Ford Motor Mount Location

[Snicklefritz]

Hey folks, the CCR plans show specs call for 27 1/8" from the back of the front crossmember for location of Chevy mounts on the standard frame. I wonder if anyone has the specs for motor mount location of the small block (289-302) Ford?

Thanks!

 

[Steakneggs]

Wouldn't that depend on which mounts you want? It's easy to Google how far from the bellhousing face the SBC mount holes are, I've seen the same diagrams for the SBF Windsors. Or are you going off the front of the block? That gives more header clearance.

 

[Snicklefritz]

good points. i should have specified that i would be using their (ccr) style motor mounts. the reason i'm throwing the question out there is that the frame construction would be farmed out and an engine and trans may not be available to use at the time. i just thought if someone had this dimension it would be helpful.

 

[RESINATOR]

The Frame mounts will go in the same location for both Chevy and Ford. The Motor bracket we make is meant to put the Ford motor in the correct location. The only thing we do different is to bring the Frame mount up 3/4" for better steering box clearance.

 

[RESINATOR]

Here's the link to the section on our website
Motor & Trans Mounts

 

[Snicklefritz]

thanks a bunch jerry that was a huge help! and it's a bonus the photos are such eye candy.

it's been a while but i wonder if it was you who i communicated with via email a while back; i think it was about the master cylinder mount.

 

[RESINATOR]

Glad they helped.
Yes, I do most of the e-mails involving questions and tech

 

[Steakneggs]

Why wouldn't you move the engine forward 1/2" instead? That would keep the CG lower, which helps everything.
Do those mounts have any interlock feature?

 

[Snicklefritz]

3/4 of an inch isn't going to effect the cg by any perceptible amount.

it's a car with 100 year old suspension technology that will ride on bias-plies, not a f1 car.

 

[Snicklefritz]

Glad they helped.

the red car in the photos, and i think on the facebook page, is a real inspiration.

[

 

[rbsWELDER]

Hey Resinator - Have you ever seen a t-Bucket with Power Steering? Do you sell the components?

 

[RESINATOR]

RBS, We don't do anything with power steering on the T-Buckets. With the correct steering box, pitman arm length and steering arm lengths these light cars normally would not need or want power. Even the heavier early thirties cars feel twitchy with power.
There are a few companies that make compact, electric and power assisted Vega boxes. Try Flaming River.
Most of the power units take up more space than is available or that looks good. A power rack would be a better solution if you could figure that out.

 

[RESINATOR]

Steakneggs, The problem with some of the Ford heads is more of a width problem, not a "hit the top of the box" problem. If I remember correct, using our set-up, the Ford motor would have to go a few inches forward to solve the same problem. This has only come up a few times in many, many years. I'm not a Ford head guru, otherwise I could narrow that style down for you.

 

[Snicklefritz]

Steakneggs, The problem with some of the Ford heads is more of a width problem, not a "hit the top of the box" problem. If I remember correct, using our set-up, the Ford motor would have to go a few inches forward to solve the same problem. This has only come up a few times in many, many years. I'm not a Ford head guru, otherwise I could narrow that style down for you.

just judging by the photos above, and recollecting other examples, it doesn't seem the 289/302 headers would necessarily run afoul of the box and the 351 with its taller deck height should be ok. but maybe the boss heads would be an issue or other ford engine series? i'm real rusty with this stuff and of course a newbie about t-buckets. in any event i'm not going to second guess the folks who designed the frame.

also, i think moving any engine too far may screw with the aesthetics of the car and potentially cause other clearance issues in a domino effect. with other frame designs moving the engine up or forward may be just the ticket.

 

[Snicklefritz]

View attachment 17981

RESINATOR, it looks like the frame mounts are at a rearward angle in this photo. is this so?

 

[Indycars]

nd potentially cause other clearance issues in a domino effect.

Oh man, I hate the domino effect ! It seems like Mr Domino and Murphy's law seem to play tag-team when I get started on most of my projects. The latest domino effect visited me on my header design project !!!

Good Luck !!!

 

[Snicklefritz]

Oh man, I hate the domino effect ! It seems like Mr Domino and Murphy's law seem to play tag-team when I get started on most of my projects.

 

[RESINATOR]

Yes, they are at about 3-4 degrees on all our frames.

 

[T-Test]

RESINATOR, it looks like the frame mounts are at a rearward angle in this photo. is this so?

That is how you get your driveshaft angle. Trans down 3* and rear pinion up 3*. If you put a level on the intake after removing the carb, you will see that to get it level you will have to tilt the engine down to the rear.
If you mount the engine high on the frame for road clearance, you will also get more clearance for the TRADITIONAL steering box mount under the headers but lose clearance in the floor of the Bucket. Vega box mounted with cross steer is another way but has a longer shaft to the box ..

 

[Neshkoro]

My first bucket, in the mid 60s, had the drive shaft u joints out of phase. It loped down the road. It was a quick and easy fix. When I made the drive shaft I wasn’t sure which way to make it. I figured I had a 50-50 chance of making it correct. I was wrong!