When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Just wanted to come back in with an update - had the car up on an alignment rack at the shop last weekend and noticed the engine and oil pan resting on the drag link. Ordered solid 442 motor mounts from Mondello that say they raise the engine up an inch above the factory mounting height. this should solve all of the problems plaguing the drivability of the vehicle. With the spacer removed from the trans mount the knocking went away but it still felt off, almost like a bearing was worn out. Hoping that when the new motor mounts slot into place the extra height on the front will mean a lower exiting angle for the driveshaft and more clearance to the trans tunnel. Also ordered a high torque mini starter and high flow thermostat but those issues are unrelated. Soon the car is going with me and my fiance on our honeymoon up the blue ridge parkway. I just wanted to say thank you again to everyone and next time I will more quickly defer to the expert advice on this forum.
I’m hoping they work, it’s been hit and miss with Mondello throughout the rebuild on parts that work and parts that don’t. I’m only quoting what I was told the mounts are basically flat stock steel with brackets welded on to sit above the frame perches. If I need to tweak them a bit to fit it should be manageable. I have my doubts about them but when I replaced the rubber mounts with another set the engine sat too low still. The frame mounts are correct I’m assuming these new motor mounts are too soft and let the engine squish them too much. I could t find a set of poly motor mounts, so I figured I’d try the solid ones. Trade one vibration for another.
I’m hoping they work, it’s been hit and miss with Mondello throughout the rebuild on parts that work and parts that don’t. I’m only quoting what I was told the mounts are basically flat stock steel with brackets welded on to sit above the frame perches. If I need to tweak them a bit to fit it should be manageable. I have my doubts about them but when I replaced the rubber mounts with another set the engine sat too low still. The frame mounts are correct I’m assuming these new motor mounts are too soft and let the engine squish them too much. I could t find a set of poly motor mounts, so I figured I’d try the solid ones. Trade one vibration for another.
First, I'm assuming these "442 motor mounts" are dimensionally equivalent to the 2328 mounts. Your current frame pads are designed for the 2261 motor mounts and are not designed for the others. Since the solid mounts have no compliance at all, you will not be able to force them into place as some people have done with the rubber 2328s. More to the point, even if it were possible, raising the engine above the stock location causes a slew of other problems, like exhaust and linkage clearance, driveshaft angle problems, etc. You'd have been much smarter to get new 2261 mounts (about $4 apiece at RockAuto), which would have put your motor right where it was when it left the factory (and DIDN'T scrape the fan shroud).
From what I understand the mounts that were sold to me (over the phone) by Mondello are designed for the 350 small block olds engine in 1970 and later cutlasses. He called them 442 mounts, I am merely quoting what I was told. I will see what happens when I try to install them, and let you guys know how big of a mistake I've made. I have replaced the motor mounts twice now, once when the engine was out with pioneer 2261 mounts and now again while the engine was in the car (pioneer 2261) and it still sat making contact with the drag link. The frame pads are the right shape and size from what I can tell with the information I have gathered here, and are easily as old as the rest of the frame around them.
From what I understand the mounts that were sold to me (over the phone) by Mondello are designed for the 350 small block olds engine in 1970 and later cutlasses. He called them 442 mounts, I am merely quoting what I was told. I will see what happens when I try to install them, and let you guys know how big of a mistake I've made. I have replaced the motor mounts twice now, once when the engine was out with pioneer 2261 mounts and now again while the engine was in the car (pioneer 2261) and it still sat making contact with the drag link. The frame pads are the right shape and size from what I can tell with the information I have gathered here, and are easily as old as the rest of the frame around them.
"Old" doesn't matter for the metal frame pads. And once again, if you've installed new 2261 mounts, then that isn't your problem.
