Yeah buddy congratulations I’m impressed that’s a really good song That was taken from one of their live versions too for whatever reason UA-cam compresses it it was crystal clear whenever I recorded it and put it back.
My 2000 XJ 4.0 is about to cross 215k, running like a top, not burning oil or anything. When she starts burning oil, I'm gonna ball home the cylinders, throw some new pistons, rings, rod bearings, probably a new mild cam and cam bearings, and run her until she gives out.
When International Harvester redesigned the pickup line in 1969,it used the 232,258 AMC engine till the last year of the IHC light duty trucks in 1975,it was also the standard engine in the Scout IIs ,also the 401 AMC,was an option in the 74 Travelall.
We had a 73 Hornet with the 232, and an 83 Eagle with the 258. Both were good engines. I called the Hornet "The Anvil" as it was simply unbreakable. I still want a CJ7 with the 258 and a 3 speed manual. WYR: CJ5 and Hornet for the previous reasons. Thank you as always - well done sir! ~ Chuck
My friend Frank had a Gremlin with a 258 (dunno what year). I liked that car, and once did a clutch in it with him. You either loved it or hated it. I liked those Gremlins! The 258 was a great power plant.
2 things... One. My Grampa had a '74 Hornet with the 232/auto. That thing was bulletproof. Only issue was the body rusted away. I ran the thing in '95 in a demo derby, and the only reason I came in 2nd was because my @$$ broke and the wheels couldn't turn against the body... BUT... after 30 minutes of running with no coolant, that engine still ran. The only issue was there was a heat riser pipe from the manifold to the carb that would rot out causing it to run rough until fully warmed up. We fixed the issue after the second time by putting in copper tubing instead of the whatever kind of cheap metal was used. Two. In '88 I bought a Commanche Pioneer pick-up, 4.0/5sp as a work horse. My ex-husband liked it so much, he bought the Eliminator version with the same mechanicals for his everyday driver. (I stuck to my Grand Marquis for that, thankyouverymuch). Bulletproof my ample @$$. BOTH mechanically were rolling pieces of caca. My Mom had an '03 Wrangler, and was the same (I begged her not to buy it). WYR: 1) EAGLE (so far ahead of it's time!) 2) Gremlin (my mom had a '74 with the 304 V8... was a screamer! And she LOVED to prove it!
In the summer of 1968 My dad traded in his 1962 Rambler American (with a flathead six) for his very first new car, a base Javelin with the 232. In 1969 My mom got a used 1965 Rambler Classic with the 232, in the fall of 1970 she traded in the Classic on a Hornet Sportabout with the 232. I learned the basics of pulling wrenches with those three cars. The engine was torquey for it's size, but what I remember most was how smooth it was. Particularly in that Classic, you could barely tell if it was running at idle. I loved these engines, thank you for posting this. (You gained me as a subscriber.)
Welcome to the community i’m a huge AMC fan and just a fan of orphan cars in general =) Awesome story thank you so much for sharing those memories with us
I owned a 1972 AMC Hornet with a 258 and Automatic. I dove to NY to Florida and back again in 1986. I went 65 mph and only had depress gas pedal 1/4 of the way and averaged 28 mpg. I also had a 1976 AMC Pacer with a 232 and Automatic. It had the troublesome Prestolite ignition and the module was expensive. So when it failed I put a breaker point distributor and has to drop the voltage going to it with a ballast resistor (NAPA Echlin ICR 13). These engines were rock solid and would run forever it seemed with only basic maintenance. So easy to work on too.
@@What.its.like. I think The word reliable sums up the strategy of AMC The bulk of the vehicles they designed and sold were built to be solid reliable vehicles which they sold for a fair price. That's not to say they couldn't step out of their comfort zone from time to time. I think the Marlin, Javelin, and the AMX prove that. However, not only could they step out of a box they actually could create a new box that was never before seen. The Eagle is proof of that. Would we even have a huge SUV market nowadays If not for the vision that AMC had when they created the Eagle?
Since Rambler/AMC was perceived as a minor player by most of the public the cars were not given serious consideration by the typical middle American buyer in my opinion even when some of these cars made a lot more sense than some of the oversized boats that were in fashion@@carlmontney7916
Best of both worlds AMC/Chrysler 4.0 with 258 crank stroker motor. The bore spacing is the same as Ford small block and Cleveland engines. Working on a Frankenstein 6 with a pair of Cleveland heads welded together.
The 242 was/is like a double sized GT6 (Triumph) engine, without the CD Stromberg carb set up. SMOOTH! I will live with the bad gas mileage knowing the repair costs of "modern" engines, there is no free lunch.
Totally agree but with the Classic stuff if you switch out the rear end it’s been through a single barrel or two barrel carburetor even a full barrel carburetor is pending on what it is you can get decent gas mileage out of old stuff.. I have a 52 Chevy 1 ton truck that’s a Dually 373 rear end 350 I get 20 miles to the gallon on the highway which is better than a new truck.. My truck has a stake bed I drove a truck for a company landscape company got 6 miles to the gallon
Old stuff usually could lean out the carburetor mixture at light throttle cruise conditions and advance the ignition timing by vacuum advance at the same time,I don't think new emissions controlled engines are allowed to do that. I think that allowed the older engines to pull higher RPM at cruise speeds without paying as much penalty in reduced gas mileage. @@What.its.like.
I owned 4.0L AMC/Chrysler straight six engines for three decades. They were the most bulletproof, reliable engines that I ever owned and I've owned a lot of different engines over the years. The 4.0L's ran well, never used oil, had decent power for a straight six, and did everything that I asked them to do. Their fuel economy was not stellar, but not terrible, either. The engines were actually put together better than the vehicles in which they were installed. The story is that the 4.0L just could not meet the then new 2007 model year emission standards from the EPA. The 3.7L and 3.8L V6 engines that replaced the 4.0L were garbage.
I think the carburetor jetting for the early 232 was slightly leaner than typical GM products of the era which made the engine more sensitive to developing performance issues when the spark plugs or breaker points/ignition system were overdue for replacement/service "tune up" although someone who knew what they were doing could probably have rejetted the carb or changed metering rods if a simple readjustment of the "idle needles" wasn't enough I think the ignition timing of these needed to be set precisely and the factory recommended different initial timing setting depending on whether the driver intended to buy high octane gasoline or not . I think the factory setting for ignition timing were more aggressive than other Detroit car brands which may have helped the typical Rambler product to have better gasoline mileage than the competition.
