Rear Engine mount spacer bushes

[SAJ]

I am replacing the rear engine mounting rubbers using Snyders' pieces, which are 0.2 inch thick for the L-shaped pads and 0.215 for the outer pads. What came out were about 1/4 inch thick for both inner and outer pads (and no rubber under the mounts against the lower frame flanges). The new thinner rubbers leave a gap of about 1/16 inch between frame and mount i.e. no squash on the rubbers, but 1/16 of "slop". The spacer bushes control this and they are 1-1/8 inch long. What length should they be? were mine made longer than standard to accommodate the thicker rubbers used, I wonder, and should now be shortened? How much compression should there be on the rubbers, when bolted up tight against the spacers?
The car is a Canadian 1931 Tudor with Canadian-type malleable cast steel mounts.
I read all the recent posts and my rubber thicknesses are the same as those quoted, but the length of the spacers was not mentioned.
Thanks for any advice
SAJ in NZ

[BudP]

Just made two recent purchases of mounting rubbers and spacers, one from Bratton's and the other purchase from Synder's. Synder's had the better fit for the mounts. My spacers on hand, can't tell if they are from Synder's or Brattons, measure .5295. IIRC both Snyder's and Brattons spacers were identical. I must be missing something in your description because 1 1/8 seems wrong.

[d.j. moordigian]

I had the same problem, same supplier and parts. I'm using them for "mock up".
I couldn't find my original hardware to check the spacer and bolt length. I'm also
about 100% sure the bolts are too long......which I didn't check in the " Hardware"
book. I have no problem with the rubber...

Dudley

[d.j. moordigian]

Up date on the bolt and nut, from the Snyder's kit. I measured the bolt(s)
from the kit @ 1.5". The "Standard Hardware" book has it @ 1 3/8". The
nut is a 28-29 style. The problem is the finish for both....it's Zink. It should
either plain or Raven depending on year. Brattons, could be more correct,
at least in the finish department...

[SAJ]

Thank you for the replies. BudP, my spacers are 1-1/8 inch. Far longer than yours. They are press fitted into the castings (Canadian) and protrude 0.890 inches (see Pic 1). Thicknesses are engine mount 0.235, rubber (L-shape) 0.20, frame 0.1625 (with paint), flat rubber 0.215, outside plate 0.25 inch. Total thickness 1.0625 inch. Spacer 1.125 inch. Therefore gap left between rubbers and frame when all tightened down .0625, so my 1/16th estimate was correct (see pic 2).
I suspect the USA pressed mounts are thinner than the Canadian cast mounts. Or maybe US spacers don't house into the plates but sit between them?
I would still like to know roughly how much the rubbers should be compressed when in place - if at all. At the moment the installed Mounts can rock and wobble due to the 1/16th clearance. This seems counter-intuitive to me. I feel the rubbers should be under some compression. I can alter this after the engine is installed by putting on slip-fit washers over the protruding ends of the spacers outside the outer plates, but it will be a bit fiddly to centre them to ensure they ride over the spacers. I think iI will do this anyway, rather than pressing out and shortening the spacer, in case I find thicker rubbers as originally fitted give less vibration. As you can tell, I am not a points man and want a smooth-running car that looks original from 3 feet away.
I have welded on bob weights, balanced pistons and rods etc etc.
But the finish on my mounting bolts is correct!! I would not like shiny zinc standing out every time someone looked under there, so I sympathize with Dudley. My Chassis is aerosol epoxydised black, so I will just give the bolts a whiff of this to stop rust anyway.
SAJ in NZ

[Bob C]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

I looked in my Canadian parts book and it shows the same part numbers
as the US parts book for the spacers and cushion.

Bob

[SAJ]

Hi Bob, that's interesting. I don't have a Canadian parts book. Is this something I could obtain, or is it a collectors item? I looked in the judging standards, but the Canadian section did not help.
Regards
SAJ in NZ

[Bob C]

The book I have is an original 1928-38 I got on Ebay.

