Rear mounts

[ford35lh]

I can't find an illustration of the transmission to frame mount for a 35 pickup
in the Chassis Parts book.

Was there a cushion between the frame mount and transmission ???

[Kurt in NJ]

It's a ring of rubber sandwiched between the transmission housing and u- joint housing with metal to frame, and it includes the hand brake lever mount

[deuce lover]

Here is one on EBAY


https://www.ebay.com/itm/1935-1936-F...QAAOSwZjJU96kO

[ford35lh]

Thanks, coudn't remember if there was a rubber cushion between the mount
and the frame. Explains why I have no parts bag marked as such.

[Mac VP]

The large diameter rubber ring is the vibration component of the rear support. The steel “ears” on the part were directly bolted to the frame of the car. Some guys have added small rubber cushions under the steel mounting ears but you’d be slightly changing the angle of the motor & trans assembly if you did.

[JM 35 Sedan]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Some folks have removed the '35-36 frame mounts and replaced those with the '37-40 (maybe to '41?) rear trans mount bracket, that uses two rubber donut mounts. So you would have the 35-36 round rubber and the rubber donuts working for you at the trans mount.

[tgarner317]

I know this is an older thread, but is it possible to do this upgrade on a completed car? The rear mount on my 36 needs to be replaced. Thanks

[JM 35 Sedan]

Originally Posted by tgarner317

I know this is an older thread, but is it possible to do this upgrade on a completed car? The rear mount on my 36 needs to be replaced. Thanks

I'm not sure if you are wanting to install the 37-40 rear mount bracket that I mentioned in my previous post or the transmission mount with rubber molding that deuce lover mentioned in his post, or maybe both??
In any case, you would need to either drop/remove the complete rear assembly, or remove the engine and transmission to do this work on a completed vehicle.

[tgarner317]

I’d like to do the 37-40 mount upgrade. Could it be done by supporting the transmission with a jack while removing the original 36 mounts and replace with the 37-40 style crossmemver and mount? I guess is my question..

[Kube]

Originally Posted by tgarner317

I’d like to do the 37-40 mount upgrade. Could it be done by supporting the transmission with a jack while removing the original 36 mounts and replace with the 37-40 style crossmemver and mount? I guess is my question..

To answer your question: Replacing the rear frame bracket is labor intensive. If the body is on the frame, even more so.
The torque tube will need to be moved back about 6" or so and the transmission will need to be removed. Then, all of the rivets will need to be removed from the authentic frame brace.

My question is "Why do you consider this an upgrade?"
It seems to me to be a lot of additional work for no positive results.

[tgarner317]

Trying to eliminate some vibration from the car. Seems like some of the vibration is coming from the trans area and the rubber on stock rear mount is split and falling apart. I just thought if was easy enough without pulling the motor I’d change to the later style mount. Thanks for tour responses and insight!

[JM 35 Sedan]

When I did this on a 35 Tudor sedan, the body was off the frame, and the engine and transmission were removed. I'm thinking when doing this on a complete car, at least the transmission would need to be removed in order to get the existing trans mount brackets out and the 37-40 mount installed. Getting the rivets out, and removing the two transmission mounting brackets will be the biggest challenge. I believe the 37-40 bracket bolted in place using the original rivet holes.
Obviously, toe boards, sheet metal trans cover, front seat, and other misc items must also be removed.

[Kube]

Originally Posted by tgarner317

Trying to eliminate some vibration from the car. Seems like some of the vibration is coming from the trans area and the rubber on stock rear mount is split and falling apart. I just thought if was easy enough without pulling the motor I’d change to the later style mount. Thanks for tour responses and insight!

I'd suggest you simply install a new (reproduction) 36 mount. I am confident you'll be quite pleased.
To do that you'll only need to pull the torque tube back a bit.

[JM 35 Sedan]

Originally Posted by tgarner317

Trying to eliminate some vibration from the car. Seems like some of the vibration is coming from the trans area and the rubber on stock rear mount is split and falling apart. I just thought if was easy enough without pulling the motor I’d change to the later style mount. Thanks for tour responses and insight!

According to a member here known as "flatheadfan" (Tom Mason), the addition of the '37-'40 trans mount, it's two rubber donut pads, combined with the original '35-'36 trans mount with rubber molded in place, did help reduce vibrations and noise within the vehicle. He has made many previous posts on this subject and converted his '35 & '36 to this type trans mount. I have also heard that some late '36 production vehicles were actually built with the '37-'40 mount. It does involve some work, but I don't feel it would be an overwhelming project on a completed vehicle in my opinion.

[tgarner317]

Thank you both for your insight. I’ll get my car up on jakstands and take a better look at everything decide which way I’ll go. Thanks again!

[Kube]

Originally Posted by JM 35 Sedan

According to a member here known as "flatheadfan" (Tom Mason), the addition of the '37-'40 trans mount, it's two rubber donut pads, combined with the original '35-'36 trans mount with rubber molded in place, did help reduce vibrations and noise within the vehicle. He has made many previous posts on this subject and converted his '35 & '36 to this type trans mount. I have also heard that some late '36 production vehicles were actually built with the '37-'40 mount. It does involve some work, but I don't feel it would be an overwhelming project on a completed vehicle in my opinion.

I have no doubt that what he did helped as he had at one time suggested. I also have little doubt that there were other issues with his vehicle than the rear mount being less than in perfect condition.
The original mount worked quite well, certainly as it was intended to do.
Oh, Mike Driskell has beautiful reproductions of these at a very fair price...

[tgarner317]

Thanks, I believe I’ve purchased a few things from him in the past via his auction site store.

[Kube]

Originally Posted by tgarner317

Thanks, I believe I’ve purchased a few things from him in the past via his auction site store.

Just moments ago, I'd finished painting a mount I got from Mike quite recently. I'll be installing it in my '36 soon.
My car is very smooth (no vibration) and no chatter. Still, the mount (rubber) is soft and well, "shot".
I'd rather replace the mount before it fails and leaves me in a predicament.

[JM 35 Sedan]

Originally Posted by tgarner317

Thanks, I believe I’ve purchased a few things from him in the past via his auction site store.

Here's one of the threads on this subject you might want to check out:
https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showt...37+trans+mount

Also, I believe Third Gen Automotive is closed this week. Not sure if you can leave a message to order a '35-'36 rear trans mount, but when they reopen next week, I'm sure he will give you promt service and quick delivery on your order.

[rotorwrench]

If there are other vibration sources such as a worn main shaft rear bearing or a bad U-joint then replacing the worn rear engine/trans mount will not completely fix the situation. The drive shaft can also have vibration issues. Clutch & flywheel issues are also a possibility. I'm with Kube on this one. The mount was adequate for a car with no issues. Ford thought the final mount system through 1948 was so good that they didn't need steady rods but when they fail, there is a bigger problem than just a failed mount. They probably should have kept the steady rods. Change it if you want but the improvement is not that much of an improvement.