My new (temporary) ride
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,067
Likes: 1
From: In your garage, swipin' da lug nutz

The straight-six'* were never known to be fuel efficient, even with the Carter 1-barrel carb. They aren't all that as far as horsepower goes either. I think they put out 140 hp if memory serves. But they put out GOBS of torque, which is why those motors are more at home in the Jeeps than under the hood of AMC cars.
I have seen kits that will refit the 232-258 engines to fuel injection, and it does alot for them, including better fuel mileage.
I have seen kits that will refit the 232-258 engines to fuel injection, and it does alot for them, including better fuel mileage.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,808
Likes: 0
From: Erie Pennsylvania

Hmm...if it was mine i would look into that. The torque you can definitely. Wouldn't mind keeping it and using it to tow a small boat now that I am getting tint fishing.
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,067
Likes: 1
From: In your garage, swipin' da lug nutz

Originally Posted by crash'swife93ssei
I've never seen one and if I have I don't remember... You'd never believe that car is in that good of shape if there weren't pics to go with the words. Amazed.
Nowadays, the only place you will find them is in the junkyard. Sad really. AMC never really got the break it needed to succeed (though it was very stupid on their part teaming up with Renault).
AMC made some durable cars. I cna't recall every having a problem with any of my Javelins or AMX'*. They all went over 120K without ever needing a rebuild and if you were easy on it, the tranny held very up well too.
IMO, AMC lost out because of poor styling choices... but wow did they make some ugly cars! Renault was just a last ditch effort to revive the dead horse.
IMO, AMC lost out because of poor styling choices... but wow did they make some ugly cars! Renault was just a last ditch effort to revive the dead horse.


