PDA

View Full Version : MN12Technologies Motor Mount Prototype Review



Thomas
02-18-2005, 06:53 PM
I took some pics with my oh-so-awesome camera phone *sarcasm* and hopefully you can get an idea of what they are like. The top bolts are larger for added strength, and are 316 SS (very strong!). The bottom bolts are stock diameter but are longer and go into the aluminum more more added strength as well. The mount itself is 2/3 aluminum and 1/3 poly urethane. This combination will make a very stiff and strong mount, with a little padding for slight shock absorbing. My guess is the car will shake more, but wont absorb the small rattling vibrations, only the lope of the engine, by the way, I love my cam :)

Anyways, if you're interested in this product follow this thread, I'll be installing them and doing a write up on the final results and my personal account of their performance. Personally...I can't WAIT to put these on!

Now for the pics:

Left side
http://members.tccoa.com/thomas/MN12TechMounts/motormount1.jpg
http://members.tccoa.com/thomas/MN12TechMounts/motormount2.jpg
http://members.tccoa.com/thomas/MN12TechMounts/motormount3.jpg
http://members.tccoa.com/thomas/MN12TechMounts/motormount4.jpg

Right side
http://members.tccoa.com/thomas/MN12TechMounts/motormount6.jpg
By the way, the mount brackets are from my old crappy fluid filled ones. So thats why they're dirty hehe, I sent them to him along with several measurements of the installed height of my current ones so he could make the mount perfectly.

-Thomas

Thomas
02-18-2005, 06:55 PM
Well it was nice out today so I got motivated and installed them in the driveway at my parents' place (Mom parked her car in the garage so Id fix her air shocks before I worked on my car again, sure outsmarted her hehe).

The height is about the same as my solid rubebrs were, maybe just slightly shorter, which is good. There's no problems with being a little shorter, in fact I think the stock mounts are a little shorter than the solids. Anyway, I started her up and it idles great with solid mounts, kinda lost some of the cam lope though :( I yanked the throttle bracket a few times and the engine doesnt torque sideways at all, but it vibrates slightly when at idle. I took it for a drive, when I first sat inside with it in park it vibrated a little. When I put it into drive it rattled a lot. I can hear some of the dash brackets rattling around. The off-line response has improved greatly. Once the rpms are up a little, probably around 1000-1200rpm the vibration goes away for the most part, but you can still feel it.

I called Julian (T-bird4vr) over for a second opinion, took him for a test drive. He said he wouldnt get both mounts for his car, but possibly the passenger side one (which is cushioned more, as seen in the pics above) and that he wouldnt put them on a stock car if you're just upgraded because your mounts went bad, the solid rubbers are a good choice for that. He also said he wouldnt use them on a lightly modded car either, they feel great for a highly modded car though, street or track. I agreed with him.

So the concensus is, dont get these if you like a smooth ride, and dont get them just to replace your bad ones. Get them strictly for performance reasons. It might be a little more tolerable with just the passenger side, so I'd reccomend a rubber driver and this alumi/poly for the passenger side if you're looking for for streetability with a bit better torque response.

I'll keep marking my experiences with them for a few weeks to see if I get used to it or change my thoughts or anything. But these mounts are awesome in my opinion, I like them a lot, great design, great quality, very durable, and great improvement on torque response. When I get my 3000 stall converter I'll see how they do then too :)

and on a side note - Julian returned the favor by giving me a ride in his car :) He just installed the smaller pulley and raised top on his autorotor and is pushing about 18psi now. I seriously dooded my pants, he floored it and the 225/60/16 tires actually hooked, surprisingly, and I my cheeks touched my ears. I couldnt move from my seat. Deffinetely has mid 12's in it.

-Thomas

XR7 Dave
02-18-2005, 08:34 PM
I seriously dooded my pants.

-Thomas


That is too funny! :D

Regarding the mounts, if that poly were replaced with rubber, the mount would be excellent. I'd ask the maker if they would use rubber instead, it should lose the shakes if you could get that.

Thomas
02-18-2005, 08:55 PM
yeah I agree, I might talk to him about making two different kinds, one with rubber and one with poly, for a sort of mild and heavy setting.
-Thomas

XxSlowpokexX
02-19-2005, 02:57 AM
Maybe a bit more poly and a bit less aluminum?

