Best 914-6 engine mount Options

[Superhawk996]

From an NVH standpoint, the URO OEM style mount is going to provide superior isolation.

[lesorubcheek]

What really makes the OEM style mount superior to the bulkhead mount? Agree it's nice to have a look close to factory, but for a car that's a conversion and not a real 914-6, can't see where it would make much difference from a "it'll be worth more" perspective.

Is it easier to install and remove an engine with the factory style OEM mount? The bulkhead mount just looks like it would be superior with two front mount points spread out as opposed to a single centered point for the OEM style. Does the bulkhead mount cause any interference or make access more difficult, or is there some additional work required to install it?

[mb911]

What really makes the OEM style mount superior to the bulkhead mount? Agree it's nice to have a look close to factory, but for a car that's a conversion and not a real 914-6, can't see where it would make much difference from a "it'll be worth more" perspective.

Is it easier to install and remove an engine with the factory style OEM mount? The bulkhead mount just looks like it would be superior with two front mount points spread out as opposed to a single centered point for the OEM style. Does the bulkhead mount cause any interference or make access more difficult, or is there some additional work required to install it?

So the reason I suggest the Oem style is the following reasons

1. Does not interfere with shift linkage in anyway shape or form
2. Does not interfere with heat exchanger installation
3. Does not interfere with the wiring harness
4. Does not require moving the brake regulator
5. Can be installed with proper engine height and angle

The naroscape Does not work well with line 1,2,4, and 5

PMS is about the same

The Rich Johnson mount is a solid second in choice for me. PMS and Naro are last for me

[Steve]

What really makes the OEM style mount superior to the bulkhead mount? Agree it's nice to have a look close to factory, but for a car that's a conversion and not a real 914-6, can't see where it would make much difference from a "it'll be worth more" perspective.

Is it easier to install and remove an engine with the factory style OEM mount? The bulkhead mount just looks like it would be superior with two front mount points spread out as opposed to a single centered point for the OEM style. Does the bulkhead mount cause any interference or make access more difficult, or is there some additional work required to install it?

I might be biased, but the 911 has two mounts, it will be less vibration and stronger. Overkill maybe.. The factory mount requires welding and its best practice to weld in the bulk head mount. Installing and removing the motor, from my experience requires you to remove the tin in front of the motor to get to the two bolts through the mounts. The front tin also hangs on the bulkhead mount, when raising or lowering the motor. I am guessing the factory mount would also require this? Easy to remove and install the front tin with the motor in the car.

[ClayPerrine]

I always wondered why Porsche didn't add the proper mounts to use the 911 crossbar when installing the six in the 914 chassis?

That would put the mounts way farther outboard, and would make it much easier to install and remove the motor. Plus it would mean less parts count in inventory.


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

[mb911]

I always wondered why Porsche didn't add the proper mounts to use the 911 crossbar when installing the six in the 914 chassis?

That would put the mounts way farther outboard, and would make it much easier to install and remove the motor. Plus it would mean less parts count in inventory.


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

That's a great point if it would have been engineered for it than all the items I listed would be a non issue. Also Interesting why the heat exchangers were not mirrored

[Steve]

I always wondered why Porsche didn't add the proper mounts to use the 911 crossbar when installing the six in the 914 chassis?

That would put the mounts way farther outboard, and would make it much easier to install and remove the motor. Plus it would mean less parts count in inventory.


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

That's a great point if it would have been engineered for it than all the items I listed would be a non issue. Also Interesting why the heat exchangers were not mirrored

If they used the stock 911 bar, would it interfere with the heat exchangers like the cross bar motor mount did. Also the pissing match on using the four cylinder mounts versus moving the drivetrain mount to the firewall. Does it change the center of gravity?

[mepstein]

I always wondered why Porsche didn't add the proper mounts to use the 911 crossbar when installing the six in the 914 chassis?

That would put the mounts way farther outboard, and would make it much easier to install and remove the motor. Plus it would mean less parts count in inventory.


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

That's a great point if it would have been engineered for it than all the items I listed would be a non issue. Also Interesting why the heat exchangers were not mirrored

If they used the stock 911 bar, would it interfere with the heat exchangers like the cross bar motor mount did. Also the pissing match on using the four cylinder mounts versus moving the drivetrain mount to the firewall. Does it change the center of gravity?

Center of gravity doesn’t change just by moving a pivot point.

[burton73]

Factory engine mount stiffening modification. Installed by PMB

In number 41 factory 6

Bob B

[burton73]

For reference of mount with it put on a painting rotisserie. 30th 6th down the production line

Bob B

[lesorubcheek]

This is amazing information. Here's a few things gleaned from reading around. Hopefully it's correct. Please correct if something is screwed up.

