[Mgs] mgb engine mounting UPDATE

[Peter Ryner]

Thanks all for your insight and information.  I checked my spare engine 
yesterday and it had brackets on both sides of the foward engine mounts. 
Although I already have the transmission rod I decided to take the brackets 
and install on my '66 roadster.  After cleaning and painting I attempted to 
install them this morning.  Found that the driver's side worked great,  the 
studs are plenty long enough for the bracket and the grounding strap. 
However, the studs on the passenger side mount are too short to allow 
installation of the bracket.  The nuts attach but only engage about half of 
the nut depth.  These are new mounts from Moss.  I decided that the rod and 
one bracket on the driver's side should be sufficient especially if that is 
what was used for non US markets.
Pete
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glenn Schnittke" <g.schnittke at comcast.net>
To: <mgs at autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 1:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Mgs] mgb engine mounting


> 23 years is a long time to go without an accident if you drive like I
> do. :^)
>
> I don't know how "original specific" you're intending the build to be,
> but even if your research tells you that the 'control brackets' are
> correct and the engine restraint rod isn't, I'd recommend the restraint
> rod. The purpose of the plates was to prevent the engine from moving
> towards the front end of the car in the event of a front end collision.
> I just put a couple of them back into a customer's car without the rod
> and I can't see how they would do the job as effectively as the rod.
> Mind you, (and I've had this happen to me on a '74 car) that more than
> just keeping the fan blades from trashing the radiator, the restraint
> also keeps the crankshaft pulley from hitting the steering rack and
> possibly bending it, and, as it's the lower half of the pulley that
> hits, prevents possible bending damage to the crankshaft itself as well
> as cracking the pulley. Given the choice, I'd go with both for economy's
> sake in the event of a collision. Originality is one thing, safety is
> another. Neither of these is going to save your life, but the difference
> between a busted up radiator and a bent crank and steering rack and
> busted pulley might make the call on whether to save the car after a
> collision. I can't imagine a concourse judge even looking at the car
> from an angle where he could see the rod and the peace of mind would
> allow driving the car more which is what the car wants anyway, isn't it?
>
> Moss calls it a recoil bracket and it's p/n 413-075. $15 x 2. They call
> the restraint rod a stayrod and it's p/n 413-130. look it up on their
> website and they will show you all of what you need. There's other bits
> to it. It goes between the crossmember and an eye cast into the body of
> the transmission.
>
> Glenn
>
>> From: Max Heim<mvheim at sonic.net>
>> To: MG List<mgs at autox.team.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Mgs] mgb engine mounting
>> Message-ID:<CABB0E3B.352E8%mvheim at sonic.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>>
>> I also have a 66 B, it didn't have this "control bracket" either, and I
>> could never figure out what parts were needed or how it was supposed to 
>> go
>> together. So far I have managed to get by without it for 23 years.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Max Heim
>> '66 MGB GHN3L76149
>> If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
>> it's the primer red one with chrome wires
>>
>>
>> on 10/12/11 4:28 AM, Peter Ryner atpryner at verizon.net  wrote:
>>
>>> >  I'm putting a '66 MGB together that I got as a huge box of parts. 
>>> > I've only
>>> >  worked on a couple of MGs but have lots of TR and AH experience.  I'm
>>> >  installing the front engine mounts and am trying to figure out if I 
>>> > need to
>>> >  install a control bracket for the engine mount.  It is item #40 on 
>>> > the
>>> >  illustrations used by VB and "The Complete Official MGB.  I do not 
>>> > have any
>>> >  control brackets in my parts supply.  I looked in the Moss catalogue 
>>> > and the
>>> >  illustration number is 95.  It shows a part number for the early 
>>> > roadsters
>>> >  and GTs with a qty required of 2.  It also shows a part number for 
>>> > later
>>> >  cars, two required, but not available.
> _______________________________________________