Print Page | Close Window

1968 AMX Front Trunnion Elimination

Printed From: TheAMCForum.com
Category: The Garage
Forum Name: Suspension, Steering, Brakes & Wheels
Forum Description: What makes it stop, turn, and smooths the ride
URL: https://theamcforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=46328
Printed Date: Mar/28/2024 at 1:58pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: 1968 AMX Front Trunnion Elimination
Posted By: husker
Subject: 1968 AMX Front Trunnion Elimination
Date Posted: Jan/09/2013 at 8:53pm
Are there any alternatives to eliminate the trunnions on a '68 AMX?
 
I am aware of the Control Freak set up but not looking to spend that kind of $.  I was hoping for more of a bolt in using later model parts.
 
Will the upper control arms and spindle/upright from a later car fit in a '68-9 AMX?  If so has anybody tried this?
 
My thougt would be to modify or fab a new upper control arm to accept a coil-over similar to the WSC kit for '70-up cars.  Or just use that kit for that matter.
 
Thanks



Replies:
Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/09/2013 at 9:39pm
Control Freak is the best option that I am aware of. Other's provide alternatives but are not the size and breadth of Control Freak.


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: 348AMX
Date Posted: Jan/09/2013 at 9:48pm
I agree^^^, the trunnion suspension is a good setup when in good condition and maintained properly.
But if you want to upgrade then I would save up and get the control freak set-up, its a really nice package, and a LOT of muscle car enthisiasts across all brands are using it.

The fact that they even made it available at all for AMX's is reason enough to support them and purchase their products. It will make an AMX handle amazing.


Posted By: husker
Date Posted: Jan/09/2013 at 10:08pm

I agree that the Control Freak stuff is really nice but it is just cost prohibitive for me right now. 

 
Anybody know about the upper control arm/knuckle interchange between a 1968 amx and something from the 70's or 80's?  Hornet, Grem, Concord, etc.....
 
Thanks
 


Posted By: purple72Gremlin
Date Posted: Jan/09/2013 at 11:41pm
If you want improved geometry, go control freak. otherwise leave it stock.


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 4:42am
The upper control arm from 70+ AMC will not fit your 69 and down car. You are pretty much stuck with a trunnion and the suspension as AMC designed it.
The best that can be said is when in good shape it works. Past that I can think of no reason to keep it except the expense of replacing it.
I am aware in the past of effort to design something to replace things with at this point in time have no idea where they went.  The price of the control freak suspension is not only typical of the genre but the components are too. 
I am aware of some conversions done where the entire spring housing has been cut out of the inner fender well and then a 70 and up front suspension and spring housing has been installed. It takes a fair amount of work to do it and a passably good fabricator to pull it off. If you are that good it is reasonable way to go. If not? Then the alternative is still the control freak or maybe others too. Or be good at rebuilding your trunnions or having it done for you.



-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 7:59am
Originally posted by husker husker wrote:

I agree that the Control Freak stuff is really nice but it is just cost prohibitive for me

Anybody know about the upper control arm/knuckle interchange between a 1968 amx and something from the 70's or 80's?  Hornet, Grem, Concord, etc.....

Thanks

 


Freshly rebuilt trunnions work perfectly fine in our pre-70 cars. You will need a thrust bearing with a 1" ID and ACE hardware has the mylar washers and o-rings required to rebuild the trunnions. The AMC vendors and other here on the forum have urethane horizontal bushings needed for the trunnions and urethane providers have the vertical bushing that goes over the steering knuckle end inside the trunnion as well. The 70 and up ball joint can be used on the control arm by drilling two new holes for the rear bolts and both the original style rubber bushings or urethane bushings are available for the rest of the front end.

The only time you cannot rebuilt the trunnion is when the hole for the steering knuckle has eggshape wear. When that happens the trunnion is no longer rebuildable and either needs to be sleeved or tossed in the trash.

Properly lubricated and installed urethane bushing kits will bring the car closer to the ride and handling of a more modern car and the Control Freak style front end will make your old AMC totally feel like a modern engineered car. With either option, it is highly recommended that you use radial tires due to without them, the car will ride like a cement truck on factory correct bias ply tires in combination with urethane bushings.

We put urethane suspension parts in all the cars we restore and would not consider using anything else. Others dislike the urethane bushings claiming they make the ride too harsh. My first hand experience is that with urethane bushings along with KYB gas adjust shocks on good quality radial tires our cars feel far more like a tight modern suspension engineered car than the wallowing and wandering vehicles that were so common in the 50s through the 70s. Others may disagree buy anyone who drives my cars, including hard core proponents of urethane bushings, all agree that they are great driving cars.

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: bigbadgreen
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 8:33am
Any problems with urethane being too squeaky?


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 8:38am
only if you fail to use enough of the grease they give you. One car has a initial squeak that goes away with 2 minutes of driving but I believe it is in the strut rod bushing that was replaced before we got the car so it will be taken apart and properly greased and that will be the end of the squeak.

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 9:17am
The use of rubber in the upper and lower, especially the lower control arm allows the movement of the arm to flex at the bushing. Urethane does not flex. When installed it must rotate rather than flex. Rubber is vulcanized to the inner and outer shell, the urethane bushing must rotate with in the inner and outer shell.  Long term driving causes excessive wear of the bushing due to the rotation. Also the lower control arm due to the dynamics of the strut rod and the single point mounting goes through a monkey motion movement due to the dynamics. This also requires the flex of the lower control  arm bushing to allow that movement with out stressing the mounting point of the bushing used at the point of rotation, that of the engine cross member.
Radial tires require an alignment setting of positive caster. About 1 or 1 1/2 degrees. The AMC front end follows design featured by the use of non-power steering, that of negative caster which favors steering input assistance to for non-power. That is as the car turns the weight transfer during turning helps turn the steering wheel. This also causes wander for short wheel base cars such as the AMX, Gremlin and Spirits and anything else but quite obvious in short wheel base. As Power steering steadily became factory standard, front suspensions were designed to favor Positive Caster which self aligns going straight ahead but makes it harder to turn the steering wheel.
Bias tires had a fair amount of slde slip, radials do not and AMC never re-designed their front suspension to favor modern technology. In fact Bias tires were still pretty much standard almost to the end of production including bias belted.
There is about enough room to dial in up to3 degrees of positive caster but doing so greatly increases the monkey motion of the lower control arm. If the bushing does not flex the control arm will thus stress the mounting point woggling out the bushing mounting hole due to stress and inducing cracks into it.
Re-enforcing it is not the answer, it is designed to flex, all re-enforcing does is aggravate the fatigue factor.  Long term is excessive wear of the bushing, lower control arm and damage.  Unless rubber is used.
If the car is not driven it makes no difference, a show car looks good. On the show car circuit in the automotive hobby many of them have never run much less had lubricant in them.
A common fix for a woggled out lower control arm bushing being loose on install is to tack weld the bushing in place. As the urethane bushing must rotate, think what tack welding does.
So no, I don't use urethane when I rebuild a front suspension. I use rubber on the bushings. Not only does it ride like a truck almost no matter what tires are used and driving one any distance these days on anyting other than good radials is a bit silly. My Spirit uses p235 60 14's in front, P245 60 14's in back, tracks straight down the road at speed and has about 45,000 miles on it now. That would not be a comfortable ride on Bias Ply Tires. All my AMC cars run radials and rubber replacement bushings.
In you have no choice, use urethane. That is what they are their for. I made my own sway bar mountings out of urethane for the 1980 AMX I did. They do not make rubber ones that big for that car. At the time it was rebuilt. 
But for a long term safe driver?
Rubber works, reduces wear and is not as harsh on the lower control arm when set to reflect Radial Tire favored specifications.
I've rebuilt some 2 dozen front suspensions and still have a stock of spares on the shelf and have become quite adept at reconditioning lower control arms.
Yes I agree, an AMC car with urethane handles well. Nothing moves, it should. But then again if it was re-bushed with OAK it would handle well too. It just would not last very long.



