Crank pulley removal...again

[Lona]

My roadster has excessive motor vibration which I suspect might be coming from the front motor mount. From the photo, it looks like the mount is non-standard after market. The springs are much larger and there is no flat metal spring plate between the yoke and the cross member nor is there any spring on the center yoke bolt on the underside of the cross member.

When the photo was taken, the rear float-a-motor lower bolts were removed and the uppers were loosened. Also, the yoke bolts are removed. The motor is jacked up in excess of one inch. It can go higher if I remove the accelerator linkage but have not done this as it looks like the motor would have to go up another two inches or so in order to clear the crank pulley and this does not seem to be a prudent thing to do.

The yoke should come out if the pulley is removed but I need to know if this is a one piece or a two piece pulley. Can anyone tell from this photo? If it's a one piece, the radiator would need to come out first but this is prime driving time with the wife and grand kids and I don't want to get into anything time consuming until after summer. If it's a two piece, I understand they can be removed without taking the rad out and this would be a much less time consuming job.

Would appreciate input from anyone who can advise what kind of pulley this is and any other comments which would be helpful in replacing the front mount. I have a new Snyders front mount kit on hand ready to install but intend to use the existing yoke.

Thanks for any advice you can give.

Glen

[31Tudor]

It is hard to tell by the picture, but a two part pulley you would see a seam and a notch where the two pieces meet. A one piece you would not seam any seem at all. If it is a one piece then I do think that you would need to remove the radiator in order to give you enough room to pull the pulley out. I have had to remove the accelerator linkage in order to raise the engine high enough to remove the yoke.

[Veger]

Good Day!

Here is a pic of mine if you look very close lol you will see that break by the belt and then on the shaft you will see that very tiny seam. This was a two piece pully which was very Easy to take off but to replace it with the one piece took extra work but of course was worth it.



Good Luck and Keep on Truckin'

[BILL WILLIAMSON]

If you suspect it's a 2 piece, using drift & a hammer, tap on a spoke & try to turn it in a clockwise direction, viewed from the front.
If you're going back with a new 2 piece pulley, just break the spokes with a heavy drift & a hammer & slip it off easily!
Bill W.

[Dave in MN]

1) I don't see a seam on any of the surface near the seal. 2) There is not enough material directly behind the crankshaft ratchet nut where the components of two piece pulley come together to be a threaded two piece. The pulley looks like a one piece cast iron.

I have removed these front engine supports without removing the pulley. Remove the lower nut on the yoke...raise the engine as you plan...enough so the lower yoke bolt clears the hole in the front crossmember... remove the (2) 3/4" front mount bolts and wiggle the part around...it should come out.

Second option: If you cannot raise the engine higher, after removing the two 3/4" bolts, it looks like the yoke will hit the spokes on the pulley before the lower bolt clears the hole in the crossmember. You may need to remove the ratchet nut and slide the pulley forward as far as possible to create the "wiggle room" you need to remove the yoke. Any amount you can raise the engine will help your efforts.

On the aftermarket spring set you have the two spring towers are connected at the base with a section of the same spring coil wire. This connecting coil runs next to the center bolt of the yoke and rests almost directly on the crossmember. This connected spring makes it very difficult to move the yoke around much.
Good Day!

[Lona]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

The consensus seems to be that I have a one piece pulley. The options are to break it off and install a two piece, remove the rad to get the one piece off, or to jack up the engine to provide enough room to remove the yoke.

To get the yoke center bolt to clear the cross member, I would have to raise the engine about 1 3/4 to 2". Is this amount of lifting ok or will there be a danger of breaking something, especially the bell housing?

Not wanting to lose any summer driving, I put everything back together and will attack the problem again in the fall. However, I had difficulty lining up the bottom float-a-motor holes (even with the top ones loose but still in place) and getting the hand crank to engage the pulley nut until I tightened up the bottom center yoke bolt (the one with no spring on it). The nut had to be tightened considerably to draw the motor downward enough to get the bolts and crank to line up. This further leads me to suspect my vibration is due to this odd front mount oversize spring setup which needs the springs overly compressed to get everything lined up.

