From: ray wach [raywach@juno.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 8:58 PM To: 928@list.928oc.org Cc: mdpresto@bellsouth.net; jhoagland@home.com; dicongo@earthlink.net Subject: [928OC Public] Motor Mounts To anybody that's interested: When my motor mounts wore out on my '86 auto, I shopped around for some time for an alternative to Porsche's $250 mounts. I knew my mounts were worn out from the two standard symptoms: The engine sat low in the car, so that the bottom of the oil pan was about 10mm below the bottom of the cross member, and there was a vibration around 2000rpm, whether the car was moving or not, in gear or not. To find the alternative mounts, I just walked into parts stores and asked the clerks to help me find a mount that looked similar to the Porsche mount. Eventually I found a mount for Ford pickup and sedan engines and transmissions that's very similar to the Porsche mount. It's hydraulic (fluid-filled), shaped the same way, and apparently intended to hold at least as much weight. The Ford mounts are made by Anchor, who apparently is the largest supplier of motor and transmission mounts in the US, with a large catalog. Anchor's part number is "EM-2696" but the box says that Pioneer number "672696" and Seal/Pow number "270-2861" also apply. Any car parts store that supplies to professionals should be able to get them; my local place has them in stock. I haven't been able to hold my new mount and a new Porsche mount side by side, but the differences I have identified are as follows: 1. The Porsche mount uses a large stud on the bottom to hold it from turning, and a square shoulder on the top to keep it centered. The Ford mount has only a small stud on the top. I found that I could align the small stud with a fold in the metal that sits on top of the mount and ignore it, and that I could center the mount by hand while I tightened the nuts. 2. The Porsche mount and the Ford mount use different threads on their studs, so I had to use new nuts to hold them in place. I think they cost less than $0.50 each, but I don't remember. I didn't record the thread pitch of the Ford mounts but I believe they were metric; the parts shop had the nuts in stock. 3. The Porsche mount is 79mm tall unloaded (thanks to Greg Nichols for measuring one for me) while the Ford mount is about 70mm tall. I installed mine without shims and the engine sits only slightly higher than it did before the change, but next time I might think about using shims, if I can find some 5 to 10mm thick aluminum. 4. The Porsche mounts cost about $250 each because they only made enough for a few cars, while I paid about $30 each for the Ford mounts. If they only last half as long, I still come out ahead. The new mounts seem to work fine. I haven't changed the transmission mounts yet but the vibration has disappeared. It took a long day's work to drop the lower control arms, drop the steering rack, support the engine (bottle jack on the bell housing), drop the subframe, and replace the motor mounts, and put everything back. I'd already done it, but if you haven't it might be a good time to replace the steering rack mounts--replacing them cured a vibration at 50-60mph. As I already had extra parts, I installed freshly painted heats shield on the motor mounts. The original heat shields (and the subframe in two small places) were developing rust--nothing scary but still ugly. Hope this is helpful, Ray Wach Virginia '86 928 '87 944 From: Chuck Bos [cbos@erols.com] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 11:49 AM To: 928 Rennlist; 928 OC Mailing LIst Subject: [928OC] 928 Motor Mount Replacement with Ford Mounts, Update This is a follow-up to the research and work done by Ray Wach, which he shared with the 928OC list on 2/14/2001. I followed all his suggestions, and the job was a complete success, saving several hundred dollars in parts costs over the OEM Porsche parts. Here are some comments which are in addition to the ones is Ray’s procedure. Ray’s observations are absolutely correct, and I would not change any of them. I have put Ray’s comments, my comments, and some pictures in a Word document. If you would like a copy sent to you, email me directly. Please to not post the requests to any of the lists, which I follow only in digest form where I miss a lot. I purchased the hydraulic motor mounts from a local part supplier, who tends to be on the high side, but I did not have time to shop around due to scheduling constraints. I paid $59 each (compared to around $250-$270 list price). It’s well worth checking with the Big Three for prices of the OEM mounts first- right now the OEM mounts are $175 on sale at Devek). The Ford ones I got are supplied by Anchor Industries, part number 2696. It is a hydraulic transmission mount for a 1984-1994 Ford Tempo. There are other Ford applications, but I didn’t find out what they are. Ray said he obtained his for about $30 each so it is definitely worth taking some time to shop around. The mounting studs are 12 mm x 1.75 mm, a common size for which I already had nuts, but buy four new nuts at the same time you get the mounts. You will also need to get 6-10 steel washers with at least a 12 mm or ½ inch hole to use as shims. Based on Rays’ suggestion, I installed shims on the bottom of the mounts totaling about 7-8 mm in thickness to raise the motor to the proper level. Even though the new Ford mount measures about 77 mm in height (close to the 79 mm for the Porsche mount), it must settle down more than the Porsche one, requiring shims to raise it to the proper height. Due to constraints on lift time available, I just threw in some big, old seat belt mounting washers I had, which were about 60 mm in diameter with a 12.5 mm or 1/2 inch hole, and they did the job just fine. It probably would be better and easier to install if you were to cut or machine a single shim out of steel or aluminum. This would need to be a big round washer 50-75 mm in diameter with a 12.5+ mm hole in the center. Do not exceed 8 mm in thickness or the locating pin in the bottom of the mount will not catch the mating hole in the mount bracket on the car. If you want to custom-make the shims, buy your Ford mounts first and