This photo shows the frame mount that is in the car currently. According to your thread Joe they are the type 3 small block mounts. Which should be the correct ones for the car
This photo shows the frame mount that is in the car currently. According to your thread Joe they are the type 3 small block mounts. Which should be the correct ones for the car
Correct. These are used with 2261 mounts. The engine didn't need to be 1" higher when it left the factory, so why should it now? Find out where the problem is - incorrect core support bushings? Bend frame rail flange where the trans crossmember mounts? Wrong trans crossmember? The motor mounts are NOT your problem.
How would I know if the trans crossmember is wrong? It was in the car before the rebuild without causing issues but it was difficult to reinstall. I installed tubular rear control arms as well earlier in the project could they be causing a problem? The trans crossmember almost seemed like it was too short when I went to reinstall it.
How would I know if the trans crossmember is wrong? It was in the car before the rebuild without causing issues but it was difficult to reinstall. I installed tubular rear control arms as well earlier in the project could they be causing a problem? The trans crossmember almost seemed like it was too short when I went to reinstall it.
A photo of the crossmember where it bolts to the frame would be useful.
I'm hedging the trans cross-member is incorrect or the trans mount position is too high - pitching the engine downwards causing the fan to hit the bottom of the fan shroud.
You stated:
It was in the car before the rebuild without causing issues but it was difficult to reinstall. I installed tubular rear control arms as well earlier in the project could they be causing a problem? The trans crossmember almost seemed like it was too short when I went to reinstall it.
If you have difficulty in installation I'd focus all your attention on that cross-member (as others have suggested).
...had the car up on an alignment rack at the shop last weekend and noticed the engine and oil pan resting on the drag link.
Back of the engine is sitting far too high as the result of the incorrect trans cross-member and/or trans mounts. You know the engine & oil pan should not be touching the center (drag) link.
The center link sits below the top of the crossmember (as can be seen in Post 49). How does the oil pan hit the center link without being crushed on the crossmember first?
The center link sits below the top of the crossmember (as can be seen in Post 49). How does the oil pan hit the center link without being crushed on the crossmember first?
Obviously it doesn't hit the center link without hitting the forward center frame cross-member first. The OP did state drag link, but I'm wondering if he meant to say cross-member instead of drag link. I can't recall specifically, but there's what - about a 2" height separation between the bottom of the oil pan and the top of the forward center frame cross-member? There's no conceivable way the oil pan can be hitting the center link, but he did say it was hitting the drag link which I took to mean the center link. Hopefully he meant to say cross-member rather than drag link.
H Oil pan on front crossmember and center link Trans crossmember Trans crossmember
Here are some photos of the engine contacting the front crossmember and center link as well as trans crossmember
This part of the frame rail looks like it's pushed upward, likely from being jacked up incorrectly. That raises the crossmember closer to the floor pan and causes the front of the motor to incorrectly angle downward.
This is the part where I get to put my amateur status on display for everyone to critique.
This car in this thread is a 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass - is this correct? Yes or No
Is there ANY difference in the frame rails between a 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass and a 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Convertible?
This is the part where I get to put my amateur status on display for everyone to critique.
This car in this thread is a 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass - is this correct? Yes or No
Is there ANY difference in the frame rails between a 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass and a 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme Convertible?
Forward of the firewall, no. The differences are in the straight section of the frame rails under the rockers. The outer part of the frame rails is the same on both the open channel frames and the boxed convertible frames. The difference is that the convertible frames have the additional sections welded in to turn the open C-channel into a closed box beam.
Here is the open channel frame:
Here is the additional piece welded in to make it a convertible frame:
Thanks Joe. I don't feel quite as bad having asked that question knowing now there is in fact a difference. Evidently (which I cannot state affirmatively) my convertible trans cross-member is also mounted differently than the open-frame non-convertible. These two photos demonstrate the frame trans cross-member mounting locations on my 71 CS convertible. Appreciably different than the open channel.
This part of the frame rail looks like it's pushed upward, likely from being jacked up incorrectly. That raises the crossmember closer to the floor pan and causes the front of the motor to incorrectly angle downward.
I will get it on the frame rack at work this weekend and see about measuring and pulling. Thank you for the help!
