JamesC

iTrader: (5)

For pics, see posts #15 and #16.

I've always wondered about the vibration issues that some members experience with Energy Suspension poly mounts. ES claims their version is 1.937 tall (with pre-load plate). I recently measured a rubber OE replacement at 1.931, a difference that would seem insignificant. I wonder, however, if OE rubber "motor" mounts, especially if they were trashed, would exacerbate the problem: lower in front with trashed mounts, higher at the tail shaft with a new poly mount. Remove the pre-load plate, as some have suggested, and the tail shaft drops to a more kind position, perhaps eliminating the problem by evening the position front to rear. That said, I'm using ES's poly motor mounts along with their trans mount with pre-load plate and have never experienced any terrible problems: more noise, yes, perhaps a bit of vibration, yes, but that would seem inevitable when poly is thrown in.

Comments or other conclusions?

JamesC

Drew

iTrader: (58)

I've done it both ways, stock rubber motor mounts with the poly mount, and poly mounts all around. Out of 6 or 7 cars with just the poly mount, only one had any issues. Those issues were cleared up by removing the pre-load plate. My 86 T/A with poly mounts on the engine and transmission was as smooth as a stock all rubber setup.

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

similar experience with the preoload plate. I picked up vibes with the plate, removed it and everything was fine. Until the ES mount failed. I've had a prothane since and have not had any problems

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

So, to the heart of the problem: What makes removal of the pre-load plate necessary on some vehicles and not others?

JamesC

//<86TA>\\

iTrader: (14)

honestly, i dont know why its even there. IIRC the mount was th same size as the one i removed, but then adding the 1/8" thick or so plate raised the trans enough to cause vibes.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

As I mention above, ES says their mount, to include the pre-load plate, is 1.937. The OE replacement I measured is 1.931. To me the difference is insignificant enough to be unimportant--provided ES's info is correct. If the info is indeed on the money, the problem members experience must be elsewhere.

JamesC

Tony89GTA

iTrader: (7)

I believe you numbers are off, the hight difference between my ES mount with plate was around 1/4" from the stock replacement if i remember right. When I installed it the last time I took the plate off and grounded the surface down to be close to the same level as the stock replacement.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I'm using the ES website for their number, but I measured the OE replacement with a digital caliper. One way or another, we come back to why ES mounts seem to work fine on some cars, but not on others.

JamesC

Tony89GTA

iTrader: (7)

Just did a quick measure of my ES mount on the car since it's up in the air, nothing to super accurate but with the plate added I'am at 1.97 and I probably grounded about 1/8 off that or more. So think the number ES gives us is little off unless they changed something over the last 8 years or so.

But your right hard to believe that small of a difference can cause a vibration on some peoples cars.

mh82camaro

hey james,
i have a similar problem myself....vibration/noise at highway speeds after putting in e/s trans mount and torque arm mount. i too heard about taking out the plate....took out the plate and my noise/ vibration went from around 65-70 to 75-80...wierd.i thought it was my new gears....but pulled cover and no metal shavings at all. i didn't know what else to do...i just figured ...well i am not driving that fast all time anyhow. i too, would love to figure this wierd question out myself

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Spohn says this one is the correct height:

http://www.spohn.net/shop/1982-1992-...-Mount-GM.html

Note ES's site:

http://www.energysuspensionparts.com...asp?prod=71604

The odd part is that the above mount (Prothane) cross references to ES 3.1108, which is the problematic piece that is the subject of discussion. That said, the Prothane version doesn't appear to have the pre-load plate. 86, is this the one you're using?

JamesC

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

After driving a couple of hours to a car show, I discovered that around 70-75 there was enough vibration that I felt it in the driver's seat. I suspect that I'd never been aware of it before because I was using the secondary member with its four rubber donuts/isolators. Here's what Spohn says in a 2002 post:

"The Prothane mount does not have the shim plate, and it is actually the CORRECT height, unlike the ES mount. You don't get the vibration headaches with the Prothane mount. It's what we install here at the shop."

I've ordered the Prothane mount. I'll do some measuring between the ES and Prothane mount for general board info, do the install later in the week hopefully, and report my findings.

JamesC

mh82camaro

yeah please let me know if that works out for you....cause if it does i will replace my es mount also. hope it works.....

dustpusher

I have had both the es and the prothane mount and had vibration with both.I plan on changing motor mounts and u joints to see if it fixes the problem.The prothane mount had much less vibration than the es did but still not vibration free.I have went to a stock mount again and no vibration.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I haven't run a vibration test yet, but here's the long and short of it: An Anchor rubber OE replacement (p/n 2394 from Advance Auto $6.99+ tax) and the ES poly mount (p/n 3.1108 from AutoZone $29.99+ tax), in black below, are very close to the same height (the OE is actually a fraction higher until the pre-load plate is added--and according to ES instructions, shown in post #31, the pre-load plate is required). How much greater that difference might be after the rubber mount compresses, I'm unsure. The Prothane mount (p/n 71604 from Spohn $25.95+ shipping), in red, is exactly the same height as the OE and requires no pre-load plate, seemingly making it the best bet.