CJ and I loved all my standard transmission gremlins 😉 I had a hornet amx .. ran good just smogged and robbed 😢 slow as a turtle 🐢 !!!! Great Episode 👏👏👏 Happy Motoring ✌️🤠
I always thought the Eagle was a really cool looking vehicle that would be fun to drive but have never driven one, I'd pick that one, and the Gremlin would be cool too! 😎
Absolutely one of the best engines ever. Bulletproof bottom end and runs forever. The bolt-on parts vary, such as the Jeep's plastic valve cover which is a fiasco, the basics inside were solid and uber-relaible. These engines used to be cheap at the junkyards because nobody ever needed one with demand so low, so went the price. Many AMC's were scrapped with good engines, a lot being driven to the crusher. We once ran a 232 in a scrapper American wide open with no load for about 12 minutes total trying to blow it up and it simply wouldn't cooperate. No other engine would have withstood that level of abuse. WYR the Grand Cherokee and the Gremlin.
I totally agree This year I would love to get four engines 225 Chrysler 232 amc 300 ford 292 Chevy Drain all the oil and see which one last the longest
@@What.its.like. All of those American straight sixes were good engines, but because of the seven main bearings I'll bet on the AMC! To make it slightly more even, I'd choose the Mopar 225, the AMC 232 (or 258), the 250 Ford, and the 250 Chevrolet because they were available in competing vehicles.
My 1980 CJ7 had a 258. The engine was okay but the carburetor warped the baseplate and leaked. In those days AMC was buying accessories from whoever would sell them cheapest. I could not get a replacement so I did my best to bend the baseplate so the butterflies worked and sealed the carb to the manifold with liquid metal. To my surprise it held. I would rather have the 1988 Eagle and the 1971 Hornet.
In reference to the q on the choice of cars, YES and YES! I have had several Gremlins and a Hornet. Wish I still had each and everyone. And AMC made a Concord not a Commadore.
7:46 Never liked a six cylinder, but most are dependable engines. Owned two Jeep products. One was a 76 Renegade with the 304 and the other was a 78 J 10 truck with the 360. AMC V8's had good power and l won't mention the 76 Matador l got on trade with the six cylinder it was junk.
My choice would be a low or no option, first year, small bumper Gremlin with a swapped in T5 5-speed tranny from a later AMC Spirit, a 3.89 geared limited slip differential from a Javelin or AMX and a 282 from a Mexican-market VAM and a cam and 3-2bbl intake and headers from Clifford (the '6=8' inline 6 cylinder speed equipment manufacturer!) What a sweet little sleeper that would be!😃😃😃
I just realised that the VAM 282 engine featured in this video is from my 1980 VAM Rally AMX! Thanks for the feature! Update: It has been tuned-up so I have newer pics. Here's my original video: ua-cam.com/video/g9WghexCFws/v-deo.htmlsi=pdWgfsKy9MmDH8nG.
My dad has a 76 cj5 with the 258 and that thing barely broke on my grandfather and only broke down 2 times once from a 20 year old a fuel pump breaking and 2nd from a battery
Give me the 1988 AMC Eagle all day everyday. 1988 Eagle was my 1st car short live due to.a transmission issue and I listened to my dad who said it wasn't worth putting money into to fix the Trans and boy do I wish I didn't listen to him!
That was the first new car my parents bought they loved it, I remember seeing pictures. My dad said it would go anywhere. I really want to review one but that’s a car that I really want to drive so I’ve been kind of holding off.
Our '74 Hornet had the 258. It had a backfiring problem that no dealer could solve. An independent shop called around and found a solution. A slight modification to the jets took care of it. My '88 Jeep Cherokee had the 4.0-liter. Great engine
First burnout on the street I ever witnessed as a kid was committed by a Gremlin with a six. Worthy of note: by mixing & matching parts from the 258 and the 4.0, a stroker six could be easily created that displaced 4.7 liters. In fact, Mopar offered just such a crate engine for a while. I have a 2001 Jeep Wrangler TJ with the 4.0/5 speed, but its frame is rusted out. Trying to decide whether to swap the engine into my 1987 Dodge D150 pickup, like Chrysler could have offered.
@@johneckert1365 Another example of Chrysler shunning AMC heritage. Recall they dropped the Comanche in favor of the Dakota due to internal competition and didn't want the J-series/Gladiator alongside Ram trucks.
@kevinwong6588 Those little Comanchies were cool, it's a shame they axed them. I do understand their mindset on producing 2 competing mid-size trucks. With that in mind, they did start producing thier Durango in late 90's, that was pretty much a direct competitor to the Cherokee/Grand Cherokee. Hypocrisy? 🤷♂️ I do think I agree with axing the J series pickups though. Besides using up all the parts already manufactured by AMC, there was probably no point in it. Dodge trucks really were a better product, and I think it was challenging to get the carburated AMC 360 to pass emissions in a light GVWR 1/2 ton pickup (think of all the emission crap and vacuum hose bees nest on a late Wagoneer. And no point in engineering EFI for the AMC 360. A 4.0 with EFI would've been cool in a J series. Of course I liked the 4.2 AMC, but it was getting challenging to get that to pass emissions as well. And for whatever reason, the 232 & 258 never seemed to get very good gas mileage, especially when compared to Chrysler's slant 6 🤷♂️
I don't know about the OHV version but the 196 flathead had head gasket problems and required a several step torque and occasional retorque to keep them from leaking; yes the block and head were surfaced.
My 258 was the least malaise of that era. The 4.0, a rightly renowned engine, made 47.5 HP per liter. I have, no names, a 1.8 naturally aspirated 4cyl that makes 77 HP per liter. A fine testament of how far gasoline engines have advanced in power and efficiency.
Had a '91 Cherokee and two '96 Grand Cherokees with the 242. Great cars. My ex- totaled the '91 falling asleep at the wheel. The '96 Grand Cherokees died due to transmission failures. BTW, om choice #1, what you called a "Grand Cherokee" was likely a "regular" Cherokee. The Grand Cherokee was a completely different body.
