LocostUSA.com

Space for running gear is an issue in any Locost. But, if you're looking to use a Ford T5 transmission and want a good, off-the-shelf, OEM, rubber transmission mount that isn't almost 4 inches tall, well, good luck to you. There is a solution available, however.

After spending a week locating, verifying, and then receiving, a suitable Ford T5 transmission mount, I wanted to save others the time and trouble. There is an aftermarket, rubber mount used to adapt the more modern Ford T5 to vintage mustangs. It turns out to be an excellent match for use in a Locost too. So, here is the part I found with photos and dimensions:

Scott Drake Automotive Part # C4DZ-6068-A, 8 Cylinder T-5 Conversion Part Transmission Mount
Website and catalog page ==> http://www.drakeautomotivegroup.com/Sto ... px?wid=141

Here are dimensions:



Here's how the Mustang T5 mounting plate and Scott Drake mount bolt holes match up:


This part will work with many Ford T5 transmissions, but probably not with other manufacturers, most notably GM T5s. If you're a newbie, the wide part of the mount goes on the mounting pad of the T5 and faces upwards. The narrow part, with the studs, faces to the ground and will mate to a metal crossmember you've designed and built or adapted from your donor. The two studs are 7/16 inches.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886

So a solid mount....?

Thank you, but... how is this better than something "we" could weld up?

Potentially, better vibration control and better elastic compatibility with your engine mounts.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886

Hey Lonnie- I think by "solid mount" he means "all steel, no rubber." Isn't the one you showed a "steel on top, steel on bottom, rubber in the middle" kind?

Somewhere along the way, somebody told me that you can't mix-and-match solid and rubber mounts, that they all have to be one kind or another. I don't know that it's true, but it seems to make sense... Maybe...


JDK

_________________
JD, father of Quinn, Son of a... Build Log
Quinn the Slotus:Ford 302 Powered, Mallock-Inspired, Tube Frame, Hillclimb Special
"Gonzo and friends: Last night must have been quite a night. Camelot moments, mechanical marvels, Rustoleum launches, flying squirrels, fru-fru tea cuppers, V8 envy, Ensure catch cans -- and it wasn't even a full moon." -- SeattleTom

Hey JD,

How Y'all doing?

You're right on the money with the mix and match idea. Since I'm using fully isolated, stock, engine mounts with a relatively soft (as compared to most high-performance, aftermarket parts) rubber, I wanted to use a similar mount on the transmission. It too is as you describe; metal on top and bottom, separated by the isolating rubber.

I didn't consider the idea that the poster, iadr, meant to have metal-to-metal without any kind of mount material. I've seen that in race cars, but not on a street car, which is what mine will be. I was also motivated by complaints on the Mustang forums (my donor) elsewhere that the harder, aftermarket, mount kits transmit too much vibration. Some have gone as for as removing them and reinstalling stock mounts.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886

The Drake mount *looks* very similar to the mount for a C4 automatic from an early Mustang or Maverick.

Also note that you can slot existing holes, drill new holes, or make adapter plates for mounts that almost fit.

Not that I'm likely to need one myself (I'm not a V8 kinda guy) I'm curious where the rubber is. Can you post a photo that shows the rubber part of this mount?

_________________
Locost builder and adventurer, and founder (but no longer owner) of Kinetic Vehicles

It's actually already there, Jack. The bolts are set into it along with a plate that they're attached to, which "free-floats" in the rubber casting itself. Everything is black on the part, but if you look at the photo that has "Matches Ford SN95 . . . " embedded in it, you can see the line of the rubber casting.

The rubber attaches to the big, bottom plate, and the two bolt plates free float above it in the rubber itself. That gives you the isolation as there is no metal-to-metal contact between the transmission and the chassis mount itself.

EDIT: You don't need to be using a V8 for this to be useful though. I'm using a V6, for example. However, the T5 is also used with 4-cylinder engines (Isuzu, Mazda, Pinto, Mustang) and some European cars (Jaguar). This mount is useful for one style of tailshaft on the T5, not all of them. So, it isn't a universal solution, but does have fairly wide application.

Let me know if you need more info.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886

I posed a reply to this yesterday and it disappeared today? WTF?

But here it is again . . . Based on information given to me in one of the Mustang forums, I believe you are correct. In fact, it was supposedly used on several Ford models with the C4 transmission. I didn't verify that. I just bought the Drake part.

If a person had the time and inclination, a trip to their local parts store to check out the OEM replacement parts might be worthwhile.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886