Motor mount brackets.........

BT Motorsports

Registered User
Back in the day Jason Marsh posted some pics of his motor mount brackets and the rubber piece that was missing which is used to limit the travel of the bracket, specifically of the driver's side. After some conversation with Jason and a ton of searching, I havent been able to come up with those pics or that thread but I do recall someone posting a pic of an intact bracket and rubber "limiter". Anyway, being faced with the common problem of an old car missing or having broken parts, I find myself in need of a suitable replacement. Anyone have any pics of an intact bracket assembly or source of replacement without buying a whole new assembly from Ford for some astronomical price?

Paul
 
How important is the little rubber piece on the bracket? I just did my mounts (solid rubber) and believe I left that tip off on the driver's side... Sorry, didn't take any pics, though.
 
I welded a small peice of channel,on the bottom of the torque arm that sticks out from the
motor mount.to make it stronger,I then put a peice off rubber hose over it.
The hose will replace the rubber that was on the torque box part of the motor mount.

I am hoping this will work in place of a torque strap,or chain,ect. So far it has worked.

Sorry didnt take a picture.
 
Last edited:
On the stock motor mount. The rubber stop on the torque box,that the torque
arm goes through,on my 90 sc they were TOUCHING each other when assembled.

If this stop is left out .I beleive the motor mount will fail much sooner.

Because off the rubber TOUCHING the torque arm it makes it harder to
get the mounts bolt holes lined up to the motor when assembleing.

But I would not leave them out.Without the addition of a torque strap.
 
Try these:

Here are some that I took of my engine during that discussion:

Driver Side:

mmdr.jpg


Passenger Side:

mmps.jpg


I have not seen those rubber bumpers for sale individually. Maybe Ed can give us a rundown on whether or not you can get thoses pieces with or without a motor mount. I con't believe the last set of mounts I got from Ford had those attached.
 
Once again George comes through! I should have just looked through your images directory before asking the question George lol.
Michael Mattix, I sell the solid motor mounts you mentioned as well as tranny mount for less than the company you posted the link to, the item I was asking about can be seen and is perfectly described in George D's post.
joenintiesc, I consider this piece of vital importance as it limits the motor's travel as it torques over under hard acceleration. It also will affect launch and 60' times during drag racing. When its broken or missing, the driveline absorbs the initial impact and slows down the transfer of power to the ground. On a mill like mine, Ill probably tear the mounts from the brackets after a few WOT runs without a solid torque strap or this limiting tab.
Randy & Connie I'm liking your idea and may end up going along those lines if I cant replace the missing tab. My goal is to try and stay away from a torque strap if possible as I have knock sensor concerns. With this car being a daily driver and 91 octane fuel along with high temperatures being common in Cali, Detonation is the one thing I fear in this motor as it has bitten me before.

Overall, if I do end up having to go with a torque strap of some sort, I will be looking toward something rigid like steel but soft enough to accept vibrations like nylon. My concern once again lies in the vibration affecting the knock sensor, NOT vibration being felt in the car. Will keep everyone posted.

Paul
 
Paul, I have heard those concerns over setting off the knock sensor, but I have been running a solid torque strap off of a Mustang since the car was rebuilt nearly 15,000 miles ago. None of the dyno runs have shown the characteristics of the knock sensor being set off. I think those knocking vibrations that are read through the water jackets are quite different from the clanging of the torque strap.
 
Perhaps a call to Duffy and Fred are in order regarding the knock sensor. Im not so much concerned with the sensor "falsing" and retarding timing (though that would suck) because of the solid torque strap as I am with it not functioning properly due to interference from the vibration the strap may pickup. A few GM (grand national specifically) guys have expressed the solid torque strap causing a problem for them and they had to look elsewhere for a solution in mounting. Ill be visiting their boards today for some further insite into their problems and solutions.

Paul
 
I know they are set to pickup vbirations at a certain frequency. I believe the 94-95 cars also only look for the vibration when a cylinder actually fires.

Out of curiosity, what would would constitute a knock sensor not functioning properly, besides giving a false positive. Do the GM guys have the knock sensor not ever work (retard timing) due to the vibrations of the strap? Doesn't seem very like to me, but then there are a lot of strange things.

I remember Fred always said the 3.8 knock sensor was not working on his 4.2 stroker, but I always thought that was due to all the parts changing the frequency of the "knock" and then it was out of range for the sensor.
 
Ford only sells the motor mounts complete with the brackets, no separate pieces can be ordered as far as I know.




cheers
Ed N.
 
