AMC Spirit Rally Car
Printed From: TheAMCForum.com
Category: Competition
Forum Name: Autocross, circle track
Forum Description: Ralleys, autocross, non-drag racing events and conversations
URL: https://theamcforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=90043
Printed Date: Apr/16/2024 at 8:46am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: AMC Spirit Rally Car
Posted By: jebidia24
Subject: AMC Spirit Rally Car
Date Posted: Sep/29/2017 at 4:33pm
| I am interested in building a rally car out of an AMC Spirit (in this case a kammback). The car is in rough shape but is square and is a west coast car so I don't think the rust monster is too bad. I will post pictures of the car soon. I've read posts regarding people using Eagles as rally cars which I think is really cool but unless you have enough coefficients on your rally licence it is incredibly difficult. I consider myself an experienced amature mechanic and am a professional engineer (not licenced as one.....yet). This will be my first rally car build and I have read the Rally America rule book, extensively. I have also volunteered at many rallies in my region. Since I do not currently posses a rally licence and I therefore have no coefficients on it I am limited to one of two classes, Group 2 (2 wheel drive cars, 3.0 liters of displacement or less, and naturally aspirated) or Open Light (AWD cars, 3.0 liters or less, and naturally aspirated). Now I could stretch the displacement by using a push rod (OHV) engine up to 3.3 liters. Also the engine block make must be an engine block manufactured by the car manufacturer. For my build I would like to use the much hated AMC 121 engine (as known as the VW/Audi/NSU engine). Although this engine was designed by NSU later Audi/VW, VW/Audi never used it in any of their vehicle save for the smallest Transporter Van. VW/Audi licensed the design out to AMC to be built in the USA and therefor qualifies as an AMC built engine. Also VW/Audi licenced the engine to be built by Porsche after the Porsche/VW rear drive Scirocco project fell through who then redesigned it for fuel injection and put it into the 924. The reason for using this engine is that not only does it fit in the class I am going for (group 2) but the OHC design gives it a higher redline which is useful in rally. I already have one of these engines in working conditions and plan to increase its pathetic performance using some Porsche 924 go fast bits. The plan is to fit the dual side draft weber carb kit which is currently available which should go fit the already carbureted AMC 121. I would also like to increase the compression ratio using different (again porsche 924 pistons) and install a longer duration cam (once again Porsche 924 cam) followed by Porsche 924 headers and a custom exhaust. More to come later, I have more designs worked out but I am tired of typing right now. Interested in peoples opinions and possibly find someone who has gone down the AMC rally car road before me. |
Replies:
Posted By: jpnjim
Date Posted: Sep/30/2017 at 2:53pm
|
I know the extra weight wouldn't help, but a 199" short stroke crank & a +.020" 199/232/258 block = almost exactly 3.3L. If the 4.0L head, or Edelbrock's aluminum head were legal you could build a pretty high winding potent little L6. The AMC/Audi 4 is interesting, I just imagine it being an expensive build. ------------- 71 P-code 4spd Javelin/AMX some Jeeps and some Fords |
Posted By: g-man
Date Posted: Oct/01/2017 at 2:27am
|
Michael, I got a couple questions. What is in the car now? (engine, tranny) Also, are you staying with 2 wheel drive? Lastly, I understand your reasoning behind the 121ci idea...and I know what those engines can do... But have you considered the 2.5L iron duke? These motors are very sturdy (although boring in their stock configuration) Since you have a displacement limitation, you should research this motor for the aftermarket racing development they've done with it. Purely amazing that this motor is still run in ARCA racing with very high outputs...I believe around 450 hp, if I remember correctly. Of course they are using all aftermarket pieces, but I believe that most, if not all of them will bolt into the original block. (and you could probably pick up some still usable 2nd hand parts at a discount) Not to mention that the 2.5L has a Chevy 350 bolt pattern, making tranny choices a bit less complicated. Just food for thought...I would at least look into it, you might get interested in going that route. By the way...dig the Kammback. g-man ------------- AMC only daily driver |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/02/2017 at 7:46am
|
G-man, I have a duke which lost all it's oil, which is strange for an iron duke. I would love to build a SD4 but the parts are hard to find these days (I do have a NOS SD4 valve cover) and I'm not sure what the rules say about using an engine built by another manufacturer but stock in that model of vehicle. If I thought I could find enough pieces (I searched rigorously) and the rules allowed it I would totally go down that route. Especially if I could get my hands on one of those SD4 Cosworth DOHC 16v heads.......a man can dream.
|
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/02/2017 at 7:52am
| I considered that choice also as the AMC inline 6 gives my many part options (that edelbrock aluminum head is sweat, I considered buying it for my 258 eagle resto project). I may even go down that road as I get more coefficients on my rally license. When that happens I will probably do a 258/4.0 conversion and either go dual carb or build an ITB setup (I like NA engines). |
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Oct/02/2017 at 7:54am
|
Not sure, but I think a member use to run rally back in the late 80s. I found him, he actually posted on my thread, so it was not a big search. His name is nickleone. He may pop up in on your thread. I do remember the biggest issue with front suspension is the strut rod. He bent them a lot, and they eventually break. I found a better option for upper ball joints, and also made a pretty stout update to the factory strut rod setup. Though I would think you would go with a CF suspension to cover rally abuse. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: nickleone
Date Posted: Oct/02/2017 at 10:50pm
|
AMC fan, Look at these posts etc http://theamcforum.com/forum/grm-challenge-spirit-chassis-setup_topic79790_post716829.html?KW=#716829 http://theamcforum.com/forum/lower-control-arm-box_topic79668_post715910.html?KW=#715910 http://www.planethoustonamx.com/amc-police/amc-rambler-police.htm http://theamcforum.com/forum/69-rambler-front-rear-drum-to-disc-brake-conversio_topic79323_post713693.html?KW=#713693 Nick ------------- nick 401 71 Gremlin pro rally car sold 390 V8 SX/4 pro rally car sold 1962 Classic SW T5 4 wheel disc brakes |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/05/2017 at 3:20pm
Here are some hasty photos I took of the Spirit, upon further inspection the underbody of this car is super clean.     
