The motor mount thread
11-03-2010, 03:43 PM
#201
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: where the weather suits my clothes
Age: 55
Posts: 27,921
Received 1,080 Likes
on
661 Posts
Wish I could wait for these. My front and rear mounts are beyond shot.
Got a new set of OEM mounts and going to do the Window weld treatment tonight.
Maybe when my TL hits 250,000 miles I'll be pick this set up
Got a new set of OEM mounts and going to do the Window weld treatment tonight.
Maybe when my TL hits 250,000 miles I'll be pick this set up
11-03-2010, 05:45 PM
#203
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
Yep, but sadly so will the polyurethane, just not as quickly as the window weld.
Im going on my second front mount now. That means every mount that has been poly filled has had to be replaced. I installed them last summer.
Im going on my second front mount now. That means every mount that has been poly filled has had to be replaced. I installed them last summer.
11-03-2010, 07:22 PM
#204
I need 2 more gears
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springvale, Maine
Age: 45
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
7 Posts
wow you guys actually think you know how to design? please what you feel is better is so far out in no man's land I had to laugh, the vertical bushing mount is pitiful and will never last no matter the durometer of the rubber or polyurethane, read DESIGN FLAW from the get go. You should actually seek out designers and FEA types not shade tree mechanics.
11-03-2010, 09:30 PM
#205
Lead Footed
Yeah, if people would do some searching on what we've all tried, they'll find we've already been down those paths. I proposed a lateral/horizontal design (what I often call the 3rd gen design) early on as the original Innovative vertical designs failed quickly, regardless of bushing density. I'm still running the Innovative 3rd gen design, it's not perfect as the bushings still fail after about 9-12 months. They lasted a bit longer with the black bushings - not sure what number they were. I proposed some additional changes to the 3rd gen that I felt would have worked well, but then Innovative left us hanging. In addition, the 3rd gen did not do any better at resolving the severe vibration issues associated with the rear mount. Again, a design for this was proposed and again Innovative thought they knew better.
To be honest and no offense as I don't want to broad brush all engineers, but most engineers are hard headed. They think they know more than all of the motor heads/hot rodders. We all know a lot of performance mod concepts start with motor heads/hot rodders. I personally have yet to experience one case where an engineer came to my old hot rodder community with an idea. The ideas always started with the hot rodder. Granted, most hot rodders couldn't build the part, but many have. I'm confident that if Innovative would have listened to us, we'd have had a working mount over 2 years ago. And as Friesm2000 pointed out, part of the problem is that these design engineer rocket scientists haven't paid attention to . . . it the design of our cars verses the typical 4 cyl tuner parts they are used to building, and the design physics of our engine, tranny and chassis.
Sorry, but the real issue here has been that it's the fabricators/designers/engineers that have been the problem/roadblock as we've had to deal with their arrogance thinking they know everything and we know nothing. Until one of them comes up with a fully viable aftermarket design, folks have to poly fill their mount.
Seriously, please prove me and or my design concepts I've proposed wrong.
Ruf
To be honest and no offense as I don't want to broad brush all engineers, but most engineers are hard headed. They think they know more than all of the motor heads/hot rodders. We all know a lot of performance mod concepts start with motor heads/hot rodders. I personally have yet to experience one case where an engineer came to my old hot rodder community with an idea. The ideas always started with the hot rodder. Granted, most hot rodders couldn't build the part, but many have. I'm confident that if Innovative would have listened to us, we'd have had a working mount over 2 years ago. And as Friesm2000 pointed out, part of the problem is that these design engineer rocket scientists haven't paid attention to . . . it the design of our cars verses the typical 4 cyl tuner parts they are used to building, and the design physics of our engine, tranny and chassis.
Sorry, but the real issue here has been that it's the fabricators/designers/engineers that have been the problem/roadblock as we've had to deal with their arrogance thinking they know everything and we know nothing. Until one of them comes up with a fully viable aftermarket design, folks have to poly fill their mount.
Seriously, please prove me and or my design concepts I've proposed wrong.
Ruf
Last edited by RUF87; 11-03-2010 at 09:32 PM.