Bob

[d.j. moordigian]

Originally Posted by SAJ

Thank you for the replies. BudP, my spacers are 1-1/8 inch. Far longer than yours. They are press fitted into the castings (Canadian) and protrude 0.890 inches (see Pic 1). Thicknesses are engine mount 0.235, rubber (L-shape) 0.20, frame 0.1625 (with paint), flat rubber 0.215, outside plate 0.25 inch. Total thickness 1.0625 inch. Spacer 1.125 inch. Therefore gap left between rubbers and frame when all tightened down .0625, so my 1/16th estimate was correct (see pic 2).
I suspect the USA pressed mounts are thinner than the Canadian cast mounts. Or maybe US spacers don't house into the plates but sit between them?
I would still like to know roughly how much the rubbers should be compressed when in place - if at all. At the moment the installed Mounts can rock and wobble due to the 1/16th clearance. This seems counter-intuitive to me. I feel the rubbers should be under some compression. I can alter this after the engine is installed by putting on slip-fit washers over the protruding ends of the spacers outside the outer plates, but it will be a bit fiddly to centre them to ensure they ride over the spacers. I think iI will do this anyway, rather than pressing out and shortening the spacer, in case I find thicker rubbers as originally fitted give less vibration. As you can tell, I am not a points man and want a smooth-running car that looks original from 3 feet away.
I have welded on bob weights, balanced pistons and rods etc etc.
But the finish on my mounting bolts is correct!! I would not like shiny zinc standing out every time someone looked under there, so I sympathize with Dudley. My Chassis is aerosol epoxydised black, so I will just give the bolts a whiff of this to stop rust anyway.
SAJ in NZ

Okay,..read your posts 3 times to make sure I had it correct.

Yes,...the USA spacers fit between the mount and the outer plate.
The spacers are "stops" so you can't over tighten (compress) the
rubber. The only thing I can think, to try, is this. If you use the
flywheel housing with the inside mounts, in the frame, do you
have any clearance or does it fit tight? (ya, put the rubber in also)
Did you take the mounts of the frame?....what did the rubber
measure?
*btw...had a tuff time reading your vernier caliper until I realized
it was metric on the bottom scale...lol*

[Bob C]

SAJ, The Canadian parts book I have is from 1938 and I think by then
Ford of Canada may have been using some USA style parts for replacements
because I looked at the rear engine support and it is the same number as the US
part. Be interesting to see if somebody has a Model A era Canadian parts book that shows the number for your cast mount.

Bob

[Steve Plucker]

Originally Posted by SAJ

I am replacing the rear engine mounting rubbers using Snyders' pieces, which are 0.2 inch thick for the L-shaped pads and 0.215 for the outer pads. What came out were about 1/4 inch thick for both inner and outer pads (and no rubber under the mounts against the lower frame flanges). The new thinner rubbers leave a gap of about 1/16 inch between frame and mount i.e. no squash on the rubbers, but 1/16 of "slop". The spacer bushes control this and they are 1-1/8 inch long. What length should they be? were mine made longer than standard to accommodate the thicker rubbers used, I wonder, and should now be shortened? How much compression should there be on the rubbers, when bolted up tight against the spacers?
The car is a Canadian 1931 Tudor with Canadian-type malleable cast steel mounts.
I read all the recent posts and my rubber thicknesses are the same as those quoted, but the length of the spacers was not mentioned.
Thanks for any advice
SAJ in NZ

All of the original spacer "bushes" that I have range from 1/2 inch to 9/16 inch;

Tighten the nuts just until you can place the correct cotter key in the holes.

I used BRATTON'S pads and they were hard as a rock and would not let me screw the nut all the way to insert the correct cotter key...then I ordered SNYDER'S pads and they were a little softer and I think that if I were to have used theirs, that the nuts would of screwed on just right.

