What are the simplest ( LS ) motor mounts for 1969 camaro? and where should i buy the

[burnoutbruce]

Where should i buy them? thanks guys

[BulldawgMusclecars]

Simplest as in easiest to just bolt on, drop the motor in, and have headers that fit with your mounts with no guesswork, no altering the headers, etc?

https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?82110-All-BRP-Musclerods-Items-on-Sale!!!-LSx-and-5.0-swap-kits-Brake-conversions-etc!

I may be a little biased, but having tried the typical plate systems and headers that "sort of" fit, I don't use anything else, unless BRP/Musclerods doesn't make a kit yet for the application.

[69importkilla]

It is kinda a pain in the a**, everyone has a system. But BRP seems to be the way to go..

[Andrew McBride]

There are different variables. I can tell you that carshop stock location plates and dynatech long tubes clear just fine with a stock power steering box.

[Trevor @ Texas Speed]

We used the Dirty Dingo adjustable mounts on my wagon, and they worked great! It allows you to play with the position of the engine front to back. After the issues we ran into for clearance on my '67 Chevelle LS3 swap, the adjustability was a nice feature. We will offer them, as well as other options, in our retrofit section of our website that should be up and running in the upcoming weeks!

Trevor

[indebt69]

Car shop 1" set back for me and Dynatech headers are fine.

[69blackwhss]

I have a 69 Camaro going ls1 also buddy. Am going with the hooker header mounts
An there header so I can use stock oil pan

[Z06vet]

didnt know the hooker setup allowed use of stock Fbody pan- put up some pics when you get everything installed. I just bought a pan, but would like to see this for future builds.
Scott

[hifi875]

I'm running brp. Everything fit great I used a vette accy system w air. Also am using their headers.

[Taylor1969]

Simplest has to be the S&P mounts with Stainless Works headers. Make sure to use 1972 Chevelle Rubber/Poly mounts if you use this setup.

[Taylor1969]

for more info...

I went LS1 stock radiator - pick it up at the autoparts store for <$100. Fabbed up some simple mounts and it was installed in under an hour. On top of that I put factory LS1 Fans (scored a set on amazon.com for under $100 also.

Go Mast pan... I installed one and I love it
Go Stainless Works... great build quality and Frank has a great deal on them right now
Go S&P Mounts... pretty much guaranteed to work and Frank has those also

Get these main hard parts and the install will be a breeze. I had an issue finding the right engine side mounts and ended up using 1972 Chevelle mounts and it mounted up perfect (quick call to S&P and they had me on the right path).

Also get the Magnaflow catback... installed easily, and it is really high quality. Pick them up from Frank or ebay and you'll be set.

Hector @ Rick's Stainless is the man to talk to about tanks

Tom @ Speed Inc. is the man to talk to about fuel lines, fittings, etc. He did a package for me that included all of the hoses, adaptors, vette regulator, fittings, etc. I had everything I need.

Chris

[evostilo]

I have never droped an engine in any kind of car but with BRP MUSCLE RODS 68 camaro full LS1/4L60E kit w/full length headers it basicaly droped its self in and it looks real clean compared to others, you can not run a stock F-body oil pan but they did give me a deal on a new one, Only down side is price

[Taylor1969]

I have never droped an engine in any kind of car but with BRP MUSCLE RODS 68 camaro full LS1/4L60E kit w/full length headers it basicaly droped its self in and it looks real clean compared to others, you can not run a stock F-body oil pan but they did give me a deal on a new one, Only down side is price

Other downside is that it pushes the engine forward and higher from what I understand. I have purchased from BRP before and was not very happy with the engineering and standards from a safety perspective. We installed a shock bar in the rear of my dads car... turns out it was made with a very low strength tube. The shocks completely twisted and sheared the bar under stress.

[BulldawgMusclecars]

Other downside is that it pushes the engine forward and higher from what I understand. I have purchased from BRP before and was not very happy with the engineering and standards from a safety perspective. We installed a shock bar in the rear of my dads car... turns out it was made with a very low strength tube. The shocks completely twisted and sheared the bar under stress.

Were you running it with regular shocks, or coilovers? I haven't sold or installed this piece, but haven't heard of any issues with them til now, either.

[hifi875]

I have the shock bar w my leaf springs on my 69 with no problems. I have several autocross runs several passes at the strip also

[Taylor1969]

I have the shock bar w my leaf springs on my 69 with no problems. I have several autocross runs several passes at the strip also

What shocks are you using? Have part numbers and brand?

