belvedere666 Posted January 16, 2019 Report Share Posted January 16, 2019 Planning on replacing all upper and lower body mounts on my p20. can anyone walk me through the process for the upper mounts? do I need to remove them all and lift the entire body off or can I do them in sections? whAt are some things to look out for? will the body warp if I hade them all off at the same time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted January 17, 2019 Report Share Posted January 17, 2019 technically....It is best in my opinion to loosen all mounts.....but only remove the bolts on the side you are working on, lift that side only enough to facilitate the removal and placement of new....I did mine one side at a time in this manner.....pay close attention to the body torque values outlined in the book...over tighten them...you can cause undue stress that is poor alignment... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ194950 Posted January 17, 2019 Report Share Posted January 17, 2019 Take them all of at once. Only raise the body enough to get them out at the same time. I Seem the remember the front two have no supports rubber or otherwise), and maybe the rear most also -on that I am not sure. Loosen or remove all before raising the body Including the front radiator/fender mounts to avoid any body stress/etc.. Them all should be OK. Do not over tighten any mounts as the body can and will flex. Take some door opening measurements as think best. Best to you,, DJ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDoctor Posted January 17, 2019 Report Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) I’ve done this type of project numerous times. The following steps make it rather simple – 1 - Loosen all of the mounting bolts 2 - Keep all doors, trunk, hood, closed 3 - Remove all mounting bolts on one side 4 - Lift up that side just enough to replace the rubber cushions 5 - Upon completion of that side, lower the body back onto the frame 6 - Replace the bolts on that side, but don’t tighten 7 - Repeat these steps on the second side 8 - Upon completion of the second side, tighten all bolts until the cushions bulge slightly 9 - You’re Done!!! Edited January 18, 2019 by DrDoctor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted January 17, 2019 Report Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, DrDoctor said: I’ve done this type of project numerous times. The following steps make it rather simple – 1 - Loosen all of the mounting bolts 2 - Keep all doors, trunk, hood, closed 3 - Remove all mounting bolts on one side 4 - Lift up that side just enough to replace the rubber cushions 5 - Upon completion of that side, lower the body back onto the frame 6 - Replace the bolts on that side, but don’t tighten 7 - Repeat these steps on the second side 8 - Upon completion of the second side, tighten all bolts until the cushions bulge slightly 9 - You’re Done!!! read the book... there is no such thing as tighten to bulge..it is on closed body cars a setting of 15 ft lb...on convertibles 20 ft. lbs...as I said in my reply above...read the book....avoid problems you would rather not try to address later.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDoctor Posted January 18, 2019 Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 During a conversation with my neighbor, he suggested that I expound upon my earlier explanation, so here it is – this is the process I’ve used on GM, Ford, and Chrysler products, such as ‘63/’67/’69/’72 Corvettes, ’55/’56/’57 Chevys, ’65 Pontiac, ’57 Buick, ’50 Ford, ’57 Ford, ’67 Chevy pickup, ’46 Plymouth (not mine . . .), ’34 Plymouth – well, that’s not all of them, so you can see that the list’s rather lengthy. In fact, it’s the process my neighbor and I used on a Ford panel truck, a ’34 Ford Victoria, a ’57 Chevy, a ’54 Pontiac, and a ’56 Mercury. The point is – ALL were accomplished without ANY problems. An important point is to keep the doors/trunk/hood CLOSED, to keep the body from twisting during this process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted January 18, 2019 Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 (edited) DrDoctor . Members 216 722 posts Location: . My Project Cars:. Report post #6 Posted 1 hour ago During a conversation with my neighbor, he suggested that I expound upon my earlier explanation, so here it is – this is the process I’ve used on GM, Ford, and Chrysler products, such as ‘63/’67/’69/’72 Corvettes, ’55/’56/’57 Chevys, ’65 Pontiac, ’57 Buick, ’50 Ford, ’57 Ford, ’67 Chevy pickup, ’46 Plymouth (not mine . . .), ’34 Plymouth – well, that’s not all of them, so you can see that the list’s rather lengthy. In fact, it’s the process my neighbor and I used on a Ford panel truck, a ’34 Ford Victoria, a ’57 Chevy, a ’54 Pontiac, and a ’56 Mercury. The point is – ALL were accomplished without ANY problems. An important point is to keep the doors/trunk/hood CLOSED, to keep the body from twisting during this process. Quote or.....you can read and follow the process outlined by the parent company and its engineers.....when reporting back to a question on the forum pertaining to a certain model it is best to always use the book as a reference to weed out other less than adequate processes....I will add to this a case in point, Company A makes these rubber mounts their durometer is about a 50 and Company B makes these with a durometer of say 80....if you put a 50 in place with x squish and then a 80 with x squish..the latter will be over torqued compared to the 50 and the 50 squish is still yet an questionable unknown...whereas....15 ft pound is 15 ft pound regardless of squish...………..! Edited January 18, 2019 by Plymouthy Adams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andydodge Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 Tim & Doc............I think that you both have raised good points to keep in mind regarding this particular job...........Doc I would think that your advice is quite sound and without having a specific torque setting would be what most of us would probably follow.....and Tim, having a specific torques setting for this job certainly gives us a much better way of obtaining the right outcome............to both.....................thanks as its a job I have been contemplating doing recently...........I'll keep contemplating .........lol.........thanks guys, andyd 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDoctor Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 Andy, Who’s Tim??