jpnjim

This board is small, and every single person I've dealt with here has been cool, but if I used this screen name on another board, and someone less than cool wanted to mess with me, a simple google search would find me here, and my plate. Then any info they could want is a phone call, or click away. Everyone has their own level of self (and family) preservation they feel comfortable with, personally I cringe every time I see someone post on a public forum: "I am going to Vegas/Disney/Moab/whatever from June XX to June XX (and my house will be completely empty if you want anything)" So, I refrain from posting too much personal info. YMMV.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

What's an 8-track? Rob L. :fs2: :D I can remember when everyone (even nonsmokers) kept a book of matches handy to jam under the 8-track tape to get it to play right. I can also remember when these were a hot selling item on the shelves of every single department store.

So I rolled the body into a rug, and woosh, right into the river it went...... hey, am I in the right thread?

:thumbsup: Creepy, but thanks for posting it :cheers:

Yep, all cars used to be like that. Man I feel old. :ack: Maybe later us old guys will post about 8-track players, floor mounted hi/lo beam switches, and vacuum wipers :doh: .

If you want to pop for an Indy block & billet crank, you can get a 500" AMC. :yes: I forget what the biggest stock block AMC I've heard of was, but it was over 422". :thumbsup:

best MJ cupholder:

Good reference, but I'd take it with a grain of salt, since it's compiled from so many sources, and there are so many different configurations to each engine. You could easily add, or subtract 50-60 lbs to any of those engine weights depending on how they're dressed (with, or w/o A/C compressor, exhaust manifolds, smog equipment, flexplate/flywheel, even the air cleaner assembly is heavy on some engines). I'll say this, the AMC block is heavier than a Small Block Chevy block, and the AMC heads are heavier too. Though the chart calls the AMC V8 @ 540lbs, and the SBC @ 575. I don't know how accurate it is, but urban legend/lure, and current BS usually has the Buick 215's (alum) as the lightest small blocks, then Buick 350's, Ford 302's, SBC's, and SB Chrysler LA/Ford 351W's. AMC V8's & Ford 351C's are heavier still, and once you get to Ford 351M & 400M's you're crossing over to 'medium blocks'. Early AMC (gen I), Stude & International Harvester engines are sometimes called 'Medium Blocks, but really deserve their own category, since they are small to medium cubic inch engines, but weigh more than some big blocks. Early Hemi's were also 'pre-thinwall technology' engines like the AMC/STUDE/IH engines, but with HUGE Hemi heads to add even more weight. Mopar Poly's are equally big, heavy with small displacements & tough to categorize. Lure then usually as the 400-455 Buicks as the lightest 'true' big blocks, and Hemi's as the heaviest. That leaves Mopar wedge B's & RB's, Pontiac's, Old's, Nailhead Buicks, early & late Caddy's, BBC's, W head Chevy's, Ford FE's, Y's, 385 series, SOHC's, & Boss 429's to fight it out for position in between. :ack:

It depends on which Gen II engine you are comparing to which Gen III. Gen II's used different pistons for 4bbl vs 2bbl engines. with 51cc heads, you ended up with either 10:1ish, or 9:1ish compression ratio depending on which pistons were in the engine. 1970 & early 71 GenIII's also used 51cc dogleg heads with hi & lo compression pistons, as the Gen II's did, so they also had 10:1 ish, or 9:1ish cr. During the 71 model year, the 51cc heads were phased out for 58cc heads, this dropped compression ratios to 9.5:1ish & 8.5:1ish respectively. Swapping these heads onto Gen II engines would give you the same, reduced, 9.5ish, or 8.5:1ish compression ratio. For 1972, the hi compression pistons were dropped all together, so combined with the 58cc heads, all 2 & 4bbl engines had 8.5:1ish compression ratio. So, yes, swapping a high compression Gen II short block in place of a Gen III low compression short block could likely boost HP, even if the displacement dropped (304 to 290, 360 to 343, or 401 to 390). But swapping a high compression Gen II short block in place of a high compression Gen III short block would more than likely cost you HP & torque, due to the loss of displacement. Also 401 engines used a unique, bigger cam, while all other (non-California) AMC engines from 290-390 got the same (smaller) cam. So swapping a HC 390 in place of a HC 401 short block would cost you both 11cubic inches, AND cam timing.

:thumbsup: The early engine's were quite good, it's just that the 70+ dogleg heads were much better. Truthfully tho, even the rectangular port heads flow pretty good for the small bore engines. I will say this, if you plan to do any headwork down the road, beyond a simple valvejob, you'd really be doing yourself a favor by finding some 70-71 304 heads to sink your machinework dollars into, if you are going to invest the $$$, might as well start with the improved heads, and go from there. FWIW, my first AMC engine was a Gen III (74) 304 2bbl auto, and, for what it was, it impressed me, till I got Gen II 343/4spd car. The early engines were no slouches. :yes:

Mike, Other than the 304, 1970 and 1971 V8's were still high compression engines. And were actually the top horsepower years across the board for AMC. (race spec SS/AMX's excluded) 1970 360/4bbl = 290 hp (vs 280 for the top 343) 1971 360/4bbl lost 5hp, to 285hp, due to a compression ratio drop from 10:1 to 9.5:1 (partway through the year) 1970 390 = 325hp (vs 315hp for 68-9 390's) 1970 Rebel Machine 390's = 340hp (Machine's had a special HP intake manifold) 1971 401 = 330hp (also would have been higher, but had a cr drop from 10.2:1 to 9.5:1 midway through the year). 1972 was the actual year they chopped compression ratio's (pretty much to 8.5:1 across the board), and also went to the SAE Net horsepower ratings, making things look even worse. Edit for clarity: all GEN II AMC V8's (1966-1969) were short deck, rectangular port. all GEN III AMC V8's (1970-1991) were tall deck, dogleg exhaust port. The 390 was available in both GEN II (1968 & 1969) & GEN III (1970).