I've had several Jeep TJ's with the 4.0, I had a 1999 with the internals from a 258 and made it a 4.7 l that jeep had 280 HP at the wheels and over 300 lb-ft of torque. I have a 2005 TJ unlimited with a Banks turbo kit and intercooler it makes 360 HP at the wheels and over 400 LB-FT of torque. I also have a 2001 tj with a Chevy lm7 5.3 liter and that one is fast over 400hp, but thats an engine for a different video. Thanks for what you do my father and I love your videos, they are very well curated and narrated.
Not only that, but the Grand Cherokee didn't even exist until 1993, and it was essentially Chrysler's answer to their own question of "how do we let the people know that we own Jeep now?"
The Cherokee you showed is not the grand Cherokee, it’s the Cherokee XJ. They do very well off road and I’d like one of those. Although the CJ had stronger transfer case and diffs. 2nd scenario, the Hornet! Ive been looking for one since 1980. Second choice, the Gremlin.
Question, why did AMC stay with the straight six, when the other brands went to a V6 engine. i would prefer the AMC straight 6 engines over any V6 bar none, even today. regardless of what brand.
They were broke.. that’s why this is why the in line 6 lasted as long as it did.. A good friend of mine told me that Amc Eagle is the Rodney Dangerfield of the automotive world and in a lot of ways that is the best way to describe them as a brand they had a great product they just did not know who to market it to.. they partnered with Renault which if the light at the end of the tunnel is partnering with Renault it might as well be a train at least with a train it’s over.. lol But short answer they didn’t have the money to do so
The lack of a V6 guaranteed the failure of the Pacer. That car was originally designed for the compact GM rotary engine. When that fell through, the Pacer's interior was shoved back, a massive dashboard had to be developed to cover up the intrusion, and the space utility inside was ruined. All to shoehorn that inline six in. Wouda, could, shoulda... I know. I think AMC could've saved the Pacer if they would've purchased Buick V6's to go in because it is a compact engine. But, that would've cost money and been an embarrassment for AMC. Or, AMC could've chopped off the rear cylinders of a 304 and put that in. But, that takes time and money. AMC might have had the time but, all their models were doing fine with the AMC inline six. So, why waste money developing a V6 when there was no pressing need to? Well, the Pacer happened.
@@BlackPill-pu4viIn the later years AMC did put thier 304 in Pacers. That Buick 3.8 was garbage back I the 70's and early 80's, I think that would've been a big mistake to use that.
They also blew money on a symmetrical all wheel drive system for the jeep grand Cherokee all of that stuff was ready to go when Chrysler bought them that is the main reason Lee Iacocca wanted Chrysler was because of the all-wheel-drive system and jeep.. and their engines
Loved your presentation. I always wanted a straight 6 - I just never had one. Same with a Chrysler slant 6. My 72 Dart had the 318 V8 on an automatic. I wanted a slant 6 with a 3 on the tree.
Happy you dig this episode I’ve never had a straight six powered car either couple v6 but never an in line six 3 on trees are fun to drive beat security feature now
Yep. The 242(4.0L) was the best 6cyl. engine that was put in Jeep products. It was the shining star when Renault had taken over AMC-Jeep. Although EFI had been around for years already, it was new to Renault-AMC-Jeep. The EFI system was know as Renix(Renault-Bendix) and made the 4.0L a real powerhouse. Chrysler upgraded to their own EFI system and got even more power. In it's final years, horsepower was increased again, but this was due to modifications to the exhaust system. The exhaust modifications wouldn't fit in the YJ Wranglers, so those didn't get the final hp boost. Of note, they created a 4 cyl engine by chopping off 2 cyls. from the 4.0L- 6. Used in Jeep products, it was also the base engine in the Dodge Dakota P/ups. It was also a fairly powerful engine for 2.5L and could run circles around GM's "Iron Duke" (originally introduced in the 1962 Chevy II), having better power and reliability. It was crazy for Chrysler to drop the 4.0L-6. The V6's they replaced it with have had many issues and left plenty of 'Jeepers' stranded in the back country. The Eagles were pretty cool, but their styling was dated, going back to the AMC Hornet. The mid-size Cherokees and Wagoneers had issues from their unibody build. The Pacers were a joke from day one. They probably put the final nail in AMC's coffin, what association with Renault had began.
My wife went through a phase last year where she was dying to get a Jeep. If they still had the 4 L motor, we would have one. But not with the pile of junk they replaced it with.
The 199ci was a tuff engine had one in my 1st car clifford headers and clifford 4 bbl intake I busted 7 transmissions with that motor still runs today is a rambler American
WYR 1: I'm assuming you meant Cherokee since that's what was pictured. I'll pick that. WYR 2: Pacer. I actually suggested to my Dad he look at one of these; he did and told me I was crazy! We lived south of Chicago about the same distance Aurora (home of Wayne and Garth) is west of Chicago, so maybe Pacer-lust is a geographic thing!
Way back when I used to run a Yale forklift powered by the 225 slant six. These things used to run 20 hours a day, sometimes more. Plastic bags used to get sucked up off the floor causing almost daily boilers. The engines would last as long as the forklift itself, around 10,000 hours. About the only way you could kill the engine would be to run it out of oil and keep running it. This engine deserves its reputation.
Being an Auto Body Tech. i woked at AMC MERCIDES and those in line sixes never skipped a beat,but when they started to put after market Air conditioned on them they started to over heat cause of the burden of the engine cooling system was not design for much labor but it still functioned and got by.
My 1976 AMC Hornet had the 232 inline 6, it was bulletproof. When i donated the car to my old high school auto shop 10 years later with 120,000 miles on it, the auto shop teacher asked when i re-ringed the engine because the compression was at factory spec. I just smile and told him “i never replaced the piston rings” just changed oil and filter regularly and gave it a tune up with new plugs and Penske silicone wires and distributor cap with rotor.
WYR1: Love the Eagle! WYR2: I worked as a parking valet runner in the middle to late seventies. I would prefer the Hornet Sportabout, consider the Gremlin, no thanks on the Pacer.
