Hot Rods 1964 Rambler American engine swap

I have a 1962 Rambler Classic 400 four door sedan with a stock 343 V8, 4-speed and rear end out of a 1968 Javelin. It also has the suspension from the Javelin.

No need for a Chebbie.







...this response is my opinion, not an argument. Just my opinion.

 

I was talking to someone years ago who had a late 50s or early 60s rambler with a 289 or 302 SBF who said it fit better then the SBC they were trying to fit in it first,told me the 289/302 is a little narrower then the SBC .

 

Check out HemiRambler's profile page

 

All Steel stock

 

HRM put an AMC 360 in a late 60s (66-69) American using a boneyard crossmember. Mopar won't drop in so easy. The American uses the same front crossmember as the later 70-83 Hornet/Gremlin/Concord/Spirit models. They had a V-8 option through 1979 (the American had a V-8 option 66-69 also). So swap that engine/suspension crossmember and drop in any 67+ AMC V-8 and transmission. Not that hard to drop any small block into the 64-69 American though. It's the earlier 58-63 that is super tight. It can/has been done, keeping the stock suspension, but changing spark plugs is a nightmare! Use a modern electronic ignition, EFI and platinum plugs then forget about it for a while. Can use a carb with EI and plats, but make sure carb is tuned well. Won't be as long between cleaning plugs, but longer than points. With a small block and stock suspension in the little 58-63 you have to jack the motor up to change plugs, at least with an SBC. Might be able to get to Ford SB plugs due to slightly narrower and different plug angle. Exhaust has to be tight against the block.

 

In 1969 I put a 390 AMC engine in a 64 American. I used the front xmember from a 66 V/8 American and also the t-10 tranny. The only thing I had to fabricate was the rear tranny mount.
The biggest problem with the pre 70s AMCs is the trunions. I'm currently building a 69 with a ls engine and am replacing the front suspension with 70 up parts.

 

Are you fricking kidding me!!!! Yeah its a sbc but it still took a ton of fab work and its in an ugly duckling American that would probably blow your doors off.

 

facetious

[fuh-see-shuh s]
adjective
1.
not meant to be taken seriously or literally:
a facetious remark.
2.
amusing; humorous.
3.
lacking serious intent; concerned with something nonessential,amusing, or frivolous:
a facetious person.

 

For what it is worth.... The 290-401 AMC motor is narrower than a sbf, shorter than a sbc. It will fit better in a lot of cars and can make some serious hp.

Sent from my Moto G Play using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Why don't you be really different and build a hot AMC 6 cylinder ? They have 7 main bearings and respond really well to basic hop up mods. No adapters ,no swapping. Just find a 232 and build it. Parts are available
A Rambler dealer mechanic in my home town ran Rambler 440 with a twin stick. He had a header and 4 barrel and a cam with a 4.11 gear. Outran a bunch of 289 Mustangs and tri -five Chevies with 265's and 283's.

 

I thought this thread was long dead. But, having read it again this am, the "boring" sbc argument is poking me the wrong way. I'd love to post pics of my '70 Javelin, but it's way OT. Built in the mid 80s, a 307 w/ dual AFBs, Camaro headers that fit better in my AMC than they did on a Chev, powerglide, side pipes, roof & trunk spoiler, Camaro rear fender flares, custom lacquer paint, 10" wide Cragars, & because of the "boring" engine that nobody wanted (307 vs 350), & my scrounging, the car was built for about $1200 TOTAL. It could put Mustangs to shame, drive anywhere, & turn heads like nothing I've owned since. BORING!

 

There is nothing wrong with the trunnion front suspension. Rebuilding even the 64-69 American/Javelin/AMX rubber bushed trunnions is still way cheaper than swapping to the later suspension (requires changing spring towers out) or a Mustang II suspension. Plenty of brake options for the AMC suspension. Once rebuilt the trunnions are good for another 20+ years/100K+ miles... just like ball joints. The ONLY limitation is you can only get about 3 degrees of caster with a trunnion. Most alignment specs call for 0 degrees preferred, but a little caster helps radial tires track straight better. The big cars used a different type of upper trunnion, not the rubber bushed one the 64-69 small cars used. Pre 64 had a lower trunnion too (all models, back to 1950 in the Rambler, 52 in big Nash cars), and an upper trunnion similar to the 64-69 big cars. 58-63 American (and 55 Nash Rambler, I think...) used a unique upper trunnion. All can be repaired relatively easy, but they are getting hard to find and expensive to replace. But still cheaper/easier to rebuild than replace everything.

It's not hard for many people on this forum to swap a motor. Just use what you want, it's your car! The AMC six from 64 on (not the 56-65 195.6 OHV and flat-head though!) is a great, tough motor. Easy to build to make a lot of power. I have a 4.0L EFI engine in my 63 Classic.... except for electronic almost a bolt-in, and it has more power than the factory V-8 (a 287/2V that year in the Classic) would have. I have a mild torque cam and a few other mods... sounds good with a 2.25" exhaust and turbo muffler. Many ask me if I have a V-8 in it. Performs well to, at least as good as a mild carbureted small block (under 350 inches for sure, and as good as some 350s).

In looking at V-8 dimensions, it seems the SBC, SBF, and AMC are all pretty much the same width without manifolds -- AMC being narrower than the others by 1/2" 21.5" vs 22" for SBF and SBC). The SBM (small block Mopar) is widest at 25" without exhaust manifolds (all width are with factory valve covers though). It's the manifolds (and spark plug placement) that make a big difference. The SBF comes in a bit narrower and easier to fit in a tight engine bay with factory manifolds or tight in headers.

 

Farna, I have access to a 327 out of a '66 Ambassador. Would this work easily in my '64 Classic?

 

Yes, but... the 66 Ambo got a wheelbase extension. It's all in front of the firewall (just front end stretched), so the torque tube and rear axle will work fine, but the engine mounts are in the wrong place on the crossmember. Probably easiest to make some spacers for the old six cylinder crossmember, assuming you have the old 196 (carb is on a plate on top of the head, not a separate intake sticking out the side). The V-8 cars used a different torque tube and rear axle -- a bigger one that the six -- so you need those (and of course the trans) as well.

 

Is there anyway I can get some pictures of your rear suspension and what did you put under the front if I may ask

 

@Jackie curl, respond to @HJmaniac with the @ in front of the screen name as I have on this post to send them a notice like you received from me. You will need 10 posts to PM him per forum rules and this will notify him that you are contacting him as he may never respond to this old thread.

 

In theory, unless he unsubscribed, he should get a notice.