|
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/05/2017 at 3:31pm
|
Nick, Thanks for the information, it will be useful. I would like some more information regarding your Gremlin ProRally car (whether it be old posts or outside links). For suspension purposes, I was thinking about buying the control freak coilover suspension kit for the AMC Spirit. It comes with tubular control arms and Viking double valved shocks. Now, I am not sure if the shocks will hold up that well in a Rally situation as it is a track car setup but it's a start. I would also likely go the same route for the rear suspension and lose the leaf springs for something with better articulation. Interested in any thoughts (from anyone). http://www.freakride.com/product/amc-front-coil-over-conversion-systems/ - http://www.freakride.com/product/amc-front-coil-over-conversion-systems/ http://www.freakride.com/product/amc-4--coil-over-rear-suspension-systems/ - http://www.freakride.com/product/amc-4-link-coil-over-rear-suspension-systems/
|
Posted By: nickleone
Date Posted: Oct/06/2017 at 11:05am
|
I boxed the upper and lower control arms. The uppers were prone to cracking. The biggest problem is the strut rod which bends in hard compression from a jump etc. With your lighter front end you might not have those problems.But you should find spares. Nick ------------- nick 401 71 Gremlin pro rally car sold 390 V8 SX/4 pro rally car sold 1962 Classic SW T5 4 wheel disc brakes |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/06/2017 at 8:47pm
|
i think it's pretty nifty to build a Spirit rally car - the sedan/ex Gremlin shell is a bit more rigid than the SX/4 Spirit/AMX shell, and weighs a bit less too. i agree with some of the other posts about going with the IronDuke, even though your particular car has the Audi motor, as the GM motor does have some longevity under abuse characteristics that the 2.0 doesn't have. That said, the Audi motor weighs less, and potentially could wind a bit tighter, with a wider powerband, which as you posted is a necessity for rally use. and your car is set up for it with the proper crossmember, etc. back in the day, before AMC pulled the plug on motorsports, Team Highball was experimenting with the 2.0 motor for their Gremlins and Spirits, which i did get to drive some when i was down there, and they were every bit as strong power wise as the 3.8 6 cyls they were running at the time. granted, part of that was the weight advantage of the Audi motor. The big deal was the improvement in handling balance - it totally transformed the car. As for being allowed to run the GM motor in rallys, it is a bit weird in this particular instance since your specific year model shell didnt come with it. on the other hand, who's really going to care. Rally America probably won't, NASA Rallysport for sure wont, and ARA might not. so build what you want and have fun. I'm happy to contact my folks at any of them for you. on the suspension thing, Nickleone knows what hes talking about. the big wear advantage you'll have running the 2.0 is you wont have a 700# lump of iron crashing down of the front suspension over every crest. While i do very much like the Control Freak setup, i dont think that they have engineered it for the kind of suspension travel you need from a droop standpoint. Id definitely call Al down there and ask. Also, I don't know if they've ever adapted their setup to either of the 4cyl motors. On my Gremlin, which is a combo road/tarmac rally/hillclimb car, i'm running boxed stock control arms like Nick, urethane bushings in most locations, and inverted coil-over dampers with adjustable ride height spring perches up front, and stock leafs in the rear with nylon bushings and coil-over adjustable dampers. its not high tech, but it works. Good luck! very glad to see an AMC back in any form of rally. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto  |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Oct/07/2017 at 9:52am
|
The higher revving potential of the four isn't really a plus. With the six, you have more low speed grunt (torque) than the four -- NO NEED TO WIND IT UP! One of the guys in Atlanta was having a bit of trouble being competitive with his 258 powered Spirit in SCCA class racing. He had driven an little Austin-Healey Sprite before building the Spirit and was used to winding the engine up. Solution was simple -- don't wind the engine so much, and go with a five speed and lower rear axle -- use the engine's inherent torque to pull out of the curves. A change in driving style (from high revving to using grunt) pushed him from the last 25% of the pack to the first 25%, even got a couple class wins. Before the higher revving cars were pulling away in curves -- all due to driving style! After some "retraining" he was pulling out of the curves quicker. While the higher revving cars were catching up on the straights, he was still out pulling them from the curves. ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/07/2017 at 12:11pm
yes.....but. Rally is a much different motor situation than road or oval racing. i absolutely agree, especially with all the time i have in both my 6 and v8 Gremlins at road racing venues, that i rarely had a need to zing the motors over 5k, as i could just use the grunt down low. in rally, which is done 95% of the time on low traction surfaces, with constant small and large elevation changes, powerband flexibility and range are everything. BTW, I remember that guy at RdAtl, you and i both talked with him....1996 or so i believe? ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
farna wrote:Posted By: Aljav
Date Posted: Oct/07/2017 at 10:05pm
|
Why not use a jeep 2.5? Good HP and Torque. and fuel injected. Just a thought. ------------- 69 AMX 9.86 132 mph 71 JAV/AMX and 69 Javelin, .. NAMDRA member #1106 |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/08/2017 at 9:59am
Stout, reliable, torquey motor for sure but zero RPM potential with very narrow power band. well suited as a mild jeep motor, not the ticket for rallying. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Oct/08/2017 at 10:08am
|
That's why the five speed with the AMC six -- keep it geared down. A six speed would even be better, but then you're talking a lot more money even if the rules allowed it.
