MOTOR, Flathead in 32 frame - Engine Height?

[NealinCA]

I set the engine and trans into my 32 frame on Saturday.

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-5-2.jpg

It is a 59A with an S10 T-5 using an Offy adapter.

I had been thinking I would set the engine in the stock location, which should have the crankshaft in line with the crank hole in the upper u-bolt pad. I am using a model A front crossmember so the crankshaft should be about an inch below.

I mocked everything up, and if I make the lower radiator hoses line up, the crankshaft CL is about an inch higher than the crossmember. That makes me think I have the engine about 2 inches higher than stock, but the motor mount tab is only a half inch higher than the top of the rail, which doesn't seem out of line to me.

Am I missing something here?

Do I have different water pumps? The engine came out of a 46 truck.

What does everybody else do on lower radiator hoses? It seems that if the engine was lower, the radiator hoses would be a nightmare. I have seen some cast elbows that I think were for this application.

This engine height works well with the tranmission crossmember that was already in my frame and would give me more wishbone clearance, since I am using a stock, unsplit 32 wishbone.

The only drawback I see is that I will have about a 3" hump in my floor over the transmission, which I dont see as a big deal.

I thought I would get some more opinions before I weld in motor mounts.

Is there any reason that I shouldn't mount the engine this high?

Thanks,

Neal

[Petejoe]

I Don't have any first hand experiences working with a 32.
I wish I was so blest... but I have also seen elbow extensions soldered right onto the existing lower radiator outlets. I will advise you though definitely install rebuilt high velocity pumps that have the new bearing design from Skip Haney in Florida before attaching that engine to the frame.... Guaranteed... those old pumps will either immediately leak or go bad within the first 1000 miles. Hopefully someone who has worked with a flatty in a 32 will give you more info.

[Dirty Dug]

Typically the motor mounts are set at the top of the frame rails with the rubber pad above that. That should line up well with the lower radiator hoses. You're using truck pumps so you're on the right track there. My opinion is that the motor should be somewhat paralell with the frame. The rear looks a little high to me but you may be able to loer it a bit when you fabricate the rear mount. Good luck, keep us posted. I'll take a picture of my '32 frame tonight if I can remember.

[tommy]

http://fototime.com/{16D4AACA-8F8E-4D67-821D-FB17683C6F9C}/picture.JPG

You can see the elevation of my mount pad above. The same as DD discribed. I was able to get straight hoses to hook up. Not perfectly straight but very workable.

Mine is an 8cm with the truck pumps.

[NealinCA]

I have the frame sitting at my estimated ride height/rake and I set the intake manifold level. I figured the carbs should sit level at ride height?

I think I have the radiator set at the right height. I have a stock 32 V8 radiator, there should there be about a 1/4" pad between the mounting tab on the radiator and the front crossmember, right?

I didn't think all of this stuff through when I built my GMC p/u, it just all lined up by luck http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Things are a lot tighter on the 32, so I want to try to make it all fit right the first time.

Neal

[alchemy]

The pad under the radiator is some of that woven body webbing pad, I think, not 1/4" thick. Some A crossmembers had a bump where the radiator sits and some had an indentation. If you're lucky you have the indentation so you have more room to align the grille and hood.

Since you're not using a stock trans and K-member, you should just adjust the engine height to match those lower water outlets. They are the hardest part of a '32-with-a-flatty project.

Also pay attention to your clutch linkage though. Don't want an ackward angle there.


alchemy

[Dirty Dug]

One other thing to remember is that the radiator is centered in a '32 crossmember. When you change to a model A crossmember the radiator will be farther forward assuming you placed the crossmember in the sock location.

[NealinCA]

Thanks everyone for the replies so far.

I set the 28 Model A front crossmember so the spring center line would be in the stock location. To use a stock hood do I then need to elongate my radiator mounting holes in the crossmember toward the rear? So the holes are centered over the spring?

There sure are alot of details that I hadn't considered yet.

Keep them coming.