First pic: OE and ES
Second pic: OE and ES with pre-load plate
Third pic: Prothane and OE

JamesC

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Here are a few more pics. No pre-load plate is included below. BTW, the pre-load plate measures .158 inches, which is a hair over 1/8.

JamesC

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I swapped in the Prothane mount today. After running the car through the gears on both the four lane and city streets, I'm satisfied that the ES piece was causing the issues that I couldn't live with. The Prothane, while transmitting some vibration, of course, is much tamer. One day, if and when I'm bored enough, I'd like to throw in the OE mount to see its effect.

I suggest that the Prothane mount is the one to purchase as it's dead-on to OE height.

JamesC

mh82camaro

great james, thanks for the info. i will most likely go buy the prothane mount like you suggested. yeah if you ever do get bored...and put in other oe mount...post your results....

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

While I didn't resolve the above question, I am convinced, from my own experience, that the Prothane mount is the way to go. Perhaps others will chime in.

JamesC

Jim85IROC

iTrader: (2)

I would guess it boils down to just how much their factory rubber motor mounts have sagged over the years.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

My experience with the ES mount is that they're a bit tough when new and cause vibration. The ones I've experienced that had significant mileage on them weren't unpleasant at all.

I don't have a fix for that (besides grinding the 2 bumps and not using the spacer plate) but between F-bodies and full-frame GM cars, that's my

KrisW

iTrader: (5)

The last time I swapped one, I ran an Energy Suspension mount but it was the round one and not the rectangular one. I had no issues whatsoever with it. I put it in my 87 Formula, with the T5 trans. It looks to me like everyone here is running the rectangular one. They both fit the trans, but I chose the round one simply because the ripped rubber one that came out was the round one.

Anyone else ever run that round one like I did?

jmd

iTrader: (4)

never seen it.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Probably that awful fluid-filled mount that was around for a bit. I've never seen a round poly mount.

JamesC

jmd

iTrader: (4)

I've seen a lot of OEM round T5 mounts. Did any third gens have fluid filled ones?

KrisW

iTrader: (5)

It looked like this one:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/PONTI...ts_Accessories

Except it was poly. I got it in NorCal from an AllPro parts house. Looking on the web now it seems that they must be discontinued. All the replacements are listed as the rectangle one. All I know is that it was awesome and all my vibrations (not to mention the thumping) went away. If I had known that they would be discontinued I would have bought more!

I am wondering if most of the guys who are pitching the tail of the trans up and then have a vibration are discovering worn out u-joints? Seems like they got unhappy after running at a different drive angle to me... that would also explain the higher mileage ones getting happier over time. Maybe the worn u-joint was finally wearing in to its new place after a few miles?

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

There were three cross member mounts as far as I know: one with a secondary cross member with four rubber donuts and a rectangular mount, one with the a rectangular mount, and one with a round fluid-filled mount. Pics of this latter in the following link:

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/hist...91-camaro.html

JamesC

89-bird

I hated the fluid filled mount on my car it went out shortly after I got the car in 2001 or 2002 and I swapped in an auto crossmember and mount . I have been running a oe rubber for years on my car with no problems so far . For anyone out there wanting to know the Firebird 5-speeds were the only ones to get the fluid filled mount all Camaros auto and manual got the auto rubber mount .

Mkos1980

iTrader: (8)

Been running the ES one for about 5 years with no plate. I dont have any vibration...

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Had the ES black polyurethane one for 1 year and a half (summer driving only) and it gave me vibration after 50MPH.. bad vibration the higher i went... it WAS that cuz i switched to prothane mount (bought it from Spohn's site) the vibration went away and i can drive up to 100mph with no vibration!

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Many members report not using the pre-load plate, but note what ES says in their directions.

JamesC

jmd

iTrader: (4)

the only functions it serves is to make the assembly taller dimensionally and to pre-load the two bumps cast into the poly which stiffens it up, leading to vibration but possibly lengthening the life of the mount. And the need of the mount having a flat surface to which it is mounted.

That radius direction doesn't matter either.

THADURTYBIRD

I also have run the "ES" trans & motor mounts in my '91 formula & have been fighting vib's for a while, I just thought it was a bad drive line, poor alignment, bad tires &/or worn shocks/struts or some combo of all of these, anyway after I replaced each of these parts the vib. got much better each time but still was some what present even w/ a completely rebuilt trans & drive shaft(retubed, balanced & ujoints) @ hwy speeds(+75mph) but this is the 1st I've heard of the prob. being the trans mount/pre-load plate, allthough it does seem unlikely that the diff. in the p/l plate would cause this as the tunnel mounted turque arm changes pinion angle much more doesnt it? but I'm open to any poss. options at this point as I've tried just about everything else I could think of which all needed to be redone anyway but,
I guess I'll get the "prothane" mnt. from spohn & see if it makes any diff. thanx for the info guys!

leftyblitz

Ive been running the es with the plate and ive had no problems what so ever.

