id much rather see a set of engine tilt mounts with urethane. solid mounts are for race only stuff, it gets real anoying driving down the freeway with a constant vibration.

 

Id take a set of pure solids if they fit the redline...they should

 

chicks dig vibrations

 

alright well sign me up..

 

BBZZZZZZZZZ hehe

 

it's bad when you wheel hop in the ******* snow. way to go gm.

 

why doesn't any one contact Rousch and see if you can get dimensions, or have them produce them with bushings?

i'd really consider these if there was bushings, i don't want solid mounts

 

if we still had an account with roush at work, id call them.

but we don't
cause we suck

 

yeah if TTR can design the solid one, they can design one with some poly in them too right?

 

This topic is for TRUE SOLID mounts, metal to metal, which also tilts the engine forward. (Metal brakets for mounts, bolted directly from the frame to the engine)

I dont think there will be a large demand for a solid urathane mount, which tilts the engine forward.

Most will use the current TTR mounts, or the 100% metal mounts (which tilt the engine forward), why go 1/2 way between these setups?

 

**** if you are going to make em, might as well buy yours. Better than sitting trying to make em myself lol.
I'm in, only question would be how soon could they be available. I got my new motor going in soon, and would like to be able to get this done before.

 

We would need to know how much tilt is needed, a set of the GM ones to us would help a ton. We could have them in a month, if we had the GM ones here...

 

with the exsisting mounts, minor modification would would be needed to all three mounts to tilt the motor forward a touch, but still retain the poly style inserts in there. it works in my head. then again, so does whirrled peas.

is the oil pickup going to pose an issue when the motor is tilted?

 

get the proper angle for the axles but not have my teeth fall out

 

subscribed

 

Look closer. Thats a 4t65e in those pictures. Unless thats whats installed in your car, Rousch will do you no good.
Maybe a comprimise between the solid mounts and poly insert for some people....design them with a rubber surface between the mount and the mounting point on the frame as well as under the bolt mounting points.

 

ala sbc style.

if i could get a set of stock mounts. i could possibly have a set of cnc milled billet ones made

ohhhhhhhh bling bling y0

 

so i had a blue bird fly in and tell me this is what they did for the auto trans..

 

I have a set of bwoody solid mounts and the vibrate really bad. I can imagine doing something completely solid? Whats the problem with the stock location other then axle angle? And what is happening because of that angle?

 

subscribed

 

Hey guys... didn't read the whole thread, but has anyone addressed the fact that the engine is already relatively far ahead of the axles already as it is, and moving it further forward will make weight distribution significantly worse than the already crappy stock amount, and also most likely hurt the car on the track? Just curious... So I take it, that this proposed installation, would pretty much be for Drag-only 'balts? Or... am I completely fucked up on my thinking?

 

the idea isnt to move the motor forward, but to tilt it forward. this will bring the differential up, in turn raising the height of the axles to get proper driveline geometry for lowered cars. rotating the motor wont change weight distribution much.

the ideal thing is to have the axle flat. whats happening when you lower the car is the axle is now pointing uphill and in cases of very low cars (airride, coilovers, h&r race springs) is that the axles are on such a steep angle they cause vibrations and shortened axle life. by rotating the motor forward the axles will be close to flat and these issues go away.

as i said before, id be in for urethane, but not solid. the car vibrates enough as it is, id be doing this to get rid of vibrations, not add more. and engine movment is so little as it is with urethane mounts, solid just arent needed.

 

one of the main reasons i bought a new car is because of comfort...although i love this idea, i would not be in this if it were solid, but thats just me....maybe in another car i used specifically for the track...not my daily driver..not my baby.. i can deal with some vibs but nothing extreme, bottom line

 

The reason in performance applications is not primarily to smooth the vibrations caused by high half shaft angles, its to minimize drivetrain loss. The higher the angle, the more force applied axially which takes away from force applied to the desired angle.

Also the rack shims significantly reduce bump steer since the tie rod is obviously a fixed length but the distance from the rack to the knuckle changes with changes in the road surface. The higher the angle, the higher the ratio of that difference.

I'm going to ask a mod to move this from LSJ tech to Advanced Performance Modifications since these parts are for those who are performance oriented.

 

Moved per request