VWDiesel.net The IDI, TDI, and mTDI source.
Engine Specific Info and Questions => IDI Engine => Topic started by: TurboJ on August 06, 2012, 02:22:43 pm
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!
-
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?
-
I would do Poly front, poly trans, stock rear.
-
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.
(http://i1001.photobucket.com/albums/af136/original_danster/DSC00721.jpg)
(http://i1001.photobucket.com/albums/af136/original_danster/DSC00722.jpg)
NB, the crossmember bracket has been cut and modified to allow the mount to be fitted to a mk1 platform vehicle.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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
-
I got whatever germanautoparts sells as replacements for my 85 jetta td. helped allot in that my car doesn't really vibrate bad. at idle you can detect the bumps but its not enough to make your cd player skip or anything, even with my car starting up cold.
But what I noticed is the tranny mount is too soft for my liking. The whole thing shifts when on/off power suddenly and I hate it.
Somebody sold me some other cars solid rubber mount and I got it to fit by trimming the mounting plate slightly and it helped with the power delivery issue, BUT translated bad vibrations into the dash so I had to yank it.
As soon as I'm on the pedal and driving my engine is really smooth though all the way to reving it out, the little bumps in the dash go away.
-
how is your idle? maybe just set low.
-
theman53, can you comment on your idea about replacing hydraulic rear mount with a rubber one?
See my reply to you on this thread! ( thanks )
-
IMHO I think the factory went to hydro to make it more like a gas car feel. I could be off. I haven't owned a car with the hydro mount only driven one. I noticed no difference in "dash shake". I want the performance of the rubber mount with the poly insert, but I cannot drive one like that. The dash and rearview mirror dance at idle with that insert. Mine had VERY little noise at idle with the poly trans mount installed new. But like everything they break in and now it feels like everything is brand new stock rubber stuff...give it 1,000 miles or so.
A long winded way to say, yes if it were me and it was easily sourced I would grab the rubber mount and put it in place of the hydro one.
BTW if you need an engine mount for the low mounted turbo you are going with let me know I am making some cheap. :D
http://www.vwdiesel.net/forum/index.php?topic=29844.0
-
the mount for the rubber isolator breaks/cracks..
beware..
ive broken them with GASSER engines as well..
thats why i kept the stock hydro mount in my Jetta..
its got full hydro mounts, and i dont mind it.. its DEFINITELY 100% better than the mk1 mounts..
-
The stock hydro... This is so funny. In Europe the diesels have the rubber rear mount as standard.
The hydro rear is only used on the G60 and '89-'91 16V.
Like all others, my TD came with the rubber mount and I'm thinking whether I should upgrade to the G60 rear mount.
It has to be stiffer because it was designed to handle the power of the G60 engine.
I did use a rubber rear on the gasser Jetta but when filled with silicone it was too harsh.
I don't know how it would hold the engine without any filler though.
MAYBE the North American market got another hydraulic mount for the diesel, a softer one?
Man is this difficult...
-
The stock hydro... This is so funny. In Europe the diesels have the rubber rear mount as standard.
The hydro rear is only used on the G60 and '89-'91 16V.
MAYBE the North American market got another hydraulic mount for the diesel, a softer one?
Man is this difficult...
Mount PN's would confirm this. Wish I could say for sure, but I don't own a MK2. I do know one thing after being in a dealership, though; CHECK YOUR PN's. :P
Personally, though, if the hydro can take the punishment of a 200 hp diesel and be comfortable that's the one I'd pick. The downside is that they're probably more expensive and could leak.
-
I have a mk1. I'm using the yellow BlackForest poly mounts on front, trans, passenger side. The rear is the stock rubber mount. At idle, it definitely transfers the vibrations more than the stock rubber mk1 mounts. But it's liveable, to me anyway.
-
I used the techtonics tuning oem ones and the on/off/on throttle engine movement is more than id like.
-
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!
I did eventually sort out what was wrong with my mounts, in case anyone is interested... The front mount was a Mk II mount in a Mk III body. The Mk II mount is about an inch shorter than the Mk III mount. While they somehow had stretched the rubber mounts enough to get ONE bolt in, the proper fix was to put an actual Mk III front mount in place. Surprisingly everything just lined up when I did that. Really makes me wonder about the shop that was doing the work - I guess they must have been in there with one hell of a pry bar. :-\
-
Really makes me wonder about the shop that was doing the work - I guess they must have been in there with one hell of a pry bar. :-\
It is why I took initiative! My car has never seen a shop, and I stood beside the guy that did my safety.. As he had my breaks apart for inspection.. yeah he's licensed, but its my life!
-
When I built my Jeep I didn't use VW mounts. I am not even sure what they came on, picked out some rather simple looking rubber mounts, most likely came stock on some old chevy or dodge. Vibration isn't a problem..
I think, like the foam over the defrost system, VW might miss the engineering goal by making things way more complicated than need be...
-
VW might miss the engineering goal by making things way more complicated than need be...
Blasphemy! LOLO
-
Anyone with experience with the Rein Automotive front hydraulic engine mount 191199279C? Rein is part of CRP Industries. I need to replace mine which has probably 200K or more miles and the mount center bolt is a little off centered and collapsed on the rubber.
https://www.autohausaz.com/search/product.aspx?sid=lcm2oh55c1twyl45kglkgwqy&makeid=800026@VW&modelid=1283486@JETTA%20GL%20TDI%20&year=1992&cid=mount@mount&gid=5552@Engine/Motor%20Mount
http://www.reinautomotive.com/
http://www.reinautomotive.com/au_reincrp.asp