------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/08/2017 at 10:30am
SFAIK, transmission choice is quite open in most rally classes, so that's not a problem. the problem with more gears, is that a rally driver has better things to do with his right arm than be constantly swapping gears trying to keep the motor on full boil. wide powerband and large RPM flexibility is everything in rally. very different than in most any tarmac based motorsport other than perhaps autocross. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Oct/08/2017 at 10:58am
That is what was thinking, almost keeping the engine at top RPM range all the time. I think the turbo 4 will do better for weight and balance even if it may not have the torque the 6 cyl has. Having the proper gears setup should make such comparison a wash once the turbo kicks in. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/08/2017 at 1:48pm
This. the downside is that if i read the OPs post correctly, he's looking at running in the small bore 2WD class, which here in the states generally does not allow forced induction, but does allow a fairly wide range of engine/transmission modifications, short of a dog box, depending on the sanctioning body. my memories of driving the Highball 2.0 Spirit, while many moons ago, were that the motor's potential was there, but the real benefit was the massive improvement in front/rear weight balance on that short 96" wheelbase. My gut feeling is that the OP could have a fun, mid-pack Rallycross and stage rally car with relatively little development of the 2.0, and something that could give the front of pack cars a few raised eyebrows with a bit more development of suspension and drivetrain. I'd love to see it happen. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/30/2017 at 1:56pm
  
It took awhile but I got some quick pics of the engine out of the car with most of it's accessories removed. I am a little concerned over the natural angle the engine sits in the spirit vs the 924 in terms of intake manifold and exhaust, they may need to be modified.
|
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/30/2017 at 7:47pm
Not quite sure I follow you with the 'natural angle' the engine sits - are you referring to front/rear pitch, or that the motor lays over slightly on its side? Either way - why is it a concern? If all three of the mounts (2 engine, 1 trans) were in good shape the engine would be sitting where the engineers intended. I'm curious as to your worries that it's position isn't the same as in a 924. Very different cars, and the Porsche was fuel injected, so completely different induction setup. Only one pic posted, the one with the motor already removed - so maybe the other pics that you put up that didn't load explain more... ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/31/2017 at 7:03am
|
73Gremlin401, I am referring to the angle at which the engine lays over on its side. The reason I am concerned with the 924 is that (although fuel injected) it is the only performance car which uses the EA831 that has aftermarket support. The plan is to use as much 924 engine parts to give the 121 a little extra pep as possible. The AMC 121 and Porsche/VW 2.0 are so close that the 121 has plugs where the fuel injector would go. There are some 924 owners who like to go ,for performance and simplicity purposes, back to carbs. So Redline/Weber makes a dual DCOE kit for the 924. I was hoping to use this kit on my engine but with the difference in mounting angle the carbs would point down at about 15 degrees. The max a DCOE can be off horizontal is 5 degrees. Porsche likely mounted the engine like this because of the lower sloping hood line of the 924 and the extra space needed for the fuel injection system. I will likely still use the Redline/Weber kit but I will have to modify the manifold or build a new one. Then the only question is whether or not it will fit between the head and the brake booster/master cylinder. I could also make a manifold (lots of work) for dual downdraft carbs but I like the look and performance of DCOEs. I will also likely have to make a custom header as the 924 units will not work with the amc engine mounts, but that's not as big of a deal.
|
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/31/2017 at 2:44pm
Ah - ok, that's kind of what I was assuming. Changing the tilt of the motor would also change the tilt of the transmission, so I don't see that as something worth attempting as it could wind up opening up a whole nuther can of worms that's just not worth chasing around. On the other hand, in most cases, hood profiles and openings are un-restricted in rally, so if you do choose to create your own intake manifold, the sky is quite literally the limit. Thinking about the stock AMC intake manifold, and this is going back, waaaay back in my memory of my brief stint with the Team Highball 2.0L Spirit, is that they were getting gracious amounts of power and torque using the stock (or at least stock appearing) AMC intake, with, if memory serves, a Motorcraft 2100 2bbl carb from a 304 V8. That's a good amount of CFM (probably in the 350-400 range) for a 2.0L motor, and a dirt cheap/dependable set up. The Holley 2bbl carb (essentially, the primary half of a classic 4bbl Holley) would also be a good choice with up to 500 cfm. While I respect your desire to use as much of the 924 style setup as possible, for rally use, and parts availability/cheapness, using what you've got with a little alternative engineering may serve your better, at least in the short term as you develop the other bits of the car. On the motor mounts, IIRC the front pair are fluid filled to help deal with the 2.0s inherent shakiness. For rallying, going with solids would be the way to go (at least solid rubber/urethane) which will help dramatically with keeping the clutch linkage in line. Hope this helps! SFAIK, the 77 AMC version of the motor actually had a slight CR advantage over the Audi version; I'm not sure if that is true for the 78 and 79 versions however. The other thing to consider is that AMC used carbs only because the dealer service departments of the day had zero background with fuel injection, AMC wisely chose to not open that can of worms with their dealers. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Nov/03/2017 at 7:58am
| I don't know what is up with the pictures, I can view them all from my computer but on my tablet I only get the one of the empty engine bay. |
Posted By: pit crew
Date Posted: Nov/03/2017 at 10:49am
-------------  73 Hornet - 401EFI - THM400 - Twin Grip 20 |
Posted By: g-man
Date Posted: Nov/03/2017 at 11:51am
Can you perhaps try to insert the pics directly into your post. I have successfully done that in the past. Would really like to see the pics. g-man ------------- AMC only daily driver |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Nov/03/2017 at 1:34pm
|
g-man, I either can't get that to work or I do not know how to do it. I did install a google chrome (because I use google chrome) media extension which allows me to view photobucket pictures without the costly subscription. I am interested in anyone's ideas to fix this as I would like to share more pictures as I go.
