Help me choose the right engine mounts for my 1.6 TD!

[TurboJ]

I guess you're familiar with my four-year project ( http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php?topic=17081.0 )

What would be the best combination of engine mounts for this car?
The plan is to drive on the road mainly, and do longer trips too - I don't want super hard bushings,
but the engine movement should be contained somewhat none the less.

Also, I work at a car spare parts dealership and have all sorts of mk2 parts around me.
How do I know which mounts are which? There is some model-suitability information,
but I have my doubts about it. How do I identify the right mounts? They have some sort of colour coding.
Are the stock diesel mounts the softest? In that case maybe stock gasser mounts would be fine for me?

I remember my 1.8 CIS Jetta became way too harsh when I filled the front and rear mounts with silicone sealer...

Please help me out here - I know you have the experience.

[theman53]

It really depends on what right rear engine mount you have for your MK2. I have the all rubber one and you can buy a poly urathane insert for it... DON'T. It doesn't ride rough, but at idle it will make your teeth itch.
I have a G60 front engine mount, stock diesel rubber right rear engine mount, and a polyurathane trans mount. With the idle set just right and all the other new parts on the car it is definately bearable. I would still like it tighter, but the engine at idle is too much with the insert. If you have the hydro rear mount I don't believe you have any options, except to remove it and get the rubber one.

[gldgti]

I tried a few options in my old car and the best compromise I found was:

1. OEM AAZ rubber mount for main engine mount on he back of the block
2. BFI stage 0.5 poly mount on the front of the engine (front subframe one)
3. BFI stage 0.5 HD trans mount.

The front and trans mounts deliver very little vibration to the vehicle body but make an enormous difference to the torque reaction. The AAZ rear mount is a good OEM one to use for any of the diesels.

BFI mounts:
http://store.blackforestindustries.com/bfist5pomomo.html

[theman53]

I think those are the mounts I have that he listed. The front mount is different now I remember, but from what others have told me the front mount transmitts the least vibration and could almost be solid. That rear though, woo.

[vanbcguy]

Does anyone have pictures of the Mk III versus Mk II rear engine mount brackets?  I'm trying to sort out why my engine isn't sitting quite right in my car - I think someone used a 1.6 engine mount bracket rather than an AAZ one.  I'm guessing the 1.6 rear engine bracket is about 1" shorter than the AAZ one.  Tagging on this topic as it's pretty related.

[theman53]

That works as it is related.

I make a mount so you can run a low mounted turbo easier. For the vnt 15 it is now bolt on and go, for other turbos it is close but may need grinding. At any rate I have made it Tri-sexual with the 3 different cast mounts. Mk2 gasser, mk2 diesel, and Mk3 one hole. Depending on how they drilled the cast mount or if they replaced the piece on the car to accept the Mk2 mount then it could be off about 1". The Mk2 mount in place of the Mk3 mount would be around 1" shorter from engine to holes, so your engine would be around 1" further toward the fire wall. If that is what you are having then I would say that is it.

[R.O.R-2.0]

Does anyone have pictures of the Mk III versus Mk II rear engine mount brackets?  I'm trying to sort out why my engine isn't sitting quite right in my car - I think someone used a 1.6 engine mount bracket rather than an AAZ one.  I'm guessing the 1.6 rear engine bracket is about 1" shorter than the AAZ one.  Tagging on this topic as it's pretty related.

it is IMPOSSIBLE to use a mk2 engine bracket in a mk3, without swapping the entire subframe, or cutting the bracket off the mk3 subframe and welding it on the mk2 subframe..

the mounts are pretty identical, besides the fact that the mk3 mount has one bolt holding the aluminum engine mount to it.. and the 2 bolts that mount it to the subframe are flat, rather than mounted at a 30* angle..

if your motor mount is held to the aluminum arm off the engine with one large bolt, its a mk3 mount.
if its held to it with 3 smaller bolts, than its a mk2 mount, and probably accompanying subframe..

the mounts sit at the same height tho, besides the fact that it is impossible to interchange them.