-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 9:56am
Sorry John but I strongly disagree with your assessment. As you know, many of us within our club only use urethane and NONE of us have any of the issue you are describing nor have we worn out parts from using urethane bushings despite driving our cars all the time. On the other hand, improper installation of any part, including rubber AND urethane bushings, will cause the type of issues you describe.

I have seen many AMC suspension parts worn out due to the rubber bushings breaking down and resulting in metal to metal contact which coincidentally is the prime reason why trunnions wear out and cannot be rebuilt. Contrarily and despite using urethane now for nearly 20 years, I have NEVER seen an AMC suspension part worn out from a urethane bushing. I have also seen many rubber bushing housings tacked to control arms so that is not an issue that should be associated with urethane.

There are two schools of thought within the AMC hobby, one being that we MUST leave the cars the way AMC built them because they were designed that way and the other being that 40-50 years worth of technical advancements are available and we should use those advances to make our cars better. I think it is clear which side the two of us are on.

And I always get a kick out of those who insist that things don't work properly despite clear and indisputable examples to the contrary. I use urethane because I both believe and have first hand experience on multiple cars that they ride and handle far better than the rubber bushings. Admittedly I have a personal preference for the ride that the tighter urethane bushings produce over the softer rubber bushings but properly installed urethane bushings are an excellent and inexpensive way to upgrade the ride (my opinion of what a performance car should ride like - others do not agree) and handling of our cars.

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: husker
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 10:22am
What urethane kit do you suggest?  I was looking at the Prothane kit. 
 
Do you have a part number for the thrust bearing?
 
Thanks


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 11:17am
Preference or not is beside the point and whether you disagree or not is not a concern to me. The fact remains the lower control arm is a weak point due the way it is designed and works and urethane aggravates the failure mode.  And ride preference does not change the inherent weakness of the design.
That said, what you do is your decision. Not mine and I really don't care. Simply because my first hand experience which is also extensive is to the contrary. Which as far as I am concerned is both clear and indisputable.
Generally metal to metal contact is a function of neglect when it comes to maintenance as applied to proper care.  This could be easily seen when prowling wrecking yards looking at worn out front suspension for core parts.  These are cars that quickly became beater status once the new wore off to where repairing them became a financial burden that exceeded the cost of buying a replacement.  I have yet to see one that was not badly worn but that is a whole nother story.
So the nice thing about your disagreeing with my easement I on the other hand, disagree with yours.



-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: Wrambler
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 11:40am
Originally posted by uncljohn uncljohn wrote:


SNIP
That said, what you do is your decision.
Not mine and I really don't care.
SNIP.



You are correct it is our decision.
I have run Poly on my car in WV on crappy roads for years. No problems at all. Yes I do know how to check for the problems you mention, installed and lubed correctly they simply are not to be found on my car.

The length of your posts implies you really do care.



-------------
Wrambler
69 AMC Rambler
4.0L, 5 speed
2015 Grand Cherokee Limited
2019 Chrysler 300


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 4:19pm
We only use Prothane. If you order them from the internet be sure to specify black unless you really want bright red (if you do I will give you a great deal on a set of reds ones :-). When removing the old bushings be sure to put a spacer in between the two sections of the control arms when you press them out or you wll crush the end of the arm where the bushigns go through. Also, be mindful that you need to reuse the outer shell of the old bushing as the prothane bushings only come with the inner sleve due to the urethane bushing not containing the outer shell. Also be sure to use plenty of the bushing grease on any surface that contacts another surfare particularly the inner sleeve surace inside the bushing.

I don't have the bearing part number with me but they are 1" ID thrust bearings. When you speak with a bearing supplier be sure to tell him its a thrust bearing otherwise you might end up with a skate board bearing!    

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: 69 ambassador 390
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 9:17pm
I just pulled a number of stock rubber "INSERTS" out of the stock shells both today and in the very recent past.  This includes some NOS bushings that had never been on a car.  I did this to install poly inserts in the original shells.  The thing is, not one single rubber insert was "Vulcanised" to the shell.  They all push out very easily with the correct size washer and a bolt.  They are not vulcanised to the shell as was said.  They are very tight and don't move in the shell though.  All the shells came out shiney clean with no rubber left at all.  Secondly,  I had poly bushings in my Ambo for well over 200,000 miles and never had a crack or broken part that could be attributed to the poly.  I did have a strut rod fail at the spot where the threads ended on the shaft after hitting a huge pot hole in sub zero temps.  I can't blame that on ploy though.  More like 150,000 miles on a 30 year old car.  The trunnion suspension was always completely trouble free if adjusted correctly and kept lubricated.  I know the big car is different but basically the same idea.  The advent of ball joints was not brought about by the design being better but because it used fewer and cheaper parts.   Although I preffer the softer ride of rubber on a cruiser I can truthfully say that my big car handled a lot better with the poly.  There was more than enough adjustability in the stock suspension to make up for the radial tires and, at least on the later big cars, you can put cam bolts on both the upper and the lower arms.  The early cars had the cam bolts on both uppers and the later ones on the lowers.  By switching to all six cam bolts, the adjustability is nearl infinate.  It's a simple mod.  A final note is that if installed correctly, most poly lower strut rod sets are of a ball and socket style and they can articulate quite a bit while still controlling fore and aft movement of the control arm.  The tacking that was mentioned is a very common fix for arms that have had more than one set of bushing shells installed during their lifetime.  It is always done on the non-lipped wall of the control arm that often gets a little oversised.  I do it as a matter of course just for insurance.  Did two today that had nothing to do with poly bushings.  They were virgin AMC rubber all the way.  I usually use PST polyGraphite bushings myself because they are resistant to squeaks due to the impregnated graphite in the compound.  The ProThane are nice also.  There are legitimate reasons for both styles bushings depending on user prefference but not because of scare tactics involving part failures.  Those are most often installer error or incorrect tool usage.  Use what you want and don't be afraid of either choice due to fatigue falure issues.  You are more likely to hurt the arms pushing in and out stock rubber style bushings than to leave the shells in place and use poly inserts.

