression higher -- around 11:1. The > problem is you won't be able to run anything less than premium if you > can't find E85, and that might not even be enough. A pure LPG > conversion would have the issue of being able to find fuel at all. > You're not supposed to run heating fuel as there are no road taxes on > it. LPG road fueling stations are few and far between, and many are > only open during regular business hours (9-6 or so), so you have to > carefully plan your driving. TomJ ran his 63 Classic wagon with 232 on > LPG for about 10 years as a pure LPG vehicle. Here's his conversion info: http://worldpowersystems.com/AMC/LPG/LPG-book-final.html. > > > Here's a good report with gas mileage on both gasoline and LPG: > https://www.utmb.edu/tstem/tstemutil/Uploads/192013_8_41_29_PM_2037Ans > is%20MannieRondina_Propane_Vs_Gasoline_2.pdf > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 09:16:27 -0600 > From: "Armand Eshleman" <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "AMC, Rambler, > Nash,Jeep and family" <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [AMC-list] 78 amc amx undergoing restoration > Message-ID: <9DF8C4114B374B8F8033906D5BA19150@computzer3> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=response > > Interesting work being done, I really like the metal work part. > > I do have a question as I am not that up on Concords. Is this a Hornet > with different parts hung on the front end? > > Armand > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <BaadAssGremlins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 7:35 AM > Subject: [AMC-list] 78 amc amx undergoing restoration > > >> Nice to see people taking a interest in some of the other great cars >> AMC built, this is a 78 Concord AMX being restored for example. Not a >> whole lot of them made you know, I believe 1931 total and guess is >> less than 200 exist in 2015, not high survival rate, as most want them for 'Concord AMX' >> unique parts like air dam, louvers, flairs and dash pieces. Here are >> some neat photos a customer, Phil sent me of his ongoing restoration, >> he will be adding photos as he goes along. >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/tloftus/sets/72157645555444837/ >> >> Eddie Stakes >> 713-464-8825 days >> www.planethoustonamx.com >> _______________________________________________ >> AMC-list mailing list >> AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 11:55:25 -0500 (EST) > From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker) > To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [AMC-list] 78 amc amx undergoing restoration > Message-ID: <201502141655.t1EGtP9v006381@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > " From: "Armand Eshleman" <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> " > " [] > " > " I do have a question as I am not that up on Concords. Is this a > Hornet with " different parts hung on the front end? > > yup, reworked, mostly the same. same for spirit/gremlin. > ________________________________________________________________________ > Andrew Hay the genius nature > internet rambler is to see what all have seen > adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and think what none thought > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 12:04:28 -0500 (EST) > From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker) > To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [AMC-list] LPG in AMC's was RE: AMC-list Digest, Vol > 71, Issue 14 > Message-ID: <201502141704.t1EH4SqF006436@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > " From: "Stu Fitchett" <amckiwi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> " > " [] > " > " > " My daily driver is a Holden (Pontiac GTO) Ute with a Chev L98 in it > running " Liquid Injection LPG. > " > " I have a custom tune in it and it has 10 more rwkw and 25more rwNM > of torque " than on petrol, it uses between 5-10% more fuel than on > petrol, lpg is " approx. 50% of petrol here. > " Down side is conversion is very expensive > > i understood that lpg needed special injectors because its lubrication > qualities aren't the same as gasoline/petrol, and because of the > frosting effects of near-instant vaporization. is this not the case > anymore, or are such injectors now readily available? > ________________________________________________________________________ > Andrew Hay the genius nature > internet rambler is to see what all have seen > adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and think what none thought > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > AMC-list mailing list > AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com > > > ------------------------------ > > End of AMC-list Digest, Vol 71, Issue 16 > **************************************** _______________________________________________ AMC-list mailing list AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5646 / Virus Database: 4284/9114 - Release Date: 02/14/15 _______________________________________________ AMC-list mailing list AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com