Hot Rods Motor Mounting ?

I have a '55 265 SBC going into an original '32 frame.
I have the conversion kit for the Chev to Ford top loader 3 speed trans.
The rear of the trans is going into the stock torque tube closed system.

My question:

Is it a better mount with a Hurst mount to the rails or
use front mounts on the block to the stock front xmember?

 

Hurst mount to the rails, you need something to keep it from rocking side to side.

 

aaggie, thanks.
I'm curious how the original flathead V8 mounted to the xmember worked?

 

also, the original mount for this motor in the '55 car was at the front xmember?

 

It worked just fine. The peg mounts were used on Chevy V8s from 1955-57 and worked well too.

 

so, are we saying either mount is Ok?
I like the idea of the weight of the engine on the xmember which I think is stronger than the rails?

 

In 1948, Sid Owen built one of his '32 roadsters into a highboy, '40 Merc engine, '37 Lincoln box.
My 'mentor', Al Marceline, bought the roadster in 1950, ran it at the San Jose strip until 1956.

He installed a '55 265 then, using a McBar adaptor, Chevy stick flywheel, and Merc clutch/pressure plate.
The '55 Chevy front mounts fell right over the original biscuits on the Deuce crossmember!
I remember being surprised, but 25 year old Al told me Chevrolet had this planned.
He went on to say that in 5 years, all the Cads & Oldses in hot rods would be replaced by Chevy V8s!
He may have been over enthusiastic, or kidding...but I certainly saw more than a few Cads & Oldses give way to those little screamers...

Al's '32 eventually got a Model A rear spring, quickie, and a parade of new Smallblocks...
When he finally sold it, it had been 'updated' with 350/350, so it DOES happen to the best of 'em.

But those '55 Chevy front mounts and the '32. I still shake my head, and laugh.
It was...destiny.

 

That's cool! Thanks.

Sounds like a front mount system for me!

 

...Actually, the mounts are quite far forward for that length with an aluminum adapter.
The adapter is NOT bolted 360 degrees around the engine block: inmertia can crack the adapter on less than glass smooth roads.


The narrow spaced cross member front mounts were engineered in the Chevrolet considering wide rear side mounts. (this afforded a '3-point' engine mounting, a favorite of GM since 'way back: Chev/GMC Cad Olds Pontiac, etc)

It worked O.K. in Al's roadster, BUT in time, I asked about the new chain from the water pump bolt to the left frame rail. Al said it kept the right hand manifold from tapping the hood side! (torque strap)
I recalled the Lincoln stick moving 4"+ toward me (the passenger) when Al poured it on...

 

That's the other thing I have to consider....this setup either way is only 2 point....at the very rear of the trans (K member) and the front or side mount......nothing else inbetween.

 

The stock Chevy (55 265) mounts were the point of a triangle mount system which kept torque twist to a minimum, same as the three point systems in the Olds/Cad of the era.
I think you're better off with the side rail mounts to keep torque twist in control. With the stock Chevy biscuits up front and the two ears on the top loader as mounts there really isn't much lateral control.

 

Bobf, thanks. I want the best setup I can do.

So, who's out there with this setup and what are you using for mounts?

Any pics?

 

Do you have any idea how many SBCs were mounted using a Hurst mount and an adapter? Too many to count! Probably the most common set up in the early sixtys. I know of nothing that has made it less desirable since.



My 36 with a 55 265 using the same mounts. You have to run an electric fuel pump but that's fine. The Hurst mount is a classic hot rod speed part. A hotrod uses the Hurst mount. A streetrod uses side motor mounts. JMHO

 

thanks tommy

 

true,,BUT they had side mounts on the bellhousing...and none on the tranny..