|
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Nov/04/2017 at 7:43am
|
Use the full reply editor (the angled arrow to the right in the editor) and it will give you an option to upload pics directly to the site. For those using Firefox there is an add-on that will properly display Photobucket linked photos. You have to install it on your computer or tablet though (not sure it works with a tablet). ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Nov/05/2017 at 2:22pm
Thanks for this Farna! works perfectly with Firefox, didn't even have to reboot my computer, or restart Firefox. Perhaps this should be a forum sticky? ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Dec/04/2017 at 9:53am
   Haven't got much done in the last couple of weeks but I finally got some work done this weekend. Removed all of the parts from the inside of the engine bay (with the exception of the steering column) I could get to from the engine bay and removed both front fenders and the front air dam and headlights/bezels. I will leave the suspension and sub frame stuff for when I get it up on the lift. Since this I have also removed the doors and began disassembling them and started the interior stripping. I couldn't get the photos to post directly to the site so I used photobucket again (this time without any trouble) and I think most were able to get to a point where they could view them. I know there is a firefox add-on that allows photobucket viewing (mentioned above) and there is also a chrome add-on which I am using that allows the same thing. Hit me up if still having trouble and we can try to figure out a better solution.
|
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Dec/04/2017 at 10:26am
|
Photo bucket does not work on sites, nor my browsers firewall. I suggest moving to another photo sharing site. I use imgbb.com for quick sharing and linking of photos that I don't save and share here. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Dec/05/2017 at 6:54am
|
If you use Firefox and the add-on Photobucket photos WILL display -- I could see the images in the previous post just fine. I guess that does limit you to using Firefox or Chrome (I haven't personally tested Chrome) though. Seems like someone would make an add-on for the Microsoft browsers... but they may not support such "tampering"...
------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Dec/05/2017 at 7:39am
I am aware if It, but I don't use add ons, and with android as my primary use of browsing, i am limited to Chrome Dev as a browser of choice. Mainly because of most all browsers have way too much going on, and do not have Samsung's builtin browser customisation ability to trim down some functions. Just a personal pet peeve at how things are with android. It was cool in the Jelly Bean and Kit Kat years, but now it's a Matryoshka doll of services that most users are unaware of when they use or install an app. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Dec/05/2017 at 3:17pm
|
Well, the Chrome fix supposedly works on Android devices... I haven't tried it as my Android tablet is too old and slow for much internet use (need to buy a newer one!). https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/photobucket-hotlink-fix/kegnjbncdcliihbemealioapbifiaedg?hl=en&hotlinkfix=1512508457012 ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: barriegolfer
Date Posted: Feb/18/2018 at 12:25pm
|
Do you plan to keep the stock rear axle? Don't know if it will hold up to that kind of punishment. |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Feb/19/2018 at 7:40am
| The rear axle has really been a point of interest for this build. It has the AMC 15 with a factory open differential. My power output will not likely be very high (around 150 bhp at best) so the AMC 15/Dana 35 would meet my power needs, and it's light. As it is well known, the AMC 15 later became the Dana 35. I have read some contradictory information regarding using Dana 35 limited slip differentials and disc brake conversion parts on a AMC 15. Some places (older posts of this forum, not sure where) claim the Dana 35 rear axles use a different spline pattern than was used on the AMC 15 but I also found a differential provider (http://www.drivetrain.com/parts_catalog/positraction/no_slip_amc_amx.html) which claims by way of a table that the 1979 Spirit was fitted with the Dana 35 (or at least that the AMC 15 is close enough to the Dana 35 that the diff will work). I have looked at upgrading to the AMC 20, Ford 8.8 and Ford 9" but I haven't been able to find a complete unit that has the correct rear track width. I would like to stick with the AMC 15 if at all possible as it is the most cost effective solution at this point and I can always upgrade later. Also if any of the AMC 15 mods workout, I can use them on my Eagle which has the same rear end. I am open to suggestions regarding rear end upgrades (what will work, what doesn't). I am in a similar predicament with the trans but that is for another day. |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Feb/20/2018 at 10:28pm
