Hurst built these years ago to help put different motors in (mostly) early frames. Is there information anywhere that shows the various dimensions and differences that would allow a person to help identify one from the other? I came across one some time ago and have no clue what motor it might have been made for. The one I have is near 20" from cushion mounting slot to mounting slot. There are two pair of block mounting holes that measure approx 9" apart and 8" apart. .
From what I remember all of the adapters bolted to the engines made by Hurst have the same mounting slot measurement you have...I believe it's 20 1/2". There had to be a common width so that the parts would swap between makes. Years ago I had a 55 Chevy that had the Hurst frame brackets...with those and the corresponding Hurst engine mounted adapter bracket..you could put any motor in that Chevy. Nailhead...Hemi...etc. Let me see if I can dig out my old Bell Auto catalog for a picture..
The one I am using did not specify any application other then motor. I got it with all the original paper work in the original box.
Engine mounts and frame mounts were sold separately because they were meant to be nearly universal...the motor side was made to match 59A flathead mounts, and frame mounts for most applications in the world of 1950's and '60's engine swapping were made to place the mount holes at the same span. There were a few cars like Studebakers that had to have entirely different mounts in the Hurst catalog because their frame design did not adapt to the 59A pattern.
I can measure mine tonight that i just finished building the motor mounts for and send to you tomorrow if you like. this is on my SBC
Fitnessguy....that mount you have there is the one that fits small and big blocks because of the dual mounting pattern. It'll accommodate 8" balancers too. That places this one at about 1965 and later since that is when the big blocks came out. The earlier sbc only ones were shallower in that they didn't dip low enough for larger balancers because when those were made there weren't any.
Good information all around, thanks. And yes Fitnessguy if you would measure the distance between the two pair of mounting holes at the block it might narrow things down. Mine looks familiar to yours. Thanks for the good info Black Panther.
No problem....happy to help. Fitnessguy....now I learned something...that it'll fit 409! Of course they don't mention either 348 or 396...but must fit those as well..
Some right sides were offset for the fuel pump. Some included the spacers to do the same thing. Prior to the one with holes for the fuel line using the stock pump guys used a hole saw.. Good luck.
Needs help with dimensions on Hurst cradle SBC mount. I am using the drawing provided to fabricate the motor mount. I could help with additional dimensions. -The width of the lower band that is welded to main mount. -The length of the slots for the bolts going thru the mount biscuits. -Lastly the dimension center to center for the mount holes in the front crossmember on a 1940 Ford. I have seen conflicting dimensions, 20” and 19 7/8” Thanks in advance. Sent from my iPad using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
I looked at this one a couple of times at the tri cities swap meet Saturday but didn't need a 40.00 wall decoration.
My Rambler uses these front motor mounts and I wonder if they would be good or strong enough for this Hurst cradle application instead of the standard rubber kits you can buy for this type of mount.
I wouldn’t use them, anything with any horsepower will separate them. The mounting flange has rubber bonded to it and in turn the stud has a round flange to distribute the load but there is no mechanical connection between the top and bottom. The early Ford style that Hurst used has a through bolt for a positive connection between the frame adapter and the saddle, with a lower and an upper rubber biscuit for vibration isolation.
You could use the Rambler rubber if you also used a 'limiter' of some sort to keep the engine torque from lifting the mount very high.. This was done on some factory cars to keep from pulling the mounts apart. At one time waaaay back we just used a piece of chain from the front of the head to a suitable spot on the frame. Now-a-days a simpler restraint would be at the mount itself. Through-bolt cushions to consider are found on 4x4 trucks where the transfer case mounts on the crossmember. .
The separation problems are real even in OEM. Remember '55 type Chevies? after about 10 years with bonded mounts they were forced into two stages of recalls and replacements. Glue turned out to be somewhat weaker than bolts...and rodders were in the forefront improvising those mounts, because of course rodders hit the torque load limits before normal humans.
The Jalopy Journal
