Good point; I kinda doubt it in this case, but I'll give the manager a courtesy call.

I'd like to think that's true, it is probably about 200 lbs, but as mentioned it puts a load on the thrust bearing and a bending load on the snout. It's just IGNORANT!! Not like there aren't plenty of places to put bolt on a block!

 

You gotta understand something here. Although this is a highly recommended machine shop, employees, most of them, will take or find short cuts. It's another form of laziness also. The days of when employees take pride in their work and go the extra effort are gone especially if they are merely a laborer. It's the mentality of how can I get this job done faster and go on to the next. (more $ in my pocket).
Once the engine is gone and installed in your truck, they don't care... If I saw them doing that, I'd be pissed!

 

IMO, I don't think that in all cases that it is stupid. If it is a short block, it probably does not have an oil pan on it and they would have plastic taped on to protect the exposed crankcase parts, and would want to set the engine down on the bell housing. The crankshaft thrust bearings are made to take this kind of a load from the pressure that a throwout bearing pushes against the clutch fingers with a manual transmission. What I do not like is that the crankshaft is not the center of mass and it would lift a bit cocked. I also don't like lifting with one part which could break. I would normally put bolts in two motor mount bolts and use a 3/8" or larger chain.
But again, I'm sure that with short blocks, and no oil pan they need to lift it vertically. Finally, I have never liked lifting an engine with a carburetor plate on an aluminum manifold with 1/4" studs. Usually having the intake manifold on (not commonly installed by a machine shop) implies that the engine is assembled at its full weight. I have had occasions to do this to remove engines from vans, but I always chickened out and pulled the intake manifold and used my 3/8 chain on a couple of intake port bolts. Also today with port injection, there is no pad to lift from with an intake manifold on. Just some thoughts..................

 

You're correct on all counts, as far as: it was shrink-wrapped; the thrust bearing does resist fore-aft loads (but with an oil film); and they did have it on the bell-end in the shop but they set it upside down on a wood pallet in my truck (more stable for the ride home). Two of my sons picked it up by hand to get it out of the truck.

Interesting comments on the lifting plates. Someone threw away the stock lifting lugs, so I just finished making a plate to match the Trick Flow lower intake. Compared to the other alternatives for lifting, I couldn't see anything better. The engine will be complete minus accessories, which puts it at about 350 lbs. Spread over 6 10mm bolts, the stress (even allowing for jerking during removal) is incredibly low.

I'm leery of using exhaust manifold bolts on an aluminum head (especially because of their angle), and it would require complete removal of the headers to get on one, rather than just unbolting. Lifting on the intake, you are lifting near the C-G. Lifting using the individual intake bolts, especially if you put any bending moment on them, never gave me a good feeling. On a 302/5.0, they are only 10mm or 5/16. Using the stock lugs requires a spreader bar, which I never liked either.

 

Well, in lifting a short block, we're talkin' not much weight no heads, no oil pan, so anything with a 3/8 bolt size (10mm) will do.

In lifting a complete engine, I normally will use exhaust manifold ports because they are a good angle and two of them will normally balance the engine, and they are, on most engines, 3/8. The 289/302/351W engines use a 5/16 bolt for the exhaust, and I use lifting brackets on two head bolts. My 351W has an Edelbrock Port Injection manifold and nowhere to lift, and I also lift it with two head bolts. Chevys get lifted with the exhaust ports with iron heads, and with the lifting brackets on the head bolts on aluminum heads. Inlilne engines need the head bolt treatment. With fuel injection taking over carb plates are only for the old stuff that has a 4 barrel.

If I had any car or truck that would let the engine come out with headers on, I would just always use head bolts and the lifting brackets. I also do not personally own anything with aluminum heads although I would like to. However at my altitude, iron heads are fine with 10:1 CR.

If I did nothing but Chevys, I would just make an exhaust port lifting bracket, that would use two exhaust port bolts. But my two lifting brackets were made for head bolts, and will work with anything, and are strong enough to take a pretty taught chain across the boom of the cherry picker when removing a van engine.

Nice discussion.

Regards,

Alanco

 

You didn't mention it, but I assume you use a spreader bar when using opposing exhaust or head bolts? The problem I have with using that arrangement without a spreader is that the chain must be at less than 45-deg. which makes it tall, way too tall by the time the oil pan clears the radiator support. I wish I had an A-frame!

On engines with factory lifting lugs I make a spreader bar to suit, with 1/2"-dia. cold-rolled steel hooks down from a 3"-dia. section of boiler tube (1/4" wall) with a loop in the middle-top of the tube for the crane to hook on. No chains! No angles on anything (angles increase stress and produce bending moments). Makes removal/install a dream.

"With fuel injection taking over carb plates are only for the old stuff that has a 4 barrel." Almost all Ford V8 engines still end up with an upper and lower manifold. On my son's Mustang, the Trick Flow lower manifold has 6 bolts spread out over a 4" x 14" "carb plate". Are you thinking of Chev LT1/LSx-type manifolds (end feed)?

 

Yes, and all the Chrysler built Jeeps. My spreader bar is a piece of 2" channel 3/16 thick with a U shackle and it is 2' wide. It has two bell shackles on either end to hook chains. It isn't bent, it is straight.

 

I need to change my opinion based on later info: If it was just a bare SB shortblock that was wrapped and stored standing on end, I wouldn't have a problem with their lifting method. I'd assume they used plenty of assembly lube when installing the crank which would protect the thrust bearing from damage especially if the crank wasn't rotated thru the move.