Concerned about putting stress on the drive train because of the overtightened yoke bolt, I loosened the lower bolt a little so the hand crank would just fit into the crank nut. The easiest way to change the mount would be to raise the motor the approx 2" needed to have the yoke bolt clear the X member provided those in the know don't think this will damage anything.

Your thoughts?

Glen

[Lona]

After posting, I re-read Dave's advice and now understand it might be possible to wiggle out the yoke if the pulley is loosened and moved forward a little without having to remove it completely. I didn't understand that when I first read the post. Thanks Dave. That could be a better solution.

Glen

[Tom Wesenberg]

I have removed the front mount without removing the pulley. I removed the two large bolts and moved the ends of the mount forward and up, then slid it out the side. I removed the throttle linkage and jacked up the front of the engine. You should remove at least one bolt from each side of the rear motor mounts, then loosen the remaining bolt on each side, so you don't stress the flywheel cover.

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg

I have removed the front mount without removing the pulley. I removed the two large bolts and moved the ends of the mount forward and up, then slid it out the side. I removed the throttle linkage and jacked up the front of the engine. You should remove at least one bolt from each side of the rear motor mounts, then loosen the remaining bolt on each side, so you don't stress the flywheel cover.

Thanks, Tom. I was able to raise the motor about one inch without removing the throttle linkage but that wasn't even enough to take the pressure off the upper yoke springs. The yoke hits the pulley webbing and I can't move it in any direction. If the motor is raised at least two inches with the throttle linkage removed, I might be able to get the yoke bolt to clear the X member. The problem seems to be these rather large yoke springs. With the linkage removed, do you think the motor can be raised 2inches without damaging anything? Loosening the pulley and moving it forward a little as Dave suggests and then raising the motor 2 inches might give me the wiggle room needed to get the yoke out without having to go to the trouble of first removing the radiator. Do you think this is a good approach?

Glen

[tbirdtbird]

would love to know exactly what the heck front mount is on there.
If a Model A could talk it would give a delineation of all the horrible and incompetent mechanical things that had been done to it over 80 yrs and all that would fill a book.

in any case, agree with your decision to work on this in the off season, 'cause as we say around here, 'what could possibly go wrong?!'

If you ever have the opportunity to change to the 2-pc pulley, do it.
There are two types, one type the pieces screw together (a stupid idea)
other type the two pieces have machined notches in each other that line up, a way better idea

[Tom Wesenberg]

I agree to wait and change this after the driving is over for the season.

Can you post pictures of the springs and lower stud?
Could someone have replaced the center stud, and used longer than normal?

[Bob C]

"would love to know exactly what the heck front mount is on there."

From what little I can see it looks those mounts with the large heavy
tapered coil springs with the rubber inside them.

Bob

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg

I agree to wait and change this after the driving is over for the season.

Can you post pictures of the springs and lower stud?
Could someone have replaced the center stud, and used longer than normal?

The photo in my original thread shows the motor raised about one inch and the lower bolts of the rear mounts removed and the uppers loosened. The tension on the large tapered yoke springs was only partially relieved. The motor needed to be raised about another inch to get all of the pressure off these springs.

The photo below shows the mount back together as it was before starting work. The yoke nut had to be tightened against the X member in order to pull the engine downward enough to get the bottom rear mount bolts to align and to get the hand crank into the ratchet nut. This compressed the upper springs to an almost closed position and making an almost solid connection between the mount and the X member.

The photo of the yoke stud is in the following thread since my pics seem too large to post more than one per thread (will figure that out later).