Thanks Joe. I don't feel quite as bad having asked that question knowing now there is in fact a difference. Evidently (which I cannot state affirmatively) my convertible trans cross-member is also mounted differently than the open-frame non-convertible. These two photos demonstrate the frame trans cross-member mounting locations on my 71 CS convertible. Appreciably different than the open channel.
Correct, which is why the convertible (and Vista) crossmember is different from the one on cars with open channel frames.
Thinking this through regarding issue & possible resolution moving forward after reviewing previous statements.
(1) You stated you
...loosened the trans mount and a huge spacer fell out from above it in between the mount and the trans
.
(2) You stated
With the spacer removed from the trans mount I no longer have issues with the driveshaft hitting the trans tunnel.
(3) You stated
With the spacer removed from the trans mount the knocking went away but it still felt off, almost like a bearing was worn out.
(4) You stated
There is a clear and fresh gouge across the underside of the floor pan about where the front u-joint is located on the driveshaft.
(5) You stated
The trans mount seems to be sitting higher on the driver’s side and lower on the passenger side.
In consideration of Joe's proposed evidence regarding
...part of the frame rail looks like it's pushed upward, likely from being jacked up incorrectly. That raises the crossmember closer to the floor pan and causes the front of the motor to incorrectly angle downward
you're most likely trending in a positive direction regarding the "issue". I suggest you closely examine the driver's side of the frame at the same location where the trans cross-member attaches to the frame rail. Based upon your statements above you suspect the trans mount to be sitting higher on the driver's side and lower on the passenger side is almost counter to a "single" part of the frame rail pushed upward. IOW, you'd expect the passenger's side to be pushed upward and the driver's side to be lower - that is why I suggest you closely examine the driver's side frame rail for the same type damage.
In any case, you're going to need to identify the delta in height difference between the passenger (RH) side and the driver (LH) side. Ensure the car is sitting on a flat surface - use a level. If the level isn't long enough, place the level on a 2" x 4" board spanning the cross-member on the level surface and take height readings in as many locations as you can on both the RH & LH side where the cross-member attaches to the frame rail, at least to the bottom and to the top of the trans cross-member at the furthest points along the cross-member where the cross-member attaches to the frame rail. Be exact. If there is an indentation in the frame rail, try to determine the amount of indentation (the amount the frame rail was possibly crushed).
I have my own theory. The frame rail is a very heavy piece of thick gauge metal which would require enormous force to crush and indent the frame rail. If it was the result of being jacked incorrectly, I suspect the car would have to have fallen onto the jack to crush the frame rail or the jack gave way and the car fell onto something - possibly a concrete curb or something which was under the car while the jack gave way. I suspect what may have occurred is the car became modestly airborne or somehow came to rest on top of (1) a rail road tie, (2) a rail road metal track, or (3) a concrete curb.
Resolution: Whether you find another indentation on the LH side or you don't what possibilities exist for resolution? Without additional considerations involving a bent frame, and remaining w/in the realm of simply addressing the alignment of the transmission and the engine, I suspect your best option would be to remove the cross-member and bend the cross-member to accommodate disparities in height. Just tossing out considerations which you're going to eventually need to consider.
Last edited by Vintage Chief; August 24th, 2020 at 06:34 PM.
I have my own theory. The frame rail is a very heavy piece of thick gauge metal which would require enormous force to crush and indent the frame rail. If it was the result of being jacked incorrectly, I suspect the car would have to have fallen onto the jack to crush the frame rail or the jack gave way and the car fell onto something - possibly a concrete curb or something which was under the car while the jack gave way. I suspect what may have occurred is the car became modestly airborne or somehow came to rest on top of (1) a rail road tie, (2) a rail road metal track, or (3) a concrete curb.
Sorry, no. Put a floor jack under the open channel of the frame rail in the vicinity of the trans crossmember, jack the car up, and just watch the lower flange bend upward. A channel is not designed to take point loads in that direction. My 70 W30 frame was bent that same way when I got it.