Since you asked.... I ran RE stuff on my first real trail MJ, when I bought a daily driver/sometimes wheeler 98' XJ in 01' I decided to try Rusty's stuff out instead. Trac-bar, first one was about an inch too long (which is a big difference when you're talking about trac bars). excuse was they were experimenting with a longer bar for bigger lifts (must've been a 14" kit to be that long :nuts: ). Replacement bar was the right length, but the TRE did not fit the factory upper mount right. Taper was wrong for every OEM XJ/MJ bracket I ever tried (only would engage far enough to get 1/2 the cotter pin in). Ran it for a few years, the replacement TRE's were also a mismatch. eventually replaced with RE HD trac bar. 3" coils initially got 2.75" out of them (mostly stock XJ, stock ft bumper). After 2 wheeling weekends/4 trail days they were bent, and settled down to 2.25". I ran them for a couple more months, with 2" spacers they sagged to ~2". I replaced them with RE coils, and the Rusty's coils are now in my 2wd MJ (perfect leveling springs with the stock 2wd rear leafs). Steering Brace Bought this for my MJ. It fit perfect, and was a decent item for the price. At the time I was surprised it fit so well, since that MJ had a bent front 'frame' horn. The joke was on me, when I tried it on an MJ with a straight frame a few years later, and it did not line up with the factory holes. :rotf: I'm still running this, but had to cut & paste it a little to work with a winch bumper (not the parts fault, winch sits inside frame rails) Doesche Tech Shocks got from Rusty (tho not manufacured by him). In my opinion too soft for his soft ft coils. Were a good balance with the stiffer RE coils. I did get 6-7 years out of them (before they went dead), and they were a decent length for the application. Goodrich Stainless brake lines I actually had very good things to say about them till they started to weep, and gave me a soggy pedal that would go to the floor if you pushed for long enough. Another part Rusty offered, but did not manufacture. I only add them to 'the list' since they were part of his package, and they eventually failed, and had to come off the Jeep. I also bought RE arms, and JKS sway disconnects in 2001, and those parts are still OK, and usable. FWIW, the RE coils I bought in 1998 & 2002 are still great, and within spec, as are the 3" Rancho coils I bought in 1994 (have been in continuous use for 16 years). The Rusty's intake is the only Rusty part still on my XJ, so i was glad to give it the :thumbsup: in my first post. :doh: I also run some of his tow hook brackets on my MJ (also take off parts from the XJ). they aren't bad, but the powdercoating didn't stand a chance, and they were thinner than the C4x4 ones I compared them to a few years later. Also, I don't hate Rusty, he was actually a very cool guy to talk to on the phone. But I was disappointed in some of his stuff, and don't usually go out of my way to recommend it.

The air tube is one of the few Rusty's parts that are still on my Jeep. It's made well, and actually fits decently. I threw together my own cheesy heat divider to keep the header heat off it, and later replaced the K&N for an no-oil type, and have run it like that since 2001, or so.

There are so many innuendo's in this post, I don't know where to start :D :jump: even made me laugh re-reading it. :rotf:

Back in the CJ days you could've just stuck your key in the lock and likely popped it for her. I swear they only had like 10 different combo's back then. Dumb or not, you should've unzipped her softtop for her just to watch her climb in. :drool: :ack:

The 'Doc Hudson' (Hornet) was the Gremlin's great great grandpappy (Hudson/Nash merger = AMC). Maybe they have a soft spot for AMC's. :USAflag: Edit, I don't know if Doc & the Gremmie are related in the movie's story line, but they are related in real life. :chillin:

:thumbsup:

Did the moon look red afterward (like the news had predicted)?

I like the high clearance rear bumper. ;)

Beware that carfax has been know to kill accounts if any of the searches done are questionable at all. Basically shutting down customers first, and asking question's later. Pulling VIN's that others have been posted on internet forums (like this) is one of their big no-no's. Autocheck probably isn't as strict, but at the very least you might want to keep the VIN's to PM's. Sorry to be the wet blanket, & thanks for offering this, would've saved me a few bucks when I was looking for a mini-van. :cheers:

Planning to run a flat piece of steel under the bolts along the floor to avoid something like this ;) Yeah, I was young & dumb (and in need of a quick fix).

I used some 3/8" hardware, with thick/wide fender washers to bolt one of my shock mounts through the floor of the bed once (temporarily)........ Ripped two perfect holes right through the floor, pulling the fenderwashers and all right through. Shocks are a different kind of load than a gas tank, but I wouldn't hang anything heavy through the floor of the bed (again :doh: ).

Even just 1 rear shock is 10x's better than no rear shocks. No rear shocks = you just keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeepppppppp bouncing after hitting that last bump. 1 rear shock = squirmy, and bouncy, by 10x's better then the above.

There's been lots of threads & feedback on this one in other forums: http://www.quadratec.com/products/92122_1000_07.htm Specs seem the same as the RR one you posted.