Thanks,

Neal

[Dirty Dug]

Your radiator will mount toward the front of the crossmember. I welded studs to mine because elongating the holes wasn't enough. I'd suggest you mount your firewall and measure to make sure of required radiator location before you go much further.

[C9]

Fwiw - stock 32 hood length measured down the center of the top is 32".

Another fwiw - my 32 has 1/2" neoprene cushions and the radiator sits about right.
1/4" is sufficient if you want to get down a little farther.
You need to watch crossmember clearance though, in the 31 I had 1/8" neoprene and the bottom tank had about 1/8" clearance.
Different radiator brands have differently shaped lower tanks so your mileage may vary.

The 32's frame uses a re-pro Model A crossmember and it has elongated slots in it to allow fore and aft adjustment of the grille shell/radiator.
The Walker radiator has transversely oriented slots in the mounting tabs.
If you use neoprene - or other - rubber mount, use a nylock on the retaining nut, crank it down tight enough to compress the rubber a touch - about 1/16" - and the nylock will retain the adjustment.

[HOTRODPRIMER]

a picture to show location of flathead engine mounted in 32 frame..HRP

[flatoz]

lookin good neil, mine is set at about level with the frame rails, just along as you have the 3 degree angle down at the carbs you will be right.

[TV]

Nealing, If it were me, I would rase the Flathead up as much as you can. I know this sounds strange, but I wish I had rased mine in my 29 RPU. As you start wanting to lower the front more and more the engine gets close on the bottom side.Just something to think about.--TV http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif PS Look at how high Jimmy shine set his Flathead.

[flatoz]

I agree TV, but it depends on if your using a stock firewall or not? if so and you dont want to cut it, then you have limited space to raise it.

must admit, wish mine was a few inches higher, the sucker sits so low

[NealinCA]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree TV, but it depends on if your using a stock firewall or not? if so and you dont want to cut it, then you have limited space to raise it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well I am using an original 32 firewall, but like the rest of my project, it is no cherry. Somebody already did a little torch work on the bottom edge, so I have room to go up.

On the 3 degree thing, is that for Strombergs? And I assume sloped to the rear, as in lower in the back? I have the intake sitting level right now.

This is alot of great info, keep it coming.

Thanks,

Neal

[flatoz]

Hi Neal,

the base of your carb, so the intake mount of your carb should slope back towards the diff 3 degrees for the "right" set up ( alot dont ) that should be for all carbs as far as I know, but hey were all wrong sometime!

just thinking, I guess side draft webbers dont count http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Chopt 34]

I suggest setting the engine as high as you can comfortably manage from a packaging standpoint, it helps with the ground clearance and proportions, which is really important if you plan to run hoodless. As for the flathead in a Deuce frame, here is a shot of my mounts.

[HotRodAV8]

my understanding is the 3 degrees is for the driveshaft angles. Because you have a open driveline now in an ideal world would put the outputshaft of the trans at 3degees downhill and the rearend pinion angle 3 degrees uphill. this makes ujoints happy in life. all float carbs like to have the "float" water line to be level. most manifolds are level @ 3degrees engine angle.... but a flathead was not an open driveline "most of its life".this engine gets harder the longer you think about it? make your life easy mock up the parts in quetion making you lower radiator hose a problem that is easy to overcome. then your engine height will be solved
sounds so easy.... did you put your steeringbox on the rail??

[NealinCA]

[ QUOTE ]
.... did you put your steeringbox on the rail??

[/ QUOTE ]

Not yet. I am hoping that isn't a nightmare. I was planning to get the engine and trans located, then mount the cab and seat to set the steering box/column where it needs to be. I am still undecided on what steering gear to use...F-1, F-100, or 39 box. Then I need to see if the 39 box would work as cross steering or turn it on its side for side steering with the pitman arm up. But this is a whole other topic...

I don't think I am the first one putting a flathead in a 32 frame, so I am sure I can find some combination that will work http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

How about an open drive shaft being higher at the rear end? It looks like the rear u-joint will be about an inch higher than the front...