Thanks,
Chris

[hifi875]

right now just some kyb s. Putting a Scott Mock rear suspension on this fall that came with some qa1s.

[BigMal69]

I used tall mounts from a 1967 Camaro and Carshop plates.

[TXsilverado]

Other downside is that it pushes the engine forward and higher from what I understand. I have purchased from BRP before and was not very happy with the engineering and standards from a safety perspective. We installed a shock bar in the rear of my dads car... turns out it was made with a very low strength tube. The shocks completely twisted and sheared the bar under stress.

I know i'm digging, but I keep hearing people say that BRP puts a motor too forward and too high, but there are never any pictures to go along with those claims. I bougth BRP because my adaptor plates have my alternator stuffed into the frame with ls3 accessories so I was hoping to move the motor up and forward a little. is it ridiculous high and forward or what?

[Toddoky]

Raising the engine has a negative affect on the vehicle center of gravity, room available for intake clearance and your ability to achieve optimized U-joint working angles. The BRP kit was designed to allow use of the Hummer pan, not to optimize the functional geometry of the car.

[TXsilverado]

anyone know exactly how much higher the BRP mounts sits the motor than a conversion mount? I need to go up some as my alternator is buried into the crossmember. it wouldn't hurt my feelings if it went up an inch or so. my car is more of a pro-street style than a pro-touring. I wont be hauling ass around any corners. just straight line stuff.

I guess I could always modify the mounts to sit it down exactly where I need it to sit.

[Toddoky]

If you lower the engine, the headers you have that we're designed to work with the height of the BRP engine brackets will experience interference with the steering box (since they route next to it), so be prepared to dimple them in that location. Also the collectors will hang lower under the car.

[hifi875]

this is from 2009. If i had it to do all over again i would do the holley setup. Toddoky is correct in his statements

[TXsilverado]

that doesn't look horribly high or forward. as long as my hood shuts with the 3.6 liter kenne bell, i'll be happy. i went with the BRP setup for the 2" primary/3.5" collector option that wasn't available anywhere else without spending major cash.

I do plan to measure how much farther forward and higher the motor mounts put me. I think it has dirty dingo mounts on it now. i'll post the info for the next person looking into BRP mounts. the LS2 s10 i parted out for the Camaro had BRP mounts, and the fit/finish was great.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/04/4C5CA97B86D64BE88F6696F65EC02AC9_zpsqlru-1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/StewartSmith/media/4C5CA97B-86D6-4BE8-8F66-96F65EC02AC9_zpsqlruck0o.jpg.html)

[TXsilverado]

hifi875 has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space.

had an off subject question for you.

[Toddoky]

Fit and finish of components is certainly important, but the functional dynamic drivetrain geometry achieved from their installation is even more so...especially in a supercharged application. What's the point of maximizing the performance of an engine and installing it in a car in a way that does not optimize the U-joint working angles so that they are at a minimum for high RPM operation?

[TXsilverado]

brp advertises it as being set up for optimal driveline angles. I guess we'll know for sure once it's in and measured. I've raced extended cab Silverado's with stroker motors and nitrous in the past with less than stellar driveline angles. I'm used to running N/A and nitrous setups to 7,500 so this 6,600 rpm supercharged motor doesn't seem like a high rpm in my world. in my mind, it short shifts every time just because my ears are used to hearing the motor rev more. 33" tires also help slow down the RPM that driveshaft needs to make MPH.

ultimately if it's way out of whack, I'll call out BRP on it. i'll also make sure to post measurements of exactly how the moutns moved the motor, and the driveline angles for anyone looking to buy in the future. I couldn't find jack when doing my research.

the functional dynamic of my current adaptor plates is a torn motor mount that grounded the positive post of my alternator to the frame. it's not a good feeling watching a heavy gauge wire melt while you have no tools to remove the battery cable.

[TXsilverado]

if I decide I don't like the BRP mounts, is there a such thing as running a taller polyurethane mount on the frame side that would bolt to the adaptor plate? i would keep my mounts if the motor sat about 1/2-1" higher. i have a feeling that the 2" primary isn't going to play nice with the upper control arms i'm running.

[Toddoky]

It's your car and money; I wish you the best in achieving your goals.

[TXsilverado]

thanks. unfortunately figuring out the combination of parts necessary to achieve my goals is frustrating and expensive lol. I wish I could just swap accessories and put the alternator up top or leave my engine in place but push the motor up some.

