Engine mounts
- Thread starter bosticjb
- Start date
Gary WA
Well-known member
Its like oil?? I like stock! Your choice.
johnbuckley
Well-known member
never noticed much doifference in vibtarion etc , but I find refitting the engine easier if motor mounts are fitted
nkaminar
Well-known member
Usually the stock mounts have rock hard rubber pads that do no dampening. If you use the stock mounts replace the rubber pads.
John is right that removing and replacing an engine is simpler with the after market mounts. The bolts should just be brought up snug and not tight.
The front mounts should remain stock as the after market mounts in front do not work.
John is right that removing and replacing an engine is simpler with the after market mounts. The bolts should just be brought up snug and not tight.
The front mounts should remain stock as the after market mounts in front do not work.
Good question, As designed the stock mounts with the rubber pads and bolted to the engine was an integral part of the structure of the frame and acted as a cross member. The float a motor mounts may allow easy replacement of the engine but you loose the original frame support. These 85 year old frames are stressed enough plus the added WEIGHT they are expected to carry to comprise that structure.
Last edited:
john charlton
Well-known member
The stock motor mounts are what propels the car forward . The back axle pushes the torque tube which in turn pushes the trans and engine . The rear spring would take no appreciable ahead/astern load nor. the front motor mount .With flotamotor mounts the drive is transmitted through the rubber donuts so there must be some slight "slop" . I do have flotamotor mounts on a 29 fordor but I mean to go back to stock when I can gather some inthusiasm .
John in Suffolk County England .
In England an English muffin is a muffin .
John in Suffolk County England .
In England an English muffin is a muffin .
alexiskai
Well-known member
At the Oshkosh MARC national meet this year, someone brought in a restored Model A prototype chassis that was built in mid-1927. It has a lot of design changes from the production cars. No records were kept of why one design made it and the other didn't, but we do know that the prototype used expensive shock absorbers that weren't going to cut it for the production design. According to Bob Martino, who restored the prototype, "Ford worked with... Houdaille to design a much less expensive shock.... In July & August of 1927, the chassis and suspension had to be redesigned to accommodate these shocks."
I mention this because the prototype uses rear motor mounts that look surprisingly similar to the FAM mounts. I wonder whether the design that eventually became the production mounts was preferred because of the need to design around the cheaper shocks.
I mention this because the prototype uses rear motor mounts that look surprisingly similar to the FAM mounts. I wonder whether the design that eventually became the production mounts was preferred because of the need to design around the cheaper shocks.
Attachments
Jacksonlll
Well-known member
I like the soft mounts, but I think they might contribute to the fatigue failure between the radiator inlet and the top tank. That’s a common failure and that upper hose is very stiff. Just a thought.