11-03-2010, 09:38 PM
#206
Ruf, mine have been busted for a long time...and now I have about 160k on my 2001 cls...my son is about to start driving this car and takes it pretty easy when driving... other than the clunk I get when its cold in the morning if I am not paying attention, the car runs very well... should I get some more mounts or just keep riding? Any thoughts?
11-03-2010, 11:10 PM
#207
Lead Footed
Ruf, mine have been busted for a long time...and now I have about 160k on my 2001 cls...my son is about to start driving this car and takes it pretty easy when driving... other than the clunk I get when its cold in the morning if I am not paying attention, the car runs very well... should I get some more mounts or just keep riding? Any thoughts?
sorry, I have 2 boys and not sure they take anything easy. Anyway, driving with busted motors is never a good idea . . but I've done it while waiting for the various field test mounts to show up. Do you know if the both the front and rear are just ruptured or are they torn? If they're ruptured you could have them poly filled. If they are torn, there's not much you can do with that. If you are interested in poly filling them, check the thread from distortedolskool.https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...oly+fill+mount
If you're not in to doing that, you're choices are replacing with OEM or waiting and waiting for some aftermarket ones.
Ruf
11-03-2010, 11:25 PM
#208
Yeah, if people would do some searching on what we've all tried, they'll find we've already been down those paths. I proposed a lateral/horizontal design (what I often call the 3rd gen design) early on as the original Innovative vertical designs failed quickly, regardless of bushing density. I'm still running the Innovative 3rd gen design, it's not perfect as the bushings still fail after about 9-12 months. They lasted a bit longer with the black bushings - not sure what number they were. I proposed some additional changes to the 3rd gen that I felt would have worked well, but then Innovative left us hanging. In addition, the 3rd gen did not do any better at resolving the severe vibration issues associated with the rear mount. Again, a design for this was proposed and again Innovative thought they knew better.
To be honest and no offense as I don't want to broad brush all engineers, but most engineers are hard headed. They think they know more than all of the motor heads/hot rodders. We all know a lot of performance mod concepts start with motor heads/hot rodders. I personally have yet to experience one case where an engineer came to my old hot rodder community with an idea. The ideas always started with the hot rodder. Granted, most hot rodders couldn't build the part, but many have. I'm confident that if Innovative would have listened to us, we'd have had a working mount over 2 years ago. And as Friesm2000 pointed out, part of the problem is that these design engineer rocket scientists haven't paid attention to . . . it the design of our cars verses the typical 4 cyl tuner parts they are used to building, and the design physics of our engine, tranny and chassis.
Sorry, but the real issue here has been that it's the fabricators/designers/engineers that have been the problem/roadblock as we've had to deal with their arrogance thinking they know everything and we know nothing. Until one of them comes up with a fully viable aftermarket design, folks have to poly fill their mount.
Seriously, please prove me and or my design concepts I've proposed wrong.
Ruf
To be honest and no offense as I don't want to broad brush all engineers, but most engineers are hard headed. They think they know more than all of the motor heads/hot rodders. We all know a lot of performance mod concepts start with motor heads/hot rodders. I personally have yet to experience one case where an engineer came to my old hot rodder community with an idea. The ideas always started with the hot rodder. Granted, most hot rodders couldn't build the part, but many have. I'm confident that if Innovative would have listened to us, we'd have had a working mount over 2 years ago. And as Friesm2000 pointed out, part of the problem is that these design engineer rocket scientists haven't paid attention to . . . it the design of our cars verses the typical 4 cyl tuner parts they are used to building, and the design physics of our engine, tranny and chassis.
Sorry, but the real issue here has been that it's the fabricators/designers/engineers that have been the problem/roadblock as we've had to deal with their arrogance thinking they know everything and we know nothing. Until one of them comes up with a fully viable aftermarket design, folks have to poly fill their mount.
Seriously, please prove me and or my design concepts I've proposed wrong.