It does not appear that the stud is too long and there doesn't seem to be any rubber isolators under or inside the springs. In fact, the large upper springs seem to result in the motor being higher than it should be. This doesn't leave enough space to get the bottom spring on the stud and is likely why the previous owner left it off and why I have excessive motor vibration.

At this point, I have backed off the stud nut a turn or so to relieve some tension on the upper springs and to allow the motor to float a little until I again attack the mount replacement problem this winter. However I have a concern that loosening the nut with no lower spring between the nut an the X member might result in a snapped stud when the motor wants to rise suddenly after hitting a bump while driving.

I would appreciate opinions on whether I should tighten the stud nut firmly against the rubber grommet and X member or to leave the nut a little loose until the entire mount is replaced this winter.

Glen

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Lona

The photo in my original thread shows the motor raised about one inch and the lower bolts of the rear mounts removed and the uppers loosened. The tension on the large tapered yoke springs was only partially relieved. The motor needed to be raised about another inch to get all of the pressure off these springs.

The photo below shows the mount back together as it was before starting work. The yoke nut had to be tightened against the X member in order to pull the engine downward enough to get the bottom rear mount bolts to align and to get the hand crank into the ratchet nut. This compressed the upper springs to an almost closed position and making an almost solid connection between the mount and the X member.

The photo of the yoke stud is in the following thread since my pics seem too large to post more than one per thread (will figure that out later).

It does not appear that the stud is too long and there doesn't seem to be any rubber isolators under or inside the springs. In fact, the large upper springs seem to result in the motor being higher than it should be. This doesn't leave enough space to get the bottom spring on the stud and is likely why the previous owner left it off and why I have excessive motor vibration.

At this point, I have backed off the stud nut a turn or so to relieve some tension on the upper springs and to allow the motor to float a little until I again attack the mount replacement problem this winter. However I have a concern that loosening the nut with no lower spring between the nut an the X member might result in a snapped stud when the motor wants to rise suddenly after hitting a bump while driving.

I would appreciate opinions on whether I should tighten the stud nut firmly against the rubber grommet and X member or to leave the nut a little loose until the entire mount is replaced this winter.

Glen

Attached photo of the yoke stud from below.

Glen

[Purdy Swoft]

It appears to be way too tight. The castillated nut is only suppose to be tighten just enough for the cotter pin to enter the hole. If the front mount is tightened more it will without a doubt cause vibration.

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Purdy Swoft

It appears to be way too tight. The castillated nut is only suppose to be tighten just enough for the cotter pin to enter the hole. If the front mount is tightened more it will without a doubt cause vibration.

Purdy,
Thanks for the reply. The mount is too tight because of the incorrect upper springs which are too large and need to be changed to the original type. As mentioned, the yoke nut had to be tightened to pull the motor down enough to get the rear mount bolts and the hand crank to align. Apparently, the car has been driven this way for years before I got it. Since replacing the incorrect mounting springs will wait until the driving season is over, my dilemma is whether to leave the yoke nut tight and have no vibration isolation or to loosen the nut and have some float in the motor but run the risk of snapping the yoke because there is no space to mount a lower spring on the yoke stud. Which is worse...having no vibration isolation and motor float or allowing the motor to yank on a loosened stud bolt because there is no spring to dampen the upward movement of the motor?

I am leaning toward tightening the yoke stud nut up against the X member and living with the engine vibration until I can replace the mount this winter. I just don't know if running with the motor basically locked to the front X member is going to cause serious drive train or engine problems. Maybe it's better to run with the stud nut loose and not worry about possibly breaking the stud since the whole thing is going to be changed anyway.

What are your thoughts on which way to go?

Glen

[Tom Wesenberg]

You can get by with running the bottom nut tight, after all, my 1928 has NO springs because the front of the engine is bolted directly to the crossmember.

[100IH]

If you had the replacement kit with all the original style parts on hand, I'd recommend pry bar on the top of the springs to unmount the tops of the springs from the mount yolk. If that proves impossible with the lift your getting, cut the springs at the mid elevation and they will come out. Installation should be a snap as well as replacing the pulley. Torch or cutoff wheel might fit.

