GTP Cool Wall: 1970-1978 AMC Gremlin

[GranTurismo916]

1970-1978 AMC Gremlin nominated by @GranTurismo916

Engines: 122 ci (2.0L) I4 (Volkswagen EA827), 199 ci (3.3L) I6 (AMC 199 I6), 232 ci (3.8L) I6 (AMC 232 I6), 258 ci (4.2L) I6 (AMC 258 I6), 304 ci (5.0L) V8 (AMC Tall-deck 304), 401 ci (6.6L) V8 (Randall 401-XR)
Power: 122: ~100 hp 199: 128 hp; 232: 86-145 hp; 258: 95-150; 304: 120 hp; 401: 150 hp
Torque: 122: ~120 lb-ft.; 199: 182 lb-ft.; 232: 160-215 lb-ft.; 258: 180-240 lb-ft.; 304: 220 lb-ft.; 401: 245 lb-ft.
Weight: 1194 kg
Transmission: 3-speed manual, 4-speed manual, 3-speed automatic
Drivetrain: Front engine, rear wheel drive
Body Styles: 3-door hatchback​

Spoiler: Additional Pics

 

[Slash]

Sub zero. Send this to the ice box. It's just so odd but oozes cool because it's a AMC, and not your typical Ford/GM/Mopar hunk of iron. But it doesn't weigh anything so they were quick for their day, at least the V8 engines. Most of them were economy cars but the "performance" models (AMC got hit the hardest with emissions regulations and its related powerloss) could scoot pretty good. 150hp for it's engine size might now seem like much but when you consider that typical American 4 and 6 cylinders of the day were making well under 100 horsepower, I can almost justify it due to the many reasons of the causes which we all know. Besides, even swapping stock parts for stock parts off other earlier engines these days can really boost your power without spending money. So while like every 70s car gets polled and then gets panned for their large displacement engines and wheezing power, you can more or less double your power out of these without spending a dime if you know what you're doing.

 

[Sage Ages]

It's called a Gremlin.


Uncool.

 

[mustafur]

Car is only Cool when you swap the engine with a half decent V8. Otherwise meh.

Might be unique to americans but to everyone else it's just a bulky looking hatchback based on form not function.

 

[Niku Driver HC]

Ah, the Gremlin... I don't know what to think exactly of this. On one hand, as @Custom878 said, it's called a Gremlin. That's not what I'd call a cool name. It was cheaply made, and TIME called it one of the 50 worst cars of all time. On the other hand, it doesn't explode like a Ford Pinto, that already makes it far better as a car. And it's so mid-to-late 1970's it hurts. Not to mention that the first picture is that of a pristine car (a suprisingly good one at that), which is lovely. It was also a testbed for several alternative means of power, including electrical and even hydrogen (!!!) engines.

Ergh... I would like to rate it a cool, but we know that most Gremlins died because they aren't that good as cars. The few who have survived are defintely head-turners, but that could go both (good and bad) ways. I'll rate it Uncool.

 

[Slash]

Car is only Cool when you swap the engine with a half decent V8.

You don't even need to swap the engine, you just have to swap parts for other stock ones...you can effectively double your horsepower in a days work...hell just removing the smog stuff will free up ungodly amounts of power.

 

[Niku Driver HC]

You don't even need to swap the engine, you just have to swap parts for other stock ones...you can effectively double your horsepower in a days work...hell just removing the smog stuff will free up ungodly amounts of power.

Wow, were American emission laws that strict for the engine to be that strangled by smog equipment?

 

[Slash]

Wow, were American emission laws that strict for the engine to be that strangled by smog equipment?

I have heard of some cases by swapping exhaust for freer flowing exhaust (for example going from a single y pipe, having twin cats and a muffler half the length of the car itself to dual pipes with either new high flow cats or no cats at all), removal of the smog pump, AIR/EGR valves, putting a better breathing carburetor on it (some people even swap the intake but then you're getting into bolt-on territory), removing thermactor bumps and doing a few other things can free up as much as 85 horsepower in some cases. Typically, you're guaranteed about 50 just by removing things. Anyone who has ever done it will tell you the engine becomes an entirely different animal. This holds true well into the 1980's.

 

[Niku Driver HC]

I have heard of some cases by swapping exhaust for freer flowing exhaust (for example going frmo a single y pipe, having twin cats and a muffler half the length of the car itself to dual pipes with either new high flow cats or no cats at all), removal of the smog pump, AIR/EGR valves, putting a better breathing carburetor on it (some people even swap the intake but then you're getting into bolt-on territory), removing thermactor bumps and doing a few other things can free up as much as 85 horsepower in some cases. Typically, you're guaranteed about 50 just by removing things. Anyone who has ever done it will tell you the engine becomes an entirely different animal. This holds true well into the 1980's.

Wow... That's rather impressive, almost an 100 hp gain from minor things being added or removed. Really surprising.

