I installed two new wood blocks between the frame and crankcase arms and they are loose. I just snugged up the bolts like the service manual says. Is there a fix or a better way. thanks.
Sounds like the arms are bent on your crank case.
Royce, the arms are not bent. The pan was straightened in an old jig and checked when the motor was rebuilt. Everything lines up perfectly, it is just the wood is able to wiggle back and forth when you grasp it by hand, and I figured this would be an instant rattle. Should they wiggle or is this normal.
The wood blocks are there to stop the chassis being distorted when you tighten up the mounting bolts, so they should have been a snug fit into the rails before you tightened any bolts. If they're loose they aren't doing any sort of job, might as well be missing. I'd make a new block to fit, or shim them.
Kelley, are you using repro blocks? I usually make my own. Unless they are a snug fit, why bother installing them?
I am using the repro blocks. I had thought of using rubber as a shim. I had also thought of not installing them. Does this really need to be used?
My opinion is you need them, even though we don't drive on the rough roads of 'back then'. The crankcase is adding to the rigidity of the chassis. If the crankcase ear was just bolted to the top rail, it could tear or distort the top rail when the chassis flexes. Bolted through both rails but no support in between, it could distort the bottom rail. With the wood block clamped between the 2 rails the stress is being taken by the full depth of the chassis.
kelley, if the crankcase is good and the blocks are the proper thickness, that leaves the frame as suspect.
Have you measured the frame? To see if it is the proper width and not bellied out?
The frame should measure: 21 1/2" centre to centre.
The blocks should be: 1 1/2" thick.
Don't forget that the blocks have to clear the bolts that pass through the frame to the top of the crankcase arms. These bolts have to go in first, then the blocks, then the bolts through the side of the frame and the crankcase arms.
Everybody seems to snug fine on my T's this way.
Hope this helps ya.
I am at work right now but I will check the frame measurement when I get home. When I took the motor out I had some old blocks that were in it but I cannot find them. Things have a mysterious way of vanishing.I will also check the measurement on the new blocks. thanks to eveyone for their help.
First off, you need to have the blocks there.
Second, the blocks you have are obviously too small in that they are thinner than the frame channel is deep. You need a thicker block that protrudes a small amount, (maybe 1/16" - 1/8"), from the frame channel so that the motor mount arms contact them first and not the frame channel edges.
If the wood blocks do not contact both the frame and the arm then either the arms are bent or the blocks not thick enough. The pan arms, if they are not bent, will just scrape the frame as the engine is lowered into place. The frame rails should of course be parallel.
Thanks Royce, the arms did just scrape the frame as they entered in. I am guessing it is just the new blocks are not thick enough. I will probably just make a new pair myself. I appreciate your input you are always very helpful.
This might be of some help.
The wood blocks were the problem. I searched for an hour going through boxes and found the old ones. They fit nice and snug and everything bolted up nicely. It was just a case of a repro part that was not exactly made right. thanks
Would it make any difference if a steel spacer was used instead of the wood block? I was thinking a piece of 3/8id tubing. Nelson
Over time that might lead to crystallization at that point. The old wood motor blocks I have removed all show a good deal of indentation from the frame and hogshead arms, the wood is forgiving.
Besides, you have to have the original......it's fun telling folks that
".....the engine mounts are made of wood too"
when they ask about the wooden spoke wheels
I use a steel spacer made of 3/4" steel inside of the steering bracket block, where it can't be seen.
I do not do orginial. Henry knew how to mass produce but there was room for improvement in the product. Nelson
I agree that that was room for improvement in some places on the T but I have to say that swapping the wood block for a piece of steel tubing is defeating the purpose of the block. The idea of the block was to spread out the forces over a large area. That joint of pan arm to frame is subjected to a lot of twist and flex as the T rolled over hill and dale. To remove that large area pad and put in a sleeve would concentrate the side forces to one small area yet offer little support for twisting forces. Ford did use a lot of sleeving in lots of places such as speedometer wheel gear mounting but there was purpose to his mounting of the steering bracket and transmission arms via hard maple wood blocks.
All is well for you if you want too, it's your T.