The 232 was usually an option over the 199 as the base engine in the Rambler American. Either would show taillights to the six cylinder Ford Falcon. These were very good engines for the most part although I think emissions controls badly hobbled them in the later Gremlins and Pacers. I think some 4 cylinder engines put in Jeep or AMC products were a cut down of these engines although they may have mingled with GM Iron Dukes. Would be hard to find any weakness in these engines as compared against the Chevrolet or Chrysler sixes.
The 2.5 liter four is a trimmed down 232/258/4.0, introduced for 1984. Iron Dukes were used on some CJs in 1980-1983 as well as the DJs (also their LLV successors).
That’s what I meant to say I meant to say Concord for whatever reason I said Commodore Hudson made the Commodore and there was also a band called the Commodores but Amc did not make one
These engines are just begging for some brave soul to make a crossflow head out of either Ford Windsor/Cleveland or the Small Block Chevy/LS. The bore center is exactly the same as the Fords and only .020 less than the Chevies.
Great information but to be fair they also cracked on the 250 in-line six built by Chevy after 1978 or somewhere around in there because they were one piece
2006 jeep rubicon was peek inline 6 engine. Unfortunately most of the rubicon got trashed rock crawling and what's left is on a lucky day $14k with 200k miles on it
Very dependable and overlooked series of engines I think the best was the last as found in the Cherokee’s and grand Cherokee’s so for the would you rather I’m choosing the Cherokee the choice-5 was cool for its day but rode terribly and really wasn’t that capable unless you did a lot of axle work as most people did and in the second set it’s the gremlin and I’d have fun with the ugly duck
I believe that the Gremlin was a better car than the Pinto (and know that it was much better than the Vega) People didn't recognize Rambler/AMC as a mainstream car brand and so didn't consider purchasing it instead of the more familiar brands also I think the unibodies sounded/vibrated somewhat more harshly than the body on frame constructed General Motors cars which made some people think they were "cheap" although there were efficiency advantages -- I am not sure whether rust was more of a problem than some other brands -- I think Chrysler products might have had more rust problems than some of the body on frame brands although I think GM workmanship and paint job quality declined into the modern era If only they could sell a Hornet or Gremlin with the pre emission 232 with the 2 barrel carb -- or the Pacer with the Chrysler/Jeep 4.7 H.O. V8 ---- and maybe a modern 7 speed automatic ----
@@What.its.like. Timeless classics. The Eagle. Though not very pretty was ahead of its time long before the crossover SUV industry. My Jeeps are fun toys that empty my wallet. That's why JEEP stands for Just Empty Every Pocket. Ive owned a Jeep since I was 16. 53 now. Owned 8 of them over the years.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"In keeping Secrets of Silent Earth:3, by Coheed and Cambria
Yeah buddy congratulations I’m impressed that’s a really good song
That was taken from one of their live versions too for whatever reason UA-cam compresses it it was crystal clear whenever I recorded it and put it back.
A great motor, one of the best, international had a six I believe it was called Hurricane also a-great motor.
Seven main bearings made it a smooth and tough power plant.
My 90' jeep Cherokee 4.0 went 350k before I sold it in 04' and last I knew it is still going.
Different engine
@@jefflilyea4669 Same family.
My 2000 XJ 4.0 is about to cross 215k, running like a top, not burning oil or anything. When she starts burning oil, I'm gonna ball home the cylinders, throw some new pistons, rings, rod bearings, probably a new mild cam and cam bearings, and run her until she gives out.
When International Harvester redesigned the pickup line in 1969,it used the 232,258 AMC engine till the last year of the IHC light duty trucks in 1975,it was also the standard engine in the Scout IIs ,also the 401 AMC,was an option in the 74 Travelall.
Awesome added information thank you so much for adding that
@@What.its.like. Thank you for your research,and your great work.I always look forward to Wednesdays.
We had a 73 Hornet with the 232, and an 83 Eagle with the 258. Both were good engines. I called the Hornet "The Anvil" as it was simply unbreakable. I still want a CJ7 with the 258 and a 3 speed manual. WYR: CJ5 and Hornet for the previous reasons. Thank you as always - well done sir! ~ Chuck
Had an 88 Cherokee when I was growing up. Sold it with 234k miles to a family friend. They sold it with 276k miles a few years later.
My friend Frank had a Gremlin with a 258 (dunno what year). I liked that car, and once did a clutch in it with him. You either loved it or hated it. I liked those Gremlins! The 258 was a great power plant.
Awesome thank you so much for sharing those memories =)
2 things... One. My Grampa had a '74 Hornet with the 232/auto. That thing was bulletproof. Only issue was the body rusted away. I ran the thing in '95 in a demo derby, and the only reason I came in 2nd was because my @$$ broke and the wheels couldn't turn against the body... BUT... after 30 minutes of running with no coolant, that engine still ran. The only issue was there was a heat riser pipe from the manifold to the carb that would rot out causing it to run rough until fully warmed up. We fixed the issue after the second time by putting in copper tubing instead of the whatever kind of cheap metal was used. Two. In '88 I bought a Commanche Pioneer pick-up, 4.0/5sp as a work horse. My ex-husband liked it so much, he bought the Eliminator version with the same mechanicals for his everyday driver. (I stuck to my Grand Marquis for that, thankyouverymuch). Bulletproof my ample @$$. BOTH mechanically were rolling pieces of caca. My Mom had an '03 Wrangler, and was the same (I begged her not to buy it). WYR: 1) EAGLE (so far ahead of it's time!) 2) Gremlin (my mom had a '74 with the 304 V8... was a screamer! And she LOVED to prove it!
In the summer of 1968 My dad traded in his 1962 Rambler American (with a flathead six) for his very first new car, a base Javelin with the 232. In 1969 My mom got a used 1965 Rambler Classic with the 232, in the fall of 1970 she traded in the Classic on a Hornet Sportabout with the 232. I learned the basics of pulling wrenches with those three cars. The engine was torquey for it's size, but what I remember most was how smooth it was. Particularly in that Classic, you could barely tell if it was running at idle. I loved these engines, thank you for posting this. (You gained me as a subscriber.)
Welcome to the community i’m a huge AMC fan and just a fan of orphan cars in general =)
Awesome story thank you so much for sharing those memories with us
I owned a 1972 AMC Hornet with a 258 and Automatic. I dove to NY to Florida and back again in 1986. I went 65 mph and only had depress gas pedal 1/4 of the way and averaged 28 mpg.