 

[Sage Ages]

Worth pointing out that the low outputs of V8s of the time come from both the switch from gross to net hp, and the changes made for catering to the emission laws. It looks a lot worse on paper than it really is.

 

[Adamgp]

It should be noted the 401 was never offered from the factory in a Gremlin. It was a dealer installed package from Randall AMC in Arizona. It was a somewhat easy swap though since AMC V8s all used basically the same block.

That being said, Gremlins are awesome. Sub Zero.

 

[Slash]

Wow... That's rather impressive, almost an 100 hp gain from minor things being added or removed. Really surprising.

It's really not when you consider the size of the engines displacement wise. It was effectively cheaper to stupify already existing engines they already had in production then it was to develop new ones to meet constantly changing regulations. Couple that with the fact that regulations would change 3-4 times a year and that automakers were constantly trying to keep up, as you can see it was a recipe for disaster.

If you really wanted to get into it, without tearing out pistons and the entire bottom end apart, but by pulling the entire top end it is not uncommon to see your old Ford 302 from the 70s that made a whopping 140hp when new to be pumping out 300-350 horsepower, right from the junkyard just by swapping on exhaust, heads (sometimes even factory heads too), intake, carburetors and giving it a good tune.

Worth pointing out that the low outputs of V8s of the time come from both the switch from gross to net hp, and the changes made for catering to the emission laws. It looks a lot worse on paper.

This is absolutely true as well.

 

[Niku Driver HC]

It's really not when you consider the size of the engines displacement wise. It was effectively cheaper to stupify already existing engines they already had in production then it was to develop new ones to meet constantly changing regulations. Couple that with the fact that regulations would change 3-4 times a year and that automakers were constantly trying to keep up, as you can see it was a recipe for disaster.

If you really wanted to get into it, without tearing out pistons and the entire bottom end apart, but by pulling the entire top end it is not uncommon to see your old Ford 302 from the 70s that made a whopping 140hp when new to be pumping out 300-350 horsepower, right from the junkyard just by swapping on exhaust, heads, intake, carburetors and giving it a good tune.

No wonder I don't think much of the late "'70's all the way to the 1980's American" era when it comes to performance cars... The emission regulations destroyed engines, stupified cars and overall ruined many muscle cars. And of course the automakers were forced to resort to the measures you mentioned, trying desperatly to strangle engines to fit the rules.

 

[Slash]

No wonder I don't think much of the late "'70's all the way to the 1980's American" era when it comes to performance cars... The emission regulations destroyed engines, stupified cars and overall ruined many muscle cars. And of course the automakers were forced to resort to the measures you mentioned, trying desperatly to strangle engines to fit the rules.

The nice part is that the cars make awesome platforms to build something off of. They actually handled better than their 60s infamous counterparts, the engines were largely the same so that most go fast parts will go right on them, they are actually cheaper than the older cars, and the parts are just as available. Some people don't like some of the looks for some cars, but if you can get past than most of them are solid beginner platforms.

It was only recently (15 years or so) that modern normal people cars are able to compete with the hey day of American muscle. With most cars barely surpassing 200hp up until the mid 1990s, cars back in the day that anyone could buy at a small town dealership with 300-400+ horsepower were absolutely untouchable. That's why they are famous.

 

[Sage Ages]

People's high expectations for V8 engines come from the numbers that they read on paper that were for lopey idling, high compression, multiple carbed engines with no exhaust and no air conditioning or other accessories that don't have to worry about drivetrain loss. Sorry, but even with all of that, you're not making 400hp out the factory, so 100 and change for a "normal" motor shouldn't be a surprise. It was still the 70s after all.

 

[Slash]

People's high expectations for V8 engines come from the numbers that they read on paper that were for lopey idling,

Stop right there. No muscle car engine that ever came out of the factory had an idle like it was going to stall. Ever. Not even your Boss engines, LS6 454's, or 426 Hemi's. You wanna know what they sounded like? They sounded like your 2014 Chevy Silverado's idle. Almost all muscle cars you see on YouTube or in person that sound like they just want to quit running are all modified with performance camshafts.

Examples:

All stock muscle idled like this. Every brand, every engine, every car.



Everyone is soooooo used to hearing them sound like this video below that everyone thinks that's how they came. Far, far from it.

high compression, multiple carbed engines with no exhaust and no air conditioning or other accessories that don't have to worry about drivetrain loss. Sorry, but even with all of that, you're not making 400hp out the factory, so 100 and change for a "normal" motor shouldn't be a surprise. It was still the 70s after all.

Compression for some engines dropped as much as 4 points, going from 12:1 all the way down to 8:1. That alone is a massive horsepower and torque loss.

When they changed the way they rated engines, all those accessories and transmission were hooked up. NET horsepower was NEVER rated at the wheels. Instead of a flywheel rating, it was done at the transmission output tailshaft.

 

[Sage Ages]

Stop right there. No muscle car engine that ever came out of the factory had an idle like it was going to stall. Ever. Not even your Boss engines, LS6 454's, or 426 Hemi's. You wanna know what they sounded like? They sounded like your 2014 Chevy Silverado's idle. Almost all muscle cars you see on YouTube or in person that sound like they just want to quit running are all modified with performance camshafts.