Any reason why you just didnt go for a full poly type replacement?

XR7 Dave
02-19-2005, 11:26 AM
Maybe a bit more poly and a bit less aluminum?

Any reason why you just didnt go for a full poly type replacement?

I think it's safe to say that the aluminum portion is where the strength lies. The two bottom bolts screw into the alum and the top bolt is a stud screwed into the alum as well. It could be a lot thinner for sure, but the key is in using rubber for the mount instead of poly. there is nothing wrong with the motor sitting on rubber. The problem lies in the motor's ability to rise with torque (eliminated with this design). This is the first important advancement in motor mount design for these cars - ever. I've seen many solid motor mounts ripped. The expensive ones from MN12perf and SCP don't seem to hold up any better than the cheapies. I'd be the first to buy a pair if they are offered with rubber isolators.

David

Oh ya, how much are they or where do I look to find out?

XxSlowpokexX
02-19-2005, 11:39 AM
The poly unit seem to be much stronger in other automobile applications. Perhaps its just the design of this one. There just isnt much poly to isolate the vibrations in that application. I was just thinking perhaps a copy of the factory style would work a bit better as far as isolation of vibration. The factory design was all about that not strenght. Also if someone had the time to do this a copy of the stang design would be great but require metal fabrication as well.

Toms-SC
02-19-2005, 02:06 PM
Dave: Would these mounts work on an SC?

XR7 Dave
02-19-2005, 02:26 PM
double post. :/

XR7 Dave
02-19-2005, 02:29 PM
Dave: Would these mounts work on an SC?

That is what they are for.

Problem is that the poly is too hard. The motor has a combined weight of around 500lbs which means only 35psi surface pressure on the poly. Under idle and light load conditions, the material must have enough give to isolate vibrations at that light compressive weight. No amount of poly will do that satisfactorily. Using rubber will not adversly affect the strength of the mounts but it will eliminate the vibration problem.

Poly mounts are always harsh, particularly in V6 and 4 cyl applications and especially those which do not have balance shafts. With V8's you can even get away with solid metal mounts because of the better pulse isolation due to the firing sequence.

The Mustang style mounts would be nice, but I like this design, it utilizes the stock brackets, it's simple and effective. All it needs is some rubber.

The problem with the stock style solid rubber mounts is not the rubber, it's the process in which the attaching bolts are bonded to the rubber. There is no mechanical connection in the mounts. Herein lies the problem with them. This mount has a mechanical connection similar to the Tbird 5.0 mounts which are essentially indestructible.

MIKE 38sc
02-19-2005, 03:32 PM
These things are simple to make. I'm really surprised it had'nt been done long before now. ;) Rubber is the answer with this design, really simple and the best of both worlds.

392Bird
02-19-2005, 04:35 PM
I put a set of his V8 ones on mine, and they work great! I had to have a chain running from the drivers side head to the K member to keep from tearing the factory ones out. With these, you can just see a fraction of a inch of engine movement now. It will result in better reaction times I am sure, since the power will go to the rear wheels instead of lifting the engine.

XR7 Dave
02-19-2005, 05:18 PM
I put a set of his V8 ones on mine, and they work great! I had to have a chain running from the drivers side head to the K member to keep from tearing the factory ones out. With these, you can just see a fraction of a inch of engine movement now. It will result in better reaction times I am sure, since the power will go to the rear wheels instead of lifting the engine. You know, I always assumed that the V8 bolt pattern for attaching to the motor would be different. Are you saying that the V8 mounts were a direct bolt-in for the V6 as well? I assume you used the 5.0 V8 mounts? Are you talking about when you had a V6 or are you talking about with your current motor?

Thomas
02-19-2005, 05:21 PM
the v8's are different, he has a 392ci And I thought your were solid aluminum? :confused:

my set is the first set to fit the v6 block.

