New idea for an old concept-easier way auto trans?

[40P10touring sedan]

In an attempt to make life for myself and others easier I propose this for those who wish to do an auto trans swap and look to those here to confrim the idea I plan on doing.

In typical fashion the tried and true method of rear engine mounting with an adaptor and auto trans...modern non oem type!...has been use of the front engine "center" mount and homemade rear adaptor brackets off of the trans adaptor to "re- 3 point it" and "also adding" the newer trans' rear tail bracket.

I gotta ask why! In my mind it'd be easier to take the front flathead 6 engine mount and remove the center rubber mount and solid mount that mount bracket to the back plate of the timing cover and use the outboard mounts of that bracket with bisquit mounts...that mount was usually bolted directly to the frame via 2 bolts per side...now the new idea would be to use the inboard bolt holes as bisquit mounting holes...now for the tail end....do that as per the newer trans' needed mount. With a new front 2 point mount all that would be needed is the trans tail mount and the flathead 6 would be 3 point mounted like any other engine/trans combo.

I can't see the adaptor plate "not" taking the weight of the engine and trans together since other big block/heavy engines do it that way.

I'm not looking to buck the system nor tick other's off with this, but it just seems the easier way....to me....and for other's.

Thoughts, gentlemen, on the practical application of this idea?

[Don Coatney]

Innovation is the key to success. Why ask for opinions? Just do it and report the results...

[40P10touring sedan]

Why ask?....well, some things seem pretty sacred around here...and while I don't wish to ruffle feathers, I gotta figure there's a better way for everyone - and me.

Add Lee is about to embark in this type of swap for his 52 and if I can make it easier for the two of us, as well as others...then so be it.

I spoke of this concept a while ago in a related thread and got a couple of "that's not how your supposed to do it" responces...I get that I suppose....but I think this can work, and it's been my idea since I 1st wanted to do a trans swap in my car.

Seems folks are somewhat set in the notion that these motors need 4 mounting points when it comes to a modern trans swap, and I can't figure out why.

Oh, I do plan on doing it this way for my car...it's been set in stone already, in my head at least.

[Plymouthy Adams]

I'm with Don..what you do is not important as long as you do it well and finish the job..ruffled feathers, you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen...the POC is prime for folks that cringe at the thought of upgrade..read it for amusement, technical how to or just because you are bored..

I know you had mentioned this before an find it kinda odd that the "similar thinking" was not kept all on the same thread for easy following..

[40P10touring sedan]

I'm with Don..what you do is not important as long as you do it well and finish the job..ruffled feathers, you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen...the POC is prime for folks that cringe at the thought of upgrade..read it for amusement, technical how to or just because you are bored..

I know you had mentioned this before an find it kinda odd that the "similar thinking" was not kept all on the same thread for easy following..

I know.... most seem to easily mod their brakes to discs{and why not}, add racks for steering or switch all or in part to 12v for modern conviences{radio/AC/ease of bulb replacement or LED technology}, add electric wipers instead of the vac system and of course there are those who swap out the inline 6 for a more modern motor and 3 point mount those as they usually are...this is why I chime in with why not do the same 3 point mount for a flathead 6...when swapping in a modern auto trans of course. I don't see why it couldn't work.

Of course, I'm the same guy who asked why can't someone come up with a 6v compressor clutch for vintage AC cars who don't want to swap to 12v...the early systems were 6v...yeah, that's a whole nother feather ruffler ain't it- lol.

[1941Rick]

If you after a 3 point mount with the auto trans why not leave the front as is and make brackets ,for the round mounts,off the frame at the trans and put the mount on a cross member that bolts solid to the transmission. Built it and we will comment......

[40P10touring sedan]

If you after a 3 point mount with the auto trans why not leave the front as is and make brackets ,for the round mounts,off the frame at the trans and put the mount on a cross member that bolts solid to the transmission. Built it and we will comment......

Are you saying reversed 3 point? That would be interesting...

[Niel Hoback]

I have seen advertising from Chrysler that touted the floating power. The front mounts are up above the crank centerline and the rear mounts are below it. The ad shows a diagonal line through the motor saying that the torque twists the motor with half of the weight above the crank and half below, helping to minimize the reaction to torque vibration.

It would seem that having both ends mounted below the crank would allow the entire engine to rock sideways on its mounts due to torque reaction. I realize that most engines now are mounted that way, but most also use a torque strut or "dog bone" to minimize engine rocking movement.

Does it sound like I have to much free time?

[Paul Hoffmeyer]

If you find any Dodge or Plymouth with Powerflight from '54 or '55, you will see the high, single front mount, with a crossmember bolted solid to the tailshaft housing; and either end of that crossmember mounted with the standard rubber mounts to another crossmember that is fastened to the frame rails. Thus you have the original three point floating power setup as designed by Chrysler. If you can find them, this could be replicated on a P15 or D24 with all stock parts.

Paul H

[Guest bewillie]

Go back and look at my post on full flow oil filter. You will see front mounts as I used 200r trans with stock center mount in rear. I left stock mount in front and added one to each side to stop the torque.

[Don Coatney]

...

If you after a 3 point mount with the auto trans why not leave the front as is and make brackets ,for the round mounts,off the frame at the trans and put the mount on a cross member that bolts solid to the transmission. Built it and we will comment......

Are you saying reversed 3 point? That would be interesting...

I'm with Don..what you do is not important as long as you do it well and finish the job..ruffled feathers, you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen...the POC is prime for folks that cringe at the thought of upgrade..read it for amusement, technical how to or just because you are bored..

I know you had mentioned this before an find it kinda odd that the "similar thinking" was not kept all on the same thread for easy following..