- The Rich Johnson mount is pretty much the same as the current Maddog's Bulkhead mount.
- The Bulkhead mount looks to have a little tricky section for feeding the main wire loom up through it. Advantage here would go to using the OEM style mount.
- Unless an engine produces significant torque, there's no real advantage of spreading the load side to side. More area (or maybe volume) of rubber on mounts may reduce NVH, but torsional twist shouldn't be an issue to worry about. So, there's no real need to use the Bulkhead style over an OEM unless you have a high torque engine.
- Primary load on the front mounts is due to acceleration (upward force) and braking (downward). The location of the OEM mount is ideal relative to body structure for strength.
- 911s mount style is necessary since the rear cross member isn't structurally strong enough to attach in the center. They need to attach on the outboard where the chassis is strong enough to handle vertical forces.

Dan

[lesorubcheek]

After much deliberation, finally pulled the trigger on the Maddogs OEM style engine mount using the URO mount. Many thanks to everyone providing advice, since choosing a mount isn't a trivial task. Haven't tried to test fitment, but the parts are of excellent quality. If anyone is hesitant, here's one vote to go for it. Big thanks to Maddogs for making this so easy and for your quality work!!!!!



The only thing I may do is tack the nuts that hold the URO mount in the cradle. Looks like it may be a little difficult to get to them after welding the cradle to the firewall since they're behind the reinforcements. Then again it may be fine. Have to remember to check this before welding.


Dan

[930cabman]

After much deliberation, finally pulled the trigger on the Maddogs OEM style engine mount using the URO mount. Many thanks to everyone providing advice, since choosing a mount isn't a trivial task. Haven't tried to test fitment, but the parts are of excellent quality. If anyone is hesitant, here's one vote to go for it. Big thanks to Maddogs for making this so easy and for your quality work!!!!!



The only thing I may do is tack the nuts that hold the URO mount in the cradle. Looks like it may be a little difficult to get to them after welding the cradle to the firewall since they're behind the reinforcements. Then again it may be fine. Have to remember to check this before welding.


Dan

You won't be sorry and Dave is easily available for support. Keep us posted as you continue down the /6 conversion road

[Mark Henry]

One issue to consider is the brake pressure regulator. It's been mentioned that cars with the later setup likely have to relocate the regulator farther toward the driver's side so it has proper clearance with the /6 mount. Looks like in the PET the change was made in the '74 model year after VIN 4742915751. Do all styles of the /6 mounts have this issue? Pretty sure I've read posts where the OEM style mount has the problem. Just looking, I'd guess the Bulkhead mount would also, but can't be sure.

Dan

I made a copy of a copy of a RJ mount, for the brake pressure regulator I just cut out the whole side gusset area of interference, then I welded a new HD shaped gusset. Except for a creative brake line path mine bolts up like stock.

[rgalla9146]

After much deliberation, finally pulled the trigger on the Maddogs OEM style engine mount using the URO mount. Many thanks to everyone providing advice, since choosing a mount isn't a trivial task. Haven't tried to test fitment, but the parts are of excellent quality. If anyone is hesitant, here's one vote to go for it. Big thanks to Maddogs for making this so easy and for your quality work!!!!!



The only thing I may do is tack the nuts that hold the URO mount in the cradle. Looks like it may be a little difficult to get to them after welding the cradle to the firewall since they're behind the reinforcements. Then again it may be fine. Have to remember to check this before welding.


Dan

You made the right choice.
It is as close to original as you can get.... so no compromises.
When installing the engine be sure to have a 16" drift pin on hand to guide the
front engine mount up toward the body mount..... the rear mounts will then go
right where they belong.
Before these were available I fabricated a copy of the original 6 cyl. body mount for my GT
conversion because the others available all had one or more issues.

[lesorubcheek]

You won't be sorry and Dave is easily available for support. Keep us posted as you continue down the /6 conversion road

Sure will. It's a slow start though. Still in the planning and acquisition phase. Development won't begin until at least another year and that's if I'm lucky.

I made a copy of a copy of a RJ mount, for the brake pressure regulator I just cut out the whole side gusset area of interference, then I welded a new HD shaped gusset. Except for a creative brake line path mine bolts up like stock.

Smart way to handle it. Ours was built in late '73 and looks like it won't have the problem of relocating .

You made the right choice.
It is as close to original as you can get.... so no compromises.
When installing the engine be sure to have a 16" drift pin on hand to guide the
front engine mount up toward the body mount..... the rear mounts will then go
right where they belong.
Before these were available I fabricated a copy of the body mount for my GT
conversion because the others available all had one or more issues.

No regrets. Really pleased with how it's put together. Thanks for the suggestion, makes perfect sense. It's this kind of detail that can make all the difference when it comes times to do the install.

Dan