ANYONE KNOW anything about '63 Ramblers??? 400 Station wagons

I'm looking at a 400 station wagon...

What kind of suspension front and back? Is the OHV-six a 194? Engine swaps? Trans swaps?

Thanks!

 

engine is a 196, 127 hp, not much in the way of swapability.

front suspension is really funky.

Rearend is torque tube.

when I worked at the junkyard 25 years ago we had a yard car that was an early 60s rambler wagon, had it for a long time, because no one ever wanted to buy any parts off it. cut the back of the roof off with a torch, turned it into an el camino.

 

Hmmm...ok. So not much in the way of customization opportunities.

 

not without mucho work.

 

Trunion front end..uggh!

 

ANYONE KNOW anything about '63 Ramblers? I know they were NEVER customs and they Most Definitely were NEVER EVER traditional hotrods

 

Trans is a Borg-Warner unit used by a handful of Studes and Ford in 57-58. Pushbutton shift on it probably. The good news is it can be converted to open drive, the bad news is finding one to use to convert it. But it should be able to be serviced, at least.

For '63 there was a 196-6, a 232-6, and 287 and 327-CI versions of the AMC V8 - it's not related to any other motor except possibly later AMC motors, came out in '56, used in two or three displacements through '67.

As mentioned, torque tube rear with coil springs. Unibody. Front end is goofy too. Best bet to rod one is to torch out the pans and drop it on a complete late model frame and floor with a close wheelbase and track. 1980s GM A-body (I think, Malibu/Monte Carlo 108" WB) works for the 56-62 cars, not sure if they're the same undersides on the '63 redesign or not and too lazy to look it up atm -


'63's are pretty damn ugly IMHO, a box with V-cut front and rear end... but it aught to get you decent gas milage and no one will ever steal it -

 

Yep - the motor is a 195.6 - also referred to as a 196. These were made in both Flathead and OHV configurations. The trans if an automatic I think is a Borg Warner T35 3 speed also called a "Flash-o-matic" - the neat thing about them is that the bellhousing is a bolt on affair - which makes it easier to adapt late trans if you're a determined hot rodder.
AMC used the same type of bolt on front spindles for a zillion years making disc brake upgrades a piece of cake. I know these included '64 - not sure if '63 - worth looking into.
Overall - it's like any other old car - parts are getting harder to find - but they're out there if you look.
AS far a swapping stuff - get your torches - almost anything will fit.

 

They are BEE-YOU-TEA-FULL cars, if you're Ronnie Milsap. I love mine.

The 400 was the premium, if AMC had one then, trim line for these cars. The drive line is open, not torque tube. The Brog Warner transmissions are pretty sturdy. The body is an early form of uni-body. The 196 OHV were all forged cranks and rods. Parts are available. The front suspension does leave a lot to be desired but a disc swap is as easy as getting any AMC spindles, calipers, and such to bolt on.

Engine swapping is a limited without changing out the whole front end. The engine bay is cramped. Later AMC 6's -199,232,258 will NOT fit without firewall or radiator location modifications. Very short. Any I4 cylinder would fit quite easily.

Neat little cars but limited easy options for mods. Esay to lower - just let the air out of the tires...

 

I'm trying to build something small for the wife.

 

i have a bgt i could let you have real cheap...

 

As soon as I typed that, I knew what was coming.

I could have said that I was looking for a small rod.

 

I have a 63 4-door Rambler 660 "Classic" (the model, not a CCCA Classic). Its got a 195.6 straight-6. My personal feeling is that there is a crap-load of room under the hood. It was also available as a V-8 (360 I believe), so its got enough room for 6 cyl. front-to-back and 2 rows of 4 side-by-side. Ok really, I have heard that this engine used the same position holes for engine mounting in the later 232s and 258s. The 63 was a completely new design which won Motor Trend's Car Of The Year. Its engine configuration, was continued all the way up to 96 (I think) with mostly just displacement changes. Actually, the Jeep (available with the I-6) was the only thing that kept Chrysler afloat until the bail-out. In 63, it was even possible to get the engine with aluminum heads or in an all-aluminum form. The aluminum heads model was somewhat problematic if you didn't perform the required head bolt torquing (is torquing a word?). The temperature difference between the front cyl. and the back cyl. was significant. As such, you were supposed to retighten the head bolts every 1000 miles to the proper torque. Other than that, this engine runs like a top. 43 years and mine still runs if I charge the battery.

 

Well maybe not in TX. But 35 or 40 years ago there were a few running around that were made into Hot Rods and Customs.
So where do you draw the line for Traditional? Do you just go with what was popular and exclude those that chose to be different?
In my 52 years I have seen many odd balls used as Rods and Customs.

 

I just ignored his comment. We all talk about 60s customs on here all the time and they're part of the HAMB.

 

Yeah the rear is leaf spring and the front is rinky dink a arm with the coil spring on a mcpherson style strut tower.A friend of mine has a 351 windsor in his and its running low 10's on motor and is now supercharged with blow through carb and should run low low 9's.later
MATT