Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical question 37 lasalle trans behind a flathead??

Discussion in 'Traditional Hot Rods' started by yankee mike, Mar 14, 2014.

  1. OK here's the deal . I have a 37 LaSalle trans that was shortened back in the 50s to accept a ford rear trans mount. This was a kit sold back in the day. I know offy sells a adaptor to hook it to a 59 flathead but my question is will the front motor mount and trans mounts all work in the stock locations or is the more to it than a drop in?? Going in a stock 32 chassis with orig k member and stock front mounts. Thanks in advance
     
  2. johnny bondo
    Joined: Aug 20, 2005
    Posts: 1,547

    johnny bondo
    Member
    from illinois

    im confused, as to what you mean, can you just measure from the water pump ear to the trans mount?
     
  3. johnny bondo
    Joined: Aug 20, 2005
    Posts: 1,547

    johnny bondo
    Member
    from illinois

    or are you saying you dont have a flathead yet and you dont know
     
  4. HotRodMicky
    Joined: Oct 14, 2001
    Posts: 1,772

    HotRodMicky
    Member

    Hi,
    No i wont, the cad transmission is about 3 inches longer....
    And the adapter is quite thick,too

    You have to move or modify the crossmember
     

  5. What is your purpose for this?? Thats almost like putting a tank rear-end behind a 4 banger,,,,sell the LaSalle to somone who really needs a beefy tranny.a flatty sure does not need it
     
  6. Kevin Lee
    Joined: Nov 12, 2001
    Posts: 7,440

    Kevin Lee
    Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Boooooooo...

    Also, HotRodMicky is right on.
     
    303racer likes this.
  7. Sorry Kevin,,just because you CAN do something,does not make it a good selection,,,
    I've been there with Caddy transmissions
     
  8. HotRodMicky
    Joined: Oct 14, 2001
    Posts: 1,772

    HotRodMicky
    Member


    Well, then you never owed a 304 ci flathead that will eat 39 ford 3-speed trannies for breakfast....

    My next build has a buick 6-bolt top 3- speed transmission for that reason.
    As strong as a cad transmisson

    Both can be converted to closed drive quite easy
     
    303racer likes this.
  9. 40FordGuy
    Joined: Mar 24, 2008
    Posts: 2,907

    40FordGuy
    Member

    The "Henry Flatmotor" in bone stock trim will absolutely eat the stock Ford trans;
    If something beefier can be made to fit and work work, by all means, DO it .

    4TTRUK
     
    48fordnut likes this.
  10. TV
    Joined: Aug 28, 2002
    Posts: 1,451

    TV
    Member

    I concur with what has been said about moving the K member. We were going to install one of our lasalle trans. in my sons stock frame 32 roadster and soon found it is a big job to make this work. If you were building a new car, it would be easy.--TV
     
  11. Thanks for all the helpfull info. I have the trans I was saving for my 331 caddy. I was thinking of using it behind my 4x2 ardun.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2014
  12. HotRodMicky
    Joined: Oct 14, 2001
    Posts: 1,772

    HotRodMicky
    Member

    Then you need something stronger unless you baby the clutch everytime you drive the car.

    And where is the fun in that?!

    I use a 40 center crossmember, but you can use a 32 and modify it.
    I would cut the stock hole bigger and use rear chassis legs like industrial chassis makes.
    There i would use a 40 transmission mount.
    Thats it.
     
  13. Mickey,I see no need to discuss this further with you,BUT I do think a blown Chrys is a little more than the 304 Flatty.
     
  14. HotRodMicky
    Joined: Oct 14, 2001
    Posts: 1,772

    HotRodMicky
    Member

    Sure it is!
     
    303racer likes this.
  15. mcbay
    Joined: Aug 20, 2007
    Posts: 505

    mcbay
    Member

    Hahaha, you guys are too much...I am getting ready to install one in an original 32 frame w/torque tube behind a 296 flathead... been thinking of how to do it or how it may have been done...any ideas or pictures of one done.
    Thanks...fred
     
  16. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,682

    Bruce Lancaster
    Member Emeritus

    Again, it cannot go into a '32 frame with stock K member. K member has to be fairly heavily modified to fit the longer trans case, then of course torque tube needs to be shortened. If you go this way, look around for a K that has been altered already for a starting point (there are lots of them) and save the original one for an application with early Ford box.
    (As well as the rear legs, industrial chassis makes a nice complete X member...something to consider. Your K either needs to be replaced or to undergo radical surgery.)
     
    oldfordtin likes this.
  17. mcbay
    Joined: Aug 20, 2007
    Posts: 505

    mcbay
    Member

    I am with you Bruce..but the K member is in and stayin, hell its 83... So Plan A..cut the opening to accept the case, fab a mount using a 40 mount and rear bearing retainer.... shorten the torque tube....case closed. There is no Plan B at this time....
    Questions, opinions, objections...?

