Hurst engine mounts (SBC)

yup, half inch spacers, rectangles with two holes through 'em. any mid mount set up would work for an automatic i'd think. i'm running a 4 speed with no mid mount at all.
also get the old style gm mechanical fuel pump that is bolted together rather than the later version thats pressed together. this will let you swing your fuel lines to the back.

 

I see y'all mentioning only automatics. I'm planning on running a 4 speed. Would this change my mid-mount plate requirements? Also, I looked for a mid-mount on Speedway and only saw ones that appear to be for racing applications. Do they sell a more generic version?

 

Are you locked into your existing bell, or are you willing to swap? If I were running a four-speed, I'd be after a '55-'57 Chevy bellhousing that has the mounts cast right in.

 

I'm up in the air, honestly. I'm planning on using the bellhousing I got with my Saginaw, but I know nothing about it. I wouldn't be against a '55-'57 bellhousing, but can only imagine how much that would cost since it's a coveted Tri-5 piece!

Ultimately, though, I'd love to see a pic of a Hurst mount with a raised mech. fuel pump to see if I like the look. If not, then I may consider going with the side mount. I'm just concerned if the spacer is visible or not as that could potentially spoil the look, I would think? Does anyone have pics to share? I'd really appreciate it!

 

When Goodies Speed Shop carried the 'new' Hurst mounts, a second type came out that allowed the stock fuel pump to be used: It had these oblong spacers, 1/2" thick steel bar, bored for both holes each side, and 4 longer 3/8" bolts; 1.5" long, IIRC...

And X2 on the old style fuel pump: to be able to 'clock' the top half is the solution.

 

I also run an original Hurst front motor mount for my 327. Depending on your application, it is a little tight, but by using spacers you can avoid the mechanical fuel pump space problem.

 

Atwater Mike: You just jogged my memory,they are plate spacers;not washers. Last time I had engine out was 1981. Tommy R : The pump is not raised, stock location; I use a 327/365 type pump that has a bottom bolt on cover. Run a `57 bell,`61 T-10 with bell mounts and rear 2bolt tranny mount.

 

Ah, I think I'm getting a better mental picture now. Sometimes I'm a little slow.

So basically, I can use the Hurst mount with a mechanical fuel pump if I either space the mount forward a bit OR run an older style pump?

For the rear, I can use a '55-'57 bellhousing which has mounts cast into it. Then I wouldn't need a separate mid-mount plate, correct? And I assume this bellhousing would work fine with my Saginaw?

Thanks a ton for all the help, guys...

 

Tommy R: Space the mount,you can run any mech pump;but the type you can take apart has the best positions on the in and out lines for most hot rods. With the `57 bell , no mid plate needed. Sag tranny should bolt right up.

 

Thanks, bowie!!

 

why would you want to run bell housing mounts if you have a transmission mount on the trans?

the 55-57's used mid mounts because the distance between the front mounts were so close and the motor and trans would shift from torque load. the hurst mount has a wider "foot print" than even a stock '58 and later block motor mount. if your trans has a mount at the tail shaft, use the hurst mount and the trans mount. problem solved!

-danny

 

i run all three mounts-----solid spacers in the front instead of rubber[hurst mount] made a set of solid mid mounts and a rubber mounted tail-----was tired of the rubber mid mounts breaking----havent had any problems-----and my car is made to beat the crap out of it--so a lil vibration doesnt bother me

 

And this is why I ask you guys these questions! Thanks for chiming in, Danny. So that makes perfect sense. My Saginaw does have a mount under it so I guess coupling that with my Hurst mount and I should be good to go!

 

Thank you Danny! I will be using a front motor mount from a Chris Craft boat on my 283 that has a built in spacer for the fuel pump.($20) I thought maybe I might have to put saddle mounts in also, but you just made a lot of sense...

 

Is this the kind of fuel pump you're referring to?

 

http://www.mikeschevy.com/servlet/the-3657/55-56-57-CHEVY/Detail

http://www.mcgaughystore.com/products/Turbo-Mounts-for-Bell-Housing-1955%252d57-Chevy.html

I think these are the mounts you are looking for. I didnt see them in Speedways site. Mike's wants $80 but McGaughy has them for $70.

 

I would still run the mid mounts, (in fact I am on mine)that is a long span from the front of the block to the tail of the tranny to have that much weight torquing on an aluminum bellhousing!

 

The mounts that I posted the link to are the bellhousing mounts for a GM automatic to a 55-57 frame. I have a stock 55 bellhousing on mine plus a cross member mount under the Muncie transmission tailshaft mount. I would use with an automatic.

 

When you space the Hurst mount to clear the fuel pump you create another problem. The lower radiator hose will interfere with the hurst mount. I cut part of the lower flange away for the hose to clear, but that may not provide enough space for the hose depending on how far you space the mount from the engine.

 

We ran a Hurst mount up front and a tranny mount on the Willys gasser for years without a problem. We did run a steel Lakewood bellhousing though...

 

I had the same problem on one I did for a friend. Now that mount hangs in my rafters and I use it for mocking up motors and building side mounts! Its a great tool to use.

 

Wow, there's way more to using a Hurst mount than I would've suspected! I really like the styling, however, so I want to find a way to make it work. But before I weld the mounts to my chassis, I've got a few more questions for y'all....

- I assume the fuel pump like in post #45 is the "old style" since it's bolted together instead of pressed?

- Does the Hurst mount need to be spaced forward if an old style fuel pump is used?

- Is it possible to get a radiator hose to work with the Hurst mount, even if the mount is spaced forward a bit? 47ragtop's and Meddler1's comments have me concerned.

I now have a '55 bellhousing to use for some mid-mounts. It may be overkill, but that's okay. I also plan on a rear mount under the Saginaw.

 

It isn't a width problem it is a length problem. When you use a Hurst type mount on the very front of the motor and only a tailshaft mount on the TH350 or TH400 trans, that is a VERY long distance between the two. That puts an enormous amount of strain on the aluminum bellhousing of the automatic transmission and can lead to cracking in that area.

It wasn't so much of an issue when GM was using cast iron bellhousings and cast iron transmissions, but when they started using aluminum for their powerglides and TH transmissions it became a concern.

Don

 

Don't forget the mount biscuits, at the engine face or the transmission/engine joint, should be "floating", one up, one down, with the bolt isolated from the steel mount.

 

yup, thats the one i speak of

 

I'm planning on it, but what do you mean "one up, one down"?

Thanks!!

 

With those mounts you run a mid mount for trans, not a rear transmission mount. Here's an old B&M brochure to show what is recommended. If conventional side mounts, mid or rear mount is OK.

 

I think if I decide to move forward with the Hurst mount, I'd likely use all three mounting points. I figure the extra cross members won't be a bad thing. But I'm hoping for some clarification to the questions I asked in post #52 if anyone can help a brotha out?

 

So do you have to use mid mounts when using the hurst style motor mounts on a sbc?

 

Very recommended. Many guys have used the front and rear mounts only and have got away with it for countless miles, HOWEVER,,,,,, many havent.