MTFCA Forum

I'm installing a rebuilt 1915 engine. I see numerous Model T engine installation tips on our forum, but I'm wondering if there are any pads installed under the two rear engine mounts (leather, cloth, or ?).

I have cut up some old Bondo spreaders to use as a pad under the rear engine mounts. Got the tip from a friend.

Cut a piece the right size, drill a 3/8 or 7/16 hole for the bolt. Easiest to get the engine in the frame and then pry it up slightly to slip the pad in.

Not originally.

I don't think Ford put anything under them, and I don't think there is much to gain by doing so. Both the front and rear axles are rigidly attached to the engine unit and depend on it to keep the axles tracking properly, so the engine needs to be securely located in the frame. Ford put wooden blocks between the sides of the engine mount arms and the car's frame. These had a bolt through them, but it was not to be tightened, only snugged. The wood blocks served to limit flex in the engine mount arms and thus to limit sideways movement of the rear of the engine transmission unit on rough roads.

They're wood. Part #3083. There has been much discussion. I use them. I also use engine pans. I use good rims, so I don't waste money on flaps. I use stock ignition because it's more reliable than a disturbutor. I paint my wheels body color, like Ford. Do my comments upset anybody? I'll lie awake all night, worrying about that.

There is no easy modification to get vibration out of a Model T. A well-balanced engine and transmission can make a big difference in vibration, but the engine mounts are pretty much what they are.

still better than a harley

My car came without the wood blocks. I bought a set of blocks and the bolts that go with them and installed them. I believe that the car tracks a little better with them as compared to without them, and vibration may have been reduced a little, but my car had a well-balanced, smooth running engine and a tight chassis to begin with. Limiting movement of the engine/transmission prevents the front and rear axles from self-steering when the wheels run over bumps and holes in the road. (Especially the front axle)

Ride a late model Harley. The 8 valve motor is quite smooth.

TXGOAT2 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 21, 2025 3:46 pm

Ride a late model Harley. The 8 valve motor is quite smooth.

no interest past 1953... and then I'm looking for a Matchless 500....

Fords I can tolerate up to about 1978 if it's a pickup... 1967 if it's a car.... Dodge, similar timeline....

mortier wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 21, 2025 3:18 pm

. . . [are] there . . . any pads installed under the two rear engine mounts . . . ?

No.
Wood blocks in the frame channel as noted, with their purpose.

Making sure rhe engine is solidly bolted to the frame is important.

Just follow the procedures in the Ford Service Manual.

A revolutionary concept: When in doubt, read the directions.

Those rear engine mounts are part of the grounding of the engine. Plastic would insulate and prevent grounding.

In my introduction to the beloved Model T I may have collected all of the misinformation possible but I was lead to believe that there was a
Ford update that called for eliminating the blocks & side bolts to prevent breaking the ears off of the pan & installing bolts in the top only
with heavy springs to secure the mounts & that is what I have done on all of my T's & have had very good results & I do put a thin firm plastic
shim under the ears. I would think a firm leather would work too. There are some interesting comments on this thread.
Wilhelm, Harleys vibrate? I never noticed & I rode this one for almost 30 years If you ride British bikes I would think you would know what vibration is ( just joking ) I'll bet you know what a gudgeon pin is though.
I don't like to disagree with Steve J. because he is one of those that keep the hobby pure, but we are men & we don't need any instructions.
If we have to refer to the manual then they are corrections! If anyone is interested I have a new set of blocks & bolts I would sell @ a
reasonable price + shipping.
Craig.

Ford quit using the wood blocks on late TT trucks, citing issues with trucks used on very rough roads. The point made above about engine grounding is a valid one. If you look at the way the T chassis is built, you will see that the engine unit serves both as a frame crossmember and as one of the 3 mounting points of both the front and rear axle. If you mount the engine loosely, you can expect less stable tracking. You also risk enlarging the engine mount holes in the frame and having the engine mount bolts girdled due to vibration and chassis flexing causing movement between the bolt and the frame. You will also compromise the electrical pathway of the starter motor circuit. There is no valid reason to put anything under the rear motor mounts, and several good reasons not to do so. Your car; your choice.