Neal

[Mart]

In my opinion about 1" higher than stock would be good. It will help the rad hoses. In my car with a stock k-member the height at the rear is set. I would prefer it higher, the hoses would line up better and with a closed driveline the oil draining from the axle into the trans would be reduced.
With your setup, (open drive) having the trans lower than the rear is not a problem. Whel using 7.00 or 7.50: i6's on the rear, the axle is quite high off the ground, due to the large diameter of the wheels and tyres, so a downhill sloping driveshaft is quite common.
From my limited experience, if you have the pad that the stock biscuit mounts on level with the top of the rail, or maybe with a 1/4" spacer above the top of the rail, that should be about right.
That said, it is hard to see how high your tailshaft is. that could be higher than stock by more than one inch. It's probably not that critical when using open drive. Best just continue mocking everything up, and see how it goes.
One last thing, on my car I had the cut a clearance notch for the wishbone in the flywheel area of the sump pan. If the engine were higher that would be less necessary.
Mart.

[TV]

Nealin, I would try to run an F-1 steering box, it will fit best and give you header clearance.That said, it will need to be modified alittle. I have one that I can give you the dimensions off of if you like,the mods shouldn't be a prob for you, as I know how good of a welder you are.--TV http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[NealinCA]

[ QUOTE ]
Nealin, I would try to run an F-1 steering box, it will fit best and give you header clearance.That said, it will need to be modified alittle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is the modification to the mounting flange? I have seen a couple of solutions, but would like to hear your ideas.

I have another thing to throw in the mix. My frame had been boxed, so I haven't figured out a great way to mount a through frame box like an F-1. I guess I could just un-box that section or???

Neal

[LOUDpipes]

No big words of wisdom here. Anyway when I was building my AV8 the engine mounts were set so that the drive line would be in original level (I`m using an A front member too) so that there would not be any twist at the rear mount. That put the rad of line with the pump outlets. I did buy those cast alumnium pieces you mentioned but after that I had yo raise the rad almost an inch (ugly). Now I´m running ´51 Ford hoses (I think). They have a slight bend in them and are close match. I have a new ´32 frame for my next project that will have a similar driveline BUT with open drive so I don´t have to worry about the twist in the rear mount. The front engine mounts are now almost an inch higher (with level of the frames upper side) and about 0,4 inch back ( clears the original firewall). This also gives some free play with p-arm versus the FH engines bottom pulley. Hope this makes some sence since english is not my native language. And I think Mart had some excellent shots in his site about this topic....

[TV]

Nealin, I would cut a hole in the boxing plate.As for the modification,yes the flange needs attention as well as the shank.It is much better to shorten the neck shank and move the box inward to frame.It gives you more room to header looks better, but to do this you must remove the shaft and shorten it also the same amount.--TV http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Deuce Rails]

Neal,

I see no problem with running the engine at that height. There's not much room for the lower hoses, as you mentioned, and I'd line those up. There's plenty of clearance above the engine, there will also be more clearance for however you decide to mount your steering box.

If for any reason you need a slightly longer or shorter hood, Rootlieb can provide one for you.

Did you mount your radiator with the springs that allow for movement? That may increase the radiator height more.

[tommy]

http://fototime.com/{5FE06EDA-7983-45F8-AAAB-1BD3FF64E9F2}/picture.JPG
Neal, here is my F-100 mock up. I made the headers but I think Reds Headers makes a set for this set up. I can't drill the holes and fab the wedge untill I get the body/dash in place.

[NealinCA]

This is alot of great info.

Tommy - What is this chassis for? I know you have the SC, the roadster and the pickup, but what else?

Also a question on your headers. I just got a NOS RHS tube header, so I will probably make end up making one for the LHS. Are the flanges a standard 1-1/2" exhaust flange? Or are they something flathead specific?

Thanks,

Neal

[cheap-n-dirty]

here's how i set my up in '73

[cheap-n-dirty]

with the engine runnig.

