CJ, THANK YOU for keeping that Typhoon an AMC based six! According to John Conde, AMC head of Public Relations and the only guy at AMC that was interested in keeping history records when he worked there (passed away a few years ago), there were 2520 Solar Yellow and Classic Black "Typhoon" Classic hardtops built to commemorate the introduction of the new AMC six in late April of 64. As far as I know any options were available, the only thing special was the paint colors, 232 six, and the "Typhoon" script on each side. Not much of a special edition, but since it was to intor the six, it will be nice to see one with a six left in it! I suggest you use a 4.0L block since it has a 3.875" bore vs. a 258 3.75" bore. The 258 crank and rods will go right in, or use custom pistons and keep the 4.0L rods. Only ting is if you use a carb you would have to use an electric fuel pump, as the 4.0L block doesn't have provisions for a mechanical pump to bolt on. Well, I suppose you could use a fancy belt drive pump, but that's going a bit far! The 4.0L cam doesn't have a pump lobe either, but most aftermarket 4.0L cams do because they use the same cam blank as a 258.
Thanks for the kind words Farna! If i'm not mistaken I think the full length sport console and bucket seat interior may have been specific to the Typhoon. I'm not sure if i've seen another 770 series two door hard top with buckets. I could be wrong though, i'm still learning about AMCs. The car has some decent options like factory in dash A/C, the before mentioned buckets and full length console. One of the A/C knobs says "For Desert Use Only". What the heck does that override? It it just a funky way of saying "Max A/C"... or does it override something and make the A/C compressor run constantly?
None of the factory or aftermarket references I have state that the buckets and console were standard on the Typhoon. They were optional on all models, just not ordered on the stripper 550 model, most common on top of the line models with V-8s, naturally. As far as I can determine it was a 770 Classic Hardtop with the new six, special colors, and Typhoon badges. "Desert Only" doesn't cycle the compressor, it comes on and STAYS on (no thermostat control). If you leave it on "DO" in normal climates the evaporator under the dash will freeze up. It's only intended for very warm and dry climates only, or for short intervals of use. I guess the "Desert Only" warning was to keep people from leaving it on too long. Max AC on modern cars just recirculates cabin air, the compressor is still controlled by the thermostat. The old Rambler system is ALWAYS in recirculation mode. That's what the "push for AC/pull for heat" knob. The TSM also says the "AIR" control (off-defrost) on the right of the instrument panel should be in the "off" position when running the AC. The heater ALWAYS pulls in and warms fresh air. That flap also blocks the heater core, so you have to have the knob in the heat position to get much heat, otherwise it will take forever for the car to warm up inside. You want in in the heat position if you want the fan to pull in outside air without the AC on too. You should be able to run the AC and have it draw in fresh air by having the AIR control on. Of course you can do that anyway -- crack the right kick panel vent and the AC will draw in some fresh air (not that these cars are so tight as to require that...). I still use the factory 63 AC/heat system in my car, but with a modern compressor (stock Jeep 4.0L compressor, had to have some custom hoses made). You won't believe the times I've cursed it when in a cold climate and it won't seem to heat inside -- then maybe a few DAYS later remember that I didn't pull the darn air control knob out!!
This is a 62 American that I'm working on in my shop, between customer jobs. It will be powered by a 88 Thunderbird TC 2.3 turbo. We had an other shop build the custom front A-arm coil-over suspension to keep the factory mount points intact. This is my first post, not sure the pictures will come up. Only 3 made it
laun, cool car just up the road i was thinkin about. shave all the chrome & bmpers, lower and some cool wheels and wallah neat car. i see you're in denver, we go to estes park a lot, mind f i stop in and peek at this next spring on our trip? thanks for all the ideas guys keep 'em comin goatboy
So, Laun... I'm assuming you built custom upper arms too? What about spindles... I suspect Mustang II or the T-bird since I see the rack and pinion steering. I believe the upper shock mount had to be modified also to support the weight of the car. The pics came through VERY nicely! Please take one with the wheel off -- I'd really like to see how the upper shock mount was handled. I've long considered making new arms and using aftermarket Mustang II or stock AMC Concord/Spirit spindles. The upper spring mount is the only thing that makes that idea tricky -- don't really want to change the angle of the spring. A press in ball joint (from the bottom) would work, but couldn't get to the top to lube it later. I think they make ball joints that don't require lubing though. I have been considering putting the Ford 2.3L turbo in a 61-63 American also. I think mines actually a 62, but all three years are the same except for grille, and the 61 uses the old fashion rubber escutcheon and pin to hold the inside door handles on. I know some cutting will be involved -- I've done work like this on these bodies before. I'm just interested in seeing how it was done, so a pic of under the hood and just how much cutting you had to do (I haven't even done any measuring yet) would be nice! My "problem" is I ran across a 65 American a year ago, and it would be MUCH easier to drop that 2.3L turbo under that hood. Gotta decide just how much work I want to do. I want to section the older body about 3-4" if I go that route -- weld the doors shut and move the windshield back a few inches also, make something like the Rambler "Palm Beach" (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/amx-palm-beach.htm/printable). Well, nothing like that much custom body work, just the sectioning to make the body lower and moving the windshield/cowl back to make it look longer in the front. So why welding the doors shut? Well, otherwise the doors would be a LOT of work... making it a roadster (I'd use a roll bar and bikini top only) is taking the easy way out. My other idea is to cut the 65 up like the Bud XR-400 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1962-budd-XR400-sports-convertible.htm). This started out as a cut-up 62 two door Ambassador, looks nothing like it now! On page three of the above link there's a brief description of what was done. I am thinking about doing the same to the 65 American two door post sedan I have (I have a rusty 65 American wagon parts car). It would look more like a 65 American, and I'd likely weld the doors shut for a roadster again. I have a pretty detailed article from "Collectible Automobile" covering more of the cutting and pasting operation or I wouldn't think so much about it!