Pat/Craig, I can add my own experience to that.
When I bought my late (Aug) '25 TT Closed cab back in the 80's and tore it down, I found some interesting stuff.
The original rear pan ears had obviously fatigued and had been removed in its past, replaced by aftermarket plate steel ears bolted to the pan.
There were no side bolts or blocks. (I actually just now learned something new about TT's I hadn't known before about changes to the mounting bolt arrangement)
The top frame mounts were not solidly bolted, where both sides were mounted with a spring bolt similar to a radiator mount. Not being aware at the time that this waa probably stock, I assumed it was an aftermarket fix.

The truck had lived its life as a parcel delivery truck in Oakland CA, where I imagine it traveled more paved roads than rough, eg, not enduring much flex issues....
However, with that setup, flex obviously did its job well...or...maybe not so well....
Probably explaining the fatigue/loss of the original ears, causing major ovaling out of the frame rail top mount bolt holes, and evidence of the original ears flexing/pounding sufficiently to cause the curled edges of the ears to gouge deep grooves into the frame.

I repaired the frame, and returned to what I presumed to be the standard solid mount top/side/block. But, I also witnessed the damage the 'new' flexible mount arrangement caused..

Somewhere in Ford literature, probably a late era service bulletin, there is a paragraph or two about deleting the wood blocks on TT trucks in severe service on very bad roads. I probably came across it on the Cimoreli site, but I don't remember for sure. If I had a TT in severe service on bad roads, I'd consider using one of those belly sling devices. Keeping the springs well-oiled would help, too, by reducing the amount of flex the frame would have to bear. That's true of a T or TT operating on very bad roads or under heavy loads. If I come across the information again, I'll make a note of where it is.

Steve Jelf wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 21, 2025 10:41 pm

A revolutionary concept: When in doubt, read the directions.

“. . . ain’t never read a manual cuz that’s like cheatin’
He don’t mind the grease on his hands when he’s eatin’. . .”

Steve Jelf wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 21, 2025 3:36 pm

They're wood. Part #3083. There has been much discussion. I use them. I also use engine pans. I use good rims, so I don't waste money on flaps. I use stock ignition because it's more reliable than a disturbutor. I paint my wheels body color, like Ford. Do my comments upset anybody? I'll lie awake all night, worrying about that.

Not a problem here. It's your car - do what you want with it.

TXGOAT2 wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 22, 2025 11:07 am

Somewhere in Ford literature, probably a late era service bulletin, there is a paragraph or two about deleting the wood blocks on TT trucks in severe service on very bad roads. I probably came across it on the Cimoreli site, but I don't remember for sure. If I had a TT in severe service on bad roads, I'd consider using one of those belly sling devices. Keeping the springs well-oiled would help, too, by reducing the amount of flex the frame would have to bear. That's true of a T or TT operating on very bad roads or under heavy loads. If I come across the information again, I'll make a note of where it is.

Here is that info, remember though, the TT has a larger and thicker frame, so there is less flex than a T, but the TT was usually hauling huge loads on roads as you described. Plus this is a late change in 1925

How this really helps from preventing crankcase arm fractures is for me an unusual result of eliminating the larger TT wood block and side bolt. Would be interesting to know the engineering of that deletion.

IMO, doing the spring thing, where the block is removed and the upper bolt has a spring under it on a T frame isn't the best way at all.

Ford used the best designs for the lightweight T, with 3 point suspension of the engine, front axle, and rear axle.






T chassis found with missing wood block and bolt resulting in this

I think broken pan arms and broken frames are the result of high service hours under harsh conditions, or outright abuse. A lot of cars probably ran with collision damage, too, not to mention dry rusty springs and built up springs to carry extra loads.