Float a motor vs. stock mounts

lance leblanc

lance leblanc

Senior Member
Do the Float a Motor mounts I see on the market make that much of a difference. Will simply replacing the rubber pads in the stock mounts give statisfactory results.

Seems the tuffest part of my original '29 Tudor retoration is trying to do it on a shoe-string budget. Taking my time and replacing only the parts that can't be used is working, however having regrets later for not replacing what I should at this stage is a big worry.

The body is off, the engine is due back from builder before Thanksgiving and the chassis is ready for paint.

Lance
 
I'd stick with the original mounts with new rubber. My 28 even has the solid original front mount and I don't have any bad vibes!:)
 
Hello Lance,
I believe most here will agree that the stock mounts work well, and for much less money, myself I like to keep my truck as Henry built it, others will discuss the merits of upgrades if you are going to do a lot of touring.
Regards Brian.
 
Yeah, You don't hear that in many places these days! Someone's always pushing "New and Improved" ($$$$$$Too) Did you check your frame for bends etc. I did and found about 3/16" curve which I straightened with strategically placed Hyd. Jack and a heavy reinforcing beam to "buck" the jack. DON"T USE HEAT! Measure diagonally corner to corner to see if it's been racked. Use a straight edge along the top and bottom , near where the rear eng, mounts are, to look for sags.
Terry





lance leblanc said:
Awsome! I love it anytime someone tells me to leave the $ in my pocket.
Click to expand...
 
Checked frame for straightness. Off by maybe 1/8" guess that was acceptable. Bigger concern was the stress crack over the front spring cross member. Plan is to weld the next weekend.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    78.7 KB · Views: 165
Not only are FAM great, but when they're polished they look like a million dollars! I said it once before and I'll say it again; the stock mounts are there because Henry was cheap.
 
Memo to Self: add Float-a-Motors to list of sacrosanct "third rails" of Model A Ford ownership and maintenance.
 
lance leblanc said:
Checked frame for straightness. Off by maybe 1/8" guess that was acceptable. Bigger concern was the stress crack over the front spring cross member. Plan is to weld the next weekend.
Click to expand...

If you have a 1/8" sag over the entire length of the frame you will be surprised how badly the hood will fit. Of course you can compensate by shimming the body higher but you may have to shorten the springs in the hood latches for them to stretch enough.
 
I went the float a motor mounts on the rear of the engine and it made a huge reduction in vibrations especially around 30mph.

Not sure how much improvement I would have gotten just replacing the original pads. They were definitely beyound their service life and no longer rubbery.

What I would recommend is change the pads to try and stay original, they're cheap. If there is still more vibration than you like then change over to the floating style. It allows a lot more movement of the engine.

I guess it all depends on the ballance of the engine, consider that the movement with stock pads is limited by their thin-ness. The float mounts will not have this restriction and are even listen in the Les Andrews book. That said, I purchased a spare set of original rubbers in case I want to go back for the original look, but right now it rides pretty sweet.

The biggest problem I ran into was getting the old mounts off past the side mount tire arms. These have to be removed for success. My mounts needed to be removed to clean the surfaces since the pads deteriorated into a tarry substance with age and exposure to petrolium based products.
 
The business about the motor with original mounts providing important structural support has always sounded compelling to me, EXCEPT, there are FAM users in our club who have driven their cars to every state in the union and to Labrador and dipped their wheels in the Arctic Ocean, heavy loaded and for much of those miles towing trailers, with no structural problems whatsoever.

One thing for sure, it is much easier to get the motor in and out with the FAM.

To the original question, there was an article in Model A Times a year or two ago comparing mounts. As I recall, there wasn't much difference IF new rubber was used in the originals. I believe that Snyders started producing correctly fitting new rubber a few years ago. The article did warn against using the new FAM front mounts.
 
Last edited:
steve s said:
The business about the motor with original mounts providing important structural support has always sounded compelling to me, EXCEPT, there are FAM users in our club who have driven their cars to every state in the union and to Labrador and dipped their wheels in the Arctic Ocean, heavy loaded and for much of those miles towing trailers, with no structural problems whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Steve S=sensible,
I just regened on my promise not to "hawk" FAM!Steve, you're a sensible man, not steeped in rhetoric, like, "they're a part of the frame, your frame rails will sag, quick stops will gouge your radiator, can't tow the car from the front axle as the wishbone will pull the trans loose from the driveshaft,"etc. & on & on!:eek::eek::eek:
Looooong story short, On my sold '30 Coupe, Minerva, I put full FAM mounts on the front & rear, it was like driving a whole DIFFERENT car! Why did dear old Henry go to similar mounts on the Model B?:confused: He learned stuff that made the old 4 banger smoother!:D
If I had the energy, I would put them on my '29 Coupe, Vermin. Got to get it driving now & install my "new" Zip-A-Rak telescoping luggage rack installed. (Thanks, Bob!:D)
Anyone putting them on the front, do a search for my revised method for drilling (OH! HORRORS!) the front crossmember holes. If they're drilled per the instructions, they'll vibrate WORSE than with the old yoke system!:eek: Whew!! now I feel better. Bill W.
 
steve s said:
The business about the motor with original mounts providing important structural support has always sounded compelling to me, EXCEPT, there are FAM users in our club who have driven their cars to every state in the union and to Labrador and dipped their wheels in the Arctic Ocean, heavy loaded and for much of those miles towing trailers, with no structural problems whatsoever.
Click to expand...


Without getting into a "whizzing contest", the biggest thing that folks don't consider is the rear engine mounts are actually what the rear end pushes off of to move the weight of the entire vehicle. That is why it is a needed structural member.
 
Oh My!
What have I started, again! The rear end is still pushing against a similar "member" resulting in only a very slight rubber flexing of the rubber biscuit, not unlike the slight rubber flexing in the rubber pads between the stock mounts & the frame rails.
FAM's is NOT like mounting the motor with GIANT rubber bands! Bill W.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top