Sorry, no. Put a floor jack under the open channel of the frame rail in the vicinity of the trans crossmember, jack the car up, and just watch the lower flange bend upward. A channel is not designed to take point loads in that direction. My 70 W30 frame was bent that same way when I got it.
Ah, well you see, I would never put a floor jack in that position - I know now why I wouldn't.
From what I understand the mounts that were sold to me (over the phone) by Mondello are designed for the 350 small block olds engine in 1970 and later cutlasses. He called them 442 mounts, I am merely quoting what I was told. I will see what happens when I try to install them, and let you guys know how big of a mistake I've made. I have replaced the motor mounts twice now, once when the engine was out with pioneer 2261 mounts and now again while the engine was in the car (pioneer 2261) and it still sat making contact with the drag link. The frame pads are the right shape and size from what I can tell with the information I have gathered here, and are easily as old as the rest of the frame around them.
The mistake that you made is you called Mondello. WE (everybody in this forum) have not heard anything good about him unless you're dealing with "Bernard Mondello". There are other places to shop around.
Re posts #41 and #44, there is a person fabricating poly mounts for Olds engines somewhere in Illinois. I recently saw his posting on Facebook/OldsmobilePerformanceEngines; name is Michael Caplinger. Good pictures there of his motor mount for those interested.
I had a '67 442 convertible many years ago that would scrape the driveshaft against the tunnel when going over a large bump or when having passengers in the back seat and a small dip or bump. I think the body mounts were shot on that vehicle causing that to happen; maybe the rear springs/shocks. Never pursued it further.
Posting another update in a long list. I tried to install the Mondello mounts, they were nowhere near the frame pads, and no amount of spacing or customizing would help them. I am in the process of returning them (paying shipping and a 20% restocking fee, which certainly stings), so live and learn there. However, I ordered another set of Pioneer motor mounts and they looked completely different from the original ones I ordered and installed. We put them in last night along with a mini starter and now the engine rides a good inch and a half above the crossmember! We measured the frame rails with a tramming tool and tape measure and the rails are not perfect but not bad. There is less than a half inch of difference from side to side and front to back, and the height is consistent. The engine sits at about a 1.5 degree slope pointing down towards the rear (not quite enough but close). The new motor mounts seem to have done the trick, and the original fan is going to be reinstalled in the shroud tonight along with a new fan clutch.
I did have another questions though, I am fairly certain the radiator is on its last legs and have been shopping for a replacement. I found a 4-core radiator and corresponding brackets and top plate from the parts place that will run around $800 all in. I also found a Duralast radiator from AutoZone that is much cheaper and looks like a copper/brass radiator in the photos but is described as aluminum/plastic. From what I can tell The A 165 radiator is a four row copper/brass unit remanufactured by Spectra. Is it worth the extra $350 to get the four row radiator from The parts place? Will a three row radiator suffice? The car currently has a three row radiator and I have the AC not installed. It routinely gets above 100 degrees where I live for 6 months of the year with 100% humidity and I drive this car as much as I can.
Last edited by markvii1; September 2nd, 2020 at 10:23 AM.
If the engine sits 1.5" above the crossmember, that is NOT correct. You have apparently forced the rubber 2328 mounts onto the frame pads designed for 2261 mounts. The 2328s are dimensionally the same as the solid mounts you have. The difference is that the rubber 2328s will distort to allow you to force the bolts into place. This will put incorrect loads on the 2328s that will cause the rubber to fail sooner rather than later. You don't want to hear this, but the frame pads that you have only work with 2261 mounts. There should be about 3/4" of clearance between the oil pan and the crossmember. At this point I'm really tired of typing the same thing over and over, so lotsa luck. Did you adjust the idler arm on the frame to get the center link as low as possible?
