Register now to get rid of these ads!

Customs Anyone ever airbagged a 63 rambler wagon?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Monza 1966, Feb 20, 2011.

  1. Monza 1966
    Joined: Feb 4, 2011
    Posts: 32

    Monza 1966
    Member
    from Indiana

    I plan on doing this next winter or sometime in 2012, but I guess it depends. Anywho, I know they make kits for rangers, S10, etc, so there are no rambler kits, if so I never saw one. So, if anyone has bagged a 63 rambler wagon, what "kit" did you start out with? Pictures would be helpful. In fact any information is helpful. OR if anyone has a kit for sale that would be nice, or even parts of an air bag system.

    My exact car is a 1963 Rambler Ambassador Cross Country 880
     
  2. joel torres
    Joined: Mar 22, 2009
    Posts: 824

    joel torres
    Member

    bagging is not that hard i love airbags with shocks mounted also myself
    what type of suspension does the wagon have?
    for instance my 1947 plymouth had spings in front and leafs springs in back
    for the front i used regular chevy cups for like 85 chevy
    for the rear installed a four link and removed the leafs
    these are the front cups i made they replace the spring
    [​IMG]
    to find the pics of my rear brackets you have to search my project page

    <object width="400" height="300" ><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.facebook.com/v/168336423192042" /><embed src="http://www.facebook.com/v/168336423192042" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="400" height="300"></embed></object>
     
  3. Monza 1966
    Joined: Feb 4, 2011
    Posts: 32

    Monza 1966
    Member
    from Indiana

    I'm not very mechanical, so I'll explain it the best I can. shocks and springs all the way around. Independent rear end. The front suspension is odd. My brother who's a mechanic never saw something like it. It's almost like a Mcpherson, only the shock is separate.
     
  4. nali
    Joined: Sep 15, 2009
    Posts: 828

    nali
    Member

    It s a trunion on front .
    Easy to bag , just search a little bit , even on youtube .
     

  5. newsomtravis
    Joined: Jun 1, 2009
    Posts: 562

    newsomtravis
    Member
    from pville, ca

    anything can be done, if you are not mechanical, you probably won`t be doing it yourself i guess, find someone that does it, they can let you know what it will take and have alot of the stuff on hand.....
     
  6. farna
    Joined: Jul 8, 2005
    Posts: 1,228

    farna
    Member

    see http://theamcforum.com/forum/air-ride_topic25858.html. Just don't mention the Chevy/Ford/whatever engine you plan on putting in (if you do). You wouldn't go to a Mustang board and tell them you have a killer SBC under the hood of your 66 Shelby would you? Well... and not expect to get lots of flames/hate mail anyway! The AMC guys aren't that bad, but do prefer AMC engines in most cases, but you will find limited swap info there also. The guys on the board are a bit easier on people when it comes to the older pre 1967 cars and foreigners (AMC cars overseas).
     
  7. nicksduce
    Joined: May 26, 2009
    Posts: 20

    nicksduce
    Member
    from indiana

  8. shoot me a PM I'll get you a price on a kit
     
  9. Philsr
    Joined: Apr 23, 2006
    Posts: 16

    Philsr
    Member
    from Telford PA

    A great idea for your Ambo wagon, let us see the result of your project. Nothing like a low long roof!
    I am looking for a 1963 Cross Country wagon, 327 with twin stick, do you know of any?
     
  10. spiderdeville
    Joined: Jun 30, 2007
    Posts: 1,134

    spiderdeville
    Member
    from BOGOTA,NJ

  11. farna
    Joined: Jul 8, 2005
    Posts: 1,228

    farna
    Member

    The trunnions aren't bad at all. In 62 the big cars went to a ball joint on the bottom, trunnions on top, used the upper trunnion through 1969. The big car trunnion is much simpler and easier to deal with than the American/Javelin/AMX upper trunnion. Those can be a bear and are a bit expensive, but not as much as replacing the suspension would be. A good article on the big car trunnions: http://www.wps.com/AMC/Front-suspension/index.html. Article on the 58-63 American (and 50-55 Nash Rambler -- though upper on those is slightly different) trunnions: http://www.wps.com/AMC/1963-Rambler-American/Suspension/index.html. One thing not mentioned in the article -- tack weld the lower trunnion caps to the arms. This prevents them from working loose or turning in the arms. That can happen with wear or if the threads aren't just right. Then you wear the arms out. This is probably the best link for the 64-69 American/Javelin/AMX upper trunnion: http://www.skidmore.edu/~pdwyer/amc/trunnion.htm.

    Good luck finding a 63-64 Twin Stick Classic or Ambo wagon Phil! They exist, but hard to find something so specific. I know of a nice 63 Classic wagon near me right (mid South Carolina) now, great body, but six cylinder auto car. The guy wants $1200 for it.
     