392Bird
02-19-2005, 05:40 PM
The V6 and V8 mounts are not the same at all. Here is mine installed.

http://members.tccoa.com/393bird/l-motormount3.jpg

Here is what the MN12 tech ones look like with the factory top and bottom mounted to it, ready to be installed.

http://members.tccoa.com/393bird/mn12techmount.jpg

T-bird4vr
02-21-2005, 10:06 AM
What about running the solid left side mount to stop the motor lift and then a rubber right side mount? Would that be enough to stop the vibrations? I guess I might still be a little worried about the knock sensor artificially being tripped, but i don't know how sensitive that is.

392Bird
02-21-2005, 10:31 AM
It is odd that some are having vibrations problems with these. It should be understood that going from liquid filled to these will transmit some vibration through them, that is why Ford used the liquid filled ones to make it smother. If you need smooth, stay with liquid filled. :) I have these on both sides of mine, with a Flaming river steering system, and no rag joint, and the engine has a 248 @ .050 dur and 595 lift cam, and mine is completely acceptable. I feel a SLIGHT vibration in the steering wheel. If I thought this was too much for what it provided, I think it would be time for me to get a Buick and start checking out the blue haired women. :)

XR7 Dave
02-21-2005, 12:06 PM
It is odd that some are having vibrations problems with these. It should be understood that going from liquid filled to these will transmit some vibration through them, that is why Ford used the liquid filled ones to make it smother. If you need smooth, stay with liquid filled. :) I have these on both sides of mine, with a Flaming river steering system, and no rag joint, and the engine has a 248 @ .050 dur and 595 lift cam, and mine is completely acceptable. I feel a SLIGHT vibration in the steering wheel. If I thought this was too much for what it provided, I think it would be time for me to get a Buick and start checking out the blue haired women. :)

Perhaps you missed my earlier post. A V8, due to it's firing sequence and firing angle, can operate mounted completely solid and not be obnoxious. However, 4 and 6 cylinder engines do not enjoy such a luxury. It is the same phenomenon which make a V6 exhaust sound like crap. You don't see V8's with balance shafts very often. You do with both 4 and 6 cylinder engines. There is a reason for that.

Most of us have already given up on the fluid filled mounts. Most of us do run solid rubber mounts already, the problem is that the design of the stock SC mount does not offer any strength against torsional stress. They are a full floating design with no mechinical interlock whatsoever. Herein lies the problem and this is why the above design has potential to be better than what we currently have. Using poly as a cushion may as well be solid.

In the interest of keeping dash squeaks and rattles to a minimum (my 4cyl was bad enough it would make the CD's skip at certain rpms) I prefer to keep rubber of some sort under my V6.

Hope that made some sense.

:)

Thomas
02-21-2005, 01:19 PM
I've noticed that the shaking comes when the air/fuel gets rich sitting at idle. I've already come to get used to the slight vibration at moving speeds, the idling vibrations are most apparent, and I actually think they'll go away, for the most part, after I get a dyno tune. The start to disappear after the car warms up. Until it warms up I run pretty rich and the vibrations are there. So I think these may not be as bad as they seem on my car. But Kentwood (Creator) is sending me a revised design that wont include rubber, but will have more poly cushioning. The poly is soft, its not solid. I can squish it with my fingers, so it does provide a cushioning factor.
-Thomas

XR7 Dave
02-22-2005, 10:07 PM
I've noticed that the shaking comes when the air/fuel gets rich sitting at idle. I've already come to get used to the slight vibration at moving speeds, the idling vibrations are most apparent, and I actually think they'll go away, for the most part, after I get a dyno tune. The start to disappear after the car warms up. Until it warms up I run pretty rich and the vibrations are there. So I think these may not be as bad as they seem on my car. But Kentwood (Creator) is sending me a revised design that wont include rubber, but will have more poly cushioning. The poly is soft, its not solid. I can squish it with my fingers, so it does provide a cushioning factor.
-Thomas

Have you experimented with lowering the motor at all? Since these will not compress under load like a stocker, or blow out, :/ it would seem that an extra 1/4" or so could be had dropping the motor. It would really help us AR guys out. Let me know as I am very seriously interested.