I also had a 1976 AMC Pacer with a 232 and Automatic. It had the troublesome Prestolite ignition and the module was expensive. So when it failed I put a breaker point distributor and has to drop the voltage going to it with a ballast resistor (NAPA Echlin ICR 13). These engines were rock solid and would run forever it seemed with only basic maintenance. So easy to work on too.
Awesome thank you so much for sharing all of that information as well as those memories greatly appreciate it
91 grand Cherokee
71 Hornet
The AMC 6 cylinder engines were very well built and designed. Damn near bulletproof.
Great choices totally agree may have not been the most powerful but they were reliable
@@What.its.like. I think The word reliable sums up the strategy of AMC The bulk of the vehicles they designed and sold were built to be solid reliable vehicles which they sold for a fair price.
That's not to say they couldn't step out of their comfort zone from time to time. I think the Marlin, Javelin, and the AMX prove that. However, not only could they step out of a box they actually could create a new box that was never before seen. The Eagle is proof of that. Would we even have a huge SUV market nowadays If not for the vision that AMC had when they created the Eagle?
Since Rambler/AMC was perceived as a minor player by most of the public the cars were not given serious consideration by the typical middle American buyer in my opinion even when some of these cars made a lot more sense than some of the oversized boats that were in fashion@@carlmontney7916
Best of both worlds AMC/Chrysler 4.0 with 258 crank stroker motor. The bore spacing is the same as Ford small block and Cleveland engines. Working on a Frankenstein 6 with a pair of Cleveland heads welded together.
What about the cam.
I've owned so many AMC,s pacer .hornet. Gremlins and of course my favorite. Javelins. I still have my 1971 Javelin.
The 242 was/is like a double sized GT6 (Triumph) engine, without the CD Stromberg carb set up. SMOOTH!
I will live with the bad gas mileage knowing the repair costs of "modern" engines, there is no free lunch.
Totally agree but with the Classic stuff if you switch out the rear end it’s been through a single barrel or two barrel carburetor even a full barrel carburetor is pending on what it is you can get decent gas mileage out of old stuff.. I have a 52 Chevy 1 ton truck that’s a Dually 373 rear end 350 I get 20 miles to the gallon on the highway which is better than a new truck..
My truck has a stake bed I drove a truck for a company landscape company got 6 miles to the gallon
Old stuff usually could lean out the carburetor mixture at light throttle cruise conditions and advance the ignition timing by vacuum advance at the same time,I don't think new emissions controlled engines are allowed to do that. I think that allowed the older engines to pull higher RPM at cruise speeds without paying as much penalty in reduced gas mileage. @@What.its.like.
Eagle and gremlin. The 258 is my absolute favorite engine ever.
Sweet =)
I owned 4.0L AMC/Chrysler straight six engines for three decades. They were the most bulletproof, reliable engines that I ever owned and I've owned a lot of different engines over the years. The 4.0L's ran well, never used oil, had decent power for a straight six, and did everything that I asked them to do. Their fuel economy was not stellar, but not terrible, either. The engines were actually put together better than the vehicles in which they were installed. The story is that the 4.0L just could not meet the then new 2007 model year emission standards from the EPA. The 3.7L and 3.8L V6 engines that replaced the 4.0L were garbage.
Thank you so much for sharing all that information and insight greatly appreciate it
I think the carburetor jetting for the early 232 was slightly leaner than typical GM products of the era which made the engine more sensitive to developing performance issues when the spark plugs or breaker points/ignition system were overdue for replacement/service "tune up"
although someone who knew what they were doing could probably have rejetted the carb or changed metering rods if a simple readjustment of the "idle needles" wasn't enough
I think the ignition timing of these needed to be set precisely and the factory recommended different initial timing setting depending on whether the driver intended to buy high octane gasoline or not . I think the factory setting for ignition timing were more aggressive than other Detroit car brands which may have helped the typical Rambler product to have better gasoline mileage than the competition.
CJ and I loved all my standard transmission gremlins 😉
I had a hornet amx .. ran good just smogged and robbed 😢 slow as a turtle 🐢 !!!!
Great Episode 👏👏👏
Happy Motoring ✌️🤠
Awesome =)
Smogged and robbed that’s good..
I always thought the Eagle was a really cool looking vehicle that would be fun to drive but have never driven one, I'd pick that one, and the Gremlin would be cool too! 😎
Absolutely one of the best engines ever. Bulletproof bottom end and runs forever. The bolt-on parts vary, such as the Jeep's plastic valve cover which is a fiasco, the basics inside were solid and uber-relaible. These engines used to be cheap at the junkyards because nobody ever needed one with demand so low, so went the price. Many AMC's were scrapped with good engines, a lot being driven to the crusher. We once ran a 232 in a scrapper American wide open with no load for about 12 minutes total trying to blow it up and it simply wouldn't cooperate. No other engine would have withstood that level of abuse.
WYR the Grand Cherokee and the Gremlin.
I totally agree This year I would love to get four engines 225 Chrysler 232 amc 300 ford 292 Chevy Drain all the oil and see which one last the longest
@@What.its.like.the 225 Chrysler slant 6 will win.
@@What.its.like. Please not the 300 Ford, 200 or 240 if you are wrecking them.
@@What.its.like. All of those American straight sixes were good engines, but because of the seven main bearings I'll bet on the AMC! To make it slightly more even, I'd choose the Mopar 225, the AMC 232 (or 258), the 250 Ford, and the 250 Chevrolet because they were available in competing vehicles.
My 1980 CJ7 had a 258. The engine was okay but the carburetor warped the baseplate and leaked. In those days AMC was buying accessories from whoever would sell them cheapest. I could not get a replacement so I did my best to bend the baseplate so the butterflies worked and sealed the carb to the manifold with liquid metal. To my surprise it held. I would rather have the 1988 Eagle and the 1971 Hornet.
That was a 2bbl Carter carburetor, I believe a "BBD". Chrysler used that carb on it's 318 and 2bbl slant six
In reference to the q on the choice of cars, YES and YES! I have had several Gremlins and a Hornet. Wish I still had each and everyone. And AMC made a Concord not a Commadore.
