87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

My DD is an Acura CL Type S. This car has a problem going through engine mounts. They last about 50k miles. The front and rear mounts (transverse engine) are hydraulic and stiffen at full throttle. Under load the front mount is in tension and the rear is in compression. The side mount seems to take transverse loads.

When I replaced the front and side mount this weekend I also installed an engine torque damper from Ingalls. This is basically a fluid filled damper that dampens the motions of the engine. The advertised benefits are reduced wheel hop (front wheel drive), less engine movement, better shifts (auto), longer engine mount life.

I must say I was a bit skeptical. And I can't comment on wheel hop (never had any) or on mount life yet. But I must say the I am very impressed with how good the tranny is shifting. Shifting is quicker and firmer after the addition of the damper.

I began thinking how nice it would be to add one to the Camaro. Why not just use poly engine mounts? Well I have been down that road and could not stand the extra vibrations. By comparison the engine damper is invisible. The damper should help with throttle response as well.



If you want to see proof that this thing is actually taking load, about half way through this video, look at the flex on the left hand (body side) bracket near the bolt. I will fix this by adding stiffeners to the bracket.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/perdoch/10786162914/
John

406TPI

iTrader: (1)

Neat!

midias

My toyota had one factory. I took it out and replaced it with a solid one and it seemed to reduce wheel hop at the expense of vibration.

nosajwols

iTrader: (1)

Neat idea but I think there is a cheaper easier way. I never had to do it on my Camaro but I had a Monza (H-Body) with the Buick V6 and a four speed. It would break mounts (motor and tranny) all the time (abuse).

I used the old school racer trick of a heavy steel chain mounted between the frame rail and the motor (bolted into one of the accessory holes in the head) on the "lifting" side of the motor. The chain had no slack in it when the motor was off but at the same time it was not under load. It limited how much the motor could torque over under heavy acceleration, as the motor tried to torque over the chain limited the movement. It did not add any vibration.

Completely solved the broken mount(s) issues and looked to pretty much do what that thing is doing for about $5...

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Not my style, but that would limit maximum motion. The damper will of course dampen the motion rather than stop it all together. And it will dampen both directions while you would need 2 chains to achieve that. I am looking at this as a feel item rather than simply to make the mounts last longer.

AlkyIROC

I have two of those on my Harley because it uses rubber mounts on the engines. It reduces a lot of the harmonic vibrations.

Don't have anything like that on the car though. Front and rear motor plates keep everything stiff. If you want to eliminate excessive movement from the engine, you need to do with a solid mount.

nosajwols

iTrader: (1)

I agree it may look a little *******...

As for the other direction, unless you are down gearing/compression braking very hard I think you will be surprised how little it is needed. Big stress is under throttle.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

Yup, deceleration control is desired as well. I am a big fan of engine braking. It happens all over the track and I do it on the street as well.

BugMeNotBaby

"Fluid filled"? They are rubber.

87350IROC

iTrader: (2)

You are of course correct, it is rubber, per the manufacturer's website. That fact alone does nothing to change anything else about this conversation.