I'm questioning of my engine mounts are positioned correctly. I tried to install the driveshaft and it's about an inch too long. I'm not certain if my engine mounts are positioned wrong, or if maybe the water pumps on this engine, an 8BA, are different than the Mercury Flathead that was in this car? Thanks for your help in advance...
I have an 8ba flat in my 1940 1 1/2 truck. I will post pictures of it mounted in the frame tomorrow if you want. The spacers between the the pumps and the rubber mounts appear to be turned 180 degrees which would place the motor too far back. Hard to explain but I think the photos will make it clear. There is no body on the frame so you will be able to see the mounts clearly. Email me at [email protected] if you more info. Tim
There are three pump designs that I am aware of. The 8RT which was intro'd on the '48 Ford trucks and uses a mount design very similar to the 8CM Merc water pumps that came out in '49 and which use the side mount design like the 8RT, but are dimensioned differently. Finally there are the pumps used on 8BA Fords in '49 that have no side mount provisions. I'm thinking you have 8RT pumps which is why the "U" shaped spacers are required. So far as I can recall, the Mercs didn't use such a bracket because the "arm" on the pump was positioned to sit directly on the mount cushion with nothing else in between. It does appear, as others have poiunted out, the rotating the "U" bracket will correct the engine positioning. However I would think you would have already noticed a misalignment with the clutch linkage as well, since the Merc's through '51 use the rotating shaft style release in the bellhousing and it has to line up with the chassis pedal pivot. Ray
Thank you for the replies. I bought the car without the engine, but those U shaped mounts were with the car, and are correct for 49-51 Mercury. The transmission is a Merc-o-matic, so I cannot use the chassis pedal pivot for confirmation. After looking at my own pictures, something is a little out of wack. My RH mount is twisted more than the LH which looks pretty square to the water pump. The chassis parts catalog shows the stack up I have appears to be correct, but the picture doesn't show which way the 'front' is, which means I could have them rotated 90 degrees. Can anyone with 49-51 Mercury take a picture of their engine mounts?
With the manual transmission there is only one position that will work if the hocky puck type mounts were used. The automatic has a different rear mount that has some room to move a bit more fore & aft so the front mounts have to be right. There are several things I can see that look out of place or different than original. The pumps are correct. The mounts look different in different pictures. There are right and left mounts. Be sure you have distinctly different mounts. If they are the same, you have one that won't work. If they are mirror image they are correct. It looks like you have early type rubber biscuits. The OEM type fit the hole in the frame cross member correctly and have shouldered bolts to keep them in position. I have sucessfully replaced the shouldered bolts with plain AN bolts with a fabricated bushing to filt as was entended. This will insure the mount is the correct height (by use of OEM type) and correct location with the shouldered frame to mount bolts. The photos of your right mount looks correct. The photo of the left mount looks like a right mount to me. Are you sure you have the correct drive shaft? They usually have enough slip room fore and aft to correct for small length anomalies. make certain there is no crud blocking the inner bore of the slip yoke. The slip yoke should nearly bottom against the tail shaft seal.
Attached are photos of my truck with Merc pumps. The last picture shows a truck pump on the left - its from a 59ab but the overall config is the same as an 8rt truck pump. The Merc pump is on the right with the u shaped spacer which is necessary to make up the difference in mounting heights. The photos of the installed motor also show the off set in the mounting between the rubber mount and the mount hole in the water pump. If the u shaped spacer is installed 90 degrees off (not 180 like in my first post) it will position the motor either too far back or forward. Hope this helps.
A question....You're using an automatic trans,... It's possible the Merc O Matic and the standard shift drivelines are different lengths. Just a thought,........... 4TTRUK
51540Bat, Thank you for the pictures. It's looking like my engine mounts are rotated 90 degrees. I also may have LH mount on the RH side. I recall not being 100% certain I was installing them correctly, but I had found a picture and based installation on that. Perhaps that picture was wrong. The Chassis Parts catalog and Overhaul manual don't show any good pictures of the mounts installed. The mounts are mirror images of eachother. The pictures might be misleading. This was originally a Mercomatic car, so the driveline should work. The driveshaft and motor mounts came with the car, but it was missing the engine and transmission.
Might not help any,but here was mine b-4 I took it apart. Cant really see the biscuit,but might give you an idea
I know the 49's are different. Took me a while to find the right ones. If everything else lines up, your Driveline might have been modified to fit the other power plant that was in there. Also i think lowering your rear end might have something to do with it.
How far is your fan from the radiator? Mine measures 5/8" from the closest edge of the fan blades. I tried to take pics but having trouble uploading. My mounts are basically set the same as yours.
I don't have the factory radiator in it. I have another Flathead radiator and I made brackets to mount it, so I can't go off of that. The radiator support isn't attached 100% since I don't have the fenders on, so I really cannot go off of that either. I could go off of a few other things, maybe a bolt on the front suspension or steering box.
How about clearance from the back of the block to the firewall? It looks like your "U" mounts have two holes. Mine don't, but maybe you need to use the other hole. By the way, those are the correct water pumps.
I think you have the wrong pumps. Speedway catalog shows the different pumps. They are around page 259. The car pumps did not have a side mount. They are labeled 49 to 53 pumps. I think you need item 910-18025 and or items 910-155594 or 910-15595. The spacer you are using looks like one for installing a 39 to 48 engine in a 21 stud car. Let us know what you think. Thanks
I think the pumps are correct. They look like the ones in the Mercury manual, even though it's an 8BA. The motor mounts came with the car, and look to be correct too. The rubber spacers should be good too, they are pretty close to what I pulled off the frame. I think my problem is with the orientation of the mounts. If I rotate them 90 degrees, I think it will pull the engine and transmission forward enough to allow the driveshaft to be installed. I just haven't had time to try that yet.
Go to Van Pelts v/8 site. It shows the motor mounts for you car and yours look correct. I just search for Van Plets flatheads. They changed the Mercury motor mounts a couple of times. It is kind of a neat sight. Gives all kinds of drawings and specifications.
Hi Joe, Here are some shots ( mostly of the passenger side ) of the mounts on my 51. Hope this helps! Let me know if you need any more shots. The car is pretty much original only missing a few nobs and things like fuel door, etc. Matt Luckey Image 1 Image 2 Image 3 Image 4 Image 5
MrLuckey, Hey, your first post! Thank you for the pictures. I had originally thought my mounts were rotated 90 degrees off. From looking at your pictures, they are off maybe 20-30 degrees off.
You have the right 51 merc water pump brackets. 49 used a big square rubber block and 50 was a cross between 49 blocks and the 51 u brackets. Truck pumps have a different leg height, the merc is totally different. I went through all of this when I bought a flathead from a truck and went to drop it into my 51 merc. Van pelt is the problem solver.
Follow up: After comparing my engine mounts to pictures of others, it turned out my motor mounts were correct. I slightly adjusted the rotation of one of the mounts, but it did not affect the position of the engine front to back. The issue with getting my driveshaft appears to be that since I lowered the rear 6"-7", the driveshaft would not fit between the trans and rear axle. I modified by lowering blocks to allow the rear axle to move rearward enough to fit the driveshaft. Technically, this isn't correct because the wheelbase is too long. If I shorten the driveshaft about 1.5", it will be back to the correct wheelbase.
The Jalopy Journal