[BILL WILLIAMSON]

Lona,
You might want to think about installing the Float-A-Motor type front mounting. They are much like the '32 Model B setup & really make it SMOOTHER!
Bill W.

[TDO]

I am in the prosiest of changing to the front float a motor mount. I have the same type yoke that you have . don't no what kind it is. My spokes on the crank pulley was rubbing the yoke. the top of the yoke is straight instant of curved. While I have it apart I'm also going with the 2 piece pulley.

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg

You can get by with running the bottom nut tight, after all, my 1928 has NO springs because the front of the engine is bolted directly to the crossmember.

Tom,
Thanks. Your '28 with the engine bolted to the frame confirms my thought that tightening up the yoke nut would be the way to go for now. Is this standard for the '28? I would think you would have a good amount of engine vibration transmitted to the frame.

Postponing the work until winter gives me a chance to review the front float-a-mother mount suggested by Bill and TDO. Thanks to all for your help and suggestions.

Glen

[Tom Wesenberg]

Model A's had the solid front mount until November 1928. See page 294 in the SERVICE BULLETINS.
I don't really notice undue vibration from my solid mount.

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Tom Wesenberg

Model A's had the solid front mount until November 1928. See page 294 in the SERVICE BULLETINS.
I don't really notice undue vibration from my solid mount.

Tom,
First, sorry about the spelling error in my last post....it pays to be careful and check spelling.

Second, interesting that the '28 s had solid mounts....did not know that. Maybe my weird mount is not causing my vibration after all. Will confirm this when I get to tear the mount apart this winter. Thanks

Glen

[Bob C]

I'm pretty sure this is the spring setup you have.

Bob

[Tom Wesenberg]

Originally Posted by Bob C

I'm pretty sure this is the spring setup you have.

Bob

I was thinking the same thing.
Remove it and use it to fix your broken bicycle seat spring on the old Schwinn.

[tbirdtbird]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

There is precious little weight on the front mount, which is why the rear mounts are so massive. The front is more of a stabilizer, which is why Purdy et.al. say to not tighten the castle nut more than just enough to get the cotter in.
Your setup sounds way overtightened.

But if it has been that way, leave it alone until winter, or back the nut off as much as possible and try it and do not worry about the crank hole right now, your electric starter does work, right? Try it loose and see what happens. I seriously doubt it can do any harm loose, and in any event if there is less vibration then who cares what happens to it; it is obv. wrong.

If only a Model A could talk and tell you all the crazy mechanical violation it has suffered.......

[redmodelt]

If he has Float-A-Motor mounts in the back doesn't that take the "float" away from the front and makes it more like a solid mount because the the engine is now sitting on 3 points?
If the engine has vibrations I would think there is more to fixing it then replacing or tightening down the front mount.
The original rear mounts put the motor/tranmission at an angle, the front mount was as stated above, a stabilizer, the motor floated above but did not really rest on the front cross member.

[Purdy Swoft]

Just a thought but I'm also thinking that the rear float-A-motor mounts may play in to the overall problem. If the rear of the engine is sitting too low, it will through off the angle of the crankshaft pulley and ratchet nut in relation to hand crank alignment . A couple of things to consider is, Are the rear float-A-motor biscuits too tight, hardened and squshed down too far? this would lower the rear of the engine. The rear mounts don't need to be too tight either or this can add vibration. Could the frame be slightly sagging at the rear mounts? Check the gap at the lower rear of the hood. If the gap is wide at the bottom and too close at the front, this will be a dead give away. If the torque tube is touching or nearly touching the service brake cross shaft, this is another indication of frame sag or problems related to the float-A motor mounts. Sometimes the rear parts of the float-A-motor mounts will be l;eft off and cause the rear of the engine and transmission to get out of proper alignment which will effect alignment at the front. The rear most part of the float-A-motor mount connects to the universal joint housing and a thick square rubber block with a metal piece attached with two bolts fit over the edge of the center crossmember and raises tand stabilizes the transmission and is a necessity for proper operation of the float-a-motor mount system. I use the front mount spring setup that Bob C pictures above without the rubber parts with a spring under the castile nut with good results. Just a few thoughts and areas to check.