[gldgti]

on that basis, I reckon swapping to a mk3 sub frame would be a good upgrade, since there are lots of mounts available for that style.

the subframe is bolt on.

[vanbcguy]

That works as it is related.

I make a mount so you can run a low mounted turbo easier. For the vnt 15 it is now bolt on and go, for other turbos it is close but may need grinding. At any rate I have made it Tri-sexual with the 3 different cast mounts. Mk2 gasser, mk2 diesel, and Mk3 one hole. Depending on how they drilled the cast mount or if they replaced the piece on the car to accept the Mk2 mount then it could be off about 1". The Mk2 mount in place of the Mk3 mount would be around 1" shorter from engine to holes, so your engine would be around 1" further toward the fire wall. If that is what you are having then I would say that is it.

Guess I'll have to get the camera down there and shoot some pics!!

I've broken one front mount bracket already, and the replacement is REALLY stretched to fit.  The front mount is skewed way back towards the firewall and is definitely too short.  I didn't do the 1.6 swap on the car (honestly when I bought Jezzie I couldn't tell you the difference between a 1.6 and an AAZ on sight, and got a "surprise" as a result)... whoever did the swap though was pretty lazy.  They left the AC compressor on the car for instance even though it was a non-AC body.  I can also tell you with absolute certainty that a Mk II PS pump will work fine with a Mk III steering rack as a result.  I would not be at ALL surprised to find the Mk II bracket was left attached to the block, resulting in whatever mystery mess I have now.

If it turns out the bracket is the problem maybe I'll hit you up!

[TurboJ]

OK. So I have done some research. It would appear that all Golf G60 (same as late model mk2 GTi 16V) engine mounts will fit.
The rear G60 engine mount also fits. does it not?

Anyone have experience on these?

Also, the mk3 transmission mount fits too, but is there a problem since it has less clearance to the subframe than does the mk2 mount?

I'm thinking a G60 / G60 / VR6 mount combo should be good for my Jetta.

Any thoughts?

[theman53]

I would do Poly front, poly trans, stock rear.

[danster]

This type of early fully captive mk2 Golf front mount is rare but worth keeping an eye out for. You can insert strips of rubber to the voids in the bush to firm it up and reduce engine movement if you wish.
These were around before all that oil filled hydro nonsense came about. If I was bothered about NVH (noise, vibration and harshness) I would not have bought a 4 cylinder diesel.





NB, the crossmember bracket has been cut and modified to allow the mount to be fitted to a mk1 platform vehicle.

[TurboJ]

Any clearance issues with the G60 right rear mount?

I understand the the TD will always vibrate, but I want it to be tolerable. My last attempt wasn't tolerable even on a gasser 1.8 engine.

[TurboJ]

It really depends on what right rear engine mount you have for your MK2. I have the all rubber one and you can buy a poly urathane insert for it... DON'T. It doesn't ride rough, but at idle it will make your teeth itch.
I have a G60 front engine mount, stock diesel rubber right rear engine mount, and a polyurathane trans mount. With the idle set just right and all the other new parts on the car it is definately bearable. I would still like it tighter, but the engine at idle is too much with the insert. If you have the hydro rear mount I don't believe you have any options, except to remove it and get the rubber one.

wait... replace the hydraulic rear engine mount with a rubber one?
Why then, on all European 1.6Ds and TDs there is the rubber rear mount along with all the 8V gasser engines.
Then. '89 -> 16V and G60 get the hydraulic rear mount, that is also used on <- 93 Passat 16V.
So how would a rubber rear be better than the hydraulic one?

Also, anyone used a gas strut to keep the engine in place? That could be a solution, should be easy on vibration and tighten when there is momentum on the engine, right?

[Alleslowbuged]

Hi,

first i have to say, that i did not read all post, so pherhaps everthing is allready discussed here. I have used differend engine rear mount on my AAZ in my mk2 golf, first was motorsport like with an Audi A8 wishbone rubber mount in a self welded suport, which looses every bolt over the hole car in only 100 km or so, second was stock support with new rubber and addition poly insert, which was abit better but not much, now i have a new stock rubber and it works pretty good.

Best Regards
Alleslowbuged