[TXsilverado]

ok, I've been beating google looking for any answers I can get. from what I can tell, BRP has redesigned their motor motor mounts. they used to weld brakcets to a plate, now they bend them in an offset position which would push the motor further back than they did in the past. this is all based on google photos....it makes me a little more optimistic, but I wont know for sure until I mount it all up. here is a pic of the newest mount. it looks like they pushed the motor back a decent amount from previous mounts.

newest mount pushing motor back some (still tall)
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/04/1st20gen20mount-1.jpg

here was what a motor mount looked like on a 1st gen build thread from 2010. the new style should sit the motor further back than the old style...it will still probably be pretty far forward in the grand scheme of things but better than it was I guess.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/04/216581d1266704866afrls269camaroimg_3554-1.jpg

[hifi875]

those are what i have.

[TXsilverado]

those are what i have.

the newest bent mounts, or the older welded mounts?


my final ramble for now lol...the engine going up a little may correct some driveline stuff on my car since I sit so low. this is how it sits on a 15" wheel.

thanks for all of the help, and listening to my clueless rambling :)

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/04/E0AD1DDFF94949B9BEFAAFBEBD9F3743_zpsyiua-1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/StewartSmith/media/2014-06/E0AD1DDF-F949-49B9-BEFA-AFBEBD9F3743_zpsyiuaxkid.jpg.html)

[hifi875]

i have a driveline harmonic that im working on. it hits at about 80mph. IM not using their tranny mount and that could be the issue so..... My oil pan does hang lower than i would like but ive never hit anything and ive done 3 power tour long hauls plus alot of other stuff. That being said I still would rather have the Holley setup. It wasn't available when i did my swap 6 years ago.

[TXsilverado]

i have a driveline harmonic that im working on. it hits at about 80mph. IM not using their tranny mount and that could be the issue so..... My oil pan does hang lower than i would like but ive never hit anything and ive done 3 power tour long hauls plus alot of other stuff. That being said I still would rather have the Holley setup. It wasn't available when i did my swap 6 years ago.

when you said you have "that" mount, which one did you mean? I posted pictures of 2 different versions. I would be 100% open to trying the holly setup, but i'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. I want to run 2" primary and 3.5" collectors for the blown 408, and I'm also stuck with the LS3 accessory system that hangs my alternator off of the bottom driver's side of the motor. my adaptors are stuffing that alternator into the frame and I like to lost the car when it finally did ground out the positive post on the alternator.

btw, I checked out your build thread. awesome car! post up a thread with your trans output shaft angle, driveshaft angle and pinion angle and i'm sure we can come up with suggestions to cure that 80mph driveline vibration.

[Z06vet]

For what its worth, raising the engine in a first gen thats lowered creates a problem with driveline angle. The lower the car is, the worse effect this has. You can cut the trans tunnel to give you room to raise the trans tailshaft, but at some point your header collector will be against the floor. Since youre at a point where everything is still out of the car, you may want to consider going with the holley setup, or similar setup that puts the driveline in the best position possible. It sucks spending extra money but in the long run you'll probably be ahead of the game and out enjoying the car. After doing about 10 LS swaps in first gens, I have found several areas where I ended up doing things twice because I wasnt happy with the end results after putting some miles on the cars. This is def one of those areas. Keep us posted on your progress.

[Toddoky]

Why not just notch your subframe for the clearance you need for your alternator?

[TXsilverado]

For what its worth, raising the engine in a first gen thats lowered creates a problem with driveline angle. The lower the car is, the worse effect this has. You can cut the trans tunnel to give you room to raise the trans tailshaft, but at some point your header collector will be against the floor. Since youre at a point where everything is still out of the car, you may want to consider going with the holley setup, or similar setup that puts the driveline in the best position possible. It sucks spending extra money but in the long run you'll probably be ahead of the game and out enjoying the car. After doing about 10 LS swaps in first gens, I have found several areas where I ended up doing things twice because I wasnt happy with the end results after putting some miles on the cars. This is def one of those areas. Keep us posted on your progress.

do you know of any 2" primary 3.5" collector longtubes that will work with the holley setup?


Why not just notch your subframe for the clearance you need for your alternator?

i'm considering this, but i dont think the headers laying in my garage floor will work without the brp mounts.

i got out and rolled on the floor tonight with a recovering shattered knee cap.

the mounts that are in the car are speed and performance (S&P) that supposedly move the motor back 1". after some measuring the BRP mounts will move the engine forward 1.5" from where it currently sits. not a huge deal...but the motor will go up around 2 dang inches! i dont think i would be able to close my hood. i'm calling BRP tomorrow to discuss my options. i'm sure if i test fit it all, it's mine at that point. i'm willing to notch the cross member if the headers will fit with the S&P mounts.

