that is the question. (I did search) most vehicles have the motor sitting in the frame rails basically in a "V" fashion. I am thinking its because engine vibrations etc etc will settle the motor tighter in the "V" . Most hot rods and such I see have mounts made where they are just flat mounts with rubber sandwiched in between, as in horizontal or perpendicular to ground. Question is? Is the "V" an engineered good thing and I should duplicate it, or just do the flat sandwich and not worry about lateral movement however slight it may be? it is a 440 in a 2x3 boxed frame, torquey and I'm thinking the "V" was done for a reason and I am voting for duplicate, but thought I'd ask.
I'm not an engineer, so I can't tell you to angle the mounts or not. But I do remember that drag racers would chain the engine to the frame because the torque would rip the motor mounts apart.
I personally don't care for the V style...I like the Ch***is Engineering style...check their web site
^^ okies, thanks edit: all I saw was motor plates, front mount solid, and thats not at all what I want for a street ride . thanks though
I don't know why they "V" in place..... I can see installation is easier, motor settles in prior to bolting in. Triangulation. stronger design. Easier to remove. You can unbolt it and it won't hit the floor. just some thought........
We have the Ch***is Engineering mounts in the Anglia. We fabbed the brackets and used their biscuits (and the tin 'cup' for the lower one). They work great. With the metal insert in them they were stiff (grab the engine and yank, the whole car comes with) it let us mount the engine closer to stuff without it rubbing or hitting. They do damp out vibration well, but if you have a real healthy cam and lots o compression, it will probably shake the car more than the stock style mount. I would guess the 'V' mount came to p*** because of cost. If the engine is a V and the mounts fit in a V it should take less material to make them. I seem to remember all of the inline mounts I have seen were some kind of biscuit type mount (no V).
Engineering for the OEM engine mounts takes a LOT of things into the equation, and doesn't stop at the mounts. The remainder of the vehicle must be able to accomodate all of the loads transferred to it through the mounts, and the mounts must keep doing a good job as they settle and age. The "V" will push the rails apart as well as down (that big Mopar isn't light) from gravity, turning forces, and torque (you will have plenty of torque). The OEM-style mounts probably handle side loading better than flathead-style mounts, but will be difficult to do well and are, well, ugly. Has anyone here had problems using the flathead-style biscuits with big engines?
My bad, I forgot there are two Ch***is Engineering companies, I was talking about Ch***is Engineering Inc. They also have a good writeup on mounts for the straight VS angled. Of course that could be just a sales pitch, but it seems to make sense (or maybe that's just the dopeler effect?). Regardless, as we had an engine no aftermarket mounts were available for we chose the vintage ford one as it appeared the easiest to fab (it wasn't hard). We chose the CE biscuits as they appeared to be (and are) the stiffest non solid mount we could find.
I have close to 400 hp in my sedan, sitting on "bisquit" type mounts but they are the newer Corvette oil filled round bisquits. They handle all the side loading very well, you can't even feel the engine running through them. They wouldn't be too attractive for a fenderless or hoodless car maybe because they are almost 4" in diameter. They work better than any mount I ever used prior.
personally i built v-shaped ones. I want my engine wedged in there where the engine weight is actually helping locate itself, not fighting it. i cant explain it, but horizontal or vertical mounts just seem wrong from an engineering point of view. As for "forcing the frame apart", what a crock. you have a cross member, right?
I kinda agree here. I have the "V" type - i actually have the tubular ones. I have a BBC on them and see no signs of it "forcing the frame apart". I used these ones: (only not stainless) http://www.heidts.com/heip32.htm
yeah, that issue is a moot point for me, I know I can build the frame to support the forces of wedging, no biggie there. I think I like the "v" style idea better. Thanks for all the input indeed from everybody
I don't think he means literally "forcing the frame apart" as in breaking the frame, more so that the side loads of the engine will be forced into the frame rail, as opposed to the biscuit style where the side load will be trying to shear the bolt of the older style mount. That being said, I'm using the biscuit style in my 31 coupe with a 283, but i'm not going to be putting out tremendous horsepower either
I thought he was speaking of OEM-type V mounts where the engine actually is wedged between the sloping mounts. These (gorgeous) tubular mounts you are using do NOT provide any side load due to gravity. The OEM mounts do. The side load from sloping/wedge oem mounts does indeed push outward on the frame rails as well as down. This gravity-induced force can flex the rails outward as the engine slides down if the crossmembers are too far away.
I have the biscuit style mounts in my 57 Ford...with a 383 Mopar, which is actually lighter than the Y block that originally resided in there. I used rubber stoppers from Sears Hardware and drilled a 1/2" hole through the center. The stoppers are identical to 55-57 Chevy cushions with the exception of the taper, and they cost $2, as opposed to $25. I have logged MANY trouble free miles with this setup. For me, the trick was that I have a cushion between the two mounts, so that the motor sits on rubber, but the 1/2" bolt that goes through has a thick washer and another rubber cushion on both sides. This way, as the motor takes load and torques up (the driver's side), it's pulling on the outside cushions, and when it's cruising or at rest, it sits on the middle cushion. 1/2" grade 8 bolt will do the trick just fine. Unless you're running sub 10 sec quarter mile p***es with it, you'll have no trouble
you are correct, I was. the stock mounts on the 440 are sloped which forces the motor to settle into a "V" cradle, and would force the rails apart, but thats an easy fix with crossmember etc. I was going to duplicate the wedge type/sloped mount and then connect the two sides with a brace looped under the oil pan. Then a big "X" in the frame shortly behind the mounts to cradle the transmission tail and add frame strength as well.
Sounds worthy of a tech post. Got any pics? Trying to picture what kind of stoppers you are talking about. Sears isn't known for selling hardware like that around here that I know of.
Here's an idea I ripped off from Wyatt "Indashop". Mine's not running yet, but he says they work great. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=162837
Turbo, I think you have some great ideas, using stock style mounts will keep the factory engineered three point mounting system intact and retain factory balance. Chrysler pioneered this system, I recall seeing some ancient advertising for "floating power", this at a time when others were using four mounting points, but by the mid 50's everyone used the 3-point set-up.
I have a big block Chevy in my '31 Plymouth using the biscuit type motor mounts, and I like 'em. The biscuit type motor mounts put the force straight down, and the V type motor mounts push down and outward, which tends to try wedge the rails apart from each other. The cars like say a '69 Camaro have a really beefy cradle shaped subframe that can handle those wedging out forces, but a car with thinner parallel rails isn't really designed to handle the "wedge action" spreading forces you'd get with the V-type motor mounts. I think it's easier and simple to align the biscuit type motor mounts too, and you can add shims if you need to tilt or raise the motor for some reason. The biscuit type mounts are real easy for dropping the engine in too, because all you need to do is stick a couple long pry rods in through the holes to pull everything into alignment while you lower the engine into place. Just make sure you use lock nuts or castle nuts with cotter pins, because you don't want the nuts to fall off and then have the engine torque up off the motor mount if you floor it. I put the same type of biscuit type motor mounts in my '32 Ford pickup I'm working on.
Tim do what richard was posting, wyatt's thread is perfect. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=143120
The Jalopy Journal