I agree with you - with the relatively low torque you'll be putting out with the 2.0, your existing rear end will be just fine for awhile, and the open differential will likely not be a serious issue until you get the rest of the car sorted, and start putting down some competitive stage times. Then you'll want to look into a twin-grip unit for it. Where I'd be looking at spending the money is on brakes. Since the 2.0 gremlins 'suffer' from significantly better weight distribution when compared to the 6 cyl versions of these cars, converting the rear axle to disc brakes would be a good investment, and allow you to put a proper handbrake. While you can install a handbrake on the existing drums, modulating them is difficult. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Feb/21/2018 at 8:48am
| I have heard some information on grassroots motorsports forum that the Borg Warner HR-1 (the manual trans originally fitted with the AMC/VW 2.0) is the same as the Ford Type E (common 4 speed used in the MK1 Escort and Cortina). Does anyone know more about this? |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Feb/21/2018 at 9:14am
Well......close. it's a BW SR-4, same transmission as used in the Pinto/Mustang II of the same era. for light torque applications, it's ok. At the time, it was the most advanced and light-weight 4 speed out there. Time has not been so kind to it's reputation. For your motor, and for getting started in rally, it will do fine, and will force you to learn the art of double clutching, as it is relatively easy to beat the synchros, especially when downshifting. I used this transmission for years behind my 4.2L in my 77 Gremlin for autocrossing, and it did OK at first. switching to synthetic gear oil helped the synchros keep up, but ultimately, I had to upgrade. I suspect you will too, but for now, if it is in reasonable shape, keep what you got. The 1st thing to check is the nylon bushing that rides between the shift lever and the shift rod on the top of the transmission tailshaft. if the shift lever is wobbly, I can guarantee that is broken or missing. I'm pretty sure the part is still available through Ford channels. Replacing it will restore 90% of the shift accuracy and feel, and will help prevent grinding, etc. Do you have a factory TSM yet for your car? It will describe everything you need to know about this transmission. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: barriegolfer
Date Posted: Feb/21/2018 at 3:42pm
|
in terms of rear end you'd be looking at 57-59 Ranchero and Wagon 57.25 inches (narrowest 9" housing) 75 Mustang II 8" 57.00 inches 65-66 Mustang 57.25 inches For the ford 9.0 if the spirit is a 57 inch length (not sure?). If its 56 inches it'll be tougher http://www.jegs.com/s/tech-articles/9-inch-ford-rear-axles.html&title=9+Inch+Ford+Rear+Axles You could go custom new but its not cheap http://www.9inchfloater.com/whatis.htm |
Posted By: nickleone
Date Posted: Feb/21/2018 at 4:26pm
|
For info on RWD rally cars from the last century go to: http://www.doublegmotorsport.com/rsprep/prepindex.html Nick ------------- nick 401 71 Gremlin pro rally car sold 390 V8 SX/4 pro rally car sold 1962 Classic SW T5 4 wheel disc brakes |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Feb/22/2018 at 6:36am
|
I'd say the Grass Roots guys are probably right. As mentioned, the HR-1 and SR-4 are pretty much the same except for gear ratios. Since we know Ford used the SR-4 over here in Pintos/Mustang IIs, it's a good bet they used them in some of their European RWD cars. Ford license produced several BW trannys, notably the early autos, so it's a good bet that's what they did. That means there could be some differences, such as output splines, input lengths, and bolt pattern. If the Grass Roots guys claim them to have interchangeable internals I'd still say they are likely to be correct. Might be only one way to know for sure though. As for rear axles, doesen't sound like you need much of an upgrade. You might want to look at the Ford 7.5" from an 83-92 Ranger. It's a bit stronger than the AMC 15 (7-9/16") due to the one piece axle/hub. Wheel surface to wheel surface is 56.5". Gear ratios range from 3.08 to 4.56, but 4.56 is hard to come by -- I suspect only commercial chassis. I've seen 4.10 in 4x4 applications. You can use the rear axle from a 2WD or 4WD Ranger/Bronco II. That would give you an upgrade without a big weight difference. Jeep D35s are too wide, but you can use them with the Jeep deep offset wheels. ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Mar/26/2018 at 8:15am
 Here are some quick photos of the car. The cold winter and unheated garage made work over the winter slow but as the temp rises so does the pace of work. The interior and glass is out and the only things remaining is the suspension (front and rear), rear axle assembly, gas tank and lines, rear bumper, and subframe. Sounds like a lot but these should come out easily with the car up in the air. Got my cage welder lined up and now I am waiting on a quote for soda blasting before the seam welding begins.