Yes thank you so much for that correction I don’t know why I said Commodore not Concord
Hudson made the commodore
Great video. long time in coming glad to see this video. question 1# all 3, question 2# all 3. 👍
Great choices glad you dig this video
Your knowledge/ research is absolutely amazing
Thank you lots of research =)
Hi Jay!: INTERESTING engine episode! Too bad they didn't make that BIG six in the U.S.!!! WYR#1 CJ-5. #2 Pacer.
Sweet choices =)
7:46 Never liked a six cylinder, but most are dependable engines. Owned two Jeep products. One was a 76 Renegade with the 304 and the other was a 78 J 10 truck with the 360.
AMC V8's had good power and l won't mention the 76 Matador l got on trade with the six cylinder it was junk.
Awesome
My mom is 84 and her favorite car was her 77 Pacer G/L she loved that car and kept it for about 10 years.
Awesome =)
I never saw one of those 282 Cu.in. straight six Would've liked to definitely 😊😊
My choice would be a low or no option, first year, small bumper Gremlin with a swapped in T5 5-speed tranny from a later AMC Spirit, a 3.89 geared limited slip differential from a Javelin or AMX and a 282 from a Mexican-market VAM and a cam and 3-2bbl intake and headers from Clifford (the '6=8' inline 6 cylinder speed equipment manufacturer!) What a sweet little sleeper that would be!😃😃😃
Would you rather have that or the 401.??
Great engine episode, first pick any Jeep Cj, especially the rare Cj6 and the Cj8 Scrambler, any 4wd eagle, and the second the Hornet.
I just realised that the VAM 282 engine featured in this video is from my 1980 VAM Rally AMX! Thanks for the feature! Update: It has been tuned-up so I have newer pics. Here's my original video: ua-cam.com/video/g9WghexCFws/v-deo.htmlsi=pdWgfsKy9MmDH8nG.
Awesome thank you so much for the information and the link. I will definitely check it out.
The Cherokee I have a 2000 XJ. Second choice would be the CJ5. But if I have to pick a 2wd the Hornet.
My dad has a 76 cj5 with the 258 and that thing barely broke on my grandfather and only broke down 2 times once from a 20 year old a fuel pump breaking and 2nd from a battery
Give me the 1988 AMC Eagle all day everyday. 1988 Eagle was my 1st car short live due to.a transmission issue and I listened to my dad who said it wasn't worth putting money into to fix the Trans and boy do I wish I didn't listen to him!
That was the first new car my parents bought they loved it, I remember seeing pictures. My dad said it would go anywhere. I really want to review one but that’s a car that I really want to drive so I’ve been kind of holding off.
In its final year AMC was down to two models, the Eagle wagon and Premier.
I'll take the AMC Eagle!
Awesome choice I really like those I wanna review on this year
That guy Kevin from Junkyard Digs has rescue rescued one or two of them on his channel.
Did you ever watch Rutledge wood lost in translation (it was a good show only had one season) did one where they kind of lowered it that looked sick
No. But I will check it out.
Our '74 Hornet had the 258. It had a backfiring problem that no dealer could solve. An independent shop called around and found a solution. A slight modification to the jets took care of it. My '88 Jeep Cherokee had the 4.0-liter. Great engine
Awesome thank you so much for sharing that
I never knew they made any engines larger than the 258 . Thanks for the info.
But Mexico got that engine we didn’t
@@What.its.like. i noticed that it wasn’t offered in the USA when I kept listening. At least I know I wasn’t that out of touch. 😅
Great video, who knew amc engines a were in jeeps
I should’ve elaborated on that a little bit more they bought Kaiser Jeep in the 60s
@@What.its.like. The Jeep purchase was February 1970.
Another great engine overview, Jay. And I'll take the Eagle and Hornet.
Awesome choices glad you dig this episode
Had a 71 hornet station wagon! Loved that car! Wish I still had it!
!60 CID turbo charged version in Indycar 1970 Indianapolis 500 built by Barney Navarro. Almost made the race.
Great information =)
AMC: Always Made Correctly from After Market Components 😊🎉
Did the 1966 Rambler American use a GM/Delco starter and ignition switch ?
First burnout on the street I ever witnessed as a kid was committed by a Gremlin with a six. Worthy of note: by mixing & matching parts from the 258 and the 4.0, a stroker six could be easily created that displaced 4.7 liters. In fact, Mopar offered just such a crate engine for a while. I have a 2001 Jeep Wrangler TJ with the 4.0/5 speed, but its frame is rusted out. Trying to decide whether to swap the engine into my 1987 Dodge D150 pickup, like Chrysler could have offered.
They definitely should've used that 4.0 in pickup trucks instead of that stupid 3.9 V6
@@johneckert1365 Another example of Chrysler shunning AMC heritage. Recall they dropped the Comanche in favor of the Dakota due to internal competition and didn't want the J-series/Gladiator alongside Ram trucks.
@kevinwong6588 Those little Comanchies were cool, it's a shame they axed them. I do understand their mindset on producing 2 competing mid-size trucks. With that in mind, they did start producing thier Durango in late 90's, that was pretty much a direct competitor to the Cherokee/Grand Cherokee. Hypocrisy? 🤷♂️
I do think I agree with axing the J series pickups though. Besides using up all the parts already manufactured by AMC, there was probably no point in it. Dodge trucks really were a better product, and I think it was challenging to get the carburated AMC 360 to pass emissions in a light GVWR 1/2 ton pickup (think of all the emission crap and vacuum hose bees nest on a late Wagoneer. And no point in engineering EFI for the AMC 360. A 4.0 with EFI would've been cool in a J series. Of course I liked the 4.2 AMC, but it was getting challenging to get that to pass emissions as well. And for whatever reason, the 232 & 258 never seemed to get very good gas mileage, especially when compared to Chrysler's slant 6 🤷♂️
I want the Egale. Yes the AMC engine was tuff.
Eagles are cool
Great video, and I'm looking forward to this Tuesday! And you're tied for first on the poll I posted earlier this afternoon- good on you!
I’m stoked I can’t wait it’s going to be a lot of fun =)
Great vid!!!! 👍👍
I don't know about the OHV version but the 196 flathead had head gasket problems and required a several step torque and occasional retorque to keep them from leaking; yes the block and head were surfaced.
