<VV> Early Rear Engine Mount Differences

[Mike Shank]

This afternoon, I (started) to replace the Rear Engine Mount on my '64
convertible.  Sandwiched between the rear engine mount and frame, is a ~
1/8" thick 'mount plate' that I presume is there to lessen the bending
force on the 2 bolts that hold the engine mount to the frame.  I suspect
(fear) that I just removed a pre-'64 mount from my ''64 car - I've been
replacing parts on this car for 18 years and I'm STILL finding things
that the previous owners screwed up!!

#1 Question:  Are the hole locations in this 'mount plate' different
(vertically, relative to the top/bottom edges of the plate) from '64 to
earlier years?  

The center-to-center dim. between the holes are exactly the same in both
the old 'mount plate' and the new '64 mount.   BUT the pair of holes in
my old 'mount plate' are vertically offset ~ 1/4 from center, whereas the
pair of holes in the new '64 mount appear to require a 'mount plate' with
holes that are an equal distance from the top & bottom of the plate.  I
could force it to fit, but the bolts start off obviously skewed at an
"unnatural" angle, and I'd imagine that as I tighten up the bolts I'd
distort the rubber in the new mount.

#2 Question:  A broader one that probably answers my first ....  What
exactly changed in '64 with the engine/trans mounts, and what other parts
were affected?  Is this all due to the '64 transverse leaf spring
"pushing up" on the drive train?

I ask this because I have a '61 Lakewood (aka the "Stationary Wagon")
that when (if) I ever get to putting it back together, it will have a
complete '64 suspension.  When the time comes to buy a new rear engine
mount for this monstrosity, I'll need to know if it should be a '61 or a
'64.
Thanks in advance for any/all insight.
-Mike Shank


PS - If I am in fact replacing a pre-'64 mount w/ a '64 mount, how
adversely will my rear wheel alignment be affected?  Seems like it should
just be the camber?