David

Thomas
02-23-2005, 05:46 AM
yeah it wouldnt take much, would it be okay to compress the poly? Because I can very easily tighten the top bolt and squish the poly, it starts to balloon a little when I do this. Or I could shave the poly down some if tightening it would shorten its lifespan. Julian has solid rubbers and had no rubbing issues with his raised top though. But handling would also be improved.
-Thomas

XR7 Dave
02-23-2005, 09:35 AM
yeah it wouldnt take much, would it be okay to compress the poly? Because I can very easily tighten the top bolt and squish the poly, it starts to balloon a little when I do this. Or I could shave the poly down some if tightening it would shorten its lifespan. Julian has solid rubbers and had no rubbing issues with his raised top though. But handling would also be improved.
-Thomas

Loading the poly is not a good idea as it will shorten it's life. As noted above, the motor only puts about 35psi pressure in the poly when sitting still. Julian's car is a 94 which is why he does not have clearance issues. With a motor mount that will not compress, it would be nice to be able to lower the motor slightly so that there is no more than 3/16" clearance to the oil pan, maybe even an 1/8".

Jason Wild
02-23-2005, 10:47 AM
Ok want a set of them but like David I want them in rubber

Thomas
02-23-2005, 02:58 PM
Ive determined the shaking isnt all that bad. I've gotten used to the small vibrations at driving speeds. At idle the rattling goes away after the car is warmed up, and I think a dyno tune would actually get rid of most of it. I also have a very agressive cam in there. My exhaust shakes my car a bit too, so thats a contributing factor. I dont think it would be all that bad on a stock car or heavily modded car with a dyno tune really. It kind of reminds me of driving an f-body with exhaust.
-Thomas

XR7 Dave
02-23-2005, 03:19 PM
It kind of reminds me of driving an f-body with exhaust.
-Thomas Now you've done gone and said the F-word. :mad:

So how much are these going to be, and can I get a set for testing. I'm a good endorsment if I like em. :D ;)

Thomas
02-23-2005, 03:33 PM
price wont be determined until the final design for the mounts is done. You'd have to talk to Kentwood about pricing and endorsement.

it just reminds me of when I drove a v8 f-body with exhaust. It shakes the car a bit but not uncontrollably.

-Thomas

T-bird4vr
02-23-2005, 04:51 PM
I still think it is significatly more vibrations than I would want in my car.

Thomas
02-23-2005, 10:30 PM
yeah. I dont know if Ive just gotten used to it or the vibrations have disipated more, but it seems to be that it's calmed down since the day I installed them.

Toms-SC
02-24-2005, 08:30 PM
You've scared me outta a set

Randy N Connie
02-24-2005, 09:04 PM
Would it help reduce vibration if you. Bolted a round piece of
poly between the aluminum spacer & bottom of motor mount.

I don't know if you would need another piece of poly on the
bottom of the motor mount.Between the two bolts,& mount
To isolate the two bottom motor mount bolts.

I think one poly disc between the aluminum and bottom
mount would help a little bit.

And you would only need to run one of you mounts on
the drivers side.This is the side that get the torque to
tear the rubber mount into.And just use a solid stock
rubber mount on the passenger side.This would help cut
down any vibrations,running one.

Or you can change the thickness of the poly or rubber,
or change in shore ratings.To lessen vibrations.

The mounts look nice.

Good LUCK Randy

Thomas
02-24-2005, 11:49 PM
You've scared me outta a set


Just remember that this is a prototype, this is not the final product. I am testing it so we can figure out what needs to be improved upon. It works spectacularly in ways of strength, the vibrations could be less. That's what we're working on. So until there's a finished products dont let what I say about it discourage your wanting one, this isnt the final design.
-Thomas

XR7 Dave
02-25-2005, 12:53 PM
Just remember that this is a prototype, this is not the final product. I am testing it so we can figure out what needs to be improved upon. It works spectacularly in ways of strength, the vibrations could be less. That's what we're working on. So until there's a finished products dont let what I say about it discourage your wanting one, this isnt the final design.
-Thomas

And this is very true. Our motor mounts are one of those things that SC people have put up with for years simply because there isn't anything else offered. Our motor mounts SUCK, so I consider this a very important new product. Until a few other people have been able to give opinions, it isn't fair to make assesments. I'll try a set whenever you are ready and give an unbiased response as will others. Thanks Thomas,

David

tcshum
03-01-2005, 10:17 PM
Sorry, I'm just curious about the benefits of these mounts vs the solid rubber ones from MN12. I ask because mine are torn and the parts guy at the dealer quoted me $188 for each one (yes, he was serious).

