Plus Two Engine Mounts failed again

[Si_130/5]

I've heard that rubber compounds such as those originally used on the rotoflex couplings and engine mounts have been outlawed by health and safety legislation and we must make do with inappropriate alternatives which very quickly fail. I changed my S130 mounts a couple of years and only 500 miles ago and they have failed. I believe these were the same mounts used on the MK1 Cortina.
Does a supply of new old stock Cortina mounts exist or has anyone started producing them in countries where H&S doesn't force the production of rubber compounds wholly unsuited to their function?
Can anyone recommend a current source of Plus Two engine mounts which have lasted more than a couple of years?

Gratefully ,

Si

[rgh0]

I think they were originally Anglia not Cortina mounts. The current new replacements will already be being made in China or India and the rubber compounds are poor due to cheap manufacture not due to any health and safety regulations! Modern good quality rubber compounds are far better than 50 years ago - why do you think tyres and hoses and drive belts are better now than they were back then !

I think TTR and some of the other usual suppliers sell reinforced standard mounts that may last longer where the gap between the inner and outer steel plates at the top is also filled with rubber.

cheers
Rohan

[john.p.clegg]

Or when you get the replacements you can gun-in some low modulus silicon rubber into the gap...

John

[Chancer]

It wont be the rubber it will be that they are not using a proper rubber to metal bonding process like all suspension bushes and engine mounts for new vehicles do.

TBH the modern engine mounts and suspension bushes are 500% better than those made in the 60's, they are 100% reliable (there were many process variables that cound go wrong) and the synthetic rubber lasts for d?cades rather than a few years.

what is no being produecd for classic vehicles are just metal plates with rubber glued to them which is not the same thing at all.

15+ years ago I bought a "new" gearbox mounting for my 2000E box on my Westfield, one look at it was enought to know it wouldnt last more than a couple fo days and it didnt

If originality isnt an issue then find a suitable OE mounting from a modern production vehicle and fabricate some brackets to suit like on a Caterham except they still use A35 engine mounts

Anglia ones were crap in the day and didnt last long even on a 997 motor.

[Robbie693]

I've had TTR re-inforced mounts on mine for about 5 years and they seem fine. As Rohan mentions, they fill the void with silicone which you could probably do yourself. I had heard that they increase harshness but it's not something I have noticed so would use them again.

I have a spyder chassis so the mounts are mounted the other way up but I can't see why that would make a difference

Cheers

Robbie

[john.p.clegg]

You will if the "rubber " fails,, my upside down U will sit on the I of the mount ,,where will your engine fall to?

John

[alan]

Anglia 105E

[Si_130/5]

Thank you all for your help. I should have engaged the brain before writing. Of course the problem lay with the rubber to metal bonding on the faulty mounts and rotoflexes. I have received universal assurance that the weakness is not to be found in the mounts currently available and have bought a pair. I was also told by a company selling the reinforced versions - where the gap is filled with a bush incorporated in the rubber mould - that they aren't necessary for normal road use as the standard design is now so durable and they transmit a little more vibration through the chassis although if you haven't found this to be true Robbie I'll defer to your experience. .

Very best wishes,

Simon

[Robbie693]

You will if the "rubber " fails,, my upside down U will sit on the I of the mount ,,where will your engine fall to?

John

Hello John, my engine will fall into the 'U' too - the Spyder chassis has the mounts on the frame rather than the engine!

Robbie