-------------
Steve Brown

Algonac, Mi.

69 Ambassador sst 390

84 Grand Wagoneer

69 Cougar XR7

65 Fairlaine 500XL

79 F-350 Super Camper Special





Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 11:28pm
Ive never seen Cam Bolts on any of the 70 + suspensions I have either rebuilt or torn down for parts. If they are there they don't show up in the TSM's either. And I have built a number of them and salvaged parts on more.
Other than Trunions work when they are built correctly personally I don't like them. But that is a preference not a judgement on their functionality other than, there is no Anti-nose dive geometry on a Trunion equipped car. There is on one with ball joints.
And my concern is the operation of the lower control arm. The way it moves to support the suspension motion is in a compound arc and the lower control arm is designed to flex when doing so. And when the front suspension is adjusted for positive caster which favors the use of Radial tires the flex is aggravated.
Proper function expects the lower control arm to flex along with the bushing which does so because it is rubber.
In rebuilding them and obtaining cores I would estimate that about of third of them were damaged beyond being re-usable. I still have a stack of upper control arms but I am down to welding up lower ones and re-finishing them. And yes I care that it is understood how that suspension actually works.
But what one does with it is frankly not a concern of mine.
I like that (I forgot the name of the suspension piece referenced) it is worth the 4 grand it costs for what you get. A whole new front cross member, tubular triangulated control arms, modern disc brakes and rotors. Rack and pinion steering! I guess from what I read Power is Coming. Flaming River already has it so it can not be too far behind. It yanks an AMC car out of the dark ages and into the modern world in front suspension technology. But if you are going to spend 4 grand on suspension the odds are you are spending a whole lot more on the car. It ain't gonna be a beater and certainly not a restoration.  There are few AMC cars worth spending that amount of money on as an investment for restoration that can absorb a major non stock front end and still have people ready to spend deep pocket money on them.
Then again looking at the rest of  car.  A stiffly sprung car to utilize the benefits of being stiffly sprung needs a solid body to bolt things to and AMC is not that.
My Spirit with a 100 inch wheel base and an Arizona car thus no rust has more body flex than my Chrysler van does, a 2007 which also handles better.
An AMC car is a toy and fun to own. I have built more than a few and enjoyed everyone of them. Most of them are not worth squat financially but on the open road they draw attention, and will run well.
And re-engined run even better.
My Hornet Sportabout is one of those things. I'll end up spending close to 2 grand when the upholstery is done. But it will be righteous when completed.
 Some of them are actually collectable. But things like rubber bushings? I have yet to see one that was not vulcanized to the shell, but they are old and don't take much effort to press them apart. I had two Old Stock strut rod bushing sets purchased through Kanter. I installed them on my Hornet sitting on jack stand. Both sets failed completely in 3 weeks. I bought new moog pieces. Why did they fail? New Old Stock means just exactly that 45 year old rubber dies.
The lower control arm is a throw back design and is problem prone. Treating it with care will keep further problems from happening. Installing urethane  is asking for failure. That is a design factoid. The question is not one of if, it is one of when.
Keep in mind, many of these things went many miles with minimum maintenance. That was what they were built to do for the most part. And they did it.
 As far as stiffness.
I am tired of things that ride like trucks unless they are one.
But that is a preference.'
I will walk away from one that rides that way at this point in my life.







-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: 69 ambassador 390
Date Posted: Jan/10/2013 at 11:50pm
 We are talking a 1968 here.  That is stated in the original post.  I beleive Control Freek has a front tubular arm set up that bolts to the stock locations and is very reasonable.  That set up could be installed on the 68 for a low cost and leave the option for adding coil overs later.  The complete rack and pinnion front with coil overs does not have to be installed.  I now have the full Control freek coil over set up both front and rear but that is not all that they offer.  The stock lower arms are not designed to flex during travel but instead to follow a common sweeping motion folliowng the arc between the strut rod attaching point at the rear and the  lower bushing at the cross member.  You assertion that the arm should flex that much while supported by the triangulated strut rod doesn't jibe with all that I've learned or been tought in all my years working on suspensions.  Do you have any accepted industry litteriture to support that?  Never heard that claim before.  Fords used that same lower arm with triangulated strut for many years into the 1990s also.  Where did your info come from?

-------------
Steve Brown

Algonac, Mi.

