Best bulkhead mount options? Options

[SKL1]

Finally getting ready to send my '71 I've had since new to the restoration boys at Stalltek for paint and six conversion work.
I've never figured out the search function so would like opinions on the best bulkhead engine mount options- want a factory look and will be doing a mild 2.4 E engine build. The car has already been converted to a side shifter some 30 years ago... getting the sheet metal I got here on a group buy powdercoated as we speak.

Have at it guys...

[mate914]

A smaller engine like yours, defiantly get the original equipment.
Matt (IMG:style_emoticons/default/flag.gif)

[brant]

Agreed
You want the right original look
Stock or reproduction of stock

[FlacaProductions]

Oooh Stalltek. Looking forward to updates through the process.

[Shivers]

Only thing I have to share is Congratulations (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[mepstein]

My pick for best one.

[ClayPerrine]

I would agree with the above if you are staying with a small six. But you need to consider that you may want a bigger engine in the future. If you do, you want the stronger motor mount.

The Naroescape mount is really good, as is the Rich Johnson mount.

[mepstein]

I would agree with the above if you are staying with a small six. But you need to consider that you may want a bigger engine in the future. If you do, you want the stronger motor mount.

The Naroescape mount is really good, as is the Rich Johnson mount.

I’ll be using the maddog oem replica for a built 3.4 engine. I’ve already seen it in place on a hot 3.0 (300 hp on a Peter Dawe built engine) I tried the Naroescape mount. No bueno. Eventually I will remove it from my car and make the tin and everything fit properly bum not the first one to have problems with that mount but it sure was frustrating.

Stronger is sort of a relative term. Has the oem mount proven to be inadequate for big engines or is that just your perception. I have seen big engines in real sixes without issues. Some of them get flogged pretty hard on the track.
The nice thing about an oem style mount is everything fits the way it should.

[Superhawk996]

I tried the Naroescape mount. No bueno. Eventually I will remove it from my car and make the tin and everything fit properly bum not the first one to have problems with that mount but it sure was frustrating.

The nice thing about an oem style mount is everything fits the way it should.

Stronger is sort of a relative term.

Translation: the engine doesn’t fit right . . . But that’s normal.

The OEM mount also locates on the bulkhead where there is internal structure to support it rather than just hanging off a layer of sheetmetal that is unsupported. NVH will be better with the OEM mount and OEM rubber isolation (i.e. less in cabin noise and vibration ) Nice that the OEM rubber isolation is now being reproduced.

[ClayPerrine]

I do not like the fact that the front of the motor is only supported by one point for high power/high torque applications. In the 911, there is a wide spaced mount.

The Rich Johnson mount handles the high horsepower/high torque better than a stock 914-6 mount.

[Superhawk996]

Keep in mind OP is running a 2.4L

High HP brings along all sorts of other problems besides engine mounting.

[mepstein]

I tried the Naroescape mount. No bueno. Eventually I will remove it from my car and make the tin and everything fit properly bum not the first one to have problems with that mount but it sure was frustrating.

The nice thing about an oem style mount is everything fits the way it should.

Stronger is sort of a relative term.

Translation: the engine doesn’t fit right . . . But that’s normal.

The OEM mount also locates on the bulkhead where there is internal structure to support it rather than just hanging off a layer of sheetmetal that is unsupported. NVH will be better with the OEM mount and OEM rubber isolation (i.e. less in cabin noise and vibration ) Nice that the OEM rubber isolation is now being reproduced.

Not only does the engine tin gap about an inch but it barely cleared the shift rod and affected some of the hard brake lines. It might work for some people, not me.

[dr914@autoatlanta.com]

agree with Matt, get the original setup, we get them from germany, quite close to the original factory setup and will work GREAT for your application

Finally getting ready to send my '71 I've had since new to the restoration boys at Stalltek for paint and six conversion work.
I've never figured out the search function so would like opinions on the best bulkhead engine mount options- want a factory look and will be doing a mild 2.4 E engine build. The car has already been converted to a side shifter some 30 years ago... getting the sheet metal I got here on a group buy powdercoated as we speak.

Have at it guys...

[NARP74]

What is the difference between the 2 MD mount options?

[Root_Werks]

My pick for best one.

I used the MD mount and really like it. Installed easy, replicates the factory mount.

[mepstein]

What is the difference between the 2 MD mount options?

One is a copy of an RJ mount, that was a copy of another mount. Uses two 911 engine mounts. The other is a copy of the Porsche OEM mount. Uses one large oem 914-6 mount.
The oem style fits the best (in my opinion) and needs the least amount of adaptation of lines, tin, shift rods, etc. Porsche did a good job on the design.

[live free & drive]

Just for some tight numbers onthe Naro mount; if you locate it where they indicate the motor is 0.85" low - this can be rectified by welding the mount upward by 0.85".

The other issue is that the Naro mount puts the engine 0.5" closer to the firewall so you would need to space off the mounts 0.5" from the firewall.

The Patrick mount has offsets too that I have measured that are similar, but not exactly the same - If someone wants those I could dig them up (it's all in CAD).

[mepstein]

Just for some tight numbers onthe Naro mount; if you locate it where they indicate the motor is 0.85" low - this can be rectified by welding the mount upward by 0.85".

The other issue is that the Naro mount puts the engine 0.5" closer to the firewall so you would need to space off the mounts 0.5" from the firewall.

The Patrick mount has offsets too that I have measured that are similar, but not exactly the same - If someone wants those I could dig them up (it's all in CAD).

Yes, I had the space from firewall issue as well. Had to weld up some stock to make it work.

[Superhawk996]

Just for some tight numbers onthe Naro mount; if you locate it where they indicate the motor is 0.85" low - this can be rectified by welding the mount upward by 0.85".

The other issue is that the Naro mount puts the engine 0.5" closer to the firewall so you would need to space off the mounts 0.5" from the firewall.

The Patrick mount has offsets too that I have measured that are similar, but not exactly the same - If someone wants those I could dig them up (it's all in CAD).

Yes, I had the space from firewall issue as well. Had to weld up some stock to make it work.

And . . . We are right back to the discussion in the other recent thread about having to modify aftermarket parts to fit and do the intended job (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif)

[mepstein]

Just for some tight numbers onthe Naro mount; if you locate it where they indicate the motor is 0.85" low - this can be rectified by welding the mount upward by 0.85".

The other issue is that the Naro mount puts the engine 0.5" closer to the firewall so you would need to space off the mounts 0.5" from the firewall.

The Patrick mount has offsets too that I have measured that are similar, but not exactly the same - If someone wants those I could dig them up (it's all in CAD).

Yes, I had the space from firewall issue as well. Had to weld up some stock to make it work.

And . . . We are right back to the discussion in the other recent thread about having to modify aftermarket parts to fit and do the intended job (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol-2.gif)

Yea, there’s that. In this case, it’s not a replica of an original part. It’s supposed to be something better or at least a quality alternative. I didn’t find that to be the case. YRMV.


One thing I would be curious is how much torque is on the engine mounts and how strong do they have to be? I haven’t heard of any bulkhead mounts failing under any circumstances. Not to say I have superior knowledge or experience with the mounts. I’m just wondering how much strength is needed and does a big engine need a different mount from a small engine.
I think I remember someone noting that both factory 914-8’s use a stock style mount. If that’s true, that gives us an idea what Porsche thought about the issue.