measure the big bottom surface first to get exact measurements. My oil pan started out suspended about 12 mm below the level of the front sub frame with the squashed old Porsche mounts. When the job was finished with the shimmed Ford mounts, the pan and the sub frame were at the same level, which I guess is about right. When you are installing the Ford mounts, the bottom surface fits fine and the locating pin fits the bracket just fine. The top surface does not fit quite so precisely as Ray mentioned but tightened up OK. I personally would never try to do this job without a lift, but I know a lot of folks have. It’s four or five hours of nasty work at best on a lift so plan on a long day or a weekend if you are trying it on stands or ramps. Replacing the mounts has transformed the car from back to its quiet, powerful self again. The motor vibrations are all gone, and it is once again a joy to drive. My car, a 5-speed I recently purchased, has 114,000 miles, and I suspect the mounts have been unsatisfactory since 80 or 90 K. My other 928, an automatic, is showing signs at 105 K that the mounts are going on that one, too. These mileages are consistent from what folks at the Big Three have suggested is a normal lifetime. Is it worth it to gamble on an inexpensive replacement to the OEM mounts? Are there design parameters in the Ford mount not suitable for the 928? Ask me those questions in a couple of years! If these mounts last 50,000 miles or more, I’m sure I’ll stay happy. Meanwhile, I consider my car a guinea pig and suggest you proceed at your own risk. The original mounts are expensive, but they are designed for the specific application, are well-made and fit properly! I have access to a lift and have done similar jobs many times, so it is not a super big deal for me. You be the judge. Good luck if you give it a try. E-mail me if I’ve forgotten something. Chuck Bos 87 928 S4 Auto 88 928 S4 5-Speed 928OC Charter Member PCA Potomac Region Leesburg, VA cbos@erols.com From: Pirtle, John [John.Pirtle@ceridian.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 8:56 AM To: 928 Subject: [928] Anchor 2698 motor mounts I'm planning to do my motor mounts this summer, and have been intrigued by Ray Wach and Chuck Bos' reports of the Ford mounts (see http://members.prestige.net/jpirtle/keepers/engine/ford_mounts.txt). I did some research and just got off the phone with Wayne Williams at Anchor Industries, http://www.anchor-online.com/index.htm. I asked about the 2696 mount that Ray and Chuck used. Wayne said that for our car he would recommend the 2698. It is a sturdier mount with stiffer rubber in the walls, also hydraulic. He said the 2696 was a narrower wall and would be more spongy. The 2698 is 3.04" (77.2160mm) from mounting surface to mounting surface, and that there should be no problem using a washer to shim it. Some of the applications of the 2698 mount include: 1986-1996 Ford F350 4.9L V-6 1997 Ford Ranger 2.3L L-4 1997 Mazda B2300 2.3L L-4 (same truck as the Ranger) The 2696 mount is listed for the Ford Tempo 2.3L. Carparts.com sells the 2698 mounts for $69 each - I haven't checked locally. Any thoughts? John Pirtle Atlanta 87 Auto http://members.rennlist.com/pirtle http://www.928oc.org From: Walt Konecny [wkonecny@uswest.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:07 AM To: John Pirtle; 928 Subject: Re: [928] Anchor 2698 motor mounts ----- Original Message ----- From: Pirtle, John Subject: [928] Anchor 2698 motor mounts The initial problem appears to be that none of the listed motors weigh anywhere close to what the 928 motor weighs, nor would they have the strong "torquing" action of a 928 motor. I also doubt that any of those engine compartments get as hot as ours do. wk From: Gibson Graphics [mailto:gibsongraphics@harborside.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 3:38 PM To: 928 Subject: [928] Re: Any Long Term Updates Using the Ford Motor Mounts? > Hi, > > Anybody out there use the 2698 (Ranger and F350 mounts, NOT the Tempo > ones) motor mounts have a long term update? I read a lot of archives > about all the swapping but not much about results a year or so later. > > Thanks, > > Joe. > > 89' GT > White on Red. > I've got the Anchor 2698 mounts in my 86 5sp for about a year & 4000 miles- still working great. Brian 86 5sp, Silbermetallic, 130K From: Ed Ruiz [mailto:eds928gt@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:00 PM To: 928 Subject: [928] Re: Any Long Term Updates Using the Ford Motor Mounts? I know two local 928ers who installed the Ford Truck motor mounts, and had to replace them about a year later. YMMV. Remember, no matter where you go - there you are. ~ Merry motoring ~ From: Jay [mailto:wellwood@cox-internet.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:15 PM To: 928 Subject: [928] Re: Any Long Term Updates Using the Ford Motor Mounts? about a year & 4000 miles- My god man....do you ever drive that car???? ;) Seriuosly though, that does bring up a good point - just cause their in their a year - if the car never runs - or doesn't get hot enough to transfer heat to the mounts really good and several times (thus challenging the fluid sealed in the mounts) - the time factor is probably not a good measure of performance. I think I've got about 9,000 miles on the set of Anchors I installed a year ago last June. Jay 87 S4 From: Chris Ford [mailto:Chris.Ford@worldwidepackets.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:15 PM To: 928 Subject: [928] RE: Any Long Term Updates Using the Ford Motor Mounts? Over a year now, 5K+ miles and two track days. From: Pat Lynch [mailto:ppl@fngp.com] Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 4:46 PM To: john.pirtle@rennlist.com Subject: 928 mounts Good afternoon John, We like many other manufacturers we offer the 2696 ad 2698 in a solid version. This is just a FYI incase you are worried about the Ford mounts failing. Our web sight is www.corteco-usa.com. As to pricing, the solid units tend to run approximately 30% below the hydro units. We sell close to 8 solids for every hydro. Good luck Pat Lynch Manager-Product Marketing Corteco, The Aftermarket Business of Freudenberg-NOK Phone: 734.354.5312 Fax: 734.451.1517