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Steel driveshafts vibrate at higher speeds/RPMs.. The best bet is to go aluminum LS1 or better yet carbon fiber (but that's big $$)

Zepher

iTrader: (1)

I put an ES Mount in my friends 92 Trans Am a couple of weeks ago without the plate and we took a 10 hour trip to the Trans Am Nationals in Ohio and had no vibration issues.

I've had the ES mount in my Formula for 7 years, an Auto for 2 years and a T5 for the last 5 years, and I had no vibration issues. My car also happens to have a factory Alum Driveshaft though.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

The alum shaft made no difference with the ES and vibration in my car. Actually, the subject of this thread originally was to discover why some cars using the ES piece experience vibration while others don't. Odd, I'd say.

JamesC

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Maybe pinion angle is the culprit? Theory: Different cars have different springs (even if stock, some sag more than others) so using this mount in some cars may set it at the correct pinion angle while in some cars it may set it at the wrong angle?

THADURTYBIRD

I've had my es mount for 6-7yrs w/ plate in & always had vibs. until I lowered the car 1.5" & had it realined, got rid of 85-90% of vibro so that makes sense to me, but I still hafta put the tokicos on & new rubber helps too, I'm thinkin you should take everything into consideration when dealing w/ vibr. issues in a car.
I'm just happy to finally have some ansers to these prob's!

Dante93GTZ

iTrader: (5)

My T5 that I bought had an ES mount on it and this thread scared me into swapping it for the rubber one off of my 700R4. That, and I didn't have a 7/16"-14 bolt lying around to put in it.

canadianT/A

iTrader: (1)

I swapped out my torn rubber tranny mopunt for a Prothane mount today and I'm getting crazy vibrations that I never was before. Anything over about 50 mph and it shakes the seats. Never experienced this before(even when my shifter was jumping up 6 inches).....any suggestions before I go buy a rubber one? I also order a full set of prothane bushings for my GTA and a bit tentative now.

THADURTYBIRD

its worth a shot to find out what works best in your ride esply if your car needs one anyway & fairly inexp. parts, pretty easy to inst.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

That day arrived today. Long story short, ALL vibration ceased at ALL speeds and ALL RPM's with the OE mount, making the car much more drivable/enjoyable for me personally.

Sooo, while I can draw no solid conclusions about what induces vibration (or doesn't) when the two poly mounts in question are used, I can say that if the vibration is mount related and you wish to eliminate it, the OE version will do just that. Frankly, I'd forgotten how smooth the car could be. No returning to poly any time soon.

JamesC

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Will it hold up to your engine's power? 330HP is quite a bit for a stock tranny mount..

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I seldom 'let'er rip," so strength isn't an issue for me--and even if it were, the OE replacement cost is negligible and replacement is easy.

JamesC

Primetime91

iTrader: (15)

In the name of preventing mis-information from floating around, this isn't true.

My '88 Camaro, (Originally 2.8, 5 speed) had the fluid-filled "donut" transmission mount. I hated it

JamesC, I find it very interesting that you prefer the OEM rubber mount. Not surprising however.

Do the poly mounts even offer any improvement in performance, besides resistance to tearing under power/degrading over time like the rubber ones do?

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Probably not... I just noticed more vibs with poly than rubber, and the fact that it still looks good after racing a few times with a rebuilt 700r4... I don't think it offers 'performance' except that it might shift less sloppy than rubber..

rs owner

I have a ? I changed my tranny mount to one from advance auto for 6.99 and all of a sudden now when I creep along real slow the wheels in my posi rearend act like they don't want to turn.

I mean they act like the rearend is in a bind my father said he thought that it was the wheel bearings but I explained to him that it almost never does it when turned perfectly straight and never until I changed the tranny mount. although the one that was under the tranny was ragged out it didn't have the metal mounting surface. So I don't have anything to compare it to.

what is causing it ?

red rock

iTrader: (2)

JamesC; I too did an experiment, and changed to a prothane mount with a lot of vibrations at higher rpm's. I then used a thin piece of rubber between the mount and the transmission cross member with no results. I then switched back to my 1 year old OEM rubber mount, and was back to a vibration free ride again. Right now I may use my new prothane mount for a depth finder for fishing.

morrow

not entirely true, my 92 rs came with the greese fulled mount, i welded in a plate to mount t5he polly mount to, but im getting that vibration at 80mph to 90 mph.. but i think that fact the i welded in that plate it raised the trans tail shaft... but at the same time my car is lowerd at least 2 to 2.5 inches... and have not put in the lca relocation brakets. im still in search for my solution