View Full Version : s&p plates, ats crossmember, engine isnt level *pics
i finally installed my ls1 and t56. i am using car shop (s&p) style engine plates, energy motor mounts, ATS cross member, and energy tranny mount.
so far i have jacked the trans up all the way into the body, cut the hole in the tunnel for the shifter and added an additional 1/4 inch of plate between the trans tail shaft and the poly mount to keep the trans up.
when i place a level on the carb flange of my intake the rear of the engine needs to come up another 1/4 inch to be level. does it have to be 100% level or can i get away with a tad bit of tilt without starving any cylinders?
check these pics. does everything look ok? or is my trans tilted down too far? its jacked up all the way into the body i tried denting the floor up as much as i could.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/level-1.jpg
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/shifter-1.jpg
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/shifter2-1.jpg
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/shims-1.jpg
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/headerstoframe-1.jpg
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/belltofirewall-1.jpg
SatisTraction
11-23-2007, 07:18 AM
pinion angle is what you ned to worry about. do a search on this board. i bet that rear needs to come up 2" or more.
trapin
11-23-2007, 10:36 AM
oinion angle is what you ned to worry about. do a search on this board. i bet that rear needs to come up 2" or more.
Yeah...welcome to my nightmare, Justin. You're about where I'm at right now. Although I think I'll be done today.
dhutton
11-23-2007, 11:32 AM
Just wondering if this is due to the difference between the short and tall style sbc engine mount stands. Do you know which ones you used?
Don
i have the taller 327 style mounts. i had to beat the hell out of my hookers to get them in there. so far the #7 tube has been dented to clear the powersteering box and the pitmon arm. i still need to grind the pitmon arm down as well.
i dont want to take the engine out again but i might have too.
SatisTraction
11-23-2007, 02:13 PM
there is no way i would beat my new headers. the hooker mounts fit like a glove with the hooker headers.
How much clearance do you have under the engine to the front cross over. I'm thinking you need to use the lower engine mounts. The engine can lean back some but you have to know your pinion angle
im pretty sure the tranny is smashing into the tunnel some where. i had to remove a rubber bumper from the top of the trans directly in front of the shifter. that gave me 1/2in more space for the trans to come up.
you are most likely right about switching to the 302/350 mounts. they will lower the engine down another 3/4 of an inch according to davispzzi's web site. the 327 mounts are 2 1/4 to the frame to center for both the left and right whereas the 350/302 mounts are 1 7/16 left and 1 1/2 right from frame to center.
crawled under the car again and found where the trans is smashed into the floor. its directly behind the bellhousing, im pretty sure that little plastic tube on the top of the trans is getting pinched. here is a shot of the floor area where the trans is making contact.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/floor-1.jpg
and here is a shot of my oil pan to frame clearance. i can barely get my fingers under the pan! so i really doubt i can switch to the shorter frame stands.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/oilpantoframe-1.jpg
i may have to yank the engine and take a BFH to the trans tunnel.
dhutton
11-24-2007, 07:13 AM
Probably a stupid question, but are all your subframe mount bushings in good shape and compressed to the same thickness? Solid bushings might buy you slightly more clearance since they do not compress.
Don
SatisTraction
11-24-2007, 07:26 AM
with the shorter mounts your engine will not be at such an angle so you may have more room under the pan there. it depends on the pivot point.
i used a stock pan so that pan may be deeper in the front.
i replaced the body bushings about 6 years ago? when i tore the subframe out of it. it has only been driven this past year, shes only seen 265 miles before i put the ls1 in. im also using bolt in subframe connectors.
ok i did a lil math here. i found a diagram of the dimensions of the energy motor mounts.
the short and wide style are 2 5/8 wide and 1 3/4 tall
327 frame mout is 2.25 tall (L&R)
plus energy mount 1.75 tall
=4.00
the tall and narrow style are 2 3/8 wide and 2 3/16 tall
302 frame mount is 1.4375 tall (L) 1 7/16
plus energy mount 2.1875 tall
=3.625
302 frame mount is 1.5 tall (R) 1 1/2
plus energy mount 2.1875 tall
=3.685
i hope that is enough room to lower the engine and lift the rear of the trans.
Vegas69
11-24-2007, 04:01 PM
This is one of the reasons I decided to stick with a tko600. Seems like most have to change the tunnel for clearance. Take a look at SW's camaro on detroitspeeds website.
any other ideas? im going to classic industries on monday for the shorter frame stands and possibly motor mounts (they are priced more than summit).
or am i stuck with cutting or hammering the hell out of my trans tunnel?
SatisTraction
11-25-2007, 12:15 PM
whatever you decide to do, i would research it and buy matching parts or parts that are known to work well together.
trapin
11-26-2007, 09:11 AM
Justin, for a manual trans I would have just went with all ATS stuff since Tyler already did all the homework. Or are his conversion plates and mounts not compatable with the Hooker headers?