I know.... most seem to easily mod their brakes to discs{and why not}, add racks for steering or switch all or in part to 12v for modern conviences{radio/AC/ease of bulb replacement or LED technology}, add electric wipers instead of the vac system and of course there are those who swap out the inline 6 for a more modern motor and 3 point mount those as they usually are...this is why I chime in with why not do the same 3 point mount for a flathead 6...when swapping in a modern auto trans of course. I don't see why it couldn't work.

Of course, I'm the same guy who asked why can't someone come up with a 6v compressor clutch for vintage AC cars who don't want to swap to 12v...the early systems were 6v...yeah, that's a whole nother feather ruffler ain't it- lol.

I have seen advertising from Chrysler that touted the floating power. The front mounts are up above the crank centerline and the rear mounts are below it. The ad shows a diagonal line through the motor saying that the torque twists the motor with half of the weight above the crank and half below, helping to minimize the reaction to torque vibration.

It would seem that having both ends mounted below the crank would allow the entire engine to rock sideways on its mounts due to torque reaction. I realize that most engines now are mounted that way, but most also use a torque strut or "dog bone" to minimize engine rocking movement.

Does it sound like I have to much free time?

If you find any Dodge or Plymouth with Powerflight from '54 or '55, you will see the high, single front mount, with a crossmember bolted solid to the tailshaft housing; and either end of that crossmember mounted with the standard rubber mounts to another crossmember that is fastened to the frame rails. Thus you have the original three point floating power setup as designed by Chrysler. If you can find them, this could be replicated on a P15 or D24 with all stock parts.

Paul H

Go back and look at my post on full flow oil filter. You will see front mounts as I used 200r trans with stock center mount in rear. I left stock mount in front and added one to each side to stop the torque.

[wayfarer]

My concern would be that of the total distance between mounts. Although later packages used the trans mount and the 'front' engine mounts, the actual 'front' side mounts are quite far from the front of the engine, especially on an inline.

I do believe that some style of brace/strut would be required between pan rail and bottom of trans case. MotherMopar even used some on trucks/vans in the 60's-70's with 318-TF.

When I look at something of this nature, I always look to the factory to see if there is something comparable to study, afterall, they spent tens-of-millions on R&D.

[Plymouthy Adams]

looking to and adapting the factory setup is probably the best source for parts to modify and ideas to mount...you got the right thinking going now...but..do not in any manner think that the mounting of the engine to the bell is a weak link...just clear your mind a bit and look at farm tractors the entire chassis so to speak is nothing more than the engine+tranny+rear bolted in one assembly..all steering, hydraulics and accessory mounts are also affixed to this simple setup..

[BeBop138]

Are you saying reversed 3 point? That would be interesting...

This is using the original front mount and bracket on the bottom of the adapter plate goes to the frame mounts----rear crossmember on the rear of tranny----the adapter plate will work with manual or automatic trannys. The 55 Chev had two front puck style and two mounts on the bellhousing---so many different ways I guess if they work thats all that counts. Of course this comes from the Department of Redundancy Department--lol:rolleyes:

[40P10touring sedan]

I have seen advertising from Chrysler that touted the floating power. The front mounts are up above the crank centerline and the rear mounts are below it. The ad shows a diagonal line through the motor saying that the torque twists the motor with half of the weight above the crank and half below, helping to minimize the reaction to torque vibration.

It would seem that having both ends mounted below the crank would allow the entire engine to rock sideways on its mounts due to torque reaction. I realize that most engines now are mounted that way, but most also use a torque strut or "dog bone" to minimize engine rocking movement.

Does it sound like I have to much free time?

Yup, now picture my front mount the same as it is oem but remove the rubber isolator from the top of the motor mount to the bottoms of the mount corners...."the mount and high attachment point to the motor remains the same", one would only be swapping the rubber location with the same mount.

[40P10touring sedan]

...but..do not in any manner think that the mounting of the engine to the bell is a weak link.....

Oh, I wasn't in any way....just trying to streamline the process. The oem trans hung loose off the backend of these rear blocks for a long time with no ill effect, but they were changed for a reason come later models...now why, I don't know......

[40P10touring sedan]

My concern would be that of the total distance between mounts. Although later packages used the trans mount and the 'front' engine mounts, the actual 'front' side mounts are quite far from the front of the engine, especially on an inline.

I do believe that some style of brace/strut would be required between pan rail and bottom of trans case. MotherMopar even used some on trucks/vans in the 60's-70's with 318-TF.

When I look at something of this nature, I always look to the factory to see if there is something comparable to study, afterall, they spent tens-of-millions on R&D.

True sir, and that is a minor concern for me on this thought process only in that they do sit alittle farther forward than a normal modern low/front mounted block would be. I know these motros aren't on the light side, I do think the oem overhang front motor mount is up to the task...if the engines made far more HP my thoughts would be different. I would keep an eye on a set up as I suggested for any stress cracks or fatigue on the front mount, but I really think it's stouter than that.

[40P10touring sedan]

The 55 Chev had two front puck style and two mounts on the bellhousing---so many different ways I guess if they work thats all that counts.

Lee, I didn't know about that with the 55 chev....and that's my fave year of the tri 5's. Question sir, is the rubber mount in pic 1 a speedway?...I've got 2 sets fo the speedway mounts in boxes, but I've never pulled them out to look at them...I have an area..."things to go in the plymouth"...there they sit among other things.

[bbbbbb99]

Just an FYI for those wishing to make this swap to auto tranny. I have an original Mopar adapter plate to a powerflight from a 1956 plymouth. From what I understand wiht a very slight modification you can bolt up a 904. I don't see why you couldn't bolt up the overdrive versions either but I have yet to verify this.

Didn't mean to the hijack