|
Posted By: g-man
Date Posted: Mar/26/2018 at 3:47pm
|
I would love to see the pics...but nothing came thru except this: Don't give up, g-man
------------- AMC only daily driver |
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Mar/26/2018 at 5:30pm
I think your can find his pix on the grassroots site... If i find it, I'll post a link. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: g-man
Date Posted: Mar/26/2018 at 6:26pm
Cool...thanks, g-man ------------- AMC only daily driver |
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Mar/27/2018 at 1:05pm
Seems like the two spirits on the GRM site are gone. Like both moved on since the new year or something. Maybe the photos will pop up once the thread is edited by he op, or someone has a link to them. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Mar/28/2018 at 3:47pm
| Ok, I need some advice. I have a AMC 121 (VW EA831) with the subframe. Engine parts for the EA831 are plentiful as long as you look to the Porsche 924 tuning world (assuming those parts fit, they should). My car is naturally an auto, so I've been on the hunt for a EA831 to HR1 bellhousing. I may have found one but it is uncertain. Some other trans parts are easier to come by. I also have an iron duke with it's subframe and bellhousing (and SD4 valve cover). The main reason for going with the EA831 was high redline and ease of tuning/spare parts where the duke is waning (a stock duke is also weak), both are lightweight compared to the 258 or 304. I have recently got word of a super duty 4 (SD4) forged crank, and SD4 head. The SD4 is well known for large HP numbers as well as having a higher redline (comparative to the EA831) and relative strength. I can mate a SD4 modified Iron Duke up to a drivetrain much easier than a EA831. As for my earlier apprehension towards using a pontiac engine in my amc, it shouldn't make any difference as I was planning on using a VW engine anyway (I needed to hear someone else say it). I was under the impression though that I couldn't use a SD4 crank in my stock duke block, I could get a SD4 block but Rally America rules are strict regarding block make changes (SD4 block never offered in production vehicle). From what I am hearing though (any duke users I would like to hear from you) I can use a SD4 crank in my duke with SBC rods. I may have to modify the block to accept the SD4 head but that is ok. I haven't done any engine or drivetrain mods or purchased any parts (only research). I am in the final stages of tear down and am readying for soda blasting, seam welding, and cage installation so I am in no hurry other than SD4 parts are scarce. Should I go with the SD4 parts in my duke or stick to the EA831? Once again, I already own both engines and subframes (plus the iron duke bellhousing). |
Posted By: mitchito
Date Posted: Mar/28/2018 at 4:27pm
I'll just leave this here ------------- 1982 Rambler Lerma 1981 Rambler Lerma coupe 1978 American (Concord base) 1977 Gremlin 1976 Pacer X |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Apr/19/2018 at 3:43pm
     I was able to find some SD4 parts, so that is the route I am taking. I am going to try to put SD4 components in my stock Duke block at least for the log booking process and then run it until is breaks at which time I will put everything in an SD4 block. I am going to keep all of the EA831 parts and not modify the crossmember so if I need to go back to that engine, I have that option. Also, (if anybody can see these pictures) i know why my old DUke dung the bed. If anybody knows of a different picture hosting service that is forum friendly, hit me up. I have tried a few with no luck but it could have just been a bad day.
|
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Apr/19/2018 at 3:48pm
|
I use imgbb.com for quick and multiple uploads. Creates the bbcode so all you need to do is copy and paste. Just have to set in the pull down menu to use full bbcode not with markups, or other types of links. Works on all types of sites, just not a busy spot, so who knows for how long what will happen speed wise and longevity of hosting. You can give it a test, without creating an account. ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Apr/19/2018 at 4:09pm
       OK, I am trying imgbb and I hope this works. These would be all the pictures that people probably have not been able to see.
|
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Apr/19/2018 at 4:17pm
|
Yep, and i bet Gieko would have the slogan, So easy a cave man can do it. Ha! ------------- 71 Javelin SST body 390 69 crank, 70 block & heads NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons 78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low 50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension 79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker |
Posted By: 23baseball3
Date Posted: Apr/19/2018 at 8:44pm
|
Interesting project! Looks like you're making all the right progress and you're making decisions that make competitive and economical sense. Does the body have to remain stock? Can you do subframe connectors or will you have a roll cage? ------------- 1979 Spirit AMX 304/4 Speed AC 2005 Volvo V70R |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Apr/20/2018 at 7:05am
The Rules require a roll cage built to the spec in the picture above.
|
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: May/17/2018 at 12:37pm
 |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: May/17/2018 at 12:49pm
| In the post above are some pictures I took a couple of weeks ago. In the first one is the SD4 block which came my way. The guy I purchased the rest of my SD4 parts said a friend of his had a spare SD4 block that he wanted to part ways with. The price turned out to be right and now I have a block which is rated up to 500 hp (not that I will be making that much). Hopefully I don't run into issues when it comes time to have this beast log booked as this block was never offered in a production vehicle and is of a different make (although it is derived from a production block which my vehicle came stock with, so who knows). The only big piece I need now is a crank. I'm not sure what stroke I want to use. The largest 3.937" (3.3L) makes a lot of power but also is limits the RPMs (assuming a max piston speed of 4000 fpm) to 6096 RPM. They make strokes all the way from 2.6" (2.1L) to the 3.937" (3.3). I would like to go with the 2.6" (2.1L) as it would give me a max RPM (again assuming a max piston speed of 4000 fpm) of 9230 RPM or until I hit valve float. I am going to combat the valve float problem by going with solid roller lifters, strengthened springs, and dual roller rockers. The second picture is the car dolly I made so when I go to install the cage (next week) I can move the car wherever I need it. As hinted at before, I have the steel, tools and time ready to start the cage installation next week so hopefully all goes well. |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: May/18/2018 at 6:29am
|