69 Ambassador sst 390

84 Grand Wagoneer

69 Cougar XR7

65 Fairlaine 500XL

79 F-350 Super Camper Special





Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 6:27am
30 years of rebuilding these things and wondering why they are so badly tore up and working with people who fabricate front suspensions and modifying the Ford suspension so that it works with out going through the monkey motion action at the lower control arm.  Talking with people who seriously road race the cars and listening to the problems they  have had getting these suspensions to actually work competitively or competitively enough to function in today's world anyway.
Most of the after market solutions to the Pinto/Ford/Mustang II inherent problems is to come up with a tubular lower control arm.
And 68 or not, the problem is inherent in the lower control arm strut rod geometry as it controls the location of the lower control arm, it's pivot point and the stresses applied at it as caster is adjusted.
If control freak has bits and pieces that work, it is a function of using them if you wish to obtain a modern variation. The custom car culture uses any number of suspension variations all based on some kind of a cradle or another that bolts or welds onto the frame or becomes the frame. But each and every one of them have to be custom built to actually fit. Which apparently what the control freak does when looking at them to make them work with an AMC. The prices I see are pretty much in line with the industry at large. The question is whether some one wants to spend the price on one hand and once done, whether the end result, a modification is marketable to the next owner at that price.
And I guess in part that depends on what the next owner thinks they are buying. A valuable restification or a street rod.
For the most part, where I see the next owner paying value dollars is on a street rod if they are going to spend the money.
Most street rods change hands; routinely for far more than the same car restored does on the whole.
If the 68 has adjustable upper control arms it has no bearing on the geometry of the lower one. It's geometry for the most part is controlled by the positioning of the strut rod. The 70 and up caster is controlled specifically with the strut rod. An inexpensive application using the Ford derived pieces in suspension modifications requires re-bending of the strut rod to get the plane of motion in line with the pivot point and then making new strut rod mounts to support the thing.
While not commonly done, a good fabricator can fabricate the mounts and weld them into location and have them work.
Again, the AMC front end, designed before the universal use of radial tires was designed to work with in it's application, that of a family car rather than something with performance potential and was in it's day state of art, worked and performed it's job. The shift to ball joints was years after the industry had done so, before radial tires were popularly used and allowed the manufacturing of anti-dive braking geometry which required the steering knuckle to move in a manner the trunnious would not allow. So that was a plus.
Bias Ply tires have a whole different set of dynamics that take place where the rubber meets the road. To the extent today that in certain applications they have become a niche market product.



-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 7:31am
This discussion has come full circle. The very reason many of us use urethane is because all passenger tires other than retro manufacturered tires are radials. Rubber mounts were an important element of the car's ride and handling with bias ply tires whereas radial tires by nature of their design and more shock abosorbing nature along with gas vs oil based shocks change the entire ride and handling characteristics of a car. Interestingly, one could legitimately argue that putting radial tires on a car with rubber bushings over compensates for the very issues that have been discussed here and therein lies the rub: What is actually the best combination for ride, handling and safety? There are no back to back tests or engineering analysis of the two combinations so everything posted arguing both sides is mere speculation

One thing is for certain however and that is NONE of my cars ride like a truck and in fact ride AND handle like a modern car while still providing a supple ride that is not harsh yet much firmer than the stock rubber bushings in combination with radial tires. Suggesting otherwise is merely the result of someone not having ridden in a car with urethane bushings that is set up properly and with good gas shocks. Many, many AMCs are set up with a hodgepodge of suspension parts. On the other hand, we have researched, tested and validated the setups we use and have a list of proponents who are not only satisfied with the setup but no longer consider using anything else. Like anything in life, it all boils down to personal preference but suggesting that there are dire consequences of going one way or the other is simply not true. We are talking about 40 year old cars here. Things break and just yesterday we had to weld up an upper bushing socket that was cracked with (you guessed it) original style rubber bushings. It happens.

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 7:46am
Almost forgot to add, the car we welded up the bushing socket on is a 70 AMX that is getting new rubber bushings rather than urethane. The car is being restored for a guy who wants it for his wife to drive to stock shows with him in his killer Packard. We decided that ride comfort will no doubt be a priority over handling so the car is getting rubber bushings all around and original passenger style white latter tires just like AMC did it.

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 10:55am
My contention is and remains, the lower control arm is a weak spot in the Existing AMC front suspension as to it's operation and reliability.
What ever else one does to them is pretty much personal opinion. Mine is, urethane bushings aggravate the inherent weakness of the design.
Stiffness is not an attribute, it is a preference. And stifness does not solve design problem.
Arguing it is a positive attribute is a lost cause, it is an opinion.
And not mine.
However in either case AMC designed the lower control arm to flex in order for it to do it's job more or less and my experience in working on them the mechanical failure rate is high as a function of time and miles.
Trying to eliminate flexing aggravates binding.
I've done my home work and research to verify that.
For what ever that is worth. '
This comment excerpted from an article on the Chris Alston designed Pinto or Mustang II suspension in terms of improving on the original design by including a free standing lower control arm to eliminate the strut rod and pivot point, and inherent problem in that suspension which needed to be solved also as it is similar if not identical in operation to the AMC control arm indicates the same piece of information needed to be taken care of.

By redesigning the lower control arm into an A-arm design and incorporating a new rear mounting point that rotated on the same axis as the forward pivot, Alston eliminated the inherent binding experienced with stock-type components caused by the two off-axis pivots.

I have made my decision how to deal with the situation as I see it. And A stack of damaged lower control arms is a significant factor in making it.

The information is there for others to see and use as they see fit.
But again
using urethane because it makes things stiffer, is not a solution. In fact in certain instances, it is part of the problem.

There is apparently currently available only one option to replace the existing AMC suspension with a modern equivalent and with the associated benefits. Admittedly a tad pricey but it is one more than none.  And is probably worth every dime spent on it if you want it.
And if that works for some people the option is there.
It is not a Rambler mentality decision to use or not use it as was narrowly pointed out. It is one of evaluating need vs expense and then making an educated decision. The more knowledge that is available the better the decisions can be. Doing something for cheap rarely gives the best solution. Neither does arbitrary throwing money at things.
After all the U.S. did not get billions of dollars in debt by making financially smart decisions.




-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: tyrodtom
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 11:55am
  A lot of 4 cyl.  circle track cars have a similiar design lower strut rod,  some behind the lower arm, some ahead.   When rules allow it,  some replace the sleeve bushing with a heim rod ends.   They let the suspension go thru much more range of motion without binding.   I talking race track,  we're not concerned with road noise being transferred back thru the suspension mounts.
  I done this myself to a few cars,  and looked at my 66 American's strut rod and think I might try that on it.


-------------
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.


Posted By: THE MENACE
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 1:21pm
Originally posted by tyrodtom tyrodtom wrote:

  A lot of 4 cyl.  circle track cars have a similiar design lower strut rod,  some behind the lower arm, some ahead.   When rules allow it,  some replace the sleeve bushing with a heim rod ends.   They let the suspension go thru much more range of motion without binding.  
 I done this myself to a few cars,  and looked at my 66 American's strut rod and think I might try that on it.
 
Something like this maybe?
 
 
 
This strut rod eliminates 100% of the bind and will not twist the lower control arm (like a stock strut rod does) as the front suspension goes through it's travel. It's also much easier to adjust than a stock strut rod!
 
Dennis


-------------
Former Owner of:
The Craig Breedlove "AERO AMX"

Still Owner:
SS/AMX #9 replica (THE BIG MENACE)
70 AMX 416, EFI, Nash 5 speed   
70 Javelin 401, 727 (Wife's)
72 Gremlin Autocross Project.