[hifi875]

i have the ones exactly like in your pic above. I am running their mid length headers as well. These are pics from like 2010

[TXsilverado]

hifi, i'm looking at the differences in the engine plate that bolts to the motor. both pictures show a different mount on the motor side. the frame mount has not changed over the years, but the bracket that bolts to the motor has changed significantly. The pictures above in post 31 shows the difference. one has the brackets welded in place in center of the bracket where the other is bent into place and moves the motor approximately 1" further back than the older welded style.

[Toddoky]

Here's an image that will give you an idea as to the installed height provided by the Hooker engine mounting brackets...compare the height of the passenger side engine bracket seen in the photo posted of the BRP passenger side bracket.126228

[TXsilverado]

Hooker is a big company...do you think they would be willing to make me a 2" primary 3.5 collector longtube that works with their mounts? Or does another brand in that size fit? Ill spend the money to make it right...

arh and speedtech make a big header for the 69 camaro. anyone fitted them with the holley mounts?

[Toddoky]

The specific structure of Holley's exhaust manufacturing operations prevents being able to accomodate special request orders without loosing money in the process. I can also attest to the fact that it wouldn't be possible to build a 2" version of the current design Hooker headers as they wouldn't clear the steering components without interference somewhere.

[TXsilverado]

Ive read where people have fit arh headers with Dirty dingo and found where a arh rep said their headers were designed with detroit speed mounts. I cant find anyone using them with hooker mounts but the arh website advertises them as a fit for ls motors in the stock position. Any major drawbacks to either of those mounts? Do they sit higher/lower than the hooker setup?

Not many arh users out there posting on the net. I assume its due to the cost of them in comparison to several others. Im stuck on the 2" primary and 3.5 collector

[Toddoky]

Ive read where people have fit arh headers with Dirty dingo and found where a arh rep said their headers were designed with detroit speed mounts. I cant find anyone using them with hooker mounts but the arh website advertises them as a fit for ls motors in the stock position. Any major drawbacks to either of those mounts? Do they sit higher/lower than the hooker setup?

Not many arh users out there posting on the net. I assume its due to the cost of them in comparison to several others. Im stuck on the 2" primary and 3.5 collector

The Hooker 1st-gen specific mount kit places the engine lower in the subframe than any swap plate style mounts do that install with the stock frame stands, including the DSE mounts. The fore/aft mounted engine position provided by the Hooker brackets is also unique and generally not compatible with headers designed for use in the stock/1" set-back engine location (usually causes interference issues with the steering box).

[sheck44]

I am using the Dirty Dingo's with ARH headers on my LS7 ... lots of clearance, perfect fit, TONS of ground clearance

Cheers
Steve

[TXsilverado]

I am using the Dirty Dingo's with ARH headers on my LS7 ... lots of clearance, perfect fit, TONS of ground clearance

Cheers
Steve

what size ARH headers are you using & which oil pan are you using?

[sheck44]

Headers are 1 7/8ths and pan is the Holley
Cheers
Steve


https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/06/IMG_3279_zpsaohnbfpv-1.jpg (http://s264.photobucket.com/user/SCOBRA48/media/WAAAY%20OTT/IMG_3279_zpsaohnbfpv.jpg.html)

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/06/IMG_3275_zpsgdiybc6b-1.jpg (http://s264.photobucket.com/user/SCOBRA48/media/WAAAY%20OTT/IMG_3275_zpsgdiybc6b.jpg.html)

[TXsilverado]

thanks! they look like they tuck up great too!

that trans x-member looks nice. is that home made, or bought from someone?

[Toddoky]

So as to provide you a completely clear picture, the Holley pan he is using is the 302-1, which won't install in a 1st-gen subframe using the lower installed engine position provided by the Hooker engine brackets you inquired about previously...you would have to cut a 1" deep channel into the engine crossmember to utilize the 302-1 pan with the Hooker engine brackets.

[TXsilverado]

So as to provide you a completely clear picture, the Holley pan he is using is the 302-1, which won't install in a 1st-gen subframe using the lower installed engine position provided by the Hooker engine brackets you inquired about previously...you would have to cut a 1" deep channel into the engine crossmember to utilize the 302-1 pan with the Hooker engine brackets.

you're full of info, and I appreciate the help! I currently have the S&P adaptor brackets installed. do the holley mounts sit lower than the S&P? I did find a thread where the ARH headers worked with the S&P mounts, but it was an EXTREMELY tight fit around the steering box with a 1 7/8 header. I don't think a 2" would make it.