Thanks for the possitive words guys. I'm at my shop all the time, just contact me and we can make some arrangements. The spindle are Willwoods 2" drop Mustang II's with their brakes, I'll attach some more pictures of the set-up. I also picked up a second American for parts, but it was so clean it's now a builder. The second one will be gasser style with a blown 401.
That is a cool set up on that car. When I did mine I simply used an off the shelf Mustang 2 set up with if I remember a 54 or 56 width. I boxed the rails and used a similar brave from the shock tower although not as cool as that one. The aprons do get in the way but I retained them as they are double walled and really strength the structure. Those cars are built like tanks. Always thought a JAP car strut or coil over conversion suspension might be a almost bolt in??? Well close nothing bolts right in. If you are going 4 or 6cyl and on a budget why not convert the original to a coil over set up? There is a site that does it for 1970 AMX's to give you an idea how to set up. I think WDS OR????
When I first tied to put the 2.3l in the car, we found that with the stock turbo and intake, it was wider up top than a V8. I've fabbed a header up, to relocate the turbo, and will have to trim and clean up the intake a little bit, to not have to modify the apron shape. I always loved how the SVO mustangs performed, so, whatever it takes this will fit.
One other small tweak I've done, is the fuel filler. With a 1950 Pontiac LED lamp and some scrap tubing and Round bar.
remember don,t mess with a rambler! BEEP! BEEP! While riding in my Cadillac, what to my surprise, A little Nash Rambler was following me, about one-third my size. The guy must have wanted to pass me out As he kept on tooting his horn (beep beep). I'll show him that a Cadillac is not a car to scorn. HE COULD,NT GET OUTTA SECOND GEAR!
That upper shock mount to coil spring mount brace is ingenious! Very well done! The fuel filler is great too. I couldn't tell exactly how it's held in place, but no matter really. My first thought was that maybe you had mounted the LED light on a NASCAR style fuel filler door. I had a pop open one on the side of my old 63 American, got it from some Jap car while I was stationed at Kadena Air Base, Okinawa, Japan, back in 87-89. The only thing "wrong" with the steering crossmember/lower suspension pivot setup is that it won't move sideways. That's good in a way, the car really needs a non-moving brace under the engine, or rather between the suspension mounts on the lower side. But you can't change the alignment using shims on the bottom arm the way the factory did unless the holes in the rack mount crossbar are slotted. Doesn't look like it. Of course the upper mount can be shimmed out, but not in. If the arms have some adjustment in them that won't be a problem though. I see you had to cut the hump off on the left side for clearance, I suspected as much! Custom header for the turbo too. That might be a bit more than I'm willing to do, so I may just have to use the 65 body with that motor, maybe find a Jeep 2.5L for the American (or can that project altogether). You CAN modify a strut suspension to fit. Look for 280-Z or Volvo 240/260 front ends. They use a strut with a ball joint at the bottom. Would be easy enough to make a tubular arm or solid piece to bolt between the original arms to mount a ball joint on. Other rear wheel drive cars with struts, like maybe other Volvo models (maybe even a 960?). Hmm.. found an illustration of the 960 strut. The ball joint is "upside down" to the 240 and Nissan 280 (http://volvoforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30028, scroll down for a pic of the 960). Scroll down on this link ( http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=161414) and you'll find a 240 front suspension diagram. It's hard to tell at first, but the ball joint bolt to the arm and a plate bolts to the bottom of the strut, the ball joint tapered pin is UP. Scoll down and you'll see some more pics that show it a bit better. I've investigated this, but haven't done it.