I'll take the CJ-5 and the Eagle
My 258 was the least malaise of that era. The 4.0, a rightly renowned engine, made 47.5 HP per liter. I have, no names, a 1.8 naturally aspirated 4cyl that makes 77 HP per liter. A fine testament of how far gasoline engines have advanced in power and efficiency.
Awesome point
That first photo is not a 1964, not a rambler classic Eagle, Pacer I've owned both star spangled banner
I’ll take Eagle (!!) and Gremlin ..
Sweet choices =)
71 Jeep CJ-5, 1973 Gremlin Great video!!!
Awesome choices so, happy you dig this video
Had a '91 Cherokee and two '96 Grand Cherokees with the 242. Great cars. My ex- totaled the '91 falling asleep at the wheel. The '96 Grand Cherokees died due to transmission failures. BTW, om choice #1, what you called a "Grand Cherokee" was likely a "regular" Cherokee. The Grand Cherokee was a completely different body.
Thank you so much for that correction and for sharing your vehicles with us =)
I've had several Jeep TJ's with the 4.0, I had a 1999 with the internals from a 258 and made it a 4.7 l that jeep had 280 HP at the wheels and over 300 lb-ft of torque. I have a 2005 TJ unlimited with a Banks turbo kit and intercooler it makes 360 HP at the wheels and over 400 LB-FT of torque. I also have a 2001 tj with a Chevy lm7 5.3 liter and that one is fast over 400hp, but thats an engine for a different video. Thanks for what you do my father and I love your videos, they are very well curated and narrated.
I'll take the eagle and the pacer please !
Sweet choices =)
8:15 that is a cherokee, not a grand cherokee
Not only that, but the Grand Cherokee didn't even exist until 1993, and it was essentially Chrysler's answer to their own question of "how do we let the people know that we own Jeep now?"
The Cherokee you showed is not the grand Cherokee, it’s the Cherokee XJ. They do very well off road and I’d like one of those. Although the CJ had stronger transfer case and diffs. 2nd scenario, the Hornet! Ive been looking for one since 1980. Second choice, the Gremlin.
Thank you so much for that correction great choices
I'll take the CJ any day ! I have a 1982 CJ 7 now, with a built 258, Weber carb and DUI distributor, amazing motor.
Question, why did AMC stay with the straight six, when the other brands went to a V6 engine. i would prefer the AMC straight 6 engines over any V6 bar none, even today. regardless of what brand.
They were broke.. that’s why this is why the in line 6 lasted as long as it did.. A good friend of mine told me that Amc Eagle is the Rodney Dangerfield of the automotive world and in a lot of ways that is the best way to describe them as a brand they had a great product they just did not know who to market it to.. they partnered with Renault which if the light at the end of the tunnel is partnering with Renault it might as well be a train at least with a train it’s over.. lol
But short answer they didn’t have the money to do so
The lack of a V6 guaranteed the failure of the Pacer. That car was originally designed for the compact GM rotary engine. When that fell through, the Pacer's interior was shoved back, a massive dashboard had to be developed to cover up the intrusion, and the space utility inside was ruined. All to shoehorn that inline six in.
Wouda, could, shoulda... I know. I think AMC could've saved the Pacer if they would've purchased Buick V6's to go in because it is a compact engine. But, that would've cost money and been an embarrassment for AMC. Or, AMC could've chopped off the rear cylinders of a 304 and put that in. But, that takes time and money. AMC might have had the time but, all their models were doing fine with the AMC inline six. So, why waste money developing a V6 when there was no pressing need to? Well, the Pacer happened.
@@BlackPill-pu4viIn the later years AMC did put thier 304 in Pacers. That Buick 3.8 was garbage back I the 70's and early 80's, I think that would've been a big mistake to use that.
AMC blew way too much money developing thier Pacer, on an all-new platform. There was certainly no money left over to design a new V6 from scratch.
They also blew money on a symmetrical all wheel drive system for the jeep grand Cherokee all of that stuff was ready to go when Chrysler bought them that is the main reason Lee Iacocca wanted Chrysler was because of the all-wheel-drive system and jeep.. and their engines
Loved your presentation. I always wanted a straight 6 - I just never had one. Same with a Chrysler slant 6. My 72 Dart had the 318 V8 on an automatic. I wanted a slant 6 with a 3 on the tree.
Happy you dig this episode I’ve never had a straight six powered car either couple v6 but never an in line six
3 on trees are fun to drive beat security feature now
Yep. The 242(4.0L) was the best 6cyl. engine that was put in Jeep products. It was the shining star when Renault had taken over AMC-Jeep. Although EFI had been around for years already, it was new to Renault-AMC-Jeep. The EFI system was know as Renix(Renault-Bendix) and made the 4.0L a real powerhouse. Chrysler upgraded to their own EFI system and got even more power. In it's final years, horsepower was increased again, but this was due to modifications to the exhaust system. The exhaust modifications wouldn't fit in the YJ Wranglers, so those didn't get the final hp boost.
Of note, they created a 4 cyl engine by chopping off 2 cyls. from the 4.0L- 6. Used in Jeep products, it was also the base engine in the Dodge Dakota P/ups. It was also a fairly powerful engine for 2.5L and could run circles around GM's "Iron Duke" (originally introduced in the 1962 Chevy II), having better power and reliability.
It was crazy for Chrysler to drop the 4.0L-6. The V6's they replaced it with have had many issues and left plenty of 'Jeepers' stranded in the back country.
The Eagles were pretty cool, but their styling was dated, going back to the AMC Hornet. The mid-size Cherokees and Wagoneers had issues from their unibody build. The Pacers were a joke from day one. They probably put the final nail in AMC's coffin, what association with Renault had began.
Thank you so much for sharing that awesome insight and information greatly appreciate it
I'd take the Jeep CJ6 and the Javelin since both are collectibles with available replacement parts.
Awesome choices and reasoning with choices
My wife went through a phase last year where she was dying to get a Jeep. If they still had the 4 L motor, we would have one. But not with the pile of junk they replaced it with.