Ruf
lolRuf, mine have been busted for a long time...and now I have about 160k on my 2001 cls...my son is about to start driving this car and takes it pretty easy when driving... other than the clunk I get when its cold in the morning if I am not paying attention, the car runs very well... should I get some more mounts or just keep riding? Any thoughts?
yeah i drove easy when i was 16 too, but only when the parents/brother where in the car though
11-03-2010, 11:29 PM
#209
also i have not looked in the 3rd gen mounts recently, but could we just get that mount adapted to our cars, and we would just have to buy a new tripod piece (the bracket off the motor) 
; but then again they also have an additional mount on the tranny (basically underneath where our batteries sit) itself, but that may make that design adequate for them though idk
; but then again they also have an additional mount on the tranny (basically underneath where our batteries sit) itself, but that may make that design adequate for them though idk
11-04-2010, 10:05 AM
#210
son, taking it easy . . sorry, I have 2 boys and not sure they take anything easy. Anyway, driving with busted motors is never a good idea . . but I've done it while waiting for the various field test mounts to show up. Do you know if the both the front and rear are just ruptured or are they torn? If they're ruptured you could have them poly filled. If they are torn, there's not much you can do with that. If you are interested in poly filling them, check the thread from distortedolskool.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...oly+fill+mount
If you're not in to doing that, you're choices are replacing with OEM or waiting and waiting for some aftermarket ones.
Ruf
sorry, I have 2 boys and not sure they take anything easy. Anyway, driving with busted motors is never a good idea . . but I've done it while waiting for the various field test mounts to show up. Do you know if the both the front and rear are just ruptured or are they torn? If they're ruptured you could have them poly filled. If they are torn, there's not much you can do with that. If you are interested in poly filling them, check the thread from distortedolskool.https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...oly+fill+mount
If you're not in to doing that, you're choices are replacing with OEM or waiting and waiting for some aftermarket ones.
Ruf
I will have to ask the tech who did my tranny fluid if they are torn or ruptured, I dont really know... and yes, I used to go really big when my parents werent around too... he just doesn't seem as interested in going fast as I did when I was that same age... I was a speed demon.
11-04-2010, 10:13 AM
#212
son, taking it easy . . sorry, I have 2 boys and not sure they take anything easy. Anyway, driving with busted motors is never a good idea . . but I've done it while waiting for the various field test mounts to show up. Do you know if the both the front and rear are just ruptured or are they torn? If they're ruptured you could have them poly filled. If they are torn, there's not much you can do with that. If you are interested in poly filling them, check the thread from distortedolskool.
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...oly+fill+mount
If you're not in to doing that, you're choices are replacing with OEM or waiting and waiting for some aftermarket ones.
Ruf
sorry, I have 2 boys and not sure they take anything easy. Anyway, driving with busted motors is never a good idea . . but I've done it while waiting for the various field test mounts to show up. Do you know if the both the front and rear are just ruptured or are they torn? If they're ruptured you could have them poly filled. If they are torn, there's not much you can do with that. If you are interested in poly filling them, check the thread from distortedolskool.https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...oly+fill+mount
If you're not in to doing that, you're choices are replacing with OEM or waiting and waiting for some aftermarket ones.
Ruf
11-04-2010, 12:27 PM
#213
I was wondering why the 7th gem accord mounts holds up better. Our problem is that the engine is heavy and its Fited lateral. All cars i know VW vr6 alfaromeo 156 GTA got same issues but we may try to retrofit someother car mount to CL anyone tried that ?
11-04-2010, 01:27 PM
#214
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
So true about engineers.
When I was working in the field with my job I would ALWAYS get into arguments with engineers that know better. They dont have any hands-on experience with these things, all they pay attention to is measurements and think thats the whole story.
When I was working in the field with my job I would ALWAYS get into arguments with engineers that know better. They dont have any hands-on experience with these things, all they pay attention to is measurements and think thats the whole story.
11-04-2010, 01:52 PM
#215
the revised design has a dome shaped washer that sits on top of the mount which greatly helps evenly distribute the pressure.
the j-series motors are not THAT much heavier. than each other.
i want to go out on a limb and say it is install error for people that are having issues. IMO the best way to install these is to pull the motor up with a hoist, you cannot force the mount into place as it would cause un-needed stress on the bushing. you need to fit the motor to the mount, not the mount to the motor.
but what do i know, i havent run my set yet (85A), but i guess i will report back in a few months. they are very well built, and extremely solid. my set will be supporting a j35 SC.
RUF seems like hes been through enough to know about how to properly install them so I'm not even going to try to question his practices because he seems very well read on the whole mount situation.
best of luck to everyone.