Posted By: tyrodtom
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 2:20pm
  Like that,  but i've done it by welding threaded rod to the stock suspension arm  and installing the heim joint on that.

-------------
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.


Posted By: JonnyB
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 5:42pm
I've looked into replacing my trunions too, I'm going to use a knuckle from something non-trunion and make an upper arm, I think Howe sells a kit if you would prefer a kit, but I plan to just use tubing, heims, and some plate...

There is NO WAY I would pay that kind of $$$ either, esp. when you can make it yourself...


Posted By: Buzzman72
Date Posted: Jan/11/2013 at 9:47pm
I've often had the "fantasy" of taking a pre-'70 AMC body and swapping in the entire front frame rails and inner fenders of a '70-up body.  Such as a Hornet/Gremlin clip on an American, or my favorite, a '70-up Ambo clip on a '67 Marlin.  Sure, the upper "troughs" might have to be swapped from the old to the new, in order to be able to bolt up the fenders.  And YEAH, having the measuring system from a quality frame rack would probably make the job a ton easier; easiest yet would be to have your own frame shop out back.

But the trials and tribulations of the trunnion front end on the '68 Jav I once owned have me totally sworn off trunnion suspensions for life...unless I can win the lottery and buy the '56 Hornet Special Hollywood Hardtop I have my eye on.  THAT one, I'd keep as-is.


-------------
Buzzman72...void where prohibited, your mileage may vary, objects in mirror may be closer than they appear, and alcohol may intensify any side effects.


Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Jan/12/2013 at 1:40pm
You only have to change the spring towers to use the upper arm and spring from a 70+ car in a 68-69. The Hornet/Gremlin spring tower will work in the 68-69 Javelin AMX with a little tweaking. This is a lot of work though, lots of spot welds to drill out. I'd rebuild the upper trunnions (or get rebuilt ones). Costs less in the long run, and can be installed in a day if you have the spring tools. Car will handle great with the urethane trunnions too.

The only thing you gain is the ability to dial in more positive caster by changing. As John says, you can only get 3 degrees in the trunnion suspension before it starts to bind -- he's saying the ball joint suspension does the same, I believe. I have 3 degrees in mine now and it wants to wander a bit, as John also mentioned. This is on a 112" wheelbase Classic wagon though, not a short wheelbase AMX or Gremlin. I'm going to have it set at 0 degrees when I have it aligned next and see if anything changes.

I agree with John on the flexing of the lower arm, trunnion or ball joint suspension. It was designed to flex. If the inner bushing on the lower arm is urethane it is more resistant to twist and the arm itself must twist more and the suspension movement is hampered. I don't use urethane strut rod bushings. In my car I can feel a pot hole jar in the floor when I did. Half as much with rubber. I'm not sure the urethane bushing stresses the arm a lot more, because the whole suspension doesn't move as much. The harder urethane will bind more, restricting movement slightly. Modern smooth roads, radial tires, and good gas shocks mean the suspension doesn't HAVE to move as freely as it did in the 60s with rougher roads, harder tires, and stiffer shocks. So as Dan says, it's about full circle and doesn't matter as much. Rubber will ride a bit smoother, and good new rubber will handle just about as good as poly. Poly holds up longer though -- 10 year old rubber won't handle as good as 10 year old poly. Don't use NOS rubber, use new! NOS is still old and may be dry rotted -- won't hold up long. Should be okay for a seldom driven show car, but the NOS strut bushings I tried about 10 years ago disintegrated after a few months of driving.  I have rubber suspension bushings with urethane sway bar bushings.

For performance I've recommended "half-n-half" strut bushings -- urethane in front, rubber in back. Urethane isn't as soft and flexible as rubber, and the strut bushings restrict up and down movement a bit. The hard bushing in the front prevents caster changes on acceleration, the rubber in back allows a bit more and faster movement. Not so concerned about caster changes backing up!


-------------
Frank Swygert


Posted By: husker
Date Posted: Jan/22/2013 at 5:32pm
I am putting together parts to rubuild my trunions and had a question:
 
AMX39068 states that the thurst bearing i.d. is 1", but looking at:
 
http://www.skidmore.edu/~pdwyer/amc/trunnion.htm#parts - http://www.skidmore.edu/~pdwyer/amc/trunnion.htm#parts
 
it states to use a Nice 608v which is a 7/8 i.d. thrust bearing.  Just want to make sure before I order the parts.
 
Thanks
 


Posted By: 0069X
Date Posted: Jan/22/2013 at 7:40pm
I've never had any complaints with my trunion suspension, but all I ever hear is CONTROL FREAK. So just how expensive is it for a 69 AMX?


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/22/2013 at 9:49pm
I will throw a caliper on one tomorrow to verify but remember pretty clearly getting the 1" bearings for the AMX and SC/Ramblers that we were restoring.

-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: FuzzFace2
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 7:53am
Originally posted by 0069X 0069X wrote:

I've never had any complaints with my trunion suspension, but all I ever hear is CONTROL FREAK. So just how expensive is it for a 69 AMX?
Check out this link for more information.

http://theamcforum.com/forum/control-freak-2nd-gen-ifs_topic46547.html" rel="nofollow - http://theamcforum.com/forum/control-freak-2nd-gen-ifs_topic46547.html

Al Kamhi
Control Freak Suspensions
Winter Springs, FL
888-325-6462

http://www.freakride.com/" rel="nofollow - www.FreakRide.com

Dave ----



-------------
TSM = Technical Service Manual

75 Gremlin X v8 for sale
70 Javelin 360/auto drag car
70 Javelin 360/T5 Street car


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 9:21am
I actually think the Control Freak system is a pretty good value for replacing all those old and dated engineering parts.  If they were being put on a $50-$60K car nobody would fuss much about it but when you want to put it on a $3500 AMC, it seems disproportionate to the overall value of the car but that in no way diminishes the value of the Control Freak setup rather it just means you bite the bullet to get our beloved old AMC to have a much better and far more flexible suspension system than how it came from AMC.  

I plan to put a Contorl Freak setup in an American that I will be racing and rest assured the setup cost a heck of a lot more than the car but it will make the car more adjustable and no doubt safer at the track so to me at least, the benefits outweigh the cost.


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: 0069X
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 1:48pm
Originally posted by FuzzFace2 FuzzFace2 wrote:

[/QUOTE]
Check out this link for more information.

