Repair exhaust bolt hole

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

Yep, understood about that but I wanted to make sure my 1” difference was close. Thanks!

Don't know why the 1" is important to you but in terms of fabricating a side stand plate it is not.
Only the (4) outer holes are used and the same pattern works on both sides.
Drill all (4) holes to fit 7/16" bolts.

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

That one has a Stromberg EE-7/8 (81). The other came with an ordinary 97.

That engine pictured is probably Canadian. Do you live in Canada? The first clue to me was the LOOOONG anti-chatter rod going FORWARD from the normal location near the starter. Those rods (one on each side) go forward and attach to the front crossmember at least on '46 thru '48 Fords (and likely on '42s) built in Canada. Your intake also appears like it MAY be Canadian if that black, cylindrical thingy above #1 cylinder is part of an oil-fill apparatus. The second picture shows the same rod on what I believe is a Canadian '41 Ford. DD

[ETriggs]

Originally Posted by 51 MERC-CT

Don't know why the 1" is important to you but in terms of fabricating a side stand plate it is not.
Only the (4) outer holes are used and the same pattern works on both sides.
Drill all (4) holes to fit 7/16" bolts.

I’m doing a different style than the single side mount, I’m making one like this.

[ETriggs]

Originally Posted by V8COOPMAN

That engine pictured is probably Canadian. Do you live in Canada? The first clue to me was the LOOOONG anti-chatter rod going FORWARD from the normal location near the starter. Those rods (one on each side) go forward and attach to the front crossmember at least on '46 thru '48 Fords (and likely on '42s) built in Canada. Your intake also appears like it MAY be Canadian if that black, cylindrical thingy above #1 cylinder is part of an oil-fill apparatus. The second picture shows the same rod on what I believe is a Canadian '41 Ford. DD

Nope, I’m down in Auburn, Alabama. I will get more photos although I have started disassembling them and cleaning parts. The aluminum heads are off and I will paint them dark green with polished fin edges. I have more photos on my iPad, I will upload them to that photobucket folder.

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

I’m doing a different style than the single side mount, I’m making one like this.

I get it now and far better than hanging it on the bell housing.
(incidentally, the offset would be appox. the width of the connecting rod journal end)

[ETriggs]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Can someone check my numbers to make sure my numbers are correct? I'm using a pretty precise measuring device (tape measure) and my Mark 1 Calibrated Eyeball to make the measurements. It seems as though the top holes and bottom holes are about 1/8" wider apart.

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

Can someone check my numbers to make sure my numbers are correct? I'm using a pretty precise measuring device (tape measure) and my Mark 1 Calibrated Eyeball to make the measurements. It seems as though the top holes and bottom holes are about 1/8" wider apart.

Do you have an exhaust manifold?

Transfer the holes from it.

[ETriggs]

Originally Posted by 51 MERC-CT

Do you have an exhaust manifold?

Transfer the holes from it.

That's where I got them from, I just want to make sure my eyeballs are working as they should. I've tried to find a CAD model to use, but no luck. I didn't think I had a set of exhaust manifolds, but the crusty block I had tucked away did have a set on them that I didn't notice until I looked at the photos I posted. One thing I've learned as an engineer is to always have someone double check my numbers.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

I’m doing a different style than the single side mount, I’m making one like this.

If you want to go this route it is ok, but not needed on an 8ba. The side mount is needed on pre 8ba blocks. IMO you would be much better off mounting the block directly to the engine stand, the mount you show places a lot of weight on the joints between the angle and the cross piece.

[ETriggs]

Originally Posted by JSeery

If you want to go this route it is ok, but not needed on an 8ba. The side mount is needed on pre 8ba blocks. IMO you would be much better off mounting the block directly to the engine stand, the mount you show places a lot of weight on the joints between the angle and the cross piece.

All three of the blocks are 59AB or earlier with the cast in bellhousing. The picture I uploaded is just a photo of a I found that was already built like what I am building.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

All three of the blocks are 59AB or earlier with the cast in bellhousing. The picture I uploaded is just a photo of a I found that was already built like what I am building.

OK, If it was me I would go with the single side mount, but good luck on your project.