I beleive MN12 charges $80 + shipping per pair making theirs totally better than stock.

Would these new mounts be that much better than the MN12 solid rubber mounts?

Thanks

ScrapSC
03-02-2005, 12:01 AM
I am doing my engine swap the first of April and will be looking into a set. Like Dave said it would be sweet to have a set that lowered the engine and inch or two. :)

Thomas
03-02-2005, 12:08 AM
an inch or two isnt possible because the oil pan would collide with the k-member but it can be lowered maybe .75" at most. Some of the solid rubbers actually raise the motor 1/2" which sucks if you need hood clearance. Expect the price of these solid mounts to be somewhere between solid rubber price and the Ford price. Price hasent been set yet because the design is not yet final.

The solid rubbers are stiffer but still compress/stretch under engine torquing and under high torque situations they'll simply rip apart. I know it happens quite a bit to anyone with a high stall converter or lots of off-line torque (ex: roots blower). The solid rubbers are still not completely connected from the top bracket to the bottom. On these, the metal piece is threaded on both ends and both bracket bolts go into the aluminum, making a complete connection between the two, and also making it virtually impossible to break ;)

-Thomas

Rich Thomson
03-02-2005, 07:46 AM
I think it's safe to say that the aluminum portion is where the strength lies. The two bottom bolts screw into the alum and the top bolt is a stud screwed into the alum as well. It could be a lot thinner for sure, but the key is in using rubber for the mount instead of poly. there is nothing wrong with the motor sitting on rubber. The problem lies in the motor's ability to rise with torque (eliminated with this design). This is the first important advancement in motor mount design for these cars - ever. I've seen many solid motor mounts ripped. The expensive ones from MN12perf and SCP don't seem to hold up any better than the cheapies. I'd be the first to buy a pair if they are offered with rubber isolators.

David

Oh ya, how much are they or where do I look to find out?

David as I respect your knowledge I disagree with your belief that the "expensive" ($70 set) solid rubber motor mounts that MN12 Performance sells are no better than the stock liquid filled mounts. MN12 has sold over 900 sets of engine mounts and only 3 sets have ever been reported broken. If you have a set of broken MN12 engine mounts or know of any I will gladly replace the mounts for free! Also the engine mounts that SCP sells are made by a different manufacturer so I cannot comment on the performance quality of them.

No wanting to hijack this thread I will add my .02 to the origional post. The engine mounts made of aluminum/poly should be first thought of as race only parts. The increase in NVH can be very annoying.

Rich

Thomas
03-02-2005, 11:37 AM
I wouldnt call them race parts only, plenty of 4.6 guys have these already on their daily drivers and they cause no excess vibrations. The v6 being designed the way it was gives more vibration than the 4.6 does so we are working out a way for it to cushion the vibrations while still being very rigid. Please dont discourage this product until it's finished and you've ridden in a car with them. I respect you a lot Rich and I love your store, I'm in no way calling your motor mounts bad. But Rancherlee alone has broken 3 solid rubber mounts on his 3.8 Vortech with 3k stall. They are not a bad product they just simply do not hold up to torque. Now one of your mounts combined with one of these might make the perfect combination for somebody, I might put my passenger side solid rubber back in to see how it works then.
-Thomas

XR7 Dave
03-02-2005, 11:55 AM
David as I respect your knowledge I disagree with your belief that the "expensive" ($70 set) solid rubber motor mounts that MN12 Performance sells are no better than the stock liquid filled mounts. MN12 has sold over 900 sets of engine mounts and only 3 sets have ever been reported broken. If you have a set of broken MN12 engine mounts or know of any I will gladly replace the mounts for free!
Rich

Rich,

I meant that the cheapest solid mounts seem to hold up as well as any of the more expensive solid mounts. $70 a set is not that high, I thought yours were higher for some reason.