I have a 240Z right next to the Rambler, in the shop but, chose to send a whole lot more money on this set-up instead. The lower brace and rack mount is slotted to allow for alignment adjustments.
Couldn't see the slotting in the photos, I figured you had some method of alignment worked out though -- you've obviously done stuff like this before! That K brace under the Rambler was a problem 30+ years down the road. As the metal aged and the miles went on the weight of the engine (it's less then a hundred pounds away from a small block V-8) and banging on the suspension actually spread the rails apart. This was very gradual and took 20 years or so to be noticed much, but I'll run across one now on occasion that has well over an inch of shims (left and right combined), as much a 1.5". That's a good bit of spread! By then they can't be aligned properly without getting longer bolts, and the oil pump starts getting in the way on the right side. The brace you made is much more substantial than the stamped steel factory brace, so it should hold the rails in place better. I've welded a piece of angle on the bottom edge of the suspension mounts and cut a piece of 1/2" tubing the correct width, then run a length of hardened all-thread (not the hardware store stuff!) through the angle and tube to correct an inch of spread and prevent further. That was on cars that were going to be drivers though. I just bolted the angle to the mounts on the lower arm rod the first time, but the car would spread out slightly when it was released to adjust the arms. The shop made allowances for it, but it made the job more time consuming. If you worked on the 240Z front suspension you saw what I meant about possibly adapting it -- assuming it's strut and similar to the later 280.
Here's one at the Rodder's Reunion. Also in 57 Nash offered Fuel injection on a limited basis on the Rebel series.
Here's my wife's 64. It's currently getting transplanted with a '79 AMC 258 six, 904 automatic and open driveline rearend. We've already adapted the power disc brakes and power steering. Orphans are cool!
That 57 4 door was a factory car that (I believe) was campained by George Montgomery. and I've heard that contintal kit had a tire filled with concrete. it set track records all over the country in 57 including San Gabriel. My mom bought a brand new 64 990 Ambassador two door hardtop. black with red interior. 270 horse 327 floor shifter, it han hard (and often when I drove it)
There's a 64 Classic next door to me that my neighbor has been trying to sell me for a few years. I should just add it to the stable. It's rust free, V8 car. It's from eastern Washington but been sitting here in the rain for 7 years and the doors won't open. I've been going over there every week with some liquid wrench every week for two months with no luck so far. They just want break the windows to get it open....
Undercover -- find a source for windows first! That's curved glass and can be hard to find, but any 63-64 Classic or Ambassador glass will fit. I'm not positive, but think the 65-66 glass will fit too. Can check if needed. I don't know about the 57 Rebel that was campaigned as a drag car, but here's the beef on the 57 EFI Rebel. That's right, Electronic Fuel Injection. It was made by Bendix and called "Electrojector". Two Electrojector equipped Rebels were sent down to Daytona, Florida, for "Speed Week" in March of 57. On the beach test course one of them was the second fastest car there, only beaten by a Rochester mechanical injection Corvette. An Electrojector equipped Rebel could go from 0-60 in 7 seconds. Chrysler sold a few Electorjector equipped cars (reportedly 35) in 1958. A good article on the system and Chrysler's use can be found here: http://www.allpar.com/cars/desoto/electrojector.html. The AMC system was of course the same. As far as AMC historians can tell there were only engineering test cars built, and none got out to the general public. The Bendix EFI was crude to say the least, but state-of-the-art in 1956. It worked well as long as it was warmer than 50 degrees, and that wasn't acceptable for AMC execs for a production car (don't blame them there!!). The engineering cars were all converted to 4V and sold, AMC didn't save a bunch of cars for a museum like the bigger companies. We don't know exactly how many EFI cars were built, guesses are in the 6-12 range, but a former AMC employee reported that three were used for testing at the AMC testing facility. The only other time two are 100% known to have been at the same place at the same time was Daytona Speed Week. All the 57 Rebel specials were silver with anodized gold spear down the side and had the 327/4V (conservatively rated at 255 hp, the EFI model had 288 hp -- later model AMC 327s put out 270 hp). Production didn't start for the 4V model until February 57, so it was a late model. All had the continental spare tire and other high-end options stock (radio, but not AC). The standard 1957 V-8 Rambler got the smaller 250 V-8. Starting in 1958 all V-8 Ramblers were called "Rebel" (with the 250) through 1960. The 327 was reserved for use in the 58-66 Ambassador, which was just a stretched Rebel, and all the stretch was between the firewall and front wheel centerline. Sounds dumb, but it gave the illusion of a much bigger car without much cost -- just the front end sheet metal and "frame" rails. The 250 was dropped after 61, and no V-8 was available in the "mid size" Rambler Classic. Dealers raised such a stink that the 287 was introduced in mid 1963 for the Classic. More than most wanted to know, I'm sure! I'm just full of Rambler facts, aren't I?