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Coatney Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 hour ago, DrDoctor said: Andy, Who’s Tim??? I believe that would be general Adams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 hey Don, it was a good trip to Andersonville prison...unfortunately last week I cut a record in genealogy of my family of a family member perishing there...will have to seek out his burial spot next visit. I will make application to be buried there myself... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kencombs Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 The discussion of durometer and torque is kind of confusing to me. The factory torque is likely intended to achieve a certain compression of the mount, or 'squish' if you want to be less formal. With out knowing the factory durometer and matching it with new, using the same torque may not result in the same results. Changing the torque by observing the squish probably accounts for the unknown durometer. 18 hours ago, Plymouthy Adams said: DrDoctor . Members 216 722 posts Location: . My Project Cars:. Report post #6 Posted 1 hour ago During a conversation with my neighbor, he suggested that I expound upon my earlier explanation, so here it is – this is the process I’ve used on GM, Ford, and Chrysler products, such as ‘63/’67/’69/’72 Corvettes, ’55/’56/’57 Chevys, ’65 Pontiac, ’57 Buick, ’50 Ford, ’57 Ford, ’67 Chevy pickup, ’46 Plymouth (not mine . . .), ’34 Plymouth – well, that’s not all of them, so you can see that the list’s rather lengthy. In fact, it’s the process my neighbor and I used on a Ford panel truck, a ’34 Ford Victoria, a ’57 Chevy, a ’54 Pontiac, and a ’56 Mercury. The point is – ALL were accomplished without ANY problems. An important point is to keep the doors/trunk/hood CLOSED, to keep the body from twisting during this process. Quote or.....you can read and follow the process outlined by the parent company and its engineers.....when reporting back to a question on the forum pertaining to a certain model it is best to always use the book as a reference to weed out other less than adequate processes....I will add to this a case in point, Company A makes these rubber mounts their durometer is about a 50 and Company B makes these with a durometer of say 80....if you put a 50 in place with x squish and then a 80 with x squish..the latter will be over torqued compared to the 50 and the 50 squish is still yet an questionable unknown...whereas....15 ft pound is 15 ft pound regardless of squish...………..! Both techniques obviously have merit and i'll bet both work fine. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 it is like this....poster asks a question on procedure..many are offered up and one quotes the factory manual....it is the choice of everyone to chose a method or follow their own rainbow...but we as advisors here should always put the requirements as stated by the manual on the forefront as the accepted method. If ones chooses not to follow then that is totally on his head and odds are he will be back wondering what to do now that he is experiencing body alignment problems. then we have the next problems that many here have not even looked forward toward, the use of old used rubber going back onto the chassis....possibily not going back to the original mount, who knows if torqued to the prescribed requirement to begin with. Again, end results is not nor can ever be guaranteed but one guarantee is that the original procedure WAS CORRECT then and has application yet today. The only dog I have in this fight is that one should post what is correct in the book for the new guy who may not know or have access to the book. To that end we as advisors owe the forum these truths. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kencombs Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Plymouthy Adams said: it is like this....poster asks a question on procedure..many are offered up and one quotes the factory manual....it is the choice of everyone to chose a method or follow their own rainbow...but we as advisors here should always put the requirements as stated by the manual on the forefront as the accepted method. If ones chooses not to follow then that is totally on his head and odds are he will be back wondering what to do now that he is experiencing body alignment problems. then we have the next problems that many here have not even looked forward toward, the use of old used rubber going back onto the chassis....possibily not going back to the original mount, who knows if torqued to the prescribed requirement to begin with. Again, end results is not nor can ever be guaranteed but one guarantee is that the original procedure WAS CORRECT then and has application yet today. The only dog I have in this fight is that one should post what is correct in the book for the new guy who may not know or have access to the book. To that end we as advisors owe the forum these truths. I agree wholeheartily, when using original parts, original installation specs should be the first choice. My only point is this: If not using original parts or an exact duplicate thereof, the installation specs may need to be changed to accomadate the new material. And, I'm unaware of any original parts being available in 2018. As an example, if one were to replace the pistons in a flattie with a modern 3 ring, design with moly or chome chrome rings using a 3 or 4 pc oil ring, I'm sure you would agree that clearances and end gap should be those that match the parts being used. Kind of an extreme example for sure, but just illustrates the difficulty of adapting processes and procedures to match newer parts on older machines. Not intended to be argumentative, just explanatory. Edited January 19, 2019 by kencombs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDoctor Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Ken, You’ve got it – Thanks!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.