"Project Oval" transmission mount help / suggestions

[Dave Rosique]

OK guys, here we go...

I'm getting ready to install the transmission in my "Project Oval" soon. In the past, when installing a later T1 transmission in an early car, I've always used a T2 nosecone and bolted the thing in... The T2 nosecone tends to lift the nose of the trans resulting in lowering the engine a bit... I've always lived with it in the past, but I'm open any suggestions.

I'm setting the car up to see street / strip action with a 200+ hp engine (I hope), DOT's, and hopefully a wheelie is in the future .

So far, I have a Berg engine support (traction) bar, Berg intermediate transmission support, and I'm planning on building or buying a frame truss bar (DRKC bar?).

I'm a little hesitant to torch off the stock cast in nose mount on the frame of the car, but I could be convinced to do so if needed.

"Old School" has always worked fine, but I'd really like to know what you guys do with early cars nowdays... photos are always welcomed.

Thanks,
Dave

[Shubee2 (DSK)]

Wack that old Mount off Dave and install the later verison I use to use the bus nose cone to but it tips the motor a bit  see pictures of my 58 pan

[Shubee2 (DSK)]

Finished 58 Pan

[Dave Rosique]

Pan looks good Gary...

Funny you mention that bracket, I bought one some time ago figuring I would do just what you did... I even thought about using a late three bolt nose and adapting the pan to fit.

Thanks,
  Dave

[Zach Gomulka]

From what I've heard you can just whack off the nosecone mount. A mid mount along with the rear mount will be fine.

[Bruce]

From what I've heard you can just whack off the nosecone mount. A mid mount along with the rear mount will be fine.

That doesn't work.  A mid mount only controls side to side, or up and down movement.  Same goes for the stock rear mounts.  You must retain the stock front mount to control front to rear movement.

[Dave Rosique]

From what I've heard you can just whack off the nosecone mount. A mid mount along with the rear mount will be fine.

That doesn't work.  A mid mount only controls side to side, or up and down movement.  Same goes for the stock rear mounts.  You must retain the stock front mount to control front to rear movement.

Thanks for the input guys,

Zach, I have to side with Bruce on this one since I plan to rubber mount the transmission.

I'm open guys, show this old dog a new trick or two

~DR.

[Zach Gomulka]

No personal experience, but I found a similar thread...

http://cal-look.no/lounge/index.php/topic,8387.0.html

If you're gunning for 200+ hp  and wheelies, solid mounts may be a better choice.

[Dave Rosique]

Thanks for the thread Zach, now I even more confused

I've run solid mounts & straps on the off road stuff for years with good success.

My original plan was to set the pan up for the common 61-72 nosecone / mount, run a rubber nose & saddle mounts, strap the bell housing area, use the Berg intermediate support w/beefed up mounts (the Berg rubber mounts seem soft), install traction bar under engine, truss the frame horns and viola!

Seemed simple, but I've been out of the "scene" for so long I wanted to seek out some opinions... heck, I haven't even picked up a VW magazine until recently.

~DR.

[Jason Foster]

  My opinion is solid mount it front mid and rear no straps. Gusset case.  You can run no nosecone mount if you solid mount rear and mid. I do run all three personnaly though. I also did away with the traction bar by having a welded in "kafer bar" setup done by 407 speedshack.  If you are gonna launch this thing with slicks and do a wheelie I suggest you solid mount it.  And yes of course as you know Dave it's gonna be LOUD especially with the weld in mid mount.



My midmount is from Oldspeed in Paramount and welded in by Mike at 407 speedshack, also the seams on the framehorns were welded.


 Granted mine is a '65 pan so it was a bit easier.

[Dave Rosique]

Thanks for weighing in on this one Jason, I know your car works... but solid mounts? Aw, c'mon... I wanted a quiet car that I can abuse that doesn't break! Is that asking too much? (Probably )

Nice job on your car, and that Kafer Bar looks really stout.

~DR.

[Jason Foster]

  Seriously Dave. I think if you are gonna really beat on it do it right. 


    Just for argument sake, to the best of my knowledge Allen Wies runs no nose cone mount and Daniel Kurtzman whose S/G car I crew chief, it has a RLR 1 1/2" trans raise with weld in mid mount it runs no nose cone mount and works just fine.

[Bruce]

    Just for argument sake, to the best of my knowledge Allen Wies runs no nose cone mount and Daniel Kurtzman whose S/G car I crew chief, it has a RLR 1 1/2" trans raise with weld in mid mount it runs no nose cone mount and works just fine.

Apples and oranges.  With solid mounts, you don't need a nose cone mount.  There's no flex in STEEL.  But if you rubber mount the trans, you MUST use a nose cone mount.  Rubber deforms!

[Jason Foster]

Thanks for clarifying Bruce.     BTW I don't think Zach meant to not use a nose cone mount with rubber mounts.  Dave keep us posted I'm curious as to what you decide. Also can't wait to see your car.

[Ian M]

I've been in a several street cars (some 9s and 10's w 1.32-1.4x 60 fts)with solid mid and rear mounts and no nose cone mount,without any problems. Headliner,rear seats,carpet etc goes a LONG way toward killing the noise.  It certainly makes it very liveable IMO. I was very suprised the first time I rode in a car set up that way with a full interior,I never would have guessed solid mounts.