well heres the beast in the woods, when i parked it here 13 yrs ago there was no trees around it at all !!! i need to spend a little saw time to get it out now, but it looks pretty good all in all. lots of extra parts and a total interior inside storage, including a console with the 3 shifter option !!! i'm gettin fired up on startin a new deal so keep pics a comin, i love it. ramble dude (the rodder formerly known as goatboy)
goatboy, that's a 1961. 61-63 models look the same except for the grille -- the 61 has the square mesh grille. The others have a bit more elaborate castings in the center, but I always liked the 61 best. You can put any kind of mesh insert in there you want, or just paint it to match the color behind it. One bad thing about the 61 models is they didn't use as much galvanized metal as the 62-63. You might find rusted rocker covers, but they are easy to fab and replace. The only other difference is the way the door handles are fastened on. Should be a rubber escutcheon between the panel and handle. Push it in and you'll see a square shaft with a pin. The pin is a loose fit, so rotate the handle until the pin is near vertical then push the rubber in underneath and it should fall out. Might need a little help. Later models use a spring clip like most other cars use. Also note that except for the outer sheet metal, dash, and firewall that car is the same as 58-60 "rounded" Rambler Americans. All the glass interchanges as well as mechanical parts with the exception of heater related items. The entire dash will even swap out between the two, and doors will bolt in place (but of course the body lines are drastically different!). Just a nice thing to know if looking for mechanical parts or glass.
yea i knew it was a 61, josh wrote 62 but he didnt know. i built one of these already for my brother , this was a extra parts car but still very complete. i am going to need a windshield before long, kinda neat to know that. thx for the info
anyone have some cool ideas on a cheap drivetrain setup that will work easily for this car? dont care too much to have a ton of power, just dont want to mess with a computer at all.thanks for any pics goatboy
1980s Ford 250 I-6. That's the ONLY semi-modern engine that will fit in the engine bay. That or a Mustang/Falcon 200. I forget when they quit making the 250, but my bro had an 83/84 T-bird with a 250 six. Get the trans and all. You can even get speed parts for it! No relation to the Ford 300 six... that's actually an outgrowth of the older 240 six. The 250 is a tall deck 200... See www.fordsix.com. Also, take a look at this link right here: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=366096&highlight=rambler That's a Ford 200 in a Rambler! The 250 mounts the same, but has the SBF tranny pattern. Read up on the 200 and 250 on fordsix.com...
A FUGGIN FORDDDDDDD !!!! i am gettin hives just thinkin about that shit ! oh well i can lie about it i guess, only the ford guys will really know. like a mustang huh? will the front end or rear end fit close also, maybe transfer the whole drivetrain?
Not the front end, there's nothing wrong with the Rambler front end anyway, and it's not hard to rebuild -- just very different than anything you've seen before! A Maverick or Mustang rear end will fit, so will an S-10 Chevy. The Chevy six is just too long, though the integrated head 4.1L (intake made onto head) would probably be narrow enough. It's just 3-4" too long! Otherwise I'd say find an old Poncho OHC six and stick that in... (based on the Chevy 250 block). I don't like it either, but the Ford engine is the only thing that easily fits without a lot of cutting under the hood. I don't even recommend people rebuild the 196 Rambler six unless it's going to be a collector car and stay relatively close to home, or only occasional trips. It's too hard to find parts for, especially things like a water pump, for a daily driver, and doesn't really like to be pushed hard. Hard would be everyday driving now!
so like what year of stang or maverick, early 70's and your'e sayin the rear end is the right width? thanks for all your help goat
Any year Maverick should fit. Ford Ranger pickup is a good fit too. Either of those are 7.5-8.0", but plenty strong for a six. The Rambler rear end can be kept, just has that odd "big nut" driveshaft and rear yoke. But the u-joint is the same as an early Falcon or Mustang with six, so it's easy to build a driveshaft that works. If you get that far and decide to keep the Rambler rear end I'll let you in on the tricks to dealing with that yoke and driveshaft.
The Jalopy Journal