I would make a guess that most people who have solid mounts have no idea whether their new mounts are torn or not. Because they do not collapse when torn, only someone who launches hard would even notice they were torn in the first place. I have seen at least one of either yours or SCP's mounts torn (can't verify where it came from anymore) but it wasn't a "cheapie". Most often they rip loose from the bottom plate but I've even seen one where the rubber itself ripped. While I can't verify that these were your mounts, the very fact that they do not offer any mechanical connection or interlock with the engine makes them subject to possible failure. Couple that with the fact that on most SC's the rubber bump stop on the driver side mount is destroyed and you have a recipe for torn rubber.

For someone like myself that launches the car hard on occasion (ok a lot) the possibility of hitting the hood just once is unacceptable. Sure a torque strap would solve the problem also, but it simply isn't necessary when you consider that the 5.0 mount design is virtually indestructible.

Randy N Connie
03-02-2005, 01:33 PM
You can run the motor 1 plus inches lower,with no oil pan
clearance issues,if you have a A.J.E. K-Member.

With no stock cross-member for the oil pan to ride on.
And when the rubber mounts do break.Using a tube
k-member and no ledge for the oil pan to rest on.
It would not take long to know a motor mount is brokin.

I think your mount will be great for the tubed k-member
users.

Thanks Randy

XxSlowpokexX
03-02-2005, 04:39 PM
Lowering the motor without lowering the transmisison may negatively impact pinion angle..Hell lowering both may as well. Has this been looked at?

Also I feel the vibration that we will feel is due to there just not even being enough material to absorb it. The mounts simply do not provide that.

On v8 applications I have run full solid mounts with barely any observable excess vibration. This will not hold true to the v6 design.

I think its a great idea but a major redesign I believe is in order. Also we need to check if the design causes any harmonics that will trip our knock sensor. I had that particular problem with my turbo car.

I would love a viable alternative to factory filled or solid rubbe rmounts as would anyone. But major vibration isnt something Im willing to live with....Especially with a large camshaft

Thomas
03-03-2005, 05:15 AM
Lowering the motor without lowering the transmisison may negatively impact pinion angle..Hell lowering both may as well. Has this been looked at?

Also I feel the vibration that we will feel is due to there just not even being enough material to absorb it. The mounts simply do not provide that.

On v8 applications I have run full solid mounts with barely any observable excess vibration. This will not hold true to the v6 design.

I think its a great idea but a major redesign I believe is in order. Also we need to check if the design causes any harmonics that will trip our knock sensor. I had that particular problem with my turbo car.

I would love a viable alternative to factory filled or solid rubbe rmounts as would anyone. But major vibration isnt something Im willing to live with....Especially with a large camshaft

people raise and lower the motor, some solid rubbers sit 1/2" higher. The A.J.E. K-Member lowers it. I havent ever ehard of any problems with it.

What would you suggest for a redesign? We're open to suggestions here if you think it'll help.

I have a large camshaft, so vibrations in other motors should be less or at the most, the same as what I've got.

-Thomas

XR7 Dave
03-03-2005, 08:41 AM
people raise and lower the motor, some solid rubbers sit 1/2" higher. The A.J.E. K-Member lowers it. I havent ever ehard of any problems with it.

What would you suggest for a redesign? We're open to suggestions here if you think it'll help.

I have a large camshaft, so vibrations in other motors should be less or at the most, the same as what I've got.

-Thomas

As with any modification, the responsibility for the end result lies with the user. Raising boost without supplying additional fuel will have no less disasterous of an effect. I don't think Charles sells fuel systems.

Shimming both the transmission and diff are simple tasks and for someone who wants their driveline correct it should be a no-brainer. For everyone else, the difference in alignment should make the SC no worse than any live axle car.

:)

Randy N Connie
03-29-2005, 09:33 PM
Any updates on the motor mounts?
Purchase date?

Thanks Randy

Thomas
03-30-2005, 03:43 AM
I need to measure for clearance on the oil pan so Kentwood can make a shorter mount with the revised poly design for a 'hopefully' softer feel. Unfortunately I work 40 hours a week and when I'm not working I have trouble finding time to do it :( It's nice out now though, and I should have a day off sometime early next week to do it.

Any ideas on how to check oil pan clearance? Unbolt the mounts, stick some clay in there, drop it down, then reverse and see how thick the clay is maybe?

