Ollie's 69 Rambler Sedan

If there is nothing keeping you from swinging it around under the MC, it can still be installed there instead of in a T. I do like it in a T -- easier to get to. This seems to be a heavy duty switch, and shouldn't suffer from trash in the switch like the small replacements do. Mounting like you did does drastically reduce the amount of trash that can get in it, if not completely eliminating it.

For those dreading double flaring, just remove either line from the MC to the junction  block (or combo valve) and replace with two short sections of parts store line with the ends already flared with nuts, this switch in the middle. Doesn't matter what line it's in, front, rear, or just to one side in front. So any line can be replaced.

The torque converter sure has made a big difference, the transmission is now shifting like it should. The only issue I have had is with the kick down cable. I have a Lokar set-up. I have owned a half dozen 727/904's and have used the Lokar on them all. This one does not keep tension all the time on the cable as the others have. I don't understand it, but I have it adjusted correctly as the trans is down shifting as it should. I got it to tight, where it would downshift to second and stay there. I kept backing it off to I found the "sweet spot".

I am ready to work on the front suspension. I will do as suggested and scale the front end and total car. I will report my findings and get some opinions before I invest in another set of springs.  

We are going to make a Louisiana run next week for some sausage. Its about 400 mile round so I can see if I have stopped the oil consumption by redoing the valve stem seals. 

Passing a good time playing with junk cars........

Having AMC Fun,

Ollie

More likely oil seals, then guides. I'd pull one valve spring and inspect the seals first. Might be able to see them good enough through the spring, but removing one is better. About 18" of 1/4" Rope in sparker hole then crank up to TDC works well.

ANY 4.0L head is worth the effort. The 87-90 Renix head is the "worst", but even it offers better breathing than the 258 heads. Ports were raised about 1/8" on the Renix, the intake ports another 1/8" on the HO heads (not exhaust ports though). The best head for the street is arguably the 2000-2006 head. Check between #3 and #4 cylinders on top of head (between valves) for "TUPY" cast in. 2000-early 2001 heads didn't have this and have a thin spot there, they tend to crack. The fixed head uses the same casting number, but has that additional mark. That last head design uses a cast iron "header" and has the smallest ports, but equal flow up to around 4000 rpm. Flow starts to taper off over 4000, but it still has about the same power on a stock 4.0L as the earlier larger port heads up to 5000-5500 rpm. A lot of research went into port design, mainly to improve emissions. It has the best shaped ports of all the 4.0L heads. If you're building a race/high power engine you will want something with bigger ports. There is a flow chart in the six cylinder section, might be in the 4.0L swap subsection. Most performance builders use the 91-99 heads (7120 and 0630 castings), but the 2000-06 is still the best street head (IMHO).

This is a decent run-down of the heads with one error -- the "Note in Photo 4". It shows a 258 head with the siamesed center exhaust ports. No 4.0L head has these -- don't know how they screwed that up and never fixed it!