[flatford8]

I built a couple like this. I don’t know if the 45* braces are needed. I also used all six bolts, I tend to over engineer stuff. I never seem to get around to painting stuff either......Mark

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by flatford8

I built a couple like this. I don’t know if the 45* braces are needed. I also used all six bolts, I tend to over engineer stuff. I never seem to get around to painting stuff either......Mark

Looks good.

[JSeery]

This is what I welded up. Made it to use the existing flat plate on the engine stand.

[ETriggs]

Originally Posted by JSeery

This is what I welded up. Made it to use the existing flat plate on the engine stand.

I like that! I guess since there have been thousands of these flatheads mounted that way, they won't crack at the exhaust bolt holes. I will probably build one of those too, then see which one I like the best. Yours clearly allows significant access to everything.
Thanks!

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by ETriggs

I like that! I guess since there have been thousands of these flatheads mounted that way, they won't crack at the exhaust bolt holes. I will probably build one of those too, then see which one I like the best. Yours clearly allows significant access to everything.
Thanks!

You're correct....there HAVE actually been gazillions of these flatheads mounted that way in virtually all of the original Ford Garages and local shops back in the day, as can be seen by the use of these two ANCIENT, commercial engine stands which enthusiasts seek-out to use today. The second picture shows but one more example of the epitome of "simple" engine stand adapters. DD








........

[flatford8]

ETriggs..... there are some photos on here of stands that attach at each end of the block, allows the block to rotate and you can remove/ install the cam with the gear on it. Those stands are a work of art IMHO........ Mark

[51 MERC-CT]

And if you have a little time on your hands you can add a rotating assistant.

[Mart]

I'll chip in here as I have a little familiarity of flattys in an engine stand.

1, The side mount is perfectly adequate for holding a flathead.
2, On mine I added a second hole on the pivot so I could hold the motor vertical.
3, The downside of the side mount is that the deck face is never horizontal, so it is no good for putting a portable boring bar on.

The twin sidemount setup shown does have an advantage that the deck face could be made horizontal. Hovever, if my engine stand is anything to go by, everything would be much too flexible to use with confidence, taking into consideration the weight of the boring bar, and especially if a liner needs to be hammered in. Plus the weight of the motor is hung out a lot further than with a sidemount.

The Claybourne type of stand looks ideal for most purposes, including boring, the only downside in my eyes is that is is a bigger unit to store when not in use, which may or may not be an issue depending on space available.

So to sum up, the twin side mount unit shown only has one advantage over the sidemount, that is that the head surfaces can be made horizontal, but that isn't a big deal as it's still probably not stable enough to bore on. The disadvantage is that it is harder to make and the weight is overhung a lot more.

So I'll stick to the side mount, and when boring I'll continue to use my exhaust port mounted feet.

Mart.

[ETriggs]

Originally Posted by 51 MERC-CT

And if you have a little time on your hands you can add a rotating assistant.

I actually saved an old SBC timing chain just for that purpose. That is on my list of things to do before I go back to work after the New Year. Problem is I have about 2000 hours worth of stuff on that list and not that many hours left. Ain't that the normal thing though.

Originally Posted by Mart

I'll chip in here as I have a little familiarity of flattys in an engine stand.

1, The side mount is perfectly adequate for holding a flathead.
2, On mine I added a second hole on the pivot so I could hold the motor vertical.
3, The downside of the side mount is that the deck face is never horizontal, so it is no good for putting a portable boring bar on.

The twin sidemount setup shown does have an advantage that the deck face could be made horizontal. Hovever, if my engine stand is anything to go by, everything would be much too flexible to use with confidence, taking into consideration the weight of the boring bar, and especially if a liner needs to be hammered in. Plus the weight of the motor is hung out a lot further than with a sidemount.

The Claybourne type of stand looks ideal for most purposes, including boring, the only downside in my eyes is that is is a bigger unit to store when not in use, which may or may not be an issue depending on space available.

So to sum up, the twin side mount unit shown only has one advantage over the sidemount, that is that the head surfaces can be made horizontal, but that isn't a big deal as it's still probably not stable enough to bore on. The disadvantage is that it is harder to make and the weight is overhung a lot more.

So I'll stick to the side mount, and when boring I'll continue to use my exhaust port mounted feet.

Mart.

I've been looking for one of the Claybourne types, no luck. Good point about the lack of advantages of the twin beam mount as to the side mount.

Thanks all!