View Single Post
  #8  
Old 11-19-2013, 11:34 AM
mach4's Avatar
mach4 mach4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Diego County, CA
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Stokes View Post
I don't see what good filling the base of the mounts would do except making the whole deal a bit stiffer, which would not be better.

I'm not above messing with factory stuff but I don't see where you'll gain anything with this technique.
The back story on the filled mounts is that when I swapped an OM617 into my 380SL I had less than optimal clearance between the engine and the subframe. Having read all the horror stories about the poor quality of currently available motor mounts, I searched for a solution that would give me insurance against a collapsed mount somewhere inconvenient (like in the middle of nowhere on one of my cross country road trips) The solution I came up with was the filled mount. Most motor mounts are just a slab of rubber between two metal mounting surfaces, so making the stock MB mount into what is essentially functionally equivalent is not a stretch.

The process showed that a stiff urethane (70) will indeed make things very harsh, but the softer Shore A 30 is essentially indistinguishable from stock.

So if someone is looking for cheap insurance or to extend the replacement interval or to be able to use cheaper mounts in the first place or has a custom application, the filled mounts are an option to consider.

I also fillers my subframe mounts to prevent those from collapsing as the clearance between my valve cover and hood is very tight as well and would result in contact.
__________________
Current Stable
  • 380SL (diesel)
  • Corvette C5
  • Manx
  • Baja Bug
  • F350 Powerstroke
  • Auburn Boattail Speedster replica
Reply With Quote