[cheap-n-dirty]

passenger side.

[tommy]

[ QUOTE ]
This is alot of great info.

Tommy - What is this chassis for? I know you have the SC, the roadster and the pickup, but what else?

Also a question on your headers. I just got a NOS RHS tube header, so I will probably make end up making one for the LHS. Are the flanges a standard 1-1/2" exhaust flange? Or are they something flathead specific?

Thanks,

Neal



[/ QUOTE ]
http://fototime.com/{F2039B44-D886-4877-978E-9A51B0187731}/picture.JPG

This is a frame I'm putting together for the roadster. 1951(dates on the newspapers in the doors) is my target year. (no SBCs in 1951) Oh shit I quess the 53 steering box is wrong. I might have to recapitulate. The plan was to complete this chassis and then swap the body. I got tired of waiting so I put the roadster back on the road.
http://fototime.com/{E98CDAD6-6F57-4D62-AFCB-9129E2A2B253}/picture.JPG

The flanges are walker universal 1 3/4". The bolt holes need some "adjusting" but the work fine and are cheap. Especially the front 7/16 bolts. I like cheap. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif I think I still have the pt# at work. Other people have the flanges. They just cost more.

Cheap-n-dirty, are those aluminum Champion heads or painted cast iron ones. The Champion heads I've seen were cast iron.

[tommy]

The flanges are Walker pt# 31926. Any parts store selling Walker exhaust products should be able to get some for you.

[cheap-n-dirty]

those are cad plated cast iron heads. they are on a 3/8 by 3/8 engine with a 400 jr isky cam and the block was ported and relived.

[tommy]

I slept at the switch on a set of those. When I went back to get them they were history. I like them because they are different.

[NealinCA]

Well, I got motor mounts tacked in today. I set them flush with the top of the rail, since that seemed like the consensus and the best compromise for radiator hose alignment and pan/wishbone clearence.

Here is what I have so far...

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-2-1.jpg

and a shot from the other side...

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-2-5.jpg

I guess I could have left the motor mounts that were in the frame, I would have had plenty of ground clearence then http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-2-2.jpg

Next, I need to cut my K-member to clear the transmission and get that welded in, but it is starting to look like something.

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-1-3.jpg

It sure looks low after having it up on sawhorses...

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-3-1.jpg

Thanks again everybody for all of the help so far.


Neal

[rat bastad]

Nice pix, nice work and nice ride man....keep up the good work !!

I set up my 8BA the same way.....mounts flush with the top of the rail. All fits together real wel....check out the pic.

Rat http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[NealinCA]

Ok, I got my home hade K-member trimmed out to clear the transmission and fitted into the frame.

Now my question is about scrub line. The bottom of the wishbone ball is at 4" and with 5.50-16's in the front my rim is at 4.25". I don't have all of my leaves in the springs, so it may raise a little, but even 4.5" seems awfully low.

So for those running stock front wishbones, what kind of ground clearance do you have at the ball? Is that the lowest point?

Neal

[LOUDpipes]

Yep
That seems LOW if it driven a lot. BUT how many leaves are you gonna run eventually. Maybe I missed something but judging from the previous pics its not the scrub line you have to worry first. It´s the p-arm clearence to frame ´cause there is none. If you now have the main leaf and gonna run say 6-7 leaves (front) it is gonna rise almost three inches??? Well the rear leaves have the same thickness and stiffen up the whole spring package in the same way....

[flatoz]

Hey Neal, I'll find you a photo of mine, its that low and its a stock K member, so dont be too worried, just watch those speed humps! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

[tommy]

The first time I loaded the sport coupe on the trailer after going from the 600-16s to the 15"ers, I came to an abrupt stop!! BANG. There was a large nut welded to the trailer right in the center. That's the only time I ever hit anything and I'm running 3.50" at the ball. I just checked to be sure.