Max rpm isn't a problem, it's how you drive the car. Match the drivetrain to the engine speed. The longer stroke will also increase low speed torque, which is an advantage pulling out of the curves. It will only "limit" your top end down the long straights if you don't have enough gears. A five speed is usually all you need for most road courses, which have at most two long straights. Sounds like you intend to wind it up and go, which might be the easiest for you to do. First case in point: big block Shelby Cobra vs. small block (the two seaters). I think it was Road & Track that tested both together on a road course. Once one got in front the other couldn't pass. They started even on the track together. Whichever got out front that first time stayed there, with the other right behind but unable to pass. So for kicks they intentionally switched positions and the same thing happened. With the BB out front it walked away on the straights so far the SB couldn't keep up. But then it hit the turns and had to slow to keep from plowing off the track and the SB caught up quickly. Reversed, the SB made up a lot of time in the curves, but was run down on the straights. Your situation isn't quite like that because the longer stroke engine isn't a lot heavier, but part of the reason for the situation was because the two cars were driven differently as well. Case two is more similar to yours. Forrest (can't remember last name, might be on here) in/near Atlanta was racing a Spirit at Road Atlanta in an SCCA class. Told me he was tired of finishing near the back all the time, would at least like to be in the middle. Had raced a Sprite before, so he was winding the big six up tight. I suggested he get a five speed (was running a four) and gear a little lower, then use the gears and stop winding it up like a four -- use the low speed torque and a bit more gear and better tranny gear spread to pull away from the turns instead of winding it up on the straights nd rushing INTO the turns. He did that and started finishing in the top half (usually 12-16 cars in class) instead of bottom half. His son even won a race or two! ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: WesternRed
Date Posted: May/18/2018 at 6:47am
| I’d be choosing max power over max rpm unless there was some specific advantage in the class rules from running less displacement. |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Jun/25/2018 at 12:23pm
  |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Jun/25/2018 at 12:30pm
| In the above photos is the car up in the air completly mechanically stipped. The next photo is the car on the dolly I built to make the metal work easier. The third photo is the car with most of the exterior paint removed. I stripped the paint using aircraft paint remover rather than media blasting because I was concerned the heat generated from blasting would warp the thin 1970s steel. Cost was also a consideration. Stripping it myself has taken a long time but I have time and the SD4 engine choice along with purchasing a new garage/house has got me financially drained. Lucky for me I have everything needed for the body and cage. As far as the crank/stroke, I got a line on a 2.7L crank which I will probably buy when I have some money again. 2.7L should give me a good sweet spot for power vs. RPM. |
Posted By: 23baseball3
Date Posted: Jun/25/2018 at 3:48pm
|
Looks great! Keep us updated on your progress! ------------- 1979 Spirit AMX 304/4 Speed AC 2005 Volvo V70R |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/12/2018 at 12:44pm
Have gotten much work done on the project lately, I was busy building a new garage with insulation and heat this time (Michigan winters are brutal in an unheated and uninsulated garage). Either way, to hold people over here are some photos of AMC Spirits running rally in the late 70s and early 80s. The yellow cars are from the national VAM team. The AMX was ran by Chuck Cunningham, which unfortunately DNF'd.      |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Oct/13/2018 at 8:26am
|
Interesting that VAM ran the short lived (at least in the US) Kammback. ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: Jmerican
Date Posted: Oct/13/2018 at 5:57pm
|
I’m going to go back through this post. Very cool, though I have only skimmed. I do know the tolerances and materials were different on the German vs AMC. The 924 turbo was the first electronically managed boost control that Porsche used on a road car. The 924 GT, GTS was based on the Audi. The GTR not so much. But they made damn good power for their day. Not super reliable beyond their design spec. But won some endurance racing. Nothing like today’s Mitsubishi or VW/Audi 1.8t for boost appetite. I had a track drive in a 924GTS Clubsport, with between 245-310 hp. It lost a head gasket, but not before mopping up much more modern Porsche’s while on relatively tame rubber. I digress though. |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Oct/15/2018 at 5:24am
|
Tolerances were different for the AMC built 2.0L, but materials weren't that different. The major castings (block, crank, and head at least, and I'm pretty sure pistons and rods) were made by Audi in Germany (or wherever the engine factory was). Only minor things like the valve cover, water pump, and distributor were made in the US. AMC did the final machining and assembly of the engine over hear though. They purchased a plant specifically to machine and assemble that engine, but numbers never got up to the point they could economically start full production. Good thing it turned out, as the little front engine Porsche sales were mu h better than expected. It just wasn't big enough for the current AMC cars, and AMC didn't have the funds to develop a smaller, lighter car as they had originally planned. I suppose they could have increased the bore and stroke had they taken over production, and I suspect they had planned to, but it just wasn't quite enough for a Gremlin/Spirit. The assembly plant was sold to Deutz, IIRC. ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Nov/28/2018 at 8:41am
|
The parts for the 121 were made in Germany, at least the head and block. They have VW/Audi casting marks on them. AMC 121 engines were assembled in Indiana and were built to different specs. I am not sure what "different specs" means. I know that these engines were tuned down, have lower compression ratio, and have single barrel carburetors. I do not know if the clearances or torque specs are different. Ether way, I am under the impression that Porsche 924 2.0 internal parts will work with this engine. As stated above I plan on using a GM SD-4 engine with my build unless I am not allowed. Either way, I am keeping my 121 for some future project. I am not sure if Rally America is going to continue to exist, if it doesn't I will have to build it to either NASA or ARA rules which are different. So it might end up in this car after all. I may just build it up just to see if it is possible. It doesn't seem like there has been much work exploring the possibilities with this engine so I may break some new ground. Time will tell. Garage is mostly finished, but I am current sidetracked on my Eagle SX4 project. Will get back to this soon though. ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Nov/29/2018 at 6:19am
|