For me the hardwood block stiffener and the 2 bolts on each side are fortress against the twisting, shaking, vibrating, rattlingly that happens at the hogshead ears and the frame.
Henry made improvements too, the late T engine has straps from the top of the frame to the hogshead to help control twist, but he kept the wood blocks and the 2 bolts on each side.
When you factor that all takeoffs, running, and braking place the fulcrum of weight against the universal joint at the end of the motor, the entire rolling weight of the vehicle and torque load is passed to the engine mounts, the two rear ears and the front pan support. I keep what Henry wanted for that important 3 point mounting.
The reason I asked my question is I bought a centerdoor that has no blocks. I tried to install blocks & found it was impossiable for a 77yr old fat man to install the left side. It may be able to be done if I removed the starter. I have no idea how long it has been run without them. Nelson
Nelson, just suggest to one of the younger guys in the club that it's impossible and let him show you that you're wrong....
Enter the bolt from the outside of the frame rail. Capture the nut in a box end wrench with a piece of masking tape holding the nut tight in the box end of the wrench. Slide the wrench end down between hogshead and engine arm. Line up nut with bolt, and turn bolt to tighten nut. Turn bolt to line up cotter pin hole straight up and down. Drop cotter pin thru bolt / nut with a needle nose pliers, then pull one leg of pin back with pliers just enough to keep pin from falling out. You should chase the threads on the nut and bolt first so they go together with little resistance. Dirty threads will make this job even tougher.
If working on a centerdoor, you have to remove the passengers side seat and lay on the floor, of course.
Dick Lodge - Hence the old saying,....."old age and treachery beats youth and skill anytime", right?
I just bought wood blocks from a supplier. The height was off by about 3/16 of an inch. Therfore it would have been useless for vertical support.
I dug into an old parts box and found a new older pair of blocks which fit properly
I bought several sets of engine blocks from Bill Barth that were made of hickory and fit perfectly.
what about the bolt with a spring and nut cotter pined nut??? i see ir in the tinkering tips book.. i thought that was the new and improved way, not for show cars but for the drivers>>>
Does any one have a picture/diagram of how all these parts go together? Hard to see in the Ford service book.
I sort of agree with your method except the "average" box wrench is too thick to be able to be removed after the nut is on and the bolt is sticking out a bit beyond the nut. Your method works but I suggest you tape the nut into the end of an OPEN END wrench so that you can pull the wrench down and out.
Here is a sketch to help you.
Easy way is to use a long drift pin to locate the hole in the wood block at the frame side. Shove / tap with a push stick the wood block down the inner portion of the frame once the engine is placed. Tap slowly till the you can get the drift pin into the side frame hole and the wood block bolt hole. That lines up the horizontal bolt, adding the nut and cotter on the starter side is more challenging, use the hints of the other posts.
A open box wrench, adhesive tape the nut to the wrench, and hold it there. Sometimes I tape the nut to a long wood tongue depressor, taping just the castellated part, then you can dangle the nut down and start the bolt thru it. Always test fit the nut and bolt so the threads are loose, and add some oil too, you want that nut to thread on easy.
Thankfully those horizontal bolts and nuts don't have to be more than snug, I just tighten till the cotter hole lines up in visual sight, and slip in the pin, crimping only one leg of the cotter pin. That way you can get it back out when engine pulling is needed.
The vertical bolts need to be tight, that holds fast the motor mount. The horizontal bolts are snugged only. The wood block must be a snug fit between the frame channel and the motor mount flange of the hogshead arm.
Dick. Who are the young guys in our club? All I see are old f##ts thet are about as bad off as I am. Adam. The passenger seat is out but you still have to lay across the drivers seat & gas tank. Not one of Henry,s better ideas. As a matter of fact the whole centerdoor idea was not to good but thats why I wanted one. something different Nelson
Nelson, it's all relative. The guys in their forties and early fifties are the young guys.
An interesting point. Somewhere along the line, Ford changed the design of the crankcase arm block. I'm going to guess it is in 1924, When they introduced the 4 dip pan. Those blocks are pretty much square, and don't have the notch on top or the bevel on the bottom. I know this is trivia, but that is what I like. These were on my '25, so I would assume they used them in '26-27 too.