Okay, not the proper way to say it, but you get what I meant. Cams did play a role.

Compression for some engines dropped as much as 4 points, going from 12:1 all the way down to 8:1. That alone is a massive horsepower and torque loss.

Exactly. I didn't even know they were that high. I was thinking around 10:1 or something.

When they changed the way they rated engines, all those accessories and transmission were hooked up. NET horsepower was NEVER rated at the wheels. Instead of a flywheel rating, it was done at the transmission output tailshaft.

I never said anything about wheel horsepower.

 

[Slash]

Okay, not the proper way to say it, but you get what I meant. Cams did play a role.

Yeah for sure.

Exactly. I didn't even know they were that high. I was thinking around 10:1 or something.

Most were about 9.5:1 to about 11:1. When they dropped some went to as low as 7.5:1 in some cases. Not exactly what you're looking for in a performance engine.

I never said anything about wheel horsepower.

No, but that's what a lot of people seem to think it is.

 

[Leggy1]

401: 150 hp.

That's just poor engineering, no excuses.​

 

[Slash]

401: 150 hp.

That's just poor engineering, no excuses.​

*facepalm*

You realize that Ferrari's of the day were getting beat by in some cases pickup trucks in the acceleration department right?

 

[Roger the Horse]

The hideousness and the terrible name makes them too charming to be seriously uncool.

 

[Leggy1]

*facepalm*

You realize that Ferrari's of the day were getting beat by in some cases pickup trucks in the acceleration department right?

And? The output is poor, even considering the time and market.

 

[Slash]

And? The output is poor, even considering the time and market.

I'm not sure you understand the severity of what actually happened. The 390 of several years prior to the 401 made well over 300 horsepower. If you'd have bothered to read my previous posts, it was all explained.

 

[Sage Ages]

And? The output is poor, even considering the time and market.

It's more or less average if you can say-so.

 

[Leggy1]

I'm not sure you understand the severity of what actually happened. The 390 of several years prior to the 401 made well over 300 horsepower. If you'd have bothered to read my previous posts, it was all explained.

I understand and read the posts. The VW engine offered has a much better specific output, I assume it has to abide to the same laws?

 

[Slash]

I understand and read the posts. The VW engine offered has a much better specific output, I assume it has to abide to the same laws?

Yes but it wasn't slammed nearly as hard because of the different design, layout and less number of smog producing cylinders. The other engines produced more power, but also made more emissions and had to be contained which was harder to do. For the time period, the output of the engine here was considered normal across many manufacturers. If you ever get the chance to tear down an engine like the 401 here and rebuild it, you'll see all the crap they did to them just to be usable. Again, it was done because it was cheaper than developing an entirely new engine, and pointless to do so with so many changes going on so rapidly.

How many times in how many threads does this need to be explained before it starts to sink in? Not just you, but a lot of people seem to read this and it goes in one ear and right out the other.

If you actually bothered to read my posts and understand them like you claimed to, I wouldn't be explaining this again.

 

[mustafur]

The Main issue was American car Makers couldn't be bothered making an engine from scratch that was designed fully for the new Regulations and they suffered badly with underpowered crap until basically the 90s when they started to do so(Because the Japanese where starting to beat them senseless).

The excuse is next to none.

 

[Sage Ages]

I'd imagine a fairly decent price difference if they were to do that and have it perform the same.

 

[Slash]

The Main issue was American car Makers couldn't be bothered making an engine from scratch that was designed fully for the new Regulations and they suffered badly with underpowered crap until basically the 90s when they started to do so(Because the Japanese where starting to beat them senseless).

The excuse is next to none.

You do in fact realize that the regulations changed so frequently that there was next to no point in spending the money to develop new engines right? You know, because I've only said it 3 times in this thread now.

It's not like they passed a law and it never changed for 20 years. They were constantly tweaking things and changing things around and due to that the automakers had a hard enough time keeping up with what they had (you really should see all the changes to engines they made per year just to make it to production and sometimes not even get that far) let alone build new, or several new engines per car to only just have it be obsolete by the time it hits the market.

So yes, there is a valid excuse, and there is plenty of them. You might want to brush up on your history.

 

[mustafur]

You do in fact realize that the regulations changed so frequently that there was next to no point in spending the money to develop new engines right? You know, because I've only said it 3 times in this thread now.

It's not like they passed a law and it never changed for 20 years. They were constantly tweaking things and changing things around and due to that the automakers had a hard enough time keeping up with what they had (you really should see all the changes to engines they made per year just to make it to production and sometimes not even get that far) let alone build new, or several new engines per car to only just have it be obsolete by the time it hits the market.

So yes, there is a valid excuse, and there is plenty of them.

Yet at the same time the Europeans where putting cars into the US that even though restricted where showing up all the engines you guys had.

No Excuse.