-Thomas

Thomas
06-22-2005, 11:46 PM
Kentwood seems to have disappeared, I havent heard from him in months now. I might have to look at improving this design myself and marketing it myself :)
-Thomas

Randy N Connie
06-23-2005, 11:15 AM
Do you think with this type mount,Would it effect the knock sensor?

Thanks Randy

XR7 Dave
06-23-2005, 02:58 PM
Do you think with this type mount,Would it effect the knock sensor?

Thanks Randy

Hard to say Randy, I've seen a lot of knock sensors that don't seem to work at all and then the next one is aggressive as hell. I tune my car without it altogether.

Thomas
06-23-2005, 03:21 PM
Well, the engine actually shakes less with these mounts, in fact, I can't move it at all. I started it up for the local guys at one of the meets we had and snapped the linkage a few times, didnt move at all. I put my hand around the intake and gave it a few hard tugs, no movement. I think these mounts really lessen vibrations in the engine, but put them into the chassis. Is that safe to say Dave? I dont think there would be any problems with the vibrations affecting the knock sensor.
-Thomas

Randy N Connie
06-23-2005, 09:03 PM
I don't think it would be a problem either.But when motor mounts are broken
into,it is a problem I believe.But when the rubber mounts are broken,
they are dancing up & down slamming into each motor mount half.
This I think cause timing to be taken out with a working knock sensor.

I had broken stock mounts,The car seemed to run better after new
replacment soild rubber mounts.

Thanks Randy

Thomas
06-23-2005, 10:32 PM
I don't think it would be a problem either.But when motor mounts are broken
into,it is a problem I believe.But when the rubber mounts are broken,
they are dancing up & down slamming into each motor mount half.
This I think cause timing to be taken out with a working knock sensor.

I had broken stock mounts,The car seemed to run better after new
replacment soild rubber mounts.

Thanks Randy

it probably ran better because the engine wasnt shaking and throwing off the balance.

If I can make a copy of these mounts redesigned to what I described above, I'd like someone with an SC to test them and see what happens, I'm sure it'd be fine, but a test car would be best just to ensure that if something is wrong, it doesnt happen to more than one person.

-Thomas

Randy N Connie
06-23-2005, 10:54 PM
Thomas
I have some aluminum round stock cut already, 4 of them.
They need the 2 holes drilled and taped in the bottom
And One hole drilled and taped in the top.I don't know
if they would be the the height for you.I have about
3 foot of stock left from another job.

If you want a couple of them I can ship to you.
If your wanting some aluminum mounts to finish drilling &
tapping to test.I can drill and tap for you to if I have the
right size taps.

Thanks Randy

XxSlowpokexX
06-26-2005, 09:53 AM
I'ts all about the frequency of the vibration that will set the knock sensor off.

The unfortunate thing about knock sensors is that they will ave yoru motor but most definately will affect performance at times regardless of how well your tune is. When I was tuning my turbo car I had to pull my knock sensor off..Otherwise I woulda ripped out of my head whatever hair is left..

I was unable to run solid mounts with my knock sensor

XR7 Dave
06-28-2005, 07:39 PM
I'ts all about the frequency of the vibration that will set the knock sensor off.

The unfortunate thing about knock sensors is that they will ave yoru motor but most definately will affect performance at times regardless of how well your tune is. When I was tuning my turbo car I had to pull my knock sensor off..Otherwise I woulda ripped out of my head whatever hair is left..

I was unable to run solid mounts with my knock sensor

That is correct. The EEC is supposed to filter out sounds transmitted by the knock sensor that are not true knock. However, when the software was written, they were taking into account other noises normally heard in the motor. When you link the motor to the chassis you introduce a whole range of noises that weren't there before due to the aggressive dampning effects of the stock motor mounts. Whether or not the EEC is able to distinguish these sounds is a complete crap shoot.

I think that if you have solid mounts or anything else that makes the motor solid to the chassis (not talking about OE style "solid" mounts here but rather true solid mounts) you will have to experiment to see if false knock is being read.

Most likely anyone serious enough to need solid mounts would be comfortable tuning without a knock sensor and would simply disable it or turn it off. That doesn't mean that a knock sensor won't work with solid mounts, it just means that it is something you may have to deal with.