The new mounts are Pioneer 2261 mounts, they just seem to be manufactured better/differently, they didn't require any tweaking other than shaking the motor a bit to get the bolt hole to line up through the frame pad. I did not have to twist or distort them to get them into place. I didn't take an exact measurement last night of the engine clearance after the install as it was getting dark and wanted to get home but it sits with enough clearance to slip my finger between the oil pan and the crossmember. I apologize for frustrating you that is not my intent. My boss and I will be performing an alignment on the vehicle next week we checked the alignment while it was on the rack and it is running 3 degrees of negative caster on the LF wheel and -1.5 degrees of camber on both sides. The Hunter alignment rack was recommending around -1 degrees of caster and .5 degrees of positive camber so that is what we will aim for although it seems backwards to me. While we are there I am going to adjust the center link down as far as I can get it.
The new mounts are Pioneer 2261 mounts, they just seem to be manufactured better/differently, they didn't require any tweaking other than shaking the motor a bit to get the bolt hole to line up through the frame pad. I did not have to twist or distort them to get them into place. I didn't take an exact measurement last night of the engine clearance after the install as it was getting dark and wanted to get home but it sits with enough clearance to slip my finger between the oil pan and the crossmember. I apologize for frustrating you that is not my intent. My boss and I will be performing an alignment on the vehicle next week we checked the alignment while it was on the rack and it is running 3 degrees of negative caster on the LF wheel and -1.5 degrees of camber on both sides. The Hunter alignment rack was recommending around -1 degrees of caster and .5 degrees of positive camber so that is what we will aim for although it seems backwards to me. While we are there I am going to adjust the center link down as far as I can get it.
A finger width of clearance is about right. I call that 3/4", but I have skinny fingers.
I am fairly certain the radiator is on its last legs and have been shopping for a replacement. I found a 4-core radiator and corresponding brackets and top plate from the parts place...
Suggestion. Create another SEPARATE thread for your perceived radiator issue - if there is an issue. Maintain the topic of this thread so everyone can remain focused on your current issue. I'll say this before you create a separate radiator thread - unless you have really deep pockets and enjoy throwing money at things, perform a radiator pressure test first. Take temperature readings first. Do you have a leak? How do you know it's not cooling properly? Is it boiling over? Perform some diagnostics before you head out to drop money into something you haven't as yet demonstrates a need to be replaced. A radiator occupies only a certain volume of which that volume is comprised of coolant and metal. The greater the surface area of metal which remains in contact with the coolant the more efficient the cooling capacity. I really don't want to get into the thickness of the metal, the volume of water traversing the cores, the rate of the volume of water, etc. - but, IN GENERAL, the greater the surface area of metal which comes into contact with the coolant, the greater the ability to reduce the temperature of the coolant. Test your current radiator first, resolve this issue in this thread so we're not bouncing about.
Suggestion. Create another SEPARATE thread for your perceived radiator issue - if there is an issue. Maintain the topic of this thread so everyone can remain focused on your current issue. I'll say this before you create a separate radiator thread - unless you have really deep pockets and enjoy throwing money at things, perform a radiator pressure test first. Take temperature readings first. Do you have a leak? How do you know it's not cooling properly? Is it boiling over? Perform some diagnostics before you head out to drop money into something you haven't as yet demonstrates a need to be replaced. A radiator occupies only a certain volume of which that volume is comprised of coolant and metal. The greater the surface area of metal which remains in contact with the coolant the more efficient the cooling capacity. I really don't want to get into the thickness of the metal, the volume of water traversing the cores, the rate of the volume of water, etc. - but, IN GENERAL, the greater the surface area of metal which comes into contact with the coolant, the greater the ability to reduce the temperature of the coolant. Test your current radiator first, resolve this issue in this thread so we're not bouncing about.