[Lona]

The last several posts are very informative regarding my front mount. Yes, I think mine is the same as the spring unit posted by Bob C and the one used by Purdy. This leads me to think my setup is not just a shade tree mechanic fix as I thought but a real aftermarket device meant for the model A. Since Tom's '28 front mount is solid and Purdy uses the same mount as mine with no apparent vibration problems in either of their cars, perhaps my front mount is not the cause of my vibration after all.

Purdy has some interesting comments regarding taking a closer look at the float-a-motor rear mounts to make sure they are correctly installed and adjusted. I will do this after getting back home early next week. I'll leave the front mounts alone until reviewing the rear ones per Purdy's suggestions.
My gut feeling is that the front of a car motor should be able to float somewhat to help relieve the stress of rotational torque when accelerating and to absorb some of the movement of the engine caused by bumpy roads and hard braking. With that in mind, I'll look for a shorter spring than standard which will fit on the limited space on the yoke stud and leave the current large upper springs alone for now until I can put some miles on the car and see if there is any change in the vibration level.

These posts have been very helpful for me in understanding the first thought about a solution to a problem may not always be the correct one and that one should think more about other possible actions to take before charging ahead. While I still am not sure what is causing my vibration problem, the input from others has led me to look at more than one possibility. Thanks for the input from all.

Glen

[Lona]

Originally Posted by Purdy Swoft

Just a thought but I'm also thinking that the rear float-A-motor mounts may play in to the overall problem. If the rear of the engine is sitting too low, it will through off the angle of the crankshaft pulley and ratchet nut in relation to hand crank alignment . A couple of things to consider is, Are the rear float-A-motor biscuits too tight, hardened and squshed down too far? this would lower the rear of the engine. The rear mounts don't need to be too tight either or this can add vibration. Could the frame be slightly sagging at the rear mounts? Check the gap at the lower rear of the hood. If the gap is wide at the bottom and too close at the front, this will be a dead give away. If the torque tube is touching or nearly touching the service brake cross shaft, this is another indication of frame sag or problems related to the float-A motor mounts. Sometimes the rear parts of the float-A-motor mounts will be l;eft off and cause the rear of the engine and transmission to get out of proper alignment which will effect alignment at the front. The rear most part of the float-A-motor mount connects to the universal joint housing and a thick square rubber block with a metal piece attached with two bolts fit over the edge of the center crossmember and raises tand stabilizes the transmission and is a necessity for proper operation of the float-a-motor mount system. I use the front mount spring setup that Bob C pictures above without the rubber parts with a spring under the castile nut with good results. Just a few thoughts and areas to check.

After checking over my float-a-motor rear mounts, Purdy is right. The rear part of the mount that connects to the universal joint housing is missing on my car. The mounts themselves seem to be in good shape. I can dent the biscuits with a fingernail so the rubber is not hardened and the bolts are only about a turn or so tight and just starting to compress the rubber.

I suspect this is the cause of my excessive engine vibration and not the front mount as I thought. Probably also the reason the front of the motor won't compress the same springs Purdy uses enough to get the lower spring on the yoke stud between the castle nut and the front X member.

Would appreciate comments anyone might have on these thoughts and, also, where I might be able to find the missing rear part of the float-a-motor system. Maybe I'll have to bite the bullet, buy a complete new float-a-motor system and replace all of the components.

Glen

[Tom Wesenberg]

Or, you could go back to stock mounts.

[Purdy Swoft]

Lona, thanks for the feedback .