11 replies to this topic

[foodboy]

hello there, not sure what engine mounts to use, poly or solid??? im not that botherd about the noise.

please help

Bn

[Guess-Works.com]

neither... use standard ones on anything but an outright competition vehicle.

[foodboy]

neither... use standard ones on anything but an outright competition vehicle.

whys that then?

Bn

[markaboot]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

[Jammy]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

The teardrop mounts do. But then thats nothing to do with the engine mounts.

I'm with Guessworks. Standard rubber mounts are fine. Poly and solid engine mounts just transfer unnecessary amounts of vibration through other components.

[Guess-Works.com]

Flip fronts need solid subframe mounts not engine mounts, two completely different things...

If you are talking about subframe mounts, then solid every time...

Problem with poly, same goes for subframe, suspension and engine bushes/mounts, is that is does not degrade over time like rubber, they fail/split with no warning...

Solidly mounting an engine puts immense strain on both the engine and subframe, and hence why should only be used on competition vehicles, where they are regularly maintained, stripped down and inspected.

Poly, in my view, are a complete waste of money.

If an engine is fully mounted with good bushes on top and bottom engine steadies, then there is absolutely no reason why std engine mounts are not up to the job. Just don't buy cheap import knock offs.

[foodboy]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

The teardrop mounts do. But then thats nothing to do with the engine mounts.

I'm with Guessworks. Standard rubber mounts are fine. Poly and solid engine mounts just transfer unnecessary amounts of vibration through other components.

but dont you get more power to the wheels with the engine with poly and solit mounts?
Bn

Edited by foodboy, 20 October 2008 - 10:21 AM.

[Guess-Works.com]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

The teardrop mounts do. But then thats nothing to do with the engine mounts.

I'm with Guessworks. Standard rubber mounts are fine. Poly and solid engine mounts just transfer unnecessary amounts of vibration through other components.

but dont you get more power to the wheels with the engine with poly and solit mounts?
Bn

Err.. No, how can something which is externally mounted to an engine which is passive in the terms of does nothing but hold the unit in place affect the internal dynamics of an engine ???

[foodboy]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

The teardrop mounts do. But then thats nothing to do with the engine mounts.

I'm with Guessworks. Standard rubber mounts are fine. Poly and solid engine mounts just transfer unnecessary amounts of vibration through other components.

but dont you get more power to the wheels with the engine with poly and solit mounts?
Bn

Err.. No, how can something which is externally mounted to an engine which is passive in the terms of does nothing but hold the unit in place affect the internal dynamics of an engine ???

It has nothing to do with the internal dynamics of the engine, but contributes to energy transfer. As you accelerate with standard bushes the engine moves/ rocks this is energy being waisted through the bushes, with solid mounts less energy is wasted through the bushes as the engine cannot rock. Isnt that why they have solit engine mounts and solit engine stays????

[T.Harper]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

The teardrop mounts do. But then thats nothing to do with the engine mounts.

I'm with Guessworks. Standard rubber mounts are fine. Poly and solid engine mounts just transfer unnecessary amounts of vibration through other components.

but dont you get more power to the wheels with the engine with poly and solit mounts?
Bn

Err.. No, how can something which is externally mounted to an engine which is passive in the terms of does nothing but hold the unit in place affect the internal dynamics of an engine ???

It has nothing to do with the internal dynamics of the engine, but contributes to energy transfer. As you accelerate with standard bushes the engine moves/ rocks this is energy being waisted through the bushes, with solid mounts less energy is wasted through the bushes as the engine cannot rock. Isnt that why they have solit engine mounts and solit engine stays????

I think the result you'll feel is more response, not anymore power, however whether you notice this is arguable. Rubber

[foodboy]

dont flip fronts have to be solid mount?

The teardrop mounts do. But then thats nothing to do with the engine mounts.

I'm with Guessworks. Standard rubber mounts are fine. Poly and solid engine mounts just transfer unnecessary amounts of vibration through other components.

but dont you get more power to the wheels with the engine with poly and solit mounts?
Bn

Err.. No, how can something which is externally mounted to an engine which is passive in the terms of does nothing but hold the unit in place affect the internal dynamics of an engine ???

It has nothing to do with the internal dynamics of the engine, but contributes to energy transfer. As you accelerate with standard bushes the engine moves/ rocks this is energy being waisted through the bushes, with solid mounts less energy is wasted through the bushes as the engine cannot rock. Isnt that why they have solit engine mounts and solit engine stays????

I think the result you'll feel is more response, not anymore power, however whether you notice this is arguable. Rubber

ok yes response of the engine would be quicker.
Bn

[Jammy]

The rocking of the engine makes an infinitesimally small difference to the output of the engine.

As Guessworks says, with two standard rubber engine mounts, the gearbox steady mount, and the engine steady mount, you really shouldn't get much, if any, movement from the engine anyway.