<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" =Msonormal> http://theamcforum.com/forum/control-freak-2nd-gen-ifs_topic46547.html" rel="nofollow - [COLOR=#800080 size=3 face=Calibri - http://theamcforum.com/forum/control-freak-2nd-gen-ifs_topic46547.html[/COLOR -


<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" =Msonormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><FONT size=3 face=Calibri>Al Kamhi
Control Freak Suspensions
Winter Springs, FL
888-325-6462

http://www.freakride.com/" rel="nofollow - <FONT size=3 face=Calibri>www.FreakRide.com



<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" =Msonormal>Dave ----<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN>

[/QUOTE]

Thankyou Dave, coincidently, the 1st. 3 #'s of their phone # (325) is the same as ours. Only we live in Ohio.


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 3:27pm
The Control Freak suspension conversion with all of it's permutations seems to be about the only one brought up in the last 10 years or so that actually made it through to a final permutation and complete with options like power rack and pinion and variations to make it more functional over a wider range of uses.
What is to complain about it other than price?
But then again hit any cruise night here locally 7 days a week 52 weeks a year one will run accross variations of front suspension modifications ranging form carefully well rebuilt with lowering supplied by air, hydraulic and cut springs all of which are not only perfectly acceptable but universally approved nation wide. Including 1939 wide bolt pattern Ford Drums up to and including the humongously expensive 6 piston caliper cross drilled and etched into serious over kill. All a function of who ever wanted it done and paid to have it their way.
Check out the prices of these things. Pick a manufacturer or look at a bunch. Fat Man has a big name internationally in front suspension conversions. Those prices are not out of line with A Control Freak set up and look at all the applications there are for Fat Man front suspensions. Including pre-war Nashes and Metropolitans. But no AMC. A Henry J is at least one of them. I don't know if I will ever want to install a Control Freak suspension, I have no desire to install a Fat Man suspension either. That does not mean that they are not first cabin and worth every dime spent on them. It just means I can make the front suspension of My AMC cars do what I want them to do to my satisfaction. I can lower the front, make the car stop and turn and align the things so the tires do not wear funny. That makes me happy and I can afford that.
And should it happen that I run across a situation where either I can't do what I want to do or what I want to do can not be done then I will start saving my money to install something better.


-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: FuzzFace2
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 4:17pm
UJ you have to look at what you need to do to the car to maybe get it on the road or say you are going to push it a little harder with that 401 you just installed.
Say you have to rebuild the front end on a 68 car and find it needs trunions, all the rubber is shot, ball joints & all rod ends. What shape are the arms in, any cracks found? Box leaks and has drum brakes on all 4 corners.
By the time you track down all the parts and say AMC disc set up how long did it take and more so the $$. Now how mush more $$ would you have to add to buy the CF setup and know the control arms do not have cracks, you can get ball jounts & rod ends down the road. I hear front shocks for the early car are also getting hard to find. Dont have that issue with the CF setup.
To each his own they say but if you are going drive it hard and need everything it might be best to go with CF even if just the arm & shocks kit.
Dave ----


-------------
TSM = Technical Service Manual

75 Gremlin X v8 for sale
70 Javelin 360/auto drag car
70 Javelin 360/T5 Street car


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 4:47pm
yup, looked at, even if it has drums in front, I have a full disc conversion on the shelf in the garage. Kanter will pony up a rebuild kit for about a C note + some except the strut rod bushings are new old stock and they have failed just sitting there but Moog has a new design out, or at least one I have not seen. One on the car the other on the shelf. Brakes are all in adequate shape an shocks have been procured. Ball joint replaced with functional dust shields.
This is not my first rodeo, this is about number 24 or so. Drive shaft has been made and installed engine mounts fabricated and in place along with transmission mounts. About all that is needed at best is to fill and bleed brakes to verify master cylinder is still sound. And fill the rear axle with 90W. Good to go. And frankly it will get the job done for the cost outlayed.
And like I said, the Control Freak suspension is probably worth every dime you pay for it. But conforming to an old saying something like an apple two for a quarter is only worth it if 1. you need and apple and 2. you have a quarter.
And right now I don't need any more apples than the one I already have and I don't have a quarter to spend so I will pass until I do.



-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: FuzzFace2
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 8:35pm
You missed what I was saying. You spent a C note +, you where lucky you had the brakes on the shelf but say you did not, then throw in odds & ends what do you have in to it 2K+ and you still have some parts that are what 40+ years old?
So for another what $1500 you have all new parts and thinking you will be able to get them in 10 years do you think the same with the AMC parts?
If you are not keeping the car stock and you are going to sprnd 75% of what the kit is, go for the kit I say.
Dave ----


-------------
TSM = Technical Service Manual

75 Gremlin X v8 for sale
70 Javelin 360/auto drag car
70 Javelin 360/T5 Street car


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/23/2013 at 10:23pm
No I unnerstand what you are saying, you are missing what I am saying. For about $100.00 cash I will have brakes that will stop the car which is all that I am asking of them and stop it well. For another hundred I will have  solid front suspension that will steer it. So a cash out lay of about $200.00 out of pocket in this circumstance i have a solid functional front suspension that will go where the car is pointed and support the P235 35 19 wheels and tires that will be used to get there with including the right stance, etc.
And I do not need to spend the upwards of  four grand for the control freak suspension no matter how good it is.
To me it is not good enough to warrant spending the scoots it is required to in order to get it. At least at that level anyway.
And even if fat man made a package to fit my car the odds are if they did it would be about half the Control Freak package would cost, and that would not be worth it either.
So like I said. I don't NEED anything better than what is on it at the moment and I have places I would rather spend that money than on things I don't need or particularly want. 
What is on it at the moment is quite capable of doing the job I am asking it to do.  And as far as reliability goes I expect to get an easy 10 years out of it.  And about the only thing I might consider is later on converting to ceramic disc brake pads if I can find them being made some where. But even that is low on my bucket list.






-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 6:31am
Different people have different cost/value equations so what may not be worth it to one person is worth every penny to someone else.  Control Freak has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in making new technology suspension setups for our cars and due to lower volumes of AMCs to put those new systems on, needed to price their systems at a level where they can recover their investments over a reasonable period of time.  Frankly, I would hope we can all be thankful that there even a company out there that took the time to make an alternative available to us for the now antiquated trunnion and front brake systems at all.  

No matter who the manufacturer, whether Control Freak, Wilwood, Flaming River or anyone else, the cost for after market parts will be more expensive than fixing or buying parts when available for the original AMC systems.  Replacement parts will always be far less costly than total new systems so comparing the cost of one vs the other is not a valid equation. Bottom line is if you are perfectly happy with the late 50s to early 70s technology then stick with the factory stuff. If you want modern technology and find its improvement to be a good value then the Control Freak system is a great way to go.