[NealinCA]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep
Maybe I missed something but judging from the previous pics its not the scrub line you have to worry first. It´s the p-arm clearence to frame ´cause there is none. If you now have the main leaf and gonna run say 6-7 leaves (front) it is gonna rise almost three inches???

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the previous pictures showed the chassis with 5 leaves in the front, and the tie-rod is a piece of conduit bolted in just temporary. Yesterday I put in the front spring I plan to use with 7 leaves. It raised the front about 1-1/4". The wishbone ball is now at 4-1/2" and I have quite a bit more clearance for the tierod.

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-3-3.jpg

I brought the cab inside to start working on it yesterday also. But before I started I had to set it on the chassis and see what the pile looked like.

http://photo.starblvd.net/~NealinCA/2-3-4.jpg

I need to get the seat, firewall, and cowl/windshield area right so I can set my steering column/gear and pedals. I need to take a couple inches out of the windshield frame and fit some roadster pieces into the cowl area to get it looking right.

Neal

[LOUDpipes]

Cool looking body. Maybe I should just shut up but 1 1/4 p-arm clearence seems a bit marginal concidering the spring will still settle and the clearence will be less? Maybe it is enuff maybe not. If you would have liners, grease between leaves or posies or monoleaf, I´d say it is not enuff. Anyway my experience is surely limited to my own ride which had 7 original leaves and now a monoleaf and of course some info from friends rides. And maybe the roads here are not what you are used to. The winter time really rapes them. But still I´d say the tram rails are the worst when you hit them at about 40 mph. Makes the teeth fall out. That is why I really want have some spring travel..

[NealinCA]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I should just shut up but 1 1/4 p-arm clearence seems a bit marginal

[/ QUOTE ]

I really have about 2" clearance. In the first pic, the tierod was on top of the steering arm, now I moved it to the bottom, where it should be.

I got a few e-mails with concerns about the tierod running between the frame and wishbone. I see this commonly on Model A and 32 frames with stock wishbones. I have heard of one instance with this setup, that the tierod got pinched in a turn due to body roll and the steering wheel could not be turned.

Anybody else have problems with this? Tommy, Flatoz, TV av8, etc? What are your thoughts?

Neal

[tommy]

I've hit some pretty serious pot holes on this side of our country. The paint got chipped sometime over the years so it must have made contact once, but it sure isn't a problem. Both of my cars are done this way.

It will all depend on your selection of parts. Different depth axle drops, reversed eye spring?, reshaped steering arms? and the amount of natural sag in your spring.

I'll take some pictures tonight.

If noone gets you a picture of the P/U subrails, I'll bring my camera to work tomorrow. I took the cab to work and I'm actually working on it! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif The supports for the angled toe board are part of the deuce firewall. The deuce subrails are cut off 8" forward of the door opening just past the front body mount bolts. I'm guessing you'll need to shorten the 33 rails.

[flatoz]

Neal ,

will dig out a photo of my front end set up, but looking at the photos I would be more worried about the serious angle of the dangle on those front shackles. You'll end up with some serious bump steer as the spring wont be able to flex it will just swing from side to side.

Plus if you dont have all the weight on it yet it will only get worse.

I had to get a new main leaf made for mine about 2" shorter to bring the shackles to a 45 degree angle.

I'll go looking for that photo...

[TV]

You old dog you , I didn't know you were building a 32 rpu, that is so cool.I love it, I'm gonna go throw rocks at my 32 closed cab ha'ha. Anyway that is some kind of cool,way to go,---TV http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[TV]

Neal, yes, on kevs roadster the tie rod would bump and we had 2-1/4". We made a droped tie rod and solved the problem when you saw the car it didn't have the dropped rod.It would only hit on a bad bump, most of the time it was ok--TV http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[NealinCA]

TV - As you have probably seen, it's not a real rpu, just a cut off. I hope it turns out convincing enough. There will be alot of metal work involved though.

Now on the tierod...How much of a drop did you put in it? Any problems with adjusting toe-in?