Pluck

[SAJ]

Hello D.J. Thanks for the reply. You weren't supposed to read the vernier anyway because It doesn't actually show the true gap as the the bolts are not nutted up! I love the eagle eyes people have on this forum.
We have been metric for many years so our verniers are all "upside down". But I am a thousandths man and always have to convert mm to inches
So the US spacers are 0.5295 from BudP and that is between plates. My spacers enter the plates through both holes, so subtracting plate thicknesses from my overall measurement of 1.125 inches gives mine at 0.64 between plates - 0.11 longer than BudP's. The original rubbers I removed were 1/4 inch thick. The flywheel housing with original rubbers was a neat sliding fit, so the new thinner rubbers will cause the engine bolts to pull the chassis inwards by the difference in rubber thicknesses which is 0.5 inch less 0.415 inches or 85 thou. I guess this will not matter much and will certainly be easier to install the engine.
I just made 6 off 0.105 inch washers with chamfers to help them slide over the protruding spacers outside the outer plates and under the bolt heads. This will give 0.105 less 0.625 compression to the rubbers i.e. 40 thou squash. See pic attached.
I will see how this feels when I get the engine together and adjust if necessary.
I will put the nuts either inside or outside the frame- whichever centres the washers easiest on the spacers, though I know they should be outside according to judging standards. They were inside when I disassembled it.
Sorry for so many figures. It will be a good reference for me in the future and maybe someone else with a Canadian car can benefit sometime too.
I will be off line now until Monday, and I will offer up the flywheel housing as suggested to ensure all is OK
SAJ in NZ

[SAJ]

BobC and Pluck's replies arrived after I wrote my last one and signed off. I will digest this new information when I get back late Sunday. My nuts are self-lockers (can be painful, ahem!) And may be non standard lengh, which introduces another variable.
SAJ on holiday in NZ

[Larry Jenkins]

Does anyone have a isometric schematic of the rubber pads; plates and spacer tubes that show how they all assemble?

Thank you!

larry

[Tom Wesenberg]

I would think Les Andrews book would show them, and I think Bratton's parts book might also show them. The rubber pad kits I bought from Snyder's were a perfect fit. Just set the inner rubber in place. The rubber has a raised ridge that fits into the frame holes. Then stick the steel sleeves in the rubber holes, set the outside frame rubber in place and cover it with the metal plate. Then insert the bolts so the nuts are on the outside. Tighten the nuts and insert the cotter pins.

[Larry Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg

I would think Les Andrews book would show them, and I think Bratton's parts book might also show them. The rubber pad kits I bought from Snyder's were a perfect fit. Just set the inner rubber in place. The rubber has a raised ridge that fits into the frame holes. Then stick the steel sleeves in the rubber holes, set the outside frame rubber in place and cover it with the metal plate. Then insert the bolts so the nuts are on the outside. Tighten the nuts and insert the cotter pins.

Well done Tom..

Larry

[ian Simpson]

Originally Posted by SAJ

I am replacing the rear engine mounting rubbers using Snyders' pieces, which are 0.2 inch thick for the L-shaped pads and 0.215 for the outer pads. What came out were about 1/4 inch thick for both inner and outer pads (and no rubber under the mounts against the lower frame flanges). The new thinner rubbers leave a gap of about 1/16 inch between frame and mount i.e. no squash on the rubbers, but 1/16 of "slop". The spacer bushes control this and they are 1-1/8 inch long. What length should they be? were mine made longer than standard to accommodate the thicker rubbers used, I wonder, and should now be shortened? How much compression should there be on the rubbers, when bolted up tight against the spacers?
The car is a Canadian 1931 Tudor with Canadian-type malleable cast steel mounts.
I read all the recent posts and my rubber thicknesses are the same as those quoted, but the length of the spacers was not mentioned.
Thanks for any advice
SAJ in NZ

Originally Posted by Steve Plucker

All of the original spacer "bushes" that I have range from 1/2 inch to 9/16 inch;

Tighten the nuts just until you can place the correct cotter key in the holes.

I used BRATTON'S pads and they were hard as a rock and would not let me screw the nut all the way to insert the correct cotter key...then I ordered SNYDER'S pads and they were a little softer and I think that if I were to have used theirs, that the nuts would of screwed on just right.

Pluck

My car is a 1928 Canadian built Tudor. It has the cast steel mounts. When I changed the mount rubbers the originals had 1/2 inch spacers. I installed a Snyder's kit and found the bolts just a little too short to insert the split pins.