Comparing Fat Boy or any other system to Control Freak is a meaningless academic discussion if they do not have an equivalent system to Control Freak to replace the trunnion AMC front end. 


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 8:10am
No body makes anything to replace the trunion front end  and if fact other than some efforts in the past that never apparently reached any form of fruitation, the only front suspension alternatives that I am aware of are for Metropolitan or early Nashes.  Although if memory serves me right a few coil over alternatives were available 10 years ago for later AMC products and may very well be now but are just that, alternatives to be considered for personal rather than reasons of necessity.
And won't be as long as no one is willing to spend the money to obtain one.
A comparison to Fatman or Flaming River is neither pointless nor meaning less. They are state of art alternative suppliers for what ever purpose one has to modifying or building a custom based automobile .
For what ever that reason is, a decision to use one is not based on how much money was spent developing it nor on how much money you have that your can throw at it  but a value judgement based on need for it.
That becomes quite personal. One with deep pockets can pour money into a project and stand back bragging about how much something cost and the end result may have no value at all as applied to either technology involved or cosmetic end results. Just that it was expensive.
Some one else will do a cost analysis as to what benefits are IF ANY. And then make a cost/ benefit rational decision as to whether something is worth it or not.  And that decision affects their project and no one elses.
If the end objective is cosmetic, whether it is functional or not, casting a value judgement on it that does not apply is pointless.
If the end objective is to replace a decidedly dated design that no longer can be functional in the new application than the decision to spend money on it has nothing to do with cosmetics and again is pointless to compare.
But if an existing product can functionally perform it's duties it is also pointless to deride the decision to not replace it.
For it is pointless again to some one else.
The old adage of if it aint broke don't fix it comes to mind.
If a trunion can get the job done then it ain't broke.
If the objective is defined and then met, the the job is also defined and complete.
If the objective is to replace something just because you can than the decision to replace it can be evaluated by others as pointless.
But that makes no difference as the decision is applied to the objective at hand and become personal.
A 60's or 70's technology that meets the defined objective is not broken. It is not even open for discussion other than a personal objective that is just that. Personal.
Sort of like the latest Boeing Plane that has been banned from the sky until they figure out why the Hi Tech batteries catch on fire.
That plane represents the latest in aeronautical engineering, sitting on the ground costing money while DC3's designed in the 30's are still flying.
It how ever is an apples and oranges comparison, to can be made but it is pointless to do so.
Thus I am quite capable of determining if the 50 year old design with admittedly flaws as I percieve them to be but workable ones can get the job done with in the frame work of it's limitations and also quite capable of seeing to it the parts are functionally adequate to get the job done as available at this time it is pointless to point out that the can be replaced quite adequately for a price that I can also evaluate the worth of, to me and no one else is not worth it to me. So I choose not to do it.
Now if you choose to do so it will be for your own reasons, not mine an equally pointless to chastise you for making that decision.
It personal and very well may not be from necessity.







-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 8:25am
John, what the heck are you going on an on about?  We basically have a single provider that is offering a new alternative for our outdated trunnion front end design. 

Trunnions are getting harder and harder to find and without proper maintenance it is well know that they wear out and become unusable.  And wnen there is really only one alternative to the trunnion system out there, comparing them to someone who does not make a system for our cars has no bearing on this discussion as the other guy's system is not an option.  I have 5 or 6 requests for a Control Freak quote so obviously it IS of value to a number of people otherwise they would not be asking for a quote.  Nobody is saying the old system is broken rather the comments and inquiries are just the opposite and are about doing something better.  We replace old furnaces, old AC units, old wiring and old appliances in our homes and many other things not always because they don't work rather because newer and better technology is out there.  Some folks lke to hang onto the old stuff and some folks like to get the new stuff and that is what this is all about and to each his own.  

And when and how did airplane batteries come into the discussion????  This discussion is about putting a different designed component on an existing car while the new plane and the old plane have nearly nothing in common other than can both fly, albeit with one not currently in the air.  So are you implying that the Control Freak system is a fire hazard? LOLLOLLOLLOL


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: 348AMX
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 10:26am
Funny there was never a major manufacturer making a complete suspension for AMC's, and then suddenly control freak came out with just about the best suspension available for any muscle car for an modern upgrade.


They are deeply involved in making AMC stuff. They are currently restoring a 70' AMX and fit it with their suspension and just replaced the trunk drop offs and lower rear quarters. They post updates on it on facebook with detailed pics often.

They are also considering offering layaway plans on the suspensions to help with affordability. I think as they sell more they will come down some in price anyway. GREAT company!


Posted By: uncljohn
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 11:43am
This is an interesting question:
John, what the heck are you going on an on about?
I am on record as to saying this is a heck of a package but I neither need or want it.
If I did I would be more than willing to cough up the where with all to obtain it yet I am bombarded with the arguments that one should purchase it based on;
1. Availability
2. The amount of money it took to develop it.
3. It is about the only manufacturer making it
4. it is in constant re- design
5. It only costs about 4 grand so it is affordable to install in our 2 grand cars.
and a whole hosts of emotionally based arguments to support the company.

Back off.

I don't need it.
If I did I would buy it.
I first have to want it or need it and then afford it.
And while affording it could be an iffy proposition I do not need an argument about how modern it is as as justification for it.
That by itself is not a justification. It is a description.
And air plane batteries are modern too and if that is a justification than explain why a plane is grounded because of a modern battery.
It is a major expense that has to be justified in order to both purchase it and then install it.
If one can justify both the use of it and the expense, not only is it a modern and available option.
If one or the other can not be justified, it is not even in consideration.
It appears to be a good package
Frankly I would be tempted to call up fatman to see what could be whipped up before I sprung for this package.
If for no other reason than the probability is if I am going to replace a 50 year old front suspension on a car I am building the odds are very high I am also going to replace a 50 year old cast iron worn out motor with something more modern too along with something that represents a state of the art transmission rather than an archaic 50+ year old transmission.
As you say, it is a personal decision.
And one that is made individually.
And frankly I do not need some one to carry on about how much money was invested in the design or who put time and effort into making it available.
If I do not need it, then it makes no difference to me.
And I do not need it. Thus it is not justifiable.
And in addition, at this point in time I do not want it.
Should I ever want it the thing is available and then and only then would I consider buying it.
At the present.
What I have works
and that is all i am concerned about.
And I can make that decision with out the concerns of who makes some thing else and how much it costs.
I am glad you are restoring a 70's  AMX, however if my money was paying for a 70's AMX restoration it would not include removing parts and replacing them with aftermarket components that have nothing to do with the word restoration.
You are building a street rod. Not a restoration.
Thats cool.
And more power to you.
But as restoration if there was any value to the thing based on being a restoration a major modification based on using massive replacement non as produced parts take the value of the restoration right down the toilet.

