1964, actually. The AMC 232 was first released in the 1964 Rambler Typhoon, which was the first Rambler Classic 2-door hardtop. It was their newly designed replacement for the soon-to-disappear 196 cid six.
4 cylinder vs straight 6
- Thread starter Greenmachine
- Start date
1964, actually. The AMC 232 was first released in the 1964 Rambler Typhoon, which was the first Rambler Classic 2-door hardtop. It was their newly designed replacement for the soon-to-disappear 196 cid six.
The fact then that it lasted 42 years is amazing. Most engines don’t last half that long.
Exactly, hence some of the inherent reliability I feel like.They are a hell-for-stout hunk of iron, to be sure.
I have come to terms with the 4.0. It works for what I use it for. I’ll always complain about it, but I don’t see any better option out there. The V8 swaps while cool cost way too much money to do right, interfere with my mid-arm, and typically produce more power than you’d want in something that is just going to be crawling rocks.
Always the 6 is more expensive, but as I daily it and my commute is lots of highway I took others advice on here and went with the 6.
Side note, I didn’t own the black one with low miles long at all due to rust, and got out of it by breaking even, which was a relief. I soon after picked up a Willy’s edition so my greenmachine name on here would remain intact. The Willys is also a 6 cylinder.
TJRick
TJ Enthusiast
I think this sound reasoning is why I don't get why you insist on constantly calling the AMC 4.0 straight six engine a "turd."
A turd can still be reliable.
I usually take a dump around the same time every day, so therefore my turds are pretty reliable
Honestly, I have a love / hate relationship with the 4.0.
TJRick
TJ Enthusiast
A turd can still be reliable.
I usually take a dump around the same time every day, so therefore my turds are pretty reliable
Honestly, I have a love / hate relationship with the 4.0.
Okay, so we can both agree on the fact that it is reliable. What do you "hate" about it, exactly?
Rubicon88
TJ Addict
I'm chiming in...
I hate nothing about the AMC straight 6 other than they allowed 60 minutes to neuter them.
Sure the EPA was breathing fire down the throat of every mfg at the time for better emissions but that's a bullshit excuse. Ford and GM had no issues continuing the use of v8's, albeit with much lower power output than their 5 year/10 year prior version, but make no mistake they still used v8's.
Ford might have sold more 300 6 cylinders than ever before at the time....but some of that was also the gas crunch of 1979...which was a second oil crisis of that decade and still fresh in people's mind. 1982 wasn't far removed from that 79 gas crunch.
GM sold a bunch of 6 cylinders and 305's in the same time frame.
The point being that GM and Ford while the sales graph changed somewhat were still selling a v8.
Back to AMC...
It's no coincidence that Jeep hammered the MFG commercials.. (more fun per gallon
)commercials and advertising bullshit MPG numbers that you could only realize downhill with a huge tailwind. 27 mpg....WHAT? Yeah you heard that right. Advertising Jeep CJ's approaching 30 mpg.
WTFF!!!
They took the entire attention off ditching the v8 and focused on fuel economy.
Sure the 258 (at the time) wasn't far away in the power department from a highly choked off 304 but it didn't take much to bring the 304 back to life with HP back to a very respectable # over 200.
60 minutes little skewed stint hit...the damage was phenomenal...and done.
We need extra safe now!!!!! Let's rid the 304 and just make them all slugs.
The engine got cut first which wasn't hard to do as the casting process was a phone call away. Hey Bob, only cast 360's. Why? I'll tell you later. Have a great weekend.
The narrow track axles were next to go 82-83.
Lastly the CJ-5 model itself got whacked.
For those that don't know the 258 was embarrassing. It was similar in power to the fuel injected 2.5/2.4 (yes it really was)
It had to be running perfect and zero mods to be "semi OK"
The 4.0 hit the YJ once the 4.2's were used up and dear lord it felt like lightning hit the Jeep. It wasn't a power monster but that's just how sorry the 258 was.
The thing is Jeep didn't need anything more powerful. They were selling every Jeep made and owned the market. It was their market. Sidekicks, Trackers et al came and went but Jeep was it's own thing.
If your heart was on a Jeep you were buying it regardless.
They had no reason to add power.
Oh well.
I hate nothing about the AMC straight 6 other than they allowed 60 minutes to neuter them.
Sure the EPA was breathing fire down the throat of every mfg at the time for better emissions but that's a bullshit excuse. Ford and GM had no issues continuing the use of v8's, albeit with much lower power output than their 5 year/10 year prior version, but make no mistake they still used v8's.
Ford might have sold more 300 6 cylinders than ever before at the time....but some of that was also the gas crunch of 1979...which was a second oil crisis of that decade and still fresh in people's mind. 1982 wasn't far removed from that 79 gas crunch.
GM sold a bunch of 6 cylinders and 305's in the same time frame.
The point being that GM and Ford while the sales graph changed somewhat were still selling a v8.
Back to AMC...
It's no coincidence that Jeep hammered the MFG commercials.. (more fun per gallon
)commercials and advertising bullshit MPG numbers that you could only realize downhill with a huge tailwind. 27 mpg....WHAT? Yeah you heard that right. Advertising Jeep CJ's approaching 30 mpg. WTFF!!!They took the entire attention off ditching the v8 and focused on fuel economy.
Sure the 258 (at the time) wasn't far away in the power department from a highly choked off 304 but it didn't take much to bring the 304 back to life with HP back to a very respectable # over 200.
60 minutes little skewed stint hit...the damage was phenomenal...and done.
We need extra safe now!!!!! Let's rid the 304 and just make them all slugs.
The engine got cut first which wasn't hard to do as the casting process was a phone call away. Hey Bob, only cast 360's. Why? I'll tell you later. Have a great weekend.
The narrow track axles were next to go 82-83.
Lastly the CJ-5 model itself got whacked.
For those that don't know the 258 was embarrassing. It was similar in power to the fuel injected 2.5/2.4 (yes it really was)
It had to be running perfect and zero mods to be "semi OK"
The 4.0 hit the YJ once the 4.2's were used up and dear lord it felt like lightning hit the Jeep. It wasn't a power monster but that's just how sorry the 258 was.
The thing is Jeep didn't need anything more powerful. They were selling every Jeep made and owned the market. It was their market. Sidekicks, Trackers et al came and went but Jeep was it's own thing.
If your heart was on a Jeep you were buying it regardless.
They had no reason to add power.
Oh well.
Last edited:
Similar threads
