Engine Mount Manufacture

[William2]

I have just bought this engine mount from a well known UK Lotus dealer but it is the first time I have seen one where the solid rubber is not used at the top of the mount. Are these ok to use or could they have an inherent weakness with the lack of rubber infill?

[mariodschy]

my old one looked the same and also the one that i've purchased last week.
Should be ok.

[john.p.clegg]

But if you want to beef it up a bit,you could gun in some low modulus silicon sealant...

John

[elanner]

I've always received decent quality products from the UK Lotus parts suppliers so the engine mount will probably be fine.

But I'll bet that if there's a hole in the mount that the engine could fall in to, it will. And probably a lot sooner than you expect.

I guess the mounts that are solid to the top might transmit a bit more vibration than the ones with the thin membrane (or hole, in your case) but at least they're not totally dependent on the quality of the rubber/metal bond to hold the engine up.

Wasn't there an entry in the forum not long ago from somebody whose new engine mounts collapsed while doing nothing between fitting the engine and completing the restoration?

Nick

[peterako]

As John suggests above or.....

in my case, I cut some rubber to shape/fit the gaps from an old mount and wedged/glued them in place to fill the gaps.

This was based on a suggestion from Susan Miller when I had been experiencing a few more mount failures than expected.

I also fabricated a heat shield for the exhaust side mount out of some computer casing metal.

Haven't had any problems with Engine Mounts since....

Peter

[mariodschy]

As John suggests above or.....

in my case, I cut some rubber to shape/fit the gaps from an old mount and wedged/glued them in place to fill the gaps.


Peter

Very good idea, happy to collect the old mounts...

[The Cyclist]

In the mounts I have bought in the past, that gap has had no more than a membrane of rubber in it with no mechanical strength at all.

[William2]

There seems also to be another variation in engine mounts and that is the thickness of the metal flange that bolts to the chassis bracket. The first pair I tried to fit had a thickness of at least 1/8" and meant that they were distorting the rubber and consequently it started to come apart!! The pair I then purchased from Miles Wilkins were much thinner but fitted correctly. Food for thought!

[l10tus]

It was me who recently posted about the failing mounts.

Bought brand new 'standard mounts' from one of the normal suppliers at the begining of the refurb, finally completed the build about 6 years on, and both of the mounts had collapsed.!

It became apparent when the heater control valve was noticed nearly touching the passenger footwell.

Informed users of this site guided me to the QED mounts, which are 'heavy duty' - being completely filled with properly vulcanised rubber, upto the top of the steel hoop.

The original ones' rubber and metal components had become completely detached from one another, without the motor ever even being turned over, let alone run !

I received recommendations of all maner of ways to stop the valve rubbing on the footwell, from cutting pieces out of the fibreglass, to using various plumbing angle bends and extensions to move the valve away from the footwell, but decided to bite the bullet and pay the extra money for a proper fix, by investing in the stronger mounts.

Guess what - problem fixed !

So, no torque rattle, rubbing or bumping - just quiet.

The ones you have will probably not last 10 minutes !,

I tend to agree with the one post I received, who seemed well informed on vulcanising techniques and said the quality had decreased over the years due to some contributing factor in the raw materials and / or etching priming process used.

Not sure if anybody else manufactures these, as I didn't look any further, also seem to recall QED saying they were generally used by the 'racing fellows'.

I must admit, they look like standard ones to me, that have been 'upgraded' by adding rubber (where normally there's a hole or very thin 'flash' covering the bulk of the rubber below the hoop) - that said they positioned and supported the engine exactly where it should be, so that'll do nicely thanks!

I hope this helps and saves you having to replace failures for nothing.

Good luck,
Phil.

[billwill]

QED seem to do both standard and heavy duty engine mounts.

http://qedmotorsport.co.uk/qed-shop/lot ... heavy-duty

[512BB]

l10tus wrote:
I received recommendations of all maner of ways to stop the valve rubbing on the footwell

and

I tend to agree with the one post I received, who seemed well informed on vulcanising techniques and said the quality had decreased over the years due to some contributing factor in the raw materials

By 'I received' I pressume you mean people PMd you. What I do not understand, is why people feel the need to PM their thoughts or suggestions, instead of sharing those ideas with the board ? Can someone explain please.

That might also explain why we have over 4000 members, but only about 30 posters.

Leslie

[alan.barker]

Leslie,
imho i think it is a personal choice to pm or not
It's no big deal
Alan

[elan66]

PM sent

[William2]

I have decided to fit a pair of uprated mounts as a precaution, so thanks for all the comments.

[512BB]

Alan Barker wrote:
imho i think it is a personal choice to pm or not
It's no big deal

Forgive me Alan, the topic in question is 'ENGINE MOUNT MANUFACTURE' not 'GUESS THE AMOUNT IN MY BANK ACCOUNT' !

Most people who visit this site, do so to learn about the repair and maintenance of their car. How are they going to do that if all questions were answered by PM ?

It would be a pretty dull, uninformative site if that were to happen, would it not ? Fortunately, the majority choose to air their thoughts openly.

Leslie