Paul,

According to my dyno charts, the torque strap isn't triggering the knock sensor on mine either.

I'm using steel sleeved rubber isolaters to stop vibrations from getting into the frame. Before adding them it soulded like a rod was knocking.

David
 
With building up the thickness and adding my home brew rubber isolater (hose)
to the torque arm.There is no room for the motor to move up or down.
The motor mount torque arm will not bend or even flex.
I do not feel or hear any vibrations.
My favorite part , it was cheap.
 
Alright, after talking with a few engineers about this I believe I have come up with a simple and cost effective solution. I will be working on it and will be testing it out while I am in St Louis the first week of June. Installation will be about the same as you would rate difficulty of installing motor mounts as it will require removal of the piece that sticks through the square opening. It is quite likely that this will prevent the need for a torque strap, even on high HP/TQ mills.

Paul
 
bt motorsports, i'am trying to email you but i'am getting an error (your address is too long) if you get this please email me at(zaldain@aol.com) thanks, bob
 
The engine mount design is revealed....

The sold rubber engine mount that MN12 Performance sells works like this. The OE rubber snubber is removed why? Because the solid rubber engine mount is 1/4" taller and does not allow the engine bracket to be reassembled if the rubber snubber is there. Drivers side only. This leaves about 1/4" inch gap between the upper plate tab in the square hole. As the engine torques it will not streatch like the liquid filled ones did. Thus the reason for the OEM rubber snubber. The liquid filled mounts usually fail when the rubber snubber fails. The engine torque then tears the mount in two. All because a little piece of rubber failed. The darn thing is so close to the exhaust it gets heat cycled every time you drive the car. So back to the solid engine mounts. The MN12 Performance ones have an reinforced center to allow for much better shear strength. Each mount weights 2.5lbs. Over 500 sets sold and not one failure. If you do buy some other solid engine mount check the weight and on some they were using the same liquid filled mold for the solid. A short cutting method which left half of the mount hollow.
 
Rich, are you saying 1 of your mounts is 1/4" taller than the other or both? Its of no surprise to see the rubber tab fail on any SC given the age of these cars in addition to the heat cycling. That tab was put there for a reason, to avoid metal to metal contact (a point discussed earlier in this thread regarding the knock sensor) and to lesson the vibrations transmitted to the cabin of the car for comfort purposes. Removing this tab to install a taller mount is the precise direction people should not be going in. Remember, your system is as strong as its weakest link....remove the tab and see how long metal vs metal last as they wear against each other in addition to the points mentioned above.

You seem very confident in your product which every vendor needs to be, so I ask what your warranty and return policy is with the mounts you offer. Ill gladly give them a try in my SC but first want to know if, rather when, I tear them apart without the use of a limiting tab or torque strap, what kind of compensation will you offer? Understand, this post is in no way an attempt to begin a war, rather, to cure a more and more common problem SC owners are experiencing as they begin to modify their vehicles further and/or drive them over time.

Putting aside the issue of the arm being higher since the MN12Performance mounts are higher, how do you address the passenger side bracket having about an inch of room below it to slam as it bottoms out since the motor cant raise up on the drivers side? My point here is a solution needs to be provided which address the problem at hand, the overall movement of the engine when under heavy accelleration. This requires addressing both motor mount brackets and the limiting tab.

Paul
 
So now I'm wondering if there is a way to correct or improve the situation without taking the mounts out. I used solid mounts, but I have a friend who works in a Ford parts dept., and he supplied me with the solid mounts when I did the job. I didn't weigh them, but they seemed heavy enough. And yes, they were definately solid!

Since I also put in some hi-flow cats w/custom down tubes and a solid metal steering joint, there is a bit more room in there to maneuver from the bottom... Right now my exhaust is sitting a little low and the main pipe is rubbing on the cross brace support piece just behind the resonator. Anytime I accelerate, I hear it rubbing, which makes me wonder if there is too much play or movement in the driver's side mount... :confused:

Man, these cars are a royal PITA!!!:mad:
 
In an ideal world, a limiting tab on the top of the drivers side (stock location) and one on the bottom of the passenger side would nearly eliminate the torquing over issue. I say nearly because we all know rubber is flexible and therefor will give a bit. Now all you would have to do is find a way to counter the longevity issue. What I am working on will hopefully not transfer much if any more vibration to the cabin that stock, have less give than the rubber limiting tab and stop the motor from torquing over without the use of a torque strap.

Paul
 
Back
Top