|
Post by hicompolds on Dec 21, 2020 20:55:38 GMT -5
Are the frame mounts for the motor mounts the same or different for a 330 and a 400/ 425/455 ?
I am swapping out the 330 in my '65 Cutlass with a 425. In the process I'm also converting from a column shifted Jetaway to a Muncie so I will be welding in the z bar bracket to the frame and cutting the shifter hole in the trans tunnel. I need to be sure I'm using the correct frame mounts and motor mounts in order to avoid fitment issues.
As a note...I dropped in the 425 with the Muncie bolted to it just to mock everything up. I used the 330 frame mounts and motor mounts and it all went in with no issues. The Muncie lined up perfectly with the trans cross member too.
Any help and comments will be appreciated.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by island65cruiser on Dec 21, 2020 21:40:37 GMT -5
I think Supercars Unlimited has what you need.
|
|
|
Post by jcf85post on Dec 22, 2020 8:14:19 GMT -5
you already have what you need for engine mounting
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Dec 22, 2020 8:38:01 GMT -5
you already have what you need for engine mounting ^^^THIS! Contrary to what you may read on the web or even in reputable vendor catalogs, there is NO difference in the BBO/SBO mounts used in these cars. The 400 motor in the 1965 442 used EXACTLY the same engine mounts and frame pads as the 330, and the 425 and 400 are externally identical. Every 1964-1990 Olds V8 has motor mount bolt holes in exactly the same place on the block. Use your current frame pads and Anchor 2261 mounts (if you need new ones), same as for the 330. The crank centerline will be in exactly the same place as stock.
|
|
|
Post by BR[] on Dec 22, 2020 9:51:51 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you on this one, Joe. All of the 400 frame mounts that I have come across are much flatter than the 330 mounts. Approximately ¾" on the 400 (I don't have one in front of me) and 1½" on the 330. I've parted out around 30 of the 65's "ONLY" and that's what I've found on all of them.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Dec 22, 2020 10:01:42 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you on this one, Joe. All of the 400 frame mounts that I have come across are much flatter than the 330 mounts. Approximately ¾" on the 400 (I don't have one in front of me) and 1½" on the 330. I've parted out around 30 of the 65's "ONLY" and that's what I've found on all of them.
The 1965 PIM shows frame mount P/N 383563 for all V8 applications. Note that the PIM shows a different rubber motor mount for RPO K51, which covers all W29 cars in addition to B01 and B07 cars, but since the latter two came with 330s as well as 400s, obviously the K51 mounts are dimensionally identical to the base mounts, which are dimensionally identical to the 2261s.
|
|
|
Post by BR[] on Dec 22, 2020 10:42:52 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you on this one, Joe. All of the 400 frame mounts that I have come across are much flatter than the 330 mounts. Approximately ¾" on the 400 (I don't have one in front of me) and 1½" on the 330. I've parted out around 30 of the 65's "ONLY" and that's what I've found on all of them. The 1965 PIM shows frame mount P/N 383563 for all V8 applications. Note that the PIM shows a different rubber motor mount for RPO K51, which covers all W29 cars in addition to B01 and B07 cars, but since the latter two came with 330s as well as 400s, obviously the K51 mounts are dimensionally identical to the base mounts, which are dimensionally identical to the 2261s.
I've seen the documentation, but it doesn't explain why the 65 frame mounts that I have personally removed differed from BB to SB. We both know that the manuals and documentation have many inaccuracies. I can only go by my first hand findings.
|
|
|
Post by hicompolds on Dec 22, 2020 11:24:05 GMT -5
The 1965 PIM shows frame mount P/N 383563 for all V8 applications. Note that the PIM shows a different rubber motor mount for RPO K51, which covers all W29 cars in addition to B01 and B07 cars, but since the latter two came with 330s as well as 400s, obviously the K51 mounts are dimensionally identical to the base mounts, which are dimensionally identical to the 2261s.
I've seen the documentation, but it doesn't explain why the 65 frame mounts that I have personally removed differed from BB to SB. We both know that the manuals and documentation have many inaccuracies. I can only go by my first hand findings. These are currently listed on ebay and according to the seller they are original to his '65 442. I will compare them to mine when I get home later. Thank you for all the replies so far...it's much appreciated. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by john442 on Dec 22, 2020 13:33:21 GMT -5
You may already know this but in case you don't, Bro's sight has a tech section with a diaghram showing exactly where the frame bracket should be welded.
|
|
|
Post by hicompolds on Dec 22, 2020 14:00:00 GMT -5
You may already know this but in case you don't, Bro's sight has a tech section with a diaghram showing exactly where the frame bracket should be welded. Yep...I have printed out all that information...and I'm very thankful to have it...thanks BRO. Thanks John.
|
|
|
Post by oldolds88 on Dec 22, 2020 14:42:48 GMT -5
if its in and everything bolts up without prying on parts,use it. other frame mounts may have been different vendor. bolt it in,check your pinion angle and fan shroud for clearance.
|
|
|
Post by hicompolds on Dec 22, 2020 17:12:34 GMT -5
[quote author=" joepadavano " source ="/post/48057/thread" timestamp="1608644281"] you already have what you need for engine mounting ^^^THIS! Contrary to what you may read on the web or even in reputable vendor catalogs, there is NO difference in the BBO/SBO mounts used in these cars. The 400 motor in the 1965 442 used EXACTLY the same engine mounts and frame pads as the 330, and the 425 and 400 are externally identical. Every 1964-1990 Olds V8 has motor mount bolt holes in exactly the same place on the block. Use your current frame pads and Anchor 2261 mounts (if you need new ones), same as for the 330. The crank centerline will be in exactly the same place as stock. [/quote] Here are some pictures that I took. I included a measuring tape in the pictures. If you look closely at the engine mounts you'll see they are in fact the 2261 part number. Let me know what you guys think.