Yeah that new hurricane they have is problematic I’ve read it’s an in-line six
The 199ci was a tuff engine had one in my 1st car clifford headers and clifford 4 bbl intake I busted 7 transmissions with that motor still runs today is a rambler American
AMC gremlin round one it was a great vehicle
WYR 1: I'm assuming you meant Cherokee since that's what was pictured. I'll pick that. WYR 2: Pacer. I actually suggested to my Dad he look at one of these; he did and told me I was crazy! We lived south of Chicago about the same distance Aurora (home of Wayne and Garth) is west of Chicago, so maybe Pacer-lust is a geographic thing!
Thank you for that correction =) great choices
Way back when I used to run a Yale forklift powered by the 225 slant six. These things used to run 20 hours a day, sometimes more. Plastic bags used to get sucked up off the floor causing almost daily boilers. The engines would last as long as the forklift itself, around 10,000 hours. About the only way you could kill the engine would be to run it out of oil and keep running it. This engine deserves its reputation.
Awesome so much for sharing your experience with this engine
Being an Auto Body Tech. i woked at AMC MERCIDES and those in line sixes never skipped a beat,but when they started to put after market Air conditioned on them they started to over heat cause of the burden of the engine cooling system was not design for much labor but it still functioned and got by.
My 1976 AMC Hornet had the 232 inline 6, it was bulletproof. When i donated the car to my old high school auto shop 10 years later with 120,000 miles on it, the auto shop teacher asked when i re-ringed the engine because the compression was at factory spec. I just smile and told him “i never replaced the piston rings” just changed oil and filter regularly and gave it a tune up with new plugs and Penske silicone wires and distributor cap with rotor.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience with that edge and that’s awesome that you didn’t have to do anything to it but change the oil
WYR1: Love the Eagle!
WYR2: I worked as a parking valet runner in the middle to late seventies. I would prefer the Hornet Sportabout, consider the Gremlin, no thanks on the Pacer.
88' Eagle all day...
Awesome choice
Cj5. Hornet.
The 232 was usually an option over the 199 as the base engine in the Rambler American. Either would show taillights to the six cylinder Ford Falcon.
These were very good engines for the most part although I think emissions controls badly hobbled them in the later Gremlins and Pacers.
I think some 4 cylinder engines put in Jeep or AMC products were a cut down of these engines although they may have mingled with GM Iron Dukes.
Would be hard to find any weakness in these engines as compared against the Chevrolet or Chrysler sixes.
The 2.5 liter four is a trimmed down 232/258/4.0, introduced for 1984. Iron Dukes were used on some CJs in 1980-1983 as well as the DJs (also their LLV successors).
Eagle / Hornet.
Who else besides Chrysler (if anyone) produced an inline 6 up to 2006?
BMW
@What.its.like. Oh wow, that's right. How'd I forget them.
@@What.its.like.
GM had their Atlas 4200. People are getting insane hp out of them.
The 258 was used in the AMC Concord. AMC never built a "Commodore". I had a '78 Concord and wish I still did.
Nicely done video.
That’s what I meant to say I meant to say Concord for whatever reason I said Commodore Hudson made the Commodore and there was also a band called the Commodores but Amc did not make one
Eagle and Hornet
Sweet choices
Barney Navarro turbo charged one and got it to qualify at Indy
That’s awesome I saw footage of a turbo charged one and it sounded pretty good =)
These engines are just begging for some brave soul to make a crossflow head out of either Ford Windsor/Cleveland or the Small Block Chevy/LS. The bore center is exactly the same as the Fords and only .020 less than the Chevies.
There are two other possible headway options.
1) A DOHC head made from LQ-1 heads
2) A DOHC head made from the Infinity/Nissan V-8
Have you or can you go in-depth on the difference between SAE Gross and SAE Net horsepower and torque figures?
Exhaust manifold always cracked.
Great information but to be fair they also cracked on the 250 in-line six built by Chevy after 1978 or somewhere around in there because they were one piece
Always wanted a CJ5 . Any inline engine would do. Lean towards the 258.
"CJ5 WITH 4 WHEEL DRIVE, WITH A SMOKY ON MY TAIL..."
2006 jeep rubicon was peek inline 6 engine.
Unfortunately most of the rubicon got trashed rock crawling and what's left is on a lucky day $14k with 200k miles on it
Very dependable and overlooked series of engines I think the best was the last as found in the Cherokee’s and grand Cherokee’s so for the would you rather I’m choosing the Cherokee the choice-5 was cool for its day but rode terribly and really wasn’t that capable unless you did a lot of axle work as most people did and in the second set it’s the gremlin and I’d have fun with the ugly duck
CJ5 😁
Sweet =)
Thought i was watching the history channel
I love the history channel
That's not a 1971 CJ5, it's a 1958. And yes, I'd love the '58 CJ5!
Thank you for that correction
I’ll take the AMC Eagle
Sweet choice
Toodaloooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I believe that the Gremlin was a better car than the Pinto (and know that it was much better than the Vega)
People didn't recognize Rambler/AMC as a mainstream car brand and so didn't consider purchasing it instead of the more familiar brands
also I think the unibodies sounded/vibrated somewhat more harshly than the body on frame constructed General Motors cars which made some people think they were "cheap" although there were efficiency advantages -- I am not sure whether rust was more of a problem than some other brands -- I think Chrysler products might have had more rust problems than some of the body on frame brands although I think GM workmanship and paint job quality declined into the modern era
If only they could sell a Hornet or Gremlin with the pre emission 232 with the 2 barrel carb --
or the Pacer with the Chrysler/Jeep 4.7 H.O. V8 ---- and maybe a modern 7 speed automatic ----
CJ and Gremlin
I'd rather have the AMC Eagle and the Pacer.
Sweet choices =)
Eagle
CJ 5….anytime.
xj CHEROKEE
Sweet =)
71 CJ.
i will take the eagle
Sweet =)
AMC significantly reduced the weight of the engine in about 1980-81
Great information thank you so much for sharing that
Please pick a better genre of music. Something from the 70s a suggestion mountain Nantucket sleigh ride.
I'd pick the Cherokee. I have a CJ5 and Eagle already. 😁
Awesome choice how do you like your eagle and CJ5
@@What.its.like. Timeless classics. The Eagle. Though not very pretty was ahead of its time long before the crossover SUV industry. My Jeeps are fun toys that empty my wallet. That's why JEEP stands for Just Empty Every Pocket. Ive owned a Jeep since I was 16. 53 now. Owned 8 of them over the years.