I have a '39 Mercury sedan that I am putting a 283 into. The engine will be connected to the original 3 speed ****** via a Cragar aluminum adapter. I bought an engine mount that is similar to an early Corvette, and mounts on the front of the engine to the Ford rubber biscuits. My question is, with the aluminum ****** adapter, is this set up structurally OK or should I be using engine mounts the go on the side of the block? Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts.
We switched from the Hurst type mount that you described to the Ch***is Engineering side type for that very reason. They work great.
Im running a Hurst style front mount from speedway on the 350 in my 53 Bel Air. Bolted to an aluminum th350 with stock location trans mount. Zero issues
Yeah with my Hurst style front mount my engine barely moves under load. I think a lotta guys just overthink it
Front mounts worked, but Chevy didn't keep them very long for good reason. If my SBC engines have side mounts on them I'm putting side mounts on the frames.
Side mounts take most of the weight of the motor and put less stress on the bell housing. Not an issue with a short 3 speed manual but if you have a 3/4 speed auto side mounts work better.
I would install the engine with the front mount that you have, then make sure the side mounts clear your steering gear, before making the switch.
yup, the hurst mount will be just fine, they were made specifically for this kind of swap. the fact that they are a wider mount point to the rubber mounts than what a 55 Chev was makes it so the engine doesn't rock back and forth as much. no need for side mounts on one of these
I think GM stop using the front mounts because it was sandwiched between the water pump & the block. You had to put gaskets on both sides of the mount.
I'd use side mounts to bring the engine and trans mounts closer together. That's what Chevy did when they quit hanging the trans off the bellhousing and put a tail shaft mount on a crossmember. They did it for a reason.
No, actually, the mount brackets bolted to a pair of threaded bosses on the front of each side of the block below the water pump.
However, those reasons of the manufacturer may not be a preventative for a hot rodder. They were trying to build cars in less time, less expensive, perhaps simpler (from a manufacturing standpoint), maybe improve the feel, and certainly in the case of tri-fives to reduce the bellhousing mounts from wearing/tearing. For specific vehicles, there are space considerations, evolution of technology and parts and so on. In the OP's case, I don't believe it's a limiting factor that should prevent him, especially if he's worried about the adapter itself. His suggested set-up has been used countless times.
As an alternative for extra support, you could add some mid-mounts that use the bellhousing bolts and then have legs that extend to the frame to provide support in the middle of the setup. Then you have the front Hurst style mount, then the mid mounts, then the tailshaft trans mount.
All of the front mount GM engines be it a 216 or 235, or 265 or 57 283 or 55/59 truck engines that left the factory had the mounts on the cast iron bellhousing. That is ALL of them, None left the factory with a mount of the front of the engine and rear of the transmission. Late 60's when you could get your hands on a Turbo 350 or 4oo from the wrecking yard guy were stuffing them in Tri 5 Chevys with a rear crossmember and breaking bellhousings because the whole ***embly would flex going down the road. I saw the results of one that broke off on a 327 aluminum glide in a 55. I heard about a lot more of them. Side mounts are easy. They have been around since 58 and they don't let your aluminum bellhousing break due to flexing.
It is the early corvette mounts that went between the engine and the water pump..... Hurst mounts and trans adapters with a stock ford trans have been used thousands of times with good results, there is no aluminum bell housing with this setup, it is a 1/2" thick spacer... why re invent the wheel? My 61 Corvette has a front mount and a trans tail mount and every corvette from the era was built that way, no issues
As soon as you get more than 3 mounts weight distribution becomes an issue. The more mounts you have in the system the more scope there is for issues. You can make it work but that may be more luck than judgment. You need to balance the load accross the multipul mounts. Car manufacturers know this which is why a 3 mount system is so popular.
Your 61 has or left the factory with a cast iron glide That had a stronger case, 62 Powerglide was aluminum. 63 went to side mounts on the engine. Those aluminum adapters for the Ford trans are pretty stout and only 4 inches long and have a real stout full ring transmission case with a lot of bolts bolted to them. Not much chance of flex. These cracked and broken cases on aluminum automatics with front mount engines were a pretty common issue in the 70's. That can't be argued against if you were actually there to see it. That or bolts that loosened up and fell out all the time.
my 61 Corvette left the factory with a 4 speed and a cast aluminum bellhousing. I mis spoke when I said the adapter was 1/2" thick you are correct at 4 inches ( i had confused it with the 1/2" thick adapter on my 40 that has a 49 Caddy in it adapted to the stock trans). I still think the Hurst mount and adapter arrangement will be fine, it was done countless times
Only Corvettes had a sandwiched front mount. All others used separate mounting brackets on the block to front mount the engines so you could change a water pump and not have to block the engine up.
It will be fine. Been done for years. With nearly 30,000 miles on my 39 since built the first 5000 were with the hurst front mount on the 283 and then the stock 39 trans with an old adapter. no problem. I then switched to a top loader 3 speed (ford 303 three speed) with the mount on the tail shaft housing and the same hurst front mount. Another 20,000 miles, a trip from the VA/NC to Bonneville for speed week and countless 7000 RPM shifts and clutch dumps and I have had no issues. regarding mounting it that way. Just make sure your mounts are all good and solid with no deflection in them when you depress the clutch. It will drive you crazy and could cause throw-out bearing issues. ask me how I know......
You'll be fine with what you have. The adapter is fairly short and stout and the trans is cast iron on stock mounts, there is no issue. The concern comes in when you use stock Chevy aluminum bellhousings or aluminum case automatics. Be sure to dial indicate in your adapter though before you mate the engine and trans. Some of the early adapters were pretty far of center.
The Jalopy Journal
