Coupling assy

[rob love]

I have installed the engine/xmsn back into the 2VP carrier, and in the nice clear confines of the heated shop, I would like to solve a problem that I have always noticed with the alignment of the coupling at the differential. The angle never seems quite right, and with the one I am working on now, I have to raise the front of the engine almost 5/16 of an inch at the mounts to get the transmission coupling to line up to the differential. The manual states to tighten up the two rods to achieve this, but I can't help to feel that it would be better to have them on the same plane in the first place. While the manual states there should be no clearance between the transmission housing and the differential housing, I recall watching a later Cdn Army video saying there should be .005" clearance evenly all around. This makes sense as the engine must be able to rotate slightly with the torque of the mighty Ford engine. (Chevy would be a different story).

Short of raising the front of the engine or shimming the differential itself (not sure how well that would work) I don't see any other way of achieving this.

I have brand new motor mounts, so they are not the problem. I am really leaning towards making up a 1/4" or 5/16 spacer plate under each motor mount, but wanted to see what others thought.

Or am I worrying too much and should just jam them together tightly, put on the leather cover, and forget about it? Replacement gears may not be so available to the next guy working on it in 30 years.

[Dave Schindel]

I haven't done this, but the only complication to adding spacers would be exhaust and rad connections. Everything else should be capable of handling a 1/4 in. lift at the front of the engine. Just my 2 cents.

[rob love]

I custom make the down pipes with the engine in situ, so they won't be an issue. I am using preformed hose rather than the old heavy walled straight hose, so there is a bit more flexibility to them. Personally, I don't think 1/4 inch is going to have much effect on the radiator.

[Lynn Eades]

Rob, I have removed a few shims from under the carrier engine mount top hat sections. They are 1/8" inch (3mm) thick and just bits of flat bar that locate under the top hat section (one each end)
These are flat bar with rounded sides and cropped ends which I would bet (my left nut) are factory made and installed and from two different British carrier hulls. One from Merriden, Western Australia, and the other from a New Zealand hull.
These two carriers would never have met except at the British factory.
If you add that three mm. under your mounts and then consider that there is probably some variation in the settled height of the currently available engine mounts, then you are probably there. (who made the mounts you have? Are they original Ford? Not likely. Do they squash the same amount as the original Ford ones?
There are various engine mounts made by Ford with different part numbers. (I haven't gone far into it) Do you have the cup washer under the mount?
Do you have the big washer on top of the mount? (under the pump mount) This washer is another 2mm. Total 5mm so far.
At the end of the day the gearbox HAS to be square with the diff extension housing for the components to align. Unless you have a buckled floor or rear hull plate then it has to work. If it isn't right then, well you need to pack those mounts to suit. Thats how I see it anyhow.

[rob love]

Lynn
Interesting to hear about the shims. It is confirmation that there could be some variables.

My mounts are the repros from Mac's. It is hard to judge their over all height and hardness in relation to the original ones as those were well crushed and after 70 years the rubber was more akin to petrified wood. But in general the Mac's repros are fairly accurate.

The frame and floor do not show any serious signs of distortion...pretty sure I can rule that out.

I'm going to give the shims a try in order to get the same clearance top and bottom on the coupling. I'll update this thread with the end results. I'm also going to try and find that video on the carrier. It was almost 25 years since I watched it, and there may have been some information there. I just hope it wasn't in Beta (thinking back I'm pretty sure it wasn't)...I didn't keep one of those machines. No doubt there are shops that will have them and will transfer for a fee.

[Lynn Eades]

Rob, I wondered if the shims were because of a bad manufacture of the steel top hat sections, but there could be many reasons for things not lining up.
I'd suggest though that most likely the problems are around the front mounts (or at least that is where corrections have to be made)
I see in my 1941 to 47 chassis parts catalogue (Ford) two insulators listed;
1. 51T-6038-C
2. B-6038-C this is the same part no. insulator as in the early Canadian carrier parts book.
In FUC-03 the insulator is listed as;
09B-6038.
Macs sell an insulator on its own. 78-6038-S
They sell two mount assemblies:
1. B-6038-S. This one has the big steel cup washer that has the 1 1/8" hole, that is correct for the carriers. (washer part number 78-6048-A)
2.B-6038-C this one is the correct part number (for a carrier) but cup washer is wrong (small hole)
I don't know if the insulators are the same
Lastly the jeep has a similar looking mount supporting the transfer case. This one is part number 74-6038 It is possibly a softer mount.
Dagenham (U.K. Ford made their own mounts as well, but I cannot find any British part numbers. I do have a Ford script one with made in England on it and a patent number.

Do not forget the large dia. flat washer that fits directly under the water pump foot and on top of the insulator. This one spreads the load on the rubber as the insulator is compressed.
At least one of the other big suppliers (Early Ford?, C&G Ford? sells the parts separately. I bought mine there, but forget who it was.
I know Mackays rubber in Australia made these mounts for many years. No doubt many other rubber mount manufacturers copied them as well.
Some of the mounts are made with a steel base molded into the rubber. Some are flat on the bottom, while some have a shallow hollow underneath.The Ford 74-6038 has a deep hollow Some only have the outer ring of steel molded into them.

I guess the whole point of this post is that you have to be a bit careful to try and get the right parts. Many off the various mounts may have been produced with not too much care (or need to care) if a mount they made was an 1/8" too high or low at assembled height. Most Ford cars and trucks have rubber mounts at the rear and were / are more forgiving, by design, than the carrier.
At the end of the day, an extra washer between the water pump and the insulator will likely fix any discrepancy.