  12. slamit09
    Joined: Apr 11, 2009
    Posts: 20

    slamit09
    Member
    from san diego

    My old wagon...63 cups in front, cups in rear, no trans tunnel. Minor fabrication as bagging goes. Panhard bar had to be lengthened and exhaust re-routed. 2500 bags in front and 7 inch slams in rear. Best of luck.

    <iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hm36HFks1HE" allowfullscreen="" width="425" frameborder="0" height="349"></iframe>

     
  13. farna
    Joined: Jul 8, 2005
    Posts: 1,228

    farna
    Member

    What do you mean by "no trans tunnel"? No trans tunnel modification was required? You kept the stock drivetrain, right?
     
  14. That's a good point, given these run a torque tube there's a shot of hitting it when you get too low - and it might be good to check if changing the driveshaft angle can affect the universal.
     
  15. slamit09
    Joined: Apr 11, 2009
    Posts: 20

    slamit09
    Member
    from san diego

    Stock suspension, no problems with angles. There are several guys who have bagged AMC's, just have to do some searching and pretty much everyone has done the same thing. It will lay down just about an inch off the ground with stock size tires. You can 4 link the rear, but not needed unless you are doing and engine/drive train swap out of the torque tube set up, but no need to. Will lay really low with very little modification compared to other cars like a Falcon. These pics might help. A good idea is if you haven't bagged a car before then go to a professional shop and have it done right and safe, it will be worth the money but it won't be cheap, just make sure the shop you go to knows what they are doing.

    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  16. nali
    Joined: Sep 15, 2009
    Posts: 828

    nali
    Member

    Thanks for the pictures . I plan to bag my 66 Ambassador (quite the same car ) , and was not sure about exhaust clearance .
    It seems it need only minor modifications .
     
  17. slamit09
    Joined: Apr 11, 2009
    Posts: 20

    slamit09
    Member
    from san diego

    As far as bagging a car...one of the easiest I have done with how low it goes. It ride A LOT better than stock with the right shocks. I am bummed I sold it actually. Best of luck hope I was some help. A few other HAMBer's have bagged AMC's also. All the fronts were done the same...just replace the spring with a cup. Mine were welding on the top and the bottom but the bag could be taken out (with a little work) Stock shock location was used for both front and back.
     
  18. nali
    Joined: Sep 15, 2009
    Posts: 828

    nali
    Member

    The coil spring are almost impossible to find , event in places Farna knows . So bagging those car is the cheapest way , and more funny than a stock ride :p
     
  19. farna
    Joined: Jul 8, 2005
    Posts: 1,228

    farna
    Member

    The coils are easy. www.coilsprings.com will make springs for whatever you want at whatever ride height and spring rate you want. They only make progressive rate springs, but calculate by the rate you want to give an equivalent. In other words, they would be that rate at ride height, but would stiffen a bit as ride height went down (car was loaded) and soften as the load decreased. They work really well, all modern cars have progressive rate springs. Easy to get a spring that improves handling and has little effect on ride quality.

    The muffler will tuck up behind the rear axle a bit better than shown in the photos. With the crosswise muffler clearance isn't an issue. There's only one universal in front, and the axle is always perpendicular to the tube, so the angles don't affect the u-joint unless the angle gets sharp, and it can't. The body limits upward angle, shocks downward angle. With stock suspension the big Ramblers with coils all around are the easiest to bag.
     
  20. nali
    Joined: Sep 15, 2009
    Posts: 828

    nali
    Member

    Yes Franck , I remember about coilspring.com .
    But I m in Canada . So IIRC , the price of custom made sprins + shipping + customs is about the same as 4 bags + pump . And I can get a used pump or a belt one if I m cheap .
     
  21. slamit09
    Joined: Apr 11, 2009
    Posts: 20

    slamit09
    Member
    from san diego

  22. nali
    Joined: Sep 15, 2009
    Posts: 828

    nali
    Member

    Yes thanks ... I remember I saw this link once . Usefull informations there .
    Those car are so easy to bag ... Quite a bolt on !!! Even the front geometry is still correct ..

    Do you remember the exact references of the bags and shocks you used ?
    I suppose all Ramblers need the same .
     
  23. farna
    Joined: Jul 8, 2005
    Posts: 1,228

    farna
    Member

  24. estes
    Joined: May 25, 2011
    Posts: 62

    estes
    Member

    I love this car! I've been looking far and wide for a '63 wagon for some time now with no luck...
     
  25. farna
    Joined: Jul 8, 2005
    Posts: 1,228

    farna
    Member

    Contact Peter Stathes at www.amcrambler.com (you'll find an e-mail and phone number on the site). He's a member of the NY/NJ chapter of the AMC Rambler Club and might be able to put you in contact with a 63-64 Classic wagon. The only difference between the two is the grille, hood, and tail lights. All other body parts interchange (63 has the concave "shaver" grille, 64 has a flat grille with an indention in the middle -- hood has a lip that goes into the indention, 63 hood is straight across the front).
     
  26. estes
    Joined: May 25, 2011
    Posts: 62

    estes
    Member

    Thanks Farna! I'm going to do just that!
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.