    I do have a set of Industrial Chassis legs but think there a little overkill, but will look at them in a new light.
     
  18. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,682

    Bruce Lancaster
    Member Emeritus

    It's fairly common to find K members cut out for a big trans, usually with a sort of shelf added to the back to take a mount. If you use the '40 type 2-pad U joint housing, the part it goes onto is a separate part on frames of about that age...it is a sort of little stand that looks like it should be in a fireplace with pads for the mount biscuits. Might make a neat Ford-like installation on a platform behind K.
    The Industrial legs are very neat...we tried them on a friends frame, and they are a perfect snap-fit! You can probably save the K member holes they fit with a careful trim to stuff the trans through.
     
  19. PackardV8
    Joined: Jun 7, 2007
    Posts: 893

    PackardV8
    Member

    It's all in the driver and how he drives it. For forty years now, a good friend has been driving a '36 Ford Tudor with a strong 283" SBC which makes more than twice the horsepower of the flatmotor . Ain't broke yet and the stock Ford box hasn't complained.

    On the other hand, he knows one time flooring the throttle and sidestepping the clutch will grenade it, so he doesn't do that. Your choice.

    jack vines
     
  20. HotRodMicky
    Joined: Oct 14, 2001
    Posts: 1,772

    HotRodMicky
    Member

    A 4 1/4 stroke flathead will produce more torque than a 283 sbc
    And that kills the trans
     
  21. HotRodMicky
    Joined: Oct 14, 2001
    Posts: 1,772

    HotRodMicky
    Member

    I am running a 37 buick trans behind a 304 ci flathead in a 27t roadster
    And do a burn out everytime i drive that car!
     
    thunderbirdesq likes this.
  22. mcbay
    Joined: Aug 20, 2007
    Posts: 505

    mcbay
    Member

    32 frame.jpg cut k member.jpg donor x member.jpg right leg .jpg mock up.jpg Ford trans.jpg Cad box Offy adapter.jpg Cad in place.jpg Cad in place 2.jpg 32 frame.jpg
    Submitted for your approval....after much talk on this topic it was time for Action.
    So, out came the sawsall and the K member was cut as shown in the photos. A 36 X member was cut to make the rear legs as shown.
    Then, the Offy adapter was mounted to the mockup engine and then the converted 37 case and 32 rear mount. This set up was just under 3" longer than the Ford parts. Once this new assembly was lowered into the frame and positioned I made the frame mounts and was ready to address the rear mount.
    Several options were apparent, use the 32 mount or a later saddle mount, but I think I will use the 32 and box the legs from the mount forward to the K member.
    Thats it so far....
     
  23. 303racer
    Joined: Aug 23, 2006
    Posts: 526

    303racer
    Member

    dumb question, could you not get your 3'' on a 32 frame by simply shortening the legs and moving your 32 center cross member back 3'' if running 32k member , and shortening your torque tube ? sounds simple
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2018
    48fordnut likes this.
  24. mcbay
    Joined: Aug 20, 2007
    Posts: 505

    mcbay
    Member

    There are other options 303. Best to leave it where it is.
    This worked for me because I had other factors to deal with and it was quiet simple..
    I kinda backed into this for a few reasons, had a few boxes. the obvious strength and
    that the car has a 36/7 LaSalle nose....
    which pushed me over the edge
     
    303racer likes this.
  25. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,682

    Bruce Lancaster
    Member Emeritus

    That's shaping up well...and it all looks very Ford, not a rat's nest of steel stock like on a streetrod.
    So, ultimately the center of the K is going to move back in with enlarged center hole and a new home 3" aft...is that correct?
     
  26. titus
    Joined: Dec 6, 2003
    Posts: 5,082

    titus
    Member

    Looks good, i like the solution.

    my thoughts were to cut out the mounting area of the k-member then use some 3" or so flatbar and space it backwards, basically making a box, if that makes sense.

    I have a hilderbrandt flathead to lasalle trans and have started a couple lasalle to early ford closed drive conversions for them, someday ill finish em up and use em!

    JEFF
     
  27. mcbay
    Joined: Aug 20, 2007
    Posts: 505

    mcbay
    Member



    That's it and here it is in place...
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.