G'day all, I am just enquiring as to who (if anyone) is using different motor mounts than k-code setup's? I have my original set on ebay at the moment and I am looking at changing over to a TCP/Prothane/Ron Morris set with polyurethane bushings. I guess that the use of these mounts will drop the engine a couple of inches from it's normal height...right? Any pro's/con's would be appreciated.
Than'K's
I am no expert but lowering the center of gravity of the car can only make handling better. However it also means you have to be all the more careful on speed bumps and the likes if you dont want to leave the oil pan behind you.....
<font face='Arial'>
Since he lowers the Engine a couple of inches. What does he do with the Transmission? This can throw the Driveshaft angles off? Just curious...
</font id='Arial'>
I sent this thread to my son who worked as a "driveshaft" engineer when first out of the U of M engineering school. His response:
"This is kind of a cool idea...but you almost need a
full engineering team just to get the fine tuning of
the drive shaft angles correct.
Marv, this is the sort of debate and idea's I am looking for. Off the top of my head, I can't see why it can't work, there were no differences in engine bay and transmission tunnel between the models (K/A/C etc...) and there are certainly cars out there running the newer style mounts and they haven't reported any need for major changes. Our engines are the same size dimensionally and the body shapes are the same size, so is it just a case of that 'K' cars had their engines sitting higher in the bay and mounted with more supporting rubber and braketry?
Scott
<font face='Arial'>
I didn't say that it won't work. I'm just pointing out that if the Driveshaft Angles are changed, it can have an adverse effect on the U-Joints. Think about it. If you lower the Engine a couple of inches and don't lower the Transmission, then the Tailshaft on the Transmission is higher. The question is how much and does it change the angle that much?
</font id='Arial'>
Marv is on target. If you are going to lower the engine 'a couple of inches', that can in fact cause a problem with driveshaft.
To do this correctly you would also need to lower the tranny mount a little. You can do this exactly calculating distance from motor mount to rear of axle and tranny mount to rear of axle. A rough estimate without me going out and taking measurements, I would say 3/4 of an inch lowered on the tranny mount I think would be fine, based on a full two inch drop of engine.
It would be smart to calculate exact length, or utilize elongated straight bar for guide to driveshaft/tranny yoke 'straightness'. (is that a word?)
Jerrell
As a side note I've seen race car and hot rod builders use a magnetic angle measurement tool to check the tranny and pinion angles - remember you can even screw up the driveshaft angle with the pinion/rearend too.
I think Sears or the Home Depots of the world sell this in their tool department.
Unfortunately I'm not an expert on the angles, but the closer you are to 0° between each one the better I think.
If the engine becomes angled DOWN in the rear - I would expect you could angle UP the pinion to compensate. The ujoints compensate for slight angle differences, but not big ones.
Anybody out there done this???
<font face='Arial'>
It was many years ago when I fooled with this stuff in racing, but it seems like the stock Pinion Angle was either 5 or 15 degrees. I may be way off because the old grey matter" just don't work like it use to. <img src=images/icon_smile_sad.gif border=0 align=middle>
</font id='Arial'>
Sorry I keep bringing these old posts back up but I'm seeing them for the first time and they're interesting...
A few other things to consider (my engine sits a little lower than stock b/c I have repro motor mounts, so I had to deal w/ this):
- Clutch linkage angles change, thus making the pedal travel dimensions different than what the manual tells you
- Throttle linkage angles change (can make a slight difference if you use the stock rods vice a cable)
- Oil pan might hit lower crossmember (had to notch my crossmember for clearance)
- The thing to remember w/ the pinion angle is that the pinion moves up when accelerating due to the power going to the rear end, thus straightening the driveline angles - this is important b/c that's when the rpms are up
Hiya Scott.
I'm not sure if this is any help to you but, the 65 K Code had a different motor mount than all other V8 mustangs of 1965. I recently had to get new rubbers in my motor mounts, and the guy who sold me my motor mounts sold me the other 1965 mounts which is totally different. In the 1966 models this was changed, so all V8 motors, A, C or K had the same motor mounts. Just comparing the different types of motor mounts, the 1965 K is a lot thicker, so I gather this would make the motor sit higher. If there was no significant changes to the transmission or drive shafts from 65 to 66, then dropping the engine a little <b>may not</b> make any difference to the car.
Regards,
René
It is true the the 65 and early 66 K mounts are much different than standard mounts for either year. All of the extra bolts, rebound insulators and the thick main insulators give the impression that the mount is thicker overall. Ford made up for the extra thickness by using a cast frame bracket that is deeper than the standard 65 cast frame brackets. This makes the overall height of the engine the same with either style of mounts.
-Fred-
Fred is correct . The engines are at the same height. In a stock Mustang the pinion points up about 4 degree's. If you put the pinion at 0 degree's you may gain about 3/4 inch to lower your engine. Not enough to bother with. Just my 2 cents. Ron Morris performance does not mention about dropping the engine lower. They are a nice mounts. You would have to relocate your steering likage. Ron
Edited by - MR.FORD49 on 02/13/2007 21:02:51
Edited by - MR.FORD49 on 02/22/2007 16:18:05
Edited by - MR.FORD49 on 02/22/2007 16:19:21
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