I will do my best to describe the issues I'm having with the cooling system. The water pump pushes coolant through the system very well (with thermostat out peeking into the radiator through the fill cap it gushes through the tank from the tubes and hits the outside wall of the tank) and was replaced with the engine rebuild with an AC Delco unit. The fan clutch was freewheeling before the engine rebuild so I ordered a replacement for that as well. I installed the new fan clutch and fan last night to remove the flex fan I had been using previously. The flex fan was an 18" unit in place as a stop gap as the engine was sitting too low on the motor mounts creating clearance issues between the fan and fan shroud (original topic of this thread). I have now resolved the clearance issues by replacing the motor mounts as mentioned above, and the clutched 19.5" fan fits in the shroud perfectly (fan clutch operates as it should also). I have installed a Mr. Gasket high flow thermostat and two cheap thermostats all 180 degree stats. The regular thermostats caused the radiator to overflow under loads and acceleration and temperatures would climb quickly while driving. At idle the temperature will come back down. The high flow thermostat worked somewhat better but the high temperature issue was still there, just not as pronounced. If I use the blower motor to funnel air through the vents in the car, the temperature will drop as well. When the thermostats are in place the coolant flow through the radiator is barely a trickle coming through the tubes. All of the thermostats functioned properly when tested by placing in hot water. The radiator has a 13 pound cap on it that was recently replaced also.
I don't have exact temperature readings as the gauges I installed are the rally pack gauges and don't include numbers on the gauges for temperature or oil pressure. I am bringing a thermometer home to take better readings but when the vehicle idles I do not have overheating issues, only when the vehicle is accelerating or maintaining speed.
You removed the thermostat and saw water gushing through the tank (what tank?). The radiator? If it's gushing through the radiator (I assume you mean rapidly flowing with excellent volume) with no thermostat it sounds like the radiator is fine . Thus far the water pump is working, the engine block isn't blocking flow, and the radiator appears to be performing as expected. When you installed the 180° thermostats, you then notice a trickle of water moving through the system? You realize the coolant must achieve a temperature >180° in order for the thermostat to open. You realize there is a right direction and wrong direction to install a thermostat. The correct direction is outlined in your CSM. The radiator cap should be a 16psi radiator cap. With the radiator cap removed, run the engine (maybe 15-20 minutes) during this time air will be expelled from the system. Continue to add coolant until the fluid reaches the fill mark on the radiator - not above the fill mark (which is generally ~1" below the radiator neck line). You should see coolant moving through the radiator coolant system AFTER the coolant reaches 180°. Once the coolant reaches 180° the thermostat should open and you should see rapid flow of coolant through the radiator.
With the thermostat removed there is very good flow through the radiator. With the thermostat in place (any one of the three I have purchased) the temperature gauge climbs very fast while driving, and even after the thermostat is open the flow through the radiator is a trickle. It also spits coolant out through the overflow in great volume when the thermostat is in place and the vehicle is driving at and above operating temperature. At idle the temperature can come down some if it hasn't ejected too much coolant already. If I run the fan in the cabin even set on cool it helps to lower the engine temperature gauge.I misspoke on the radiator cap, the one currently on the radiator is a 16psi cap. My running theory is a partial blockage in the radiator that can be overcome by the lack of a thermostat due to increased coolant volume and velocity flowing through the entire system. The cost of hot tanking the radiator down here is over $100 - I ran a prestone flush through it after the rebuild but I know those don't do very much.
If you have what you describe as very good flow through the radiator with no thermostat installed you don't have an issue with the radiator. Take the car for a drive with no thermostat. You will hurt nothing. Does the temperature increase under acceleration/load? BTW, I understand you have not stated any temperatures as of yet. But, run the car with no thermostat - what happens with the gauge?
The temperature increases under load without the thermostat. It will slowly increase temperature from a cold start until the 1/4 mark on the gauge, then once I am driving the temperature will climb under acceleration and I will occasionally smell coolant under harder acceleration (when I check under the hood after I smell coolant it has spewed from the overflow line next to the radiator). After a drive I just did to retrieve lunch from up the street (4 or 5 miles each way, couple stoplights, 50 mph speed limit the whole way) on the way back the needle had climbed up to the middle of the gauge.
Last edited by markvii1; September 3rd, 2020 at 11:07 AM.
August 24th, 2020, 11:47 AM