TitoJones
11-26-2007, 09:33 AM
This is one of the reasons I decided to stick with a tko600. Seems like most have to change the tunnel for clearance. Take a look at SW's camaro on detroitspeeds website.
They used 1/2 drop subframe body bushings; hence the large modifcation to the tunnel. The T56 will fit with stock height body bushings, you just need to cut a hole for the shifter.
Tyler
Vegas69
11-26-2007, 09:48 AM
They used 1/2 drop subframe body bushings; hence the large modifcation to the tunnel. The T56 will fit with stock height body bushings, you just need to cut a hole for the shifter.
Tyler
Gotcha!
Payton King
11-26-2007, 10:03 AM
style motor mounts. I ran into this very same problem. Also, I am not sure what pan you are running? With an f body pan it should clear fine with the short motor mounts and if you are staying with the stock rear steer, the pan will need to be modified.
It will be tight but should fit with the stock height sub frame bushings. If you went with the lower ones, then you must raise the tunnel.
I personally would give Tyler or anyone else a call at ATS and let them hook you up on a front set their mounts. Good people over there!
i went to classic industries and got some 302/350 frame stands and tall/narrow motor mounts.
the 302/350 stands and tall/narrow mounts are 3.6xx inches from frame to block.
the 327 stands and short/wide motor mounts are 4 inches from frame to block.
if that doesnt work out i will swap the s&p plates from either side of the block and flip the motor mount upside down like the autokraft and ats plates.
like so.
regular s&p style
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif
flipped like the ats style
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif
Tony,
to answer your question, Rodder is the only one who i know of who has used autokraft (ats) style mounts, autokraft pan, 327 stands, energy mounts, and hooker headers along with a T56. almost a mirror of my setup. he got his headers to work just like im making mine work. ... with a BFH! haha
I FIXED IT!
first off, the short frame stands are junk. even with the short and wide energy mounts the autokraft pan sat on the frame. i finally went back to using the 327 stands and energy mounts. my measurements were way off. according to david pozzis page the 327 stands are 2.25 inches from frame to bolt hole. mine came in at 2 inches. also the energy mount was said to be 1.75 inches thick. mine cam in at 1.5 from the top of the mount to the bolt hole.
ITS WASN'T A MOUNT ISSUE! IT WAS THE T-56!
i dont know why chevy casted this ******* tab on the drivers side of the trans, but it was causing all of my mounting problems. with no frame stands in the car my dad and i pulled the header and pulled the engine forward. i took a sawzall to the mount and all was well after that. the engine always sat on the frame stands well but now both motor mount bolts slide in and out like nothing. also i took all the shims off of the poly trans mount and just used the supplied plate that came with mount.
tab on the side of the trans
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/tabontrans-1.jpg
after cutting the tab here is the dent in the floor. its dark but it was a huge dent
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/dentinfloor-1.jpg
BEFORE CUTTING THE TAB
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/headerstoframe-1.jpg
AFTER CUTTING THE TAB
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/headertoframe-1.jpg
trapin
11-28-2007, 12:56 PM
Good work.
This LS1 stuff is fun, isn't it?:lmao:
loads of fun.
im starting to think i should have used a defferent oil pan. the autokraft seems too deep in the front, the tierod will smack the pan, and it leaves the flywheel exposed.
im thinking a stock modified F body pan would have been better for the money.
the only reason the short stands didnt work was because of the oil pan.
SatisTraction
11-28-2007, 02:39 PM
did you see my post on the factory pan mods i did? it was a VERY small notch and the factory baffles are still in there.
https://www.pro-touring.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36279
i would need to cut the hell out of the front sump as well. the s&p plates im using pull the engine forward a lot more than the hooker plates.
excellent work DCx. glad you got that puppy in there bro'.
thank you for the kind words.
since the carb minifold still sits at a slight angle think one of these would help out?
its a moroso 5* wedge spacer
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2007/11/71065030-1.jpg
CarlC
11-29-2007, 07:38 AM
Factory cars have the engine sitting at a downward angle. I'll check mine later today, but something like 3-4* rings a bell.
trapin
11-29-2007, 03:52 PM
loads of fun.
im starting to think i should have used a defferent oil pan. the autokraft seems too deep in the front, the tierod will smack the pan, and it leaves the flywheel exposed.
im thinking a stock modified F body pan would have been better for the money.
the only reason the short stands didnt work was because of the oil pan.
That's interesting, I have no clearance problems with my pan and I have the S&P plates. I did think it weird that the flywheel was so exposed. But then I've driven the car without a flywheel cover on it before and it wasn't a problem.
the distance from my pan to the frame is non existant. its not touching but it is damn close!
tony, are you running energy mounts? when i finally took them off the engine they were 1.5 inches tall from the top of the mount to the bolt centerline. my factory rubber mounts were 1.75 inches from the top to the bolt centerline.
but they again if my engine comes up any higher it will hit the tunnel again.
trapin
11-30-2007, 05:14 AM
I'm not sure what the measurements are but I am running stock rubber mounts.
Powered by vBulletin®