I would definatley use a Type 2 nosecone and hockeystick whatever mount choice you go with.  The later t1 nosecone with a welded in later mount tilts the front of trans down a inch or so (if you postion it by lining the late hockeystick up with the stock early pan hole),and therefore raises the back of the engine enough that header clearance becomes a issue on the inner panel of a "H" apron,as well as the valve covers on the inner fenderwell/sidepanels. The previous owner of my car did mine that way back in the '60s or '70s to install a tunnel case trans. It may have worked with the stock 40hp that was in it,but it didn't work with a bigger motor.

[Dave Rosique]

I've been in a several street cars (some 9s and 10's w 1.32-1.4x 60 fts)with solid mid and rear mounts and no nose cone mount,without any problems. Headliner,rear seats,carpet etc goes a LONG way toward killing the noise.  It certainly makes it very liveable IMO. I was very suprised the first time I rode in a car set up that way with a full interior,I never would have guessed solid mounts.

I would definatley use a Type 2 nosecone and hockeystick whatever mount choice you go with.  The later t1 nosecone with a welded in later mount tilts the front of trans down a inch or so (if you postion it by lining the late hockeystick up with the stock early pan hole),and therefore raises the back of the engine enough that header clearance becomes a issue on the inner panel of a "H" apron,as well as the valve covers on the inner fenderwell/sidepanels. The previous owner of my car did mine that way back in the '60s or '70s to install a tunnel case trans. It may have worked with the stock 40hp that was in it,but it didn't work with a bigger motor.

Thanks for the info Ian,

So you say changing to the later style weld in mount actually lowers the nose of the transmission? Like lower than say a stock '65 pan? I was thinking by welding in a stock late mount I would eleminate tipping the transmission either way... That's the beef I have with the T2 nosecone, it makes the engine hang down a bit, although I would rather have that problem than stuffing the engine even higher in an already small engine compartment.

~Dave

[Shubee2 (DSK)]

Hi Dave I Dont Know What Ivan is Refering too But I welded mine in on my 58 Everything lines right up just like stock maybe using the 3 bolt late mount dose that but not the one I used

[Jason Foster]

  I think you should consider just running the solid rear and weld in mid and skip the nose. I ran mine like that for awhile but last time the trans was out Kaforski said to run the nose too, that it couldn't hurt so I do. Like I said and others as well many have run with no nose cone mount with a weld in mid with great success.  Like the picture I posted above Daniels S/G car runs no nosecone mount and launches hard with no problems.

[Dave Rosique]

I really appreciate the input guys. One thing I've decided for sure is to mock up an engine / transmission in the car so I can make any necessary adjustments before anything gets welded.

Jason, I totally hear what you're saying about the mid mount with no nose mount but it just seems so wrong! Ha! I'll keep you guys posted...

~DR.

[Ian M]

I've been in a several street cars (some 9s and 10's w 1.32-1.4x 60 fts)with solid mid and rear mounts and no nose cone mount,without any problems. Headliner,rear seats,carpet etc goes a LONG way toward killing the noise.  It certainly makes it very liveable IMO. I was very suprised the first time I rode in a car set up that way with a full interior,I never would have guessed solid mounts.

I would definatley use a Type 2 nosecone and hockeystick whatever mount choice you go with.  The later t1 nosecone with a welded in later mount tilts the front of trans down a inch or so (if you postion it by lining the late hockeystick up with the stock early pan hole),and therefore raises the back of the engine enough that header clearance becomes a issue on the inner panel of a "H" apron,as well as the valve covers on the inner fenderwell/sidepanels. The previous owner of my car did mine that way back in the '60s or '70s to install a tunnel case trans. It may have worked with the stock 40hp that was in it,but it didn't work with a bigger motor.

Thanks for the info Ian,

So you say changing to the later style weld in mount actually lowers the nose of the transmission? Like lower than say a stock '65 pan? I was thinking by welding in a stock late mount I would eleminate tipping the transmission either way... That's the beef I have with the T2 nosecone, it makes the engine hang down a bit, although I would rather have that problem than stuffing the engine even higher in an already small engine compartment.

~Dave

The gearbox position relative to the framehorns in a splitcase car is higher than the later tunnel case cars. A weld in midplate for a oval era pan is the same one you use in a '61 and later car with a "1 tranny raise. If you notice,Berg sells his rubber bolt in mid mounts in two versions, one has a "taller"plate to reach the intermediate housing in the earlier cars.

 Lining up the hockeystick on a later '61+ style nosecone into the hole in a splitcase era pan (then simply welding on the later mount) tips the front of the trans down a good inch or so. You can visually see how far the gearbox is tipped downward. In my case,the primary tubes on the header was nowhere close to clearing the bottom of the inner seal channel  on the "H" apron,and the valvecovers interfered with the inner side panels of the engine compartment. You could even see how far out the angle of the engine was in comparison to the seal channel .

I went with the Type 2 nosecone/hockeystick with weld in mid mount and solid rear (no nose cone mount). Everything lines up correctly and the solid rear/no nose cone/solid mid mount setup works great.

[richie]

  I think you should consider just running the solid rear and weld in mid and skip the nose. I ran mine like that for awhile but last time the trans was out Kaforski said to run the nose too, that it couldn't hurt so I do. Like I said and others as well many have run with no nose cone mount with a weld in mid with great success.  Like the picture I posted above Daniels S/G car runs no nosecone mount and launches hard with no problems.

i know my car is totally different to what you are doing dave,but i agree with jason as i only have a bolt in rear solid mount and weld in intermidiate mount,no nose cone mount at all.It seems to hold up to the odd wheelie or 2

cheers richie,uk