|
|
|
Post by jcf85post on Dec 22, 2020 23:09:04 GMT -5
even IF the frame pads are different as long as you use 330 mounts with 330 pads you will have no problem
|
|
|
Post by hicompolds on Dec 23, 2020 21:06:01 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you on this one, Joe. All of the 400 frame mounts that I have come across are much flatter than the 330 mounts. Approximately ¾" on the 400 (I don't have one in front of me) and 1½" on the 330. I've parted out around 30 of the 65's "ONLY" and that's what I've found on all of them. The 1965 PIM shows frame mount P/N 383563 for all V8 applications. Note that the PIM shows a different rubber motor mount for RPO K51, which covers all W29 cars in addition to B01 and B07 cars, but since the latter two came with 330s as well as 400s, obviously the K51 mounts are dimensionally identical to the base mounts, which are dimensionally identical to the 2261s.
So I completely forgot that I have a copy of the Parts Chassis Catalog that a very good friend loaned to me. It covers multiple years. If you look at the pictures I included from the catalog it seems to show that all V8 cars have the same frame mounts part #383563. However, it does show 2 different motor mounts between the F85 V8 non-442 cars and 442 cars ...part #s 394198 and 394199 respectively. So by using that information, I would need to get the motor mounts for the 442 cars. But according to Joe P., the 2 different part number motor mounts are dimensionally identical. If that's the case, why did they even bother with 2 different part numbers? If I'm saying anything incorrectly please let me know. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Dec 24, 2020 9:03:21 GMT -5
The 1965 PIM shows frame mount P/N 383563 for all V8 applications. Note that the PIM shows a different rubber motor mount for RPO K51, which covers all W29 cars in addition to B01 and B07 cars, but since the latter two came with 330s as well as 400s, obviously the K51 mounts are dimensionally identical to the base mounts, which are dimensionally identical to the 2261s.
So by using that information, I would need to get the motor mounts for the 442 cars. But according to Joe P., the 2 different part number motor mounts are dimensionally identical. If that's the case, why did they even bother with 2 different part numbers? If I'm saying anything incorrectly please let me know. Thanks.
The difference between those two P/Ns is in the stiffness of the rubber, not the dimensions. More to the point, you can't buy the OEM mounts anymore unless you find someone with NOS originals. The 2261 mounts are the only ones you can reasonably find today. The OEM mounts from 1965 had no interlocking feature, which is why the part number for the 442 (and Police Apprehender cars) used stronger, stiffer rubber. That is irrelevant today since all the replacements have the interlocking feature. If you buy the so-called "442" or "Big Block" mounts, you will get 2328s and those will NOT fit your frame pads.
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Dec 24, 2020 9:07:57 GMT -5
I've seen the documentation, but it doesn't explain why the 65 frame mounts that I have personally removed differed from BB to SB. We both know that the manuals and documentation have many inaccuracies. I can only go by my first hand findings.
There is no record of any other frame pad part number in any Olds literature. Nothing in the PIM. Nothing in the parts book. Nothing in the service bulletins. P/N 383563 is shown as the only frame pad for every A-body Olds built from 1964-1968, and for the 1969 350 cars. There may have been different suppliers of that P/N with slightly different configurations over the years, depending on the assembly plant, (we've seen that on other parts) but the parts were considered functionally interchangeable and there is nothing that indicates that these were only used on 442s or only with the 400 motor. They didn't get a unique part number, so there was no way to control or mandate which one went on what car. If you can't believe the engineering drawings, well, there isn't much left to talk about.
|
|
|
Post by hicompolds on Dec 29, 2020 15:10:06 GMT -5
So by using that information, I would need to get the motor mounts for the 442 cars. But according to Joe P., the 2 different part number motor mounts are dimensionally identical. If that's the case, why did they even bother with 2 different part numbers? If I'm saying anything incorrectly please let me know. Thanks. The difference between those two P/Ns is in the stiffness of the rubber, not the dimensions. More to the point, you can't buy the OEM mounts anymore unless you find someone with NOS originals. The 2261 mounts are the only ones you can reasonably find today. The OEM mounts from 1965 had no interlocking feature, which is why the part number for the 442 (and Police Apprehender cars) used stronger, stiffer rubber. That is irrelevant today since all the replacements have the interlocking feature. If you buy the so-called "442" or "Big Block" mounts, you will get 2328s and those will NOT fit your frame pads.
Joe...I had the 2328's ordered prior to your post. I received them today and I tried to install them. Sure enough, they interfere with the original frame pads. So I guess I had the setup I needed after all with the original 330 frame pads and the 2261 mounts. Thanks for the help...much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by rag on Jan 29, 2021 23:39:10 GMT -5
I agree with Joe, I compared me 442 mounts to my Cutlass mounts and can see NO difference. Both are Fremont cars, I maybe old but can still use a tape measure and my eye sight.
|
|
|
Post by rag on Jan 29, 2021 23:41:51 GMT -5
I meant to say pads, not mounts.
|
|
|
Post by yammiman on Apr 23, 2021 8:06:04 GMT -5
Okay, now that I am totally confused LOL I am going from a 330 to a 455 - I have the original 330 frame pads, will the 2261's work with these pads and this engine?
|
|