Yes, Douglas, that's the way I've been running mine. Don't know if I should go back to "stock" or not. Nobody seems to agree on this one. I just don't want to crystallize the frame, etc. I've had no alignment problems or operating problems, though.
Dan-Thanks for the drawing and instruction of the wood block. That satisfied my curiousity about them.
Dick-I must be one of the "younger" guys at 53 years.
The block in question (F/N 890) changed a few times by small amounts. What is interesting is that it was adopted very early on 12/21/07. It must have been used on the prototypes from the very beginning. In the very beginning the thing had rabbets on both ends. The rabbet that eventually gave way to the bevel was for Gas Lamp Tube Clearance according to the record of changes. What hurts is that in the record of changes there is a missing card. It must have been missing very early on because card#1 covers changes from 12/21/07 (Adopted) through 8/30/17. While then card#2 (labeled as card#2) starts out at 12/14/23 and runs through 4/20/26. Card#3 simply has one entry on 10/11/26. There must have at one time been another card between 1 and 2 but the cards themselves do NOT have a missing number???
There were in fact changes on 9/21/20, 10/14/20, 11/18//21, 7/26/22, 9/8/22, 12/11/22, 3/13/23, and 6/9/23 according to the drawings themselves. I have researched this block in the past and have figured out the various changes and their dates since not all of the above changes actually resulted in any dimensional changes but each year there is at least one of the "specified for 19xx" type changes to the drawing but no change to the part necessarily on that date. The Block was 1-7/16 thick for a long time (1907 to 10/25/25) but got thicker starting on 10/26/25 when the thickness was changed from 1-7/16 to range of 1-1/2 -- 1-17/32. They diddled with the thickness again on 2/26/26 and changed it to 1-15/32 -- 1-1/2. Then on 4/20/26 they changed it to 1-7/16 -- 1-15/32 which is about where it started out.
One constant was that it was NEVER made from anything but HARD MAPLE. The rabbeted edge gave way to bevel edge on 4/11/13. Bevel made a bit bigger on 4/25/14. Hole was 9/16 diameter after 10/4/09. Bevel was done away with on 7/26/22 and this was the beginning of the SMALLEST block since it was now only 2" x 1-7/16 thick and thus totally rectangular now. That must have been bad news since only a month or so later (9/8/22) they changed it from 2" wide to range of 2-9/32 -- 2-5/16. Then on either 3/13/23 or 6/9/23 they changed it to final dimension range of 2-5/32 -- 2-3/16 where it remained. Thus starting on 7/26/22 the block was always rectangular without any bevels or other alterations to its perimeter.
Thus 2 of the dimensions on the block were subject to lots of changes but ONE of the dimensions never varied - it was 1-3/4" and this was probably because the pan ear width didn't change either. The hole was also not always in the exact center of the block and it is unclear or not marked EXACTLY which side is up and down and which side is left and right. The only side that is clear is the thickness since the bolt goes through that dimension.
So get our your tape measure and get under there and measure that block to make sure you have the right ones in there because the crank case block police are going to be checking on that and if you have read ALL of the above then you are as sick as I am. My good friend Kim Dobbins says we are all addicted to minutia.
Sorry I didn't see this thread before the meeting last night. I find getting the left side bolt and block in is much easier with 2 people. I have a set of hemostats that I use to hold the nut from the bottom side coming in from the back while I have someone else put the bolt in and turn it. It may take a few try's but eventually I get it in. Need help, call me.
Your description of the variations in the wood block about had me laughing....what a wonder in those Ford engineering changes.
Hey, still have a question or two.....
The Service Bulletin of April 1922 shows diagrams on how to place the fuel line along the chassis. See how its says for the Touring to route it behind the wood block so the fuel line is inside the frame channel.
I have always cut the wood block with a notch to allow the fuel line to route into the frame as in the picture from the Service Bulletin:
Guess this routing changed when the block became just a rectangle. Will my fuel routing be judged wrong now And what finish did the wood block have, I normally coat it with thinned black enamel.
Dan, in FL, just woodly wondering about wrouting.