11-04-2010, 03:29 PM
#216
you are correct, but there is a j36 turbo 6th gen using the horizontal mounts with no issues (no donuting, no crazy vibrations) using 60A bushings.
the revised design has a dome shaped washer that sits on top of the mount which greatly helps evenly distribute the pressure.
the j-series motors are not THAT much heavier. than each other.
i want to go out on a limb and say it is install error for people that are having issues. IMO the best way to install these is to pull the motor up with a hoist, you cannot force the mount into place as it would cause un-needed stress on the bushing. you need to fit the motor to the mount, not the mount to the motor.
but what do i know, i havent run my set yet (85A), but i guess i will report back in a few months. they are very well built, and extremely solid. my set will be supporting a j35 SC.
RUF seems like hes been through enough to know about how to properly install them so I'm not even going to try to question his practices because he seems very well read on the whole mount situation.
best of luck to everyone.
the revised design has a dome shaped washer that sits on top of the mount which greatly helps evenly distribute the pressure.
the j-series motors are not THAT much heavier. than each other.
i want to go out on a limb and say it is install error for people that are having issues. IMO the best way to install these is to pull the motor up with a hoist, you cannot force the mount into place as it would cause un-needed stress on the bushing. you need to fit the motor to the mount, not the mount to the motor.
but what do i know, i havent run my set yet (85A), but i guess i will report back in a few months. they are very well built, and extremely solid. my set will be supporting a j35 SC.
RUF seems like hes been through enough to know about how to properly install them so I'm not even going to try to question his practices because he seems very well read on the whole mount situation.
best of luck to everyone.
yeah maybe 10-15 pounds at max (ok maybe little bit more, due to the longer stroke of the crank)
but more of what i was referring to being roughly 300 pounds heavier was the car itself, all that sound insulation and creature comforts add up fast, and that is what is doing in said mount, just too much for the mounts (and btw that is ONE person, and we don't know his driving style either, he may be a pussie when it comes to racing it around, and using all the available power
)and those dome shaped washers, sounds like the old school sway-bar endinks
(since most manufacturs have gone to the tie-rod like ones)
11-04-2010, 03:35 PM
#217
So true about engineers.
When I was working in the field with my job I would ALWAYS get into arguments with engineers that know better. They dont have any hands-on experience with these things, all they pay attention to is measurements and think thats the whole story.
When I was working in the field with my job I would ALWAYS get into arguments with engineers that know better. They dont have any hands-on experience with these things, all they pay attention to is measurements and think thats the whole story.
11-04-2010, 04:19 PM
#218
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
but then again sometimes it is engineered for EASE of assembly at the FACTORY (like alot of truck and suv fuel tanks are dropped into the frame, before the body ever goes on, so they don't have to worry about the ease of getting to the fittings, or the dropping of the tank out of the frame when it is too wide to fit through the frame rails easily (filler neck fittings hit, along with a bracket sitting right the fuck in the way on the other side)(jeep yj btw)
11-05-2010, 09:31 AM
#219
Lead Footed
So true about engineers.
When I was working in the field with my job I would ALWAYS get into arguments with engineers that know better. They dont have any hands-on experience with these things, all they pay attention to is measurements and think thats the whole story.
When I was working in the field with my job I would ALWAYS get into arguments with engineers that know better. They dont have any hands-on experience with these things, all they pay attention to is measurements and think thats the whole story.
Ruf
11-05-2010, 09:58 AM
#220
Lead Footed
you are correct, but there is a j36 turbo 6th gen using the horizontal mounts with no issues (no donuting, no crazy vibrations) using 60A bushings.
the revised design has a dome shaped washer that sits on top of the mount which greatly helps evenly distribute the pressure.
the revised design has a dome shaped washer that sits on top of the mount which greatly helps evenly distribute the pressure.
[/QUOTE]
the j-series motors are not THAT much heavier. than each other.
i want to go out on a limb and say it is install error for people that are having issues. IMO the best way to install these is to pull the motor up with a hoist, you cannot force the mount into place as it would cause un-needed stress on the bushing. you need to fit the motor to the mount, not the mount to the motor.
but what do i know, i havent run my set yet (85A), but i guess i will report back in a few months. they are very well built, and extremely solid. my set will be supporting a j35 SC.