All the big castings (head, block, crank, rods at least... maybe pistons and cam also, but since they were different may have been different source) were made in Germany. AMC had things like the water pump and valve cover made by others, and the distributor and I believe starter were locally sourced. "Different specs" means just that. AMC may have done the final machining. If you look at the specs in the TSM then look at the Audi specs there are a few thousandths difference in clearances on everything. There were a couple people running them with Audi heads and the EFI system (should have changed cam also?) years ago, don't know about now. No reason you couldn't change the pistons as well. I do remember that the Type 4 VW and the Porsche 914 rant the same engine with some internal differences, one being the Porsche version ran three compression rings rather than two to help boost compression. I don't know if there was any other difference in the piston, most likely was. ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Dec/10/2018 at 8:56am
|
Well, it looks like Rally America is going to go belly up as all my local rallys are now ARA (with the execption of the NASA events). I am waiting to hear back from ARA regarding novice class restrictions which may impact the direction of my build. Upon reading the ARA rules, even if I have to run in limited 2wd. I can still run the Spirit with the EA831. Good thing I kept it and all its parts around. Unfortunatly in limited 2wd I wont likely be able to put on my AMX fender flares. Although, they are OEM to the AMX version of the same year so an argument may be made. I was really curious to see how they looked on a kammback. I know they do not add any function and are hard to come by but I like the way they look. ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Jan/09/2019 at 7:26am
|
I still haven't heard back from ARA regarding novice driver class restrictions but I think I am going to go with the EA831 engine build after all just to be safe. One thing I will need is a bellhousing for the EA831 audi engine (AMC 121) that mates up to a Borg Warner HR1 (sold on AMC Gremlins, Concords, and Spirits from 1977 to 1979). The HR1 was also called the FoG (Ford of Germany) when mated to the ford pinto and mustang ii. In Europe they called this trans the Type E. I may have found one on a online junkyard dealers site but they wanted alot of money and couldn't give me specific details. They said it was a 1979 4 cylinder amc bellhousing but that could mean iron duke bell housing, which I already have. I could also get Lakewood to custom make one for me which will be really expensive for a bellhousing. Hoping to find a genuine original bellhousing. ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Jan/30/2019 at 10:35am
|
I heard back from ARA, they posted a bulletin (Bulletin 2018-2) regarding novice drivers. Using a naturally aspirated engine I can run an engine up to 2700cc without the need of a restricter plate. The restricter plate is 55mm id for 1.5mm. There is a caveat for engines which meet these rules but also have unusually high power outputs such as the Ford Cosworth BDG, Super 2000 engines, etc. I am guessing (as I haven't asked) that the SD-4 engine would likely fit into this category. There is a chance that the SD-4 being relatively unknown outside of the S-10, Fierro, ARCA, and midget racing worlds that the technical scrutineers may not know much of the SD-4. Either way, the SD-4 will probably have too much power to drive easily as a novice. So I am definitely going to go with the EA831. I will be adding some power and reliability upgrades as this engine could use some livening up (if only to lightly tuned Porsche 924 spec). This will also make the car lighter and easier to drive. Still trying to find a HR-1 bellhousing and possible trans. Cage work will likely begin when winter is over as the car is stuck in my other (heated) garage which is snowed in. ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Feb/25/2019 at 7:28am
I was concerned if I bought a Porsche 924 side draft carb manifold that, since the engine sits at a different angle, that when mounted in the AMC 121 engine angle, the carbs would be slanted down and not work properly. I bought a side draft intake manifold for my SD-4 engine from someone who had to build one to fit the 831 head (the head requires custom intake manifolds). He had mounted the engine side manifold to the weber side manifold using silicone tubing as the SD4 produces a lot of vibration. But this method would also work as an easy and inexpensive way of building a manifold using dissimilar metals. The way this was built gave me an idea, I could build a side draft intake manifold using the stock intake manifold. So I cut the original manifold where the tubes started to bend (so I had the maximum equal straight length possible). The plan is to use the stock intake manifold modified to accept short silicon tubing which can be mated to the weber DCOE manifold brackets I bought a long time ago. The silicone tubing will be relatively short to maintain as much rigidity and strength as possible and will be attached via hose clamps. The stock intake manifold is aluminum and the weber brakets are steel, so welding is out of the question and this seems more simple than brazing them together. To try to reduce the amount of air/fuel mixture interference, I ground the aluminum inlets to a more cone shape for better flow. I also gave them some light porting and some polishings to clean up the castings. Attached are some pictures of the "finished" product, just the aluminum part. The rest comes later.   ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Feb/25/2019 at 7:39am
|
Nice work! I like how you are thinking this through. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Feb/25/2019 at 7:58am
|
Sounds like a great plan to me, can't wait to see the rest of it! ------------- Frank Swygert |
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Oct/23/2019 at 2:00pm
|
I haven't completely lost steam on this project. I am currently lining up transmission and rear end options for this build while I finish my Eagle restoration project. I also lost some time on a lifted 1972 Jeep Commando that fell in my lap which supposedly only needed carburetor work, which turned into a complete re-wire job. I went to LSPR last weekend which really made me look forward to getting back at it. ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |
Posted By: 73Gremlin401
Date Posted: Oct/24/2019 at 11:52am
|
Glad you got up to LSPR - consistently one of the best rallies in North America. Lots of good people on the organizing side, who have been doing it for so many years, it nearly runs on autopilot. ------------- 73 Gremlin 401/5-spd. 77 Matador Wagon 360/727. 81 Jeep J10 LWB 360/4-spd 83 Concord DL 4-dr 258/auto |
Posted By: Stormogdis
Date Posted: Sep/16/2020 at 6:30am
Updates?
|
Posted By: jebidia24
Date Posted: Mar/17/2021 at 10:36am
|
This project is currently on hold. I built a house during the pandemic and I bought a rally car which is already log booked. I still own this car and will be working on it as time permits. I will use knowledge gained from my other rally car to help me build this one. ------------- 1981 Eagle SX-4 258 1979 Spirit Kammback 122 |