I think my current pan is a H3 pan. I need to look it over and see if I can find any markings on it. I saved a ton of money buying someone elses project, but not knowing the little details is driving me crazy lol.

[TXsilverado]

I found this on the holly website and will throw it in for anyone doing research in the future.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2016/06/3021_3022comp1-1.jpg?width=583

[TXsilverado]

and some information I've learned for anyone doing reseach in the future. the BRP motor mounts would have moved my engine approximately 1.5" forward and 2" up from the S&P mounts that i'm currently running. my hood wouldn't shut with the blower in that position.

It's looking like my next attempt at 2"-3.5" headers will be the ARH and dirty dingo combination. fingers crossed.

for us noobs, anyone know why dirty dingo lists different part numbers for the 67-68 vs the 69?

[Bad94]

The Hooker 1st-gen specific mount kit places the engine lower in the subframe than any swap plate style mounts do that install with the stock frame stands, including the DSE mounts. The fore/aft mounted engine position provided by the Hooker brackets is also unique and generally not compatible with headers designed for use in the stock/1" set-back engine location (usually causes interference issues with the steering box).


Can you run a LS7 oil pan with your mount?

[Motown 454]

I have the S&P plates that mount the engine in the same place where the SBC bellhousing bolts up. I have The ARH 1-7/8 headers on my 69 Camaro. There is plenty of room around the steering box and they are tucked up tight to the floor. I never tried the 2"

[Toddoky]

Yes, the Hooker engine brackets provide a lower engine position than any brand of swap plates as they are not subject to the descrete minimum height limitations imposed by the use of the stock frame stands. The Hooker engine brackets are not swap plates, they are later-style clamshell retrofit mounts that remove the frame stands from the engine mounting equation. I don't recommend their use if you are planning to use any header other than the matching Hooker headers designed around their unique geometry. Good luck to you.

[Toddoky]

I've never tried it personally, but I would say it would be unlikely that it would.

[TXsilverado]

Yes, the Hooker engine brackets provide a lower engine position than any brand of swap plates as they are not subject to the descrete minimum height limitations imposed by the use of the stock frame stands. The Hooker engine brackets are not swap plates, they are later-style clamshell retrofit mounts that remove the frame stands from the engine mounting equation. I don't recommend their use if you are planning to use any header other than the matching Hooker headers designed around their unique geometry. Good luck to you.

does the hooker design work with the LS3 accessory drive? the reason I ask is because I called S&P to see if they've run into the LS3 alternator position (low on driver's side) and see if they potentially have a cure for it. the answer was their adaptor plates will not work with the LS3 alternator placement. with that info, I assume the hooker plates wouldn't work with the LS3 alternator bracket either. on a side note, I probably wont do any business with S&P in the future. their website is lacking to say the least, and their tech line was a joke. I asked what headers they recommended with their mounts and they didn't have a definitive answer.

[TXsilverado]

I have the S&P plates that mount the engine in the same place where the SBC bellhousing bolts up. I have The ARH 1-7/8 headers on my 69 Camaro. There is plenty of room around the steering box and they are tucked up tight to the floor. I never tried the 2"

thanks for that! I called ARH today and asked what mounts they recommended and they suggested Dirty Dingo and S&P. They said that S&P was a guaranteed fit though so I'll save some money there and keep my current mounts. in the end it looks like I'm going to pull the motor and notch the cross member to clear the alt like toddoky originally suggested. I didn't want to because of all of the crap that goes into my motor (wiring harness, supercharger removal, trans removal, hoses out the wazoo for the heat exchanger/liquid cooled blower, methanol etc... let the fun begin!

what transmission crossmember are you using with the S&P mounts? I would call S&P but I doubt they have the right answers LOL.

[sheck44]

Speedtech ... fully adjustable so you can't go wrong
Cheers
Steve

[Bad94]

I've never tried it personally, but I would say it would be unlikely that it would.

Hmmm, I guess Im doing something wrong. My own mounts. LS7 oil pan, T56, Tru Turn and NO cutting on the car. Pass side head is about 1/4" off firewall.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif[/URL][/IMG]

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif[/URL][/IMG]

[Toddoky]

My answer was in regard to the question of compatibility between the LS7 pan and the new Hooker 1st-gen engine mounting brackets...apples to oranges.