Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1960 Lark VIII convertible with 1964 V8 & AT, driveshaft yoke hits X-frame member

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Drive Shaft: 1960 Lark VIII convertible with 1964 V8 & AT, driveshaft yoke hits X-frame member

    I purchased this project car from a forum-friend back in 2017 and am now finally working on it. If I recall correctly, the transmission is original to the car but the engine is from a 1964 Lark-type car. I have only driven it around my yard briefly as it emits a very loud noise and vibration which I have determined to be interference between the automatic transmission driveshaft yoke and the X-frame crossmember.

    It appears that the front motor mounts (1.375" thick rubber) and the transmission mounts are new, but it looks like the rear of the transmission needs to be raised about an inch to achieve yoke clearance. A quick look in the Stude Intl catalog shows that both 1960 and 1964 Larks use the same mounts.

    Why might the rear of the transmission be too low? Wrong transmission mounts? As it is, I can't even pull the driveshaft out of the transmission because the yoke hits the X-member. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSCF5954.JPG
Views:	258
Size:	110.3 KB
ID:	1888649
    sigpic
    In the middle of MinneSTUDEa.

  • #2
    There is supposed to be a thick metal spacer under the drivers side mount (only). And the front mounts seem a bit thin according to what you measured. They should be about 1 3/4" or possibly more. Make sure the mounts are offset to the passenger side mounting holes also. Also the main rear crossmember could be bowed (not likely, but possible). It should bolt directly to the bottom of the frame with no spacers or washers between them.
    Bez Auto Alchemy
    573-318-8948
    http://bezautoalchemy.com


    "Don't believe every internet quote" Abe Lincoln

    Comment


    • #3
      Is the transmission mount in the left (drivers side ) hole?

      Comment


      • #4
        if the car originally had a 27 rear and it was changed to a 44 rear does it have the correct drive shaft , The drive shaft for a 44 is shorter , Ed

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by paul shuffleburg View Post
          Is the transmission mount in the left (drivers side ) hole?
          I don't know if this is saying are they? OR they SHOULD be?
          But, BOTH the Front and Rear Engine Mounts go in the RIGHTMOST Holes, on Left Hand Drive Cars.

          And V8 Front Engine Mounts are 1 3/8 " Thick.
          Last edited by StudeRich; 04-06-2021, 12:37 PM.
          StudeRich
          Second Generation Stude Driver,
          Proud '54 Starliner Owner

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jts359 View Post
            if the car originally had a 27 rear and it was changed to a 44 rear does it have the correct drive shaft , The drive shaft for a 44 is shorter , Ed
            This IS important, because a Model 27 Driveshaft that is TOO Long WILL Jamb into the transmission as the Diff. moves up and down, as well as Put the Yoke too far back!

            This WAS a Lark VI, Right?
            StudeRich
            Second Generation Stude Driver,
            Proud '54 Starliner Owner

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by StudeRich View Post

              This IS important, because a Model 27 Driveshaft that is TOO Long WILL Jamb into the transmission as the Diff. moves up and down, as well as Put the Yoke too far back!

              This WAS a Lark VI, Right?
              It is an original V8 car. The original V8 caught on fire and was then replaced with a 1964 V8 by the previous owner.
              The engine is located to the far right (passenger side) as it should be, have not yet confirmed if the tranny is.
              I believe the driveshaft is the correct length. I uncoupled it from the rear end and was able to slide it into the transmission at least 1 inch. However, I was unable to pull the driveshaft out of the transmission as the U-joint knuckle hit the X-member.
              It looks to me like the tail of the transmission is too low. Might the automatic transmission mounts been swapped with those from a truck? Are the truck automatic transmission mounts shorter than those for a car?
              Thanks for everyone's responses thus far.
              sigpic
              In the middle of MinneSTUDEa.

              Comment


              • #8
                The Lark and earlier Sedan and Lark Rear engine Mounts have a Higher set of Mounting Holes to the Trans. Case than the C and K and Hawk Models.
                Measure how far the two holes are from the Top end of the "Strap" portion of the Mounts that bolts to the Trans.
                Also the Fore Aft Distance to the Edge and someone here will measure the correct one so we can figure out if that is the problem.

                They are either the 15XX202 & 203 or the 15XX970 & 971 Mounts.
                Sorry, I don't have the complete Part Numbers memorized like I did when I pulled, Sold and Invoiced them about every week at the Dealer.
                StudeRich
                Second Generation Stude Driver,
                Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by StudeRich View Post
                  The Lark and earlier Sedan and Lark Rear engine Mounts have a Higher set of Mounting Holes to the Trans. Case than the C and K and Hawk Models.
                  Measure how far the two holes are from the Top end of the "Strap" portion of the Mounts that bolts to the Trans.
                  Also the Fore Aft Distance to the Edge and someone here will measure the correct one so we can figure out if that is the problem.

                  They are either the 15XX202 & 203 or the 15XX970 & 971 Mounts.
                  Sorry, I don't have the complete Part Numbers memorized like I did when I pulled, Sold and Invoiced them about every week at the Dealer.
                  Looking at the chassis parts catalog, the Lark uses 1547202 for the right and 1547203 at the left. Part numbers 1544970 &1544971 are for C & K.
                  I am amazed that you nearly remembered the complete part numbers after all of these years!
                  Now, it may be a matter of determining if I indeed have the Lark insulator brackets or if I have the Hawk (C & K) insulator brackets. If I have the Hawk brackets, perhaps all I need to do is drill a set of holes up higher on the insulator brackets?
                  Back under the car I go!
                  sigpic
                  In the middle of MinneSTUDEa.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Because the holes only moved about a 1/2 Inch, there will not be room on the Insulator to re-drill. if they turn out to be C/K/Hawk they will have to be replaced.

                    Brent thanks, but I really did not have to remember those Part Numbers all that long, as I STILL Stock and sell those myself!
                    I could have cheated and looked them up or went to the Pole Building & looked at the Mounts, but had better things to do, like go to Bed.
                    Last edited by StudeRich; 04-07-2021, 10:40 AM.
                    StudeRich
                    Second Generation Stude Driver,
                    Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by StudeRich View Post
                      The Lark and earlier Sedan and Lark Rear engine Mounts have a Higher set of Mounting Holes to the Trans. Case than the C and K and Hawk Models.
                      Measure how far the two holes are from the Top end of the "Strap" portion of the Mounts that bolts to the Trans.
                      I measured 1.25" from center of top bolt to top edge of insulator mount. For what its worth, the head of the bottom bolt touches the bend radius of the bracket.
                      If there are mounts with the top hole only .75" from top edge, that would likely remedy my problem.

                      By the way, there is a spacer between the crossmember and the left rear insulator mount as Bezhawk mentioned.
                      sigpic
                      In the middle of MinneSTUDEa.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It hasn't rained for two days, so I went out back and dug into a 1963 Cruiser parts car with AT, and the mounts look identical to what I have on this convertible. So until I figure out why I have clearance issues, I think I will insert some large washers under the rear engine isolators to see if that gives me adequate U-joint to X-member clearance.
                        sigpic
                        In the middle of MinneSTUDEa.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I have a 60 Lark conv and had the same problem and ended up using Avanti rear mounts that lifted the trans 1.5 inch.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by markwhawk View Post
                            I have a 60 Lark conv and had the same problem and ended up using Avanti rear mounts that lifted the trans 1.5 inch.
                            Thank you for the tip Mark, I will take that into consideration.
                            When I get back to it, I will jack-up the transmission until the tailshaft appears centered vertically, and measure the distance between the crossmember and the engine isolators.
                            sigpic
                            In the middle of MinneSTUDEa.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X