RUF seems like hes been through enough to know about how to properly install them so I'm not even going to try to question his practices because he seems very well read on the whole mount situation.
best of luck to everyone.[/QUOTE]
Installation is not a big deal on these, except for the rear, which is a real pain in the arse as it's a lot more involved. With the Innovative mounts, I could swap out all three mounts in less than an 1hr.
We've also had several members that had their mounts installed professionally and they experienced the same problems.
As for the vibrations, all I can say is that when the rear mounts was replaced with an OEM mount the vibrations were gone. I could see if there was a fluke in one of my installs, but I've swapped mounts on my car over 12 times now - mostly field testing the mounts - and the results are consistent. I've also done mounts on the side for members and or their mom's car . . . we've never had a problem with the OEM mounts going back in, or the aftermarket front or side mounts - with the exception of Innovative's first side mount which was welds at the wrong spot, holes were off 1/8" and the bolts were too short, but regardless of the 5 different rear mounts we tested the problems are the same. Anyway, anyone wanting to dig into my thoughts on the design call PM me to call them and I'll be happy to do so . . . it's too much for me to want to explain it correctly in text . . .
Ruf
11-12-2010, 10:16 PM
#221
ok so my friend with a cl-s just came over...
and his OEM rear mount is a vertical mount... whereas the accord has a horizontal one. so this is probably why the CL owners are having so much trouble with innovative? I wasnt aware that the rear mount was different.
and his OEM rear mount is a vertical mount... whereas the accord has a horizontal one. so this is probably why the CL owners are having so much trouble with innovative? I wasnt aware that the rear mount was different.
11-13-2010, 08:30 PM
#222
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
The rear mount on the CL differs between automatic models and 6 speed models. I still believe the rear mount design on the 6 speed is superior to the automatic, and I question why Honda didnt use that design for the front mount.
11-13-2010, 10:32 PM
#224
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
11-14-2010, 12:26 AM
#227
maybe but then again the bushing just tears apart and hydraulic fluid leaks all over, but the issue with that though is that the factory bracket does not have a strong enough connection to the block, and gets stressed even more with being able to dump the clutch
11-23-2010, 09:47 PM
#228
Lead Footed
. . . there's a good chance we really have some mounts on the way? Thought we needed an update on this . .It's my understanding that the revised field test mounts have really been shipped and are at Excelerate. Once Excelerate has confirmed the parts are for our 2nd gen CLs & TLs we will post more details.
The bad news would be that my car is still down . . . trying to get a replacement tranny . . . which has been a major headache.
Ruf
11-23-2010, 10:24 PM
#230
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
. . . there's a good chance we really have some mounts on the way? Thought we needed an update on this . .It's my understanding that the revised field test mounts have really been shipped and are at Excelerate. Once Excelerate has confirmed the parts are for our 2nd gen CLs & TLs we will post more details.
The bad news would be that my car is still down . . . trying to get a replacement tranny . . . which has been a major headache.
Ruf
I need to toss a new front mount in anyway.
11-23-2010, 10:45 PM
#231
. . . there's a good chance we really have some mounts on the way? Thought we needed an update on this . .It's my understanding that the revised field test mounts have really been shipped and are at Excelerate. Once Excelerate has confirmed the parts are for our 2nd gen CLs & TLs we will post more details.
The bad news would be that my car is still down . . . trying to get a replacement tranny . . . which has been a major headache.
Ruf
, but it is for a base though (but only like 4th and 5th gear ratios are different for the most part, and only like 30k or so on iti am probably going to take the motor, so pulling the tranny be no issue
https://acurazine.com/forums/car-parts-sale-361/2002-tl-complete-part-out-799141/
(biggest issue is shipping though)
12-01-2010, 05:06 PM
#237
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
Poly filled mounts and the stiffy mount up top along with the two torque dampers help, but they dont make it non-existent. The suspension itself can also pick up some of the slack, so if thats sorted properly you shouldnt have much wheel hop. But the biggest issue is reliability.
Josh, can you post pics of the mounts?
Josh, can you post pics of the mounts?
12-01-2010, 10:49 PM
#238
when i origionally when to ingall's to get it made, i think i mention in the threads for it, that it is never going to be a full on replacement for good mounts (especially when you start going FI, nitrous or stroker), only going to help with the stock mounts
12-02-2010, 12:10 PM
#240
Uses turn signals in my
