Engine and Trans mount question and opinions

[hotrod1]

Opinions please.

There are a few ways to mount an engine and trans. Using the stock insulator (either rubber or urethane) and then create a mount to the frame from there. The other is to mount directly to the block and create a mount to the frame that uses urethane isolators (see pics).

The same can be done for the transmission. Hard mount the cross member directly to the transmission (with no rubber or urethane mount) and then put isolators where it bolts up to the frame.

What opinions do you have?

[mknittle]

Hard mount will transmit noise and drive you crazy.

[justplainray]

I'm a fan of using the stock isolators at the block and trans tail housing, then brackets to the frame. That's the most common way the OEMs do it.....so that works for me.
Just my $.02 worth.
justplainray

[hotrod1]

They are really not hard mounted. They do have a urethane bushing (pic 1) between the mount to the frame but they do not use the stock style rubber/urethane engine (pic 2) or transmission (pic3) mounts.

[hotrodrookie]

I like the way the first mount with the stock insulator looks. Such that the insulator can be bolted to the block and the brackets welded to the frame are in a fixed position so that when installing the engine it doesn't require someone holding up the swinging type mount shown in picture two. Just make sure the mount in picture one has verticle plates boxing it in on the sides.

[Speedbumpauto]

If you're going to run a bunch of power, I think the urethane bushed frame mount is better. It more limits the torque rotation of the engine as well as the rear movement on acceleration.

[justplainray]

Originally Posted by Speedbumpauto

If you're going to run a bunch of power, I think the urethane bushed frame mount is better. It more limits the torque rotation of the engine as well as the rear movement on acceleration.

This is the down side to OEM mounts like photo 1, with lots of power, a motor mount can/will fatigue and split apart, leaving the motor free to flop about.
With the bushing set-up (photo 2) even if the bushing fails completely, the thru bolt controls/limits the movment of the motor.

So the question is what type of duty cycle/demands do you intend to put upon your machine.

OEM works well enough for me.
Your mileage may vary.

justplainray

[mknittle]

There is always the mid 70s camaro caged rubber mount

[mknittle]

Originally Posted by hotrodrookie

I like the way the first mount with the stock insulator looks. Such that the insulator can be bolted to the block and the brackets welded to the frame are in a fixed position so that when installing the engine it doesn't require someone holding up the swinging type mount shown in picture two. Just make sure the mount in picture one has verticle plates boxing it in on the sides.

I think it wouldn't swing if they were mounted to the engine then lowered them in one unit. It might be a pain to position the first time to weld. but then most can be.

[tmoble]

The trouble with pic #1 is that hanging the weight of an engine on a cantilever like will leave you with a cracked frame. My truck now has a Camaro subframe partly because of that. Bad idea, bad implementation.

Second pic is only good for race cars.

What you want is something similar to this:
http://compare.ebay.com/like/3803618...=sbar&_lwgsi=y

[hotrod1]

anyone else have an y input? Anyone tried the urethane bushing mounts?