As a street rod the odds are it could sell at a price higher than a restored car could demand but as a street rod it would be marketed under a completely different genre to a completely different buyer.  And be listed in the back of the Good Guys Gazette classifieds not Hemmings under AMC. Nothing wrong with either place except they are two different classes of automobiles. And the second would probably be worth more not only with a Control Freak suspension package but also a Chevrolet LSX 700 hp engine and a modern computer controlled automatic transmission.
To each their own. 




-------------
70 390 5spd Donohue
74 Hornet In restoration
76 Hornet, 5.7L Mercury Marine Power
80 Fuel Injected I6 Spirit
74 232 I-6, 4bbl, 270HL Isky Cam


Posted By: 67RogueX-Code
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 1:08pm
I just completed the installation of the new "filter-out-all-posts-that-have-nothing-meaningful-to- say" software...
 
The previous page is blank...hm, I wonder if it's working or not?  LOL


-------------
Bob Wilcox

67RogueX-Code


Posted By: Rogue343
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 2:18pm
Originally posted by 67RogueX-Code 67RogueX-Code wrote:

I just completed the installation of the new "filter-out-all-posts-that-have-nothing-meaningful-to- say" software...
 
The previous page is blank...hm, I wonder if it's working or not?  LOL
 
Bob, you should be ashamed of yourself.  Wink


-------------
1967 Rambler Rogue 'X' code 343 4 speed
1966 Rambler American 440 4 door Factory 290 (now 360) 4 speed VIN 100003


Posted By: 348AMX
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 10:58pm

Anyone else following the Resto/"restification" of the 70 AMX on Control Freak Suspensions website?   It's awesome! Just saw the latest pic in their log and they detailed Tig welding repro lower rear quarter panels. This car is going to be their 2013 showcar, so A LOT of people are going to see how sweet an AMX can be! This company is really stepping up to the plate for AMC enthusiasts.


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/24/2013 at 11:10pm
I spoke at length with Al today and got prices for nearly all permutations of the front and rear Control freak setups for all AMXs, Javs and Americans and will get the word out to those of you who have requested quotes. Anyone considering using their setup should plan on having 15" wheels as the 11" Wilwood brakes may rub the inside of some of the various 14" wheels used on our cars.

After much deliberation we decided it was not necessary to ground all the Control Freak suspension systems due to being confident that the fire hazard from the car's battery not being an issue!  LOL


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: scott
Date Posted: Jan/25/2013 at 6:26am
Originally posted by 67RogueX-Code 67RogueX-Code wrote:

I just completed the installation of the new "filter-out-all-posts-that-have-nothing-meaningful-to- say" software...
 
The previous page is blank...hm, I wonder if it's working or not?  LOL
I got the software that filters out posts from people from Arizona. Works great!!! Lots of large blank areas in many threads. 


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/25/2013 at 7:03am
Originally posted by scott scott wrote:

I got the software that filters out posts from people from Arizona. Works great!!! Lots of large blank areas in many threads. 

Too bad it only works on content coming out of AZ.  Must be the heat!!!Wink


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: 348AMX
Date Posted: Jan/25/2013 at 8:28am
Prices for AMC suspension parts have been on their site for a long time.


Posted By: amx39068
Date Posted: Jan/25/2013 at 11:05pm
Originally posted by 348AMX 348AMX wrote:

Prices for AMC suspension parts have been on their site for a long time.


Agreed. Anyone who wants to pay list price should just go to their website and order them direct.  If anyone wants to get them from me they will have the opportunity to save some $$$$ over list price.


-------------
Dan Curtis-Owner and CEO AZ AMC Restorations; Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amcmusclecars/ & Curtis Real Estate Development


Posted By: 348AMX
Date Posted: Jan/26/2013 at 2:03pm
Yes its usually better to go through an authorised distributor since buying in bulk gets a lower price for the product.   I am thinking about becoming an authorised distributor for Subaru STI parts. Its a HUGE market. I'll probably start with Ralley Armor mudflaps and Cobb accessports(hand held tuners) I saved a LOT on the accessport wich usually sells for 600+ by going through a distributor, and saved $100.


Posted By: OzJavelin2
Date Posted: May/24/2013 at 7:06am
Hmm .. Thread mine but I've sat here reading it all ..

+1 agree with concept of no "default" use of urethane in suspension parts in older vehicles. Outside AMCs I've seen it cause issues on Mopars (upper control arm mounts); too harsh ... Especially on awful Australian roads. Personally I rebuilt both my Javelins with a combination of rubber and urethane. The lower control arm on AMCs looks weak to me so I stuck with rubber ..

Big hats off to Control Freak for spectacular efforts with AMC components .. Especially catering to RHD vehicles!!!!!   How great is that? We would be talking only hundreds (not tens of thousands as in the USA) of potential vehicles here. Their price would be well worth it. If I keep my RHD '69 much longer I'll be seriously thinking of a CF RHD conversion .. Sweet!!!


Posted By: alber1x
Date Posted: Jul/31/2013 at 10:32am
Originally posted by OzJavelin2 OzJavelin2 wrote:

Hmm .. Thread mine but I've sat here reading it all ..

+1 agree with concept of no "default" use of urethane in suspension parts in older vehicles. Outside AMCs I've seen it cause issues on Mopars (upper control arm mounts); too harsh ... Especially on awful Australian roads. Personally I rebuilt both my Javelins with a combination of rubber and urethane. The lower control arm on AMCs looks weak to me so I stuck with rubber ..

Big hats off to Control Freak for spectacular efforts with AMC components .. Especially catering to RHD vehicles!!!!!   How great is that? We would be talking only hundreds (not tens of thousands as in the USA) of potential vehicles here. Their price would be well worth it. If I keep my RHD '69 much longer I'll be seriously thinking of a CF RHD conversion .. Sweet!!!


We're here for you, mate! Our Control Freak Aussie is ready to rock and roll. We are also the only one's with an engineered RHD for our Mopar systems as well.

Al

-------------
Al Kamhi
Control Freak Suspensions
Winter Springs, FL

888-325-6462
407-696-2772
www.FreakRide.com
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FreakRide



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net