I was looking at this pic of Keith Weesner's Model A. The drop in the tierod will take care of it hitting the frame going straight, but not if you were in a hard turn, but I guess that would be a rare case.

Neal

[C9]

[ QUOTE ]
I got a few e-mails with concerns about the tierod running between the frame and wishbone. I see this commonly on Model A and 32 frames with stock wishbones. I have heard of one instance with this setup, that the tierod got pinched in a turn due to body roll and the steering wheel could not be turned.



[/ QUOTE ]

Give some thought to running a rear sway bar.
I have a Deuce Factory sway bar in my 32 and it really makes the car run flat in the corners.
Roy Fjastad of the Deuce Factory reported that a rear sway bar was sufficient for the roadsters.

I was surprised at how much my 32 would rock when pushed back and forth by hand with the sway bar disconnected.
(Transverse spring up front and coilovers in the back.)
Sway bar connected, no rocking to speak of.

I know you're working with non-aftermarket stuff where you can, but you could probably find a sway bar from a small car in the junkyard that would be easily adaptable to the 32 frame.

I'm wondering too, does your draglink run uphill from steering box to steering arm?
If so, perhaps you wouldn't have to disturb the boxing plate and could mount the steering box on top of the frame.

Did you see the schedule 40 flathead headers I posted a while back?
Might be a good way to go if you're building your own set.
The builder tells me they come in at a little less weight than a stock exh manifold and of course, heavier than a tubular header.

So far, the RPU is coming out looking pretty nice.

[flatoz]

Neal,

do you need to drop the tierod? after all as long as it clears the A bar on full lock both directions your home free. As its a solid unit and cant ever hit the A bar.

As for the chassis, just heat and bend your spindles so that the clearance at the draglink is a 1/2" above the A bar and that should give you clearance.

I will go home and measure mine for you and let you know tomorrow.

[NealinCA]

[ QUOTE ]
Give some thought to running a rear sway bar.

I know you're working with non-aftermarket stuff where you can, but you could probably find a sway bar from a small car in the junkyard that would be easily adaptable to the 32 frame.



[/ QUOTE ]

That is something I will think about. I have some ideas on how to make it look real traditional too...I've got some NOS lever shock arms...Hmmm

I wonder if you could take a junkyard swaybar, cut off the ends, machine a square on each end and clamp the shock arms on. You could then hook those up to the original lever arm shock ears on the ends of the 36 radius rods. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

On the steering gear, I am running a stock 32 hood and really don't want to cut it, so I think I am going to stay in the frame, even if it means more work. I think I will form a piece of 10 ga or 3/16 to reinforce the frame where I cut out the boxing plate, to keep it all tied together.

And on the headers, I do like the sch 40 weld ell idea. For now, I will probably make a second tube header to match the one I got. That will get me on the road, but someday I would like to make a nice set and have them plated. The heavy pipe would be real nice.

Thanks again for all of the info everyone.

This post has covered so many aspects of the build, it is amazing.

Now how about the front shackle angle? Looks like Tommy is in the same boat I am?

Neal

[tommy]

The tie rod on my sport coupe is dropped like the one in the picture for the same reason...Hurst motor mount on the Chevy motor. When I put it on the flatty frame it wasn't necessary. I used it anyway.

Get the tie rod as close to the wishbone as you can. The drivers side has chipped the paint, the pass is untouched. (lard ass driver) I could have gotten it closer to the wishbone. I started the drop with the oposite wheel on its stop. The drop will still be close to the outside of the frame.

If you want to be different, set the tie rod up on the center of the wishbone. Put a heavy oval tube into the wishbone for the tie rod to pass through. I've seen it done but, I think those bones were split. Shouldn't make any difference they both move together.

[Elrod]

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to be different, set the tie rod up on the center of the wishbone. Put a heavy oval tube into the wishbone for the tie rod to pass through. I've seen it done but, I think those bones were split. Shouldn't make any difference they both move together.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen it done too. Plan to do it on my coupe. Here's a picture!