Responses:
Mike Hicks - 02/01/06:
I installed one of these that I got from Clark's in my 1965 Monza
convertible. I experienced similar difficulties getting in place but I
managed to get it positioned without any grinding or filing. I was not
able to use the figure 8 washer though. I put mine on in May of 2005
and so far so good (January 2006). The non-stock appearance bothers me
a little but the price and functionality were right.
|
Kirby Smith - 02/26/06
Now that I have taken the initial steps (thanks Padgett) for
installation, in my opinion this heavy duty mount is a good idea badly
executed. Beyond the barely long enough, untapered bolts used for studs
(GM made them long and pointy for a reason), and beyond the reported
need to drag holes and slots as required (the LM OEM unit has slots for
the mounting bolts for a reason), and beyond my uncertainty w.r.t. the
effect on strength of welding on the heads of the Grade 8 bolts used to
build it, the example I got from Clarks doesn't fit the figure-8 washer,
which does fit the two LM and one EM motor mounts in my possession. It
is no more likely to fit the engine cradle, which appears to have even
less freeplay.
It would seem that a jig was not used (as it should have been) to
establish the alignment of the bolts used for stud
I'm not going to mill the washer and the engine cradle to accommodate
this out-of-tolerance mount. I'm going to ask Clarks to replace it with
one that fits the figure-8 washer. Then I can determine what milling is
needed to get it to fit the frame.
kirby
66 turbo Corsa (bought new)
Padgett wrote:
Jeff Brekke no longer have any of the mounts he was making, which I
had heard were quite good?
Had virtue of having replaceable inserts but I e-mailed Jeff and he
did not have any. When he did they were a little more expensive.
Mount had no indication of origin or any markings on it. Was part of a
paper tag attached but not enough to read. I had to e-mail Lon to ask
about them and are on page 28 of Clark's supplemental catalog. I
couldn't use the "figure 8" washer under the two stud nuts, the studs
weren't long enough I remembered these feeling a bit a bit short
but remember the factory setting for the rear mount nuts (65 FSM
specifications (in back) page 5) is 50-60 ft-lb.
The picture below was taken after
torqueing both to 50 lb-ft and then removing. 5.5 to 6 threads were
engaged (turns before nut fell off) on both. Nuts were replaced and
retorqued then one was removed again for the photo. Remember these are
locking nuts so taller than most. Note that the threads come to within
about a 1/16 of the end unlike the factory studs which have a tapered
guide end. I believe this is sufficient though barely and another 1/8" would be nice. If someone with more expert/current knowledge has a
different opinion please let me know.
I know this is getting a bit AR but only took about ten minutes and it
is 68 degrees in the garage.
Padgett
>
Late Model Corvair Rear
Motor Mount
January 2006
The late model Corvair rear motor mount don't
last forever and NOS and rebuilt units are sometime hard to come by and
always expensive. Within the last few months or so a replacement mount has
become available that seems to be readily available and is about $35 or $40
less expensive. It looks like some ingenious soul has found a rubber cab
mount from a newer pickup truck cab and modified it as an alternate
motor mount for our cars. Clark's sells a version but I purchased mine from
Lon Wall at Corvair Underground
(to date it is not in the catalog nor does it have a part number assigned
but a quick call will get you one).
Since it's a new unit not core charges
apply.
The following is what you might call a
product evaluation.
My application is a '66 2-door. Taking the old
mount out is a matter of removing the rear grill and the motor mount bracket
cover and then placing a jack underneath the rear of the engine to support
it while you remove the two nuts that hold the the engine to the mount. Four
easy to remove bolts inside the engine compartment release the mount from
the rear cross member.
This is a side view of the mount. There is
a steel plate bolted to it that is bent in on the top and bottom. The
bottom lip has the two mounting two studs and the top lip is the "fail
safe" feature which would rest on the top of the car's rear cross member
in the event of failure.
Click on any picture to enlarge
it.
In this view the top lip can be seen more
clearly. A slot has been added to allow clearance for the decklid latch
support.
The mounting flange unit has four holes that
correspond with the holes in the car's rear cross member. The passenger's
side holes end up being too close the rubber portion of the mount so a
normal hex head bolt cannot be used. Corvair Underground provides two socket-head cap screws which allow ample clearance.
Two relatively minor problems were encountered
during installation. The clearance slot in the upper lip of the mount wasn't
quite wide enough to give all the clearance that was needed. A couple of
licks with the grinder and a quick dab of black paint was all it took to
make it right. The second problem was that the four holes for attaching the
mount to the cross member weren't quite in alignment. On the original mount
these holes are slightly elongated from side to side. A few minutes
with a rat-tail file and all was well.
This view taken from the driver's side shows
the mount installed and shows the clearance between the upper lip of the
mount and the decklid latch bracket after the fix.
One of the concerns expressed on one of the
Corvair forums was that the motor mount studs were quite long enough to
accommodate the "figure-8" washer under the nuts. As you can see here the
exactly (and not one smidgen more) long enough to get the job done. The
original studs were a little longer and had nice conical ends on them to
allow for a little misalignment when the engine was lifted back in
place. These do not, so you have to be right on the money - a tire iron
helps!
Gone are the days when you could hold your
mouth just right and sneak the fuel pump by the motor mount when removing
the engine. The pump will have to come off now!
These two views show how the unit looks
installed. Not original looking by any means but not out-of-place looking at
all and very functional.
Conclusions: I like the unit. It wasn't a real joy
to install because I had to do it twice to find out the slot and hole
alignment problems. Other than that it wasn't much different than installing an
OEM unit. Overall appearance is good and it functions well, and only time
will tell if "hangs" in there.
If you've used
one of these units and/or have any additional comments, please drop me a line
at vpersh@yahoo.com and I'll add them
here. Thanks, Van Pershing
