Rob Edwards

Ryan-

Well, now that you mention it, I think I am going to return them. I don't recall having read in this thread about the anchor solids being prone to premature failure, but if that's true, I'm less enthusiastic about them. I should also mention the way one of the mounts came out of the box: wet, with oily fluid. It doesn't slosh when I shake it, so I don't think it's a hydraulic mount that is leaky straight from the factory, but someone's QA program at RockAuto needs a bit of work. For the money, I think I'll take a set of Carl's. How does he put it: What's your time worth?

wds928

When you put the MM's in, make sure the driver's side bottom MM bolt doesn't extend past the nut by more than 1/4 inch. I've recently noticed a p/s fluid leak, long after (timewise) replacing my mounts last fall.

After removing the steel plate and looking around, I couldn't find anything wrong. So I started bolting the plate and p/s rack and the flow of red fluid began. Turns out there is a banjo p/s line fitting at the top of the rack that was hitting the lower MM bolt. Rather than remove the MM to place more washers, I think I'll use the new Dremel and cut some of the excess bolt off.

RyanPerrella

good tip Bill,

I will check that out on mine , those threaded ends are pretty long.

wds928

Ryan, I cut off about 3/8" of MM bottom bolt with the Dremel. The bolt was rubbing against the large allen head fitting on the top of the steering rack and over time, it rubbed it loose. When I pulled the rack down, after draining the p/s fluid from the rack, I didn't notice anything wrong. When I put a 6mm allen wrench on the bolt though, it was loose. Tightened up and will finish putting it back together tonight.

BlackShark

I ordered 4 MM's wednesday from RockAuto and received them today. Quick turnaround! Now the installation. Anyone in the DFW area want to get together to do some MM work?

BlackShark

Oh, the important part. All MM's were the same, didn't hear any noise so I'm assuming that they are solid MM's.

dr bob

With all the discussion going on with the Anchor "solids" vs "hydraulics", it's worth a reminder that the solid mount cars came with an additional damper/shock absorber between the engine and the body. Purpose is to make sure that the engine doesn't oscillate at some resonant RPM and move around too much. The dampened "hydraulic" mounts don't have this problem.

We should probably refer to the non-hydraulic mounts as "non-hydraulic", or "solid rubber". Solid mounts are metal brackets with no flex at all.

H2

Confusing...this motor mount thing. I bought two Anchor mounts...that sloshed...and I had specified "solid." Traded off these apparently haudraulic mounts and bought two 'solid' mounts from 928Motorsports (more $$$)...and was surprised that they "sloshed" also. I was concerned but assured by the company that both the solids and the haudraulic mounts slosh. If there are solid rubber mounts "out there" (that don't slosh) I'm not sure where to get them. Someone in a post on Rennlist Carl provides an explanation as to why the solids aren't really solid. A search would turn that posting up if you're interested. I just said the heck with it and will trust 928 Motorsports.

Harvey

ROG100

Harvey,
No disrespect to Carl - However solid mounts are solid rubber. Hydraulic are liquid filled and slosh when shaken. This statement was from Anchor themselves. Solid does not slosh in the Anchor type.
I have both types and can demo to anyone that interested.
I am pretty certain that Carls MM are Anchor manufactured. If not then there is another manufacture out there that we are not aware of. Bearing in mind that Anchor sub there work out to a number of facilities. India being the main one.
I have both solid and hydraulic and as yet not seen any difference.
My preference is for the solid rubber as there is no chance of a leak. There is a big difference in the design of the original MM on the pre 84 cars and the later cars. IMOO you do not need the extra shocks. My cars are as smooth as silk in that area and so far so good on life.
My GTS has hydraulic and they are 2.5 years now and 20k miles.

Second point - I read in this thread that someone had Anchor that failed after 1 year. Never seen this post and did a search but no conclusive result. Speak up if you are out there as that would be interesting.

I am about to order another 4 sets (8 mounts) of MM from rockauto it will be interesting to see what I get.

ROG100

Donald,
Not that I have seen.
Are you saying the steering wheel became off center after the MM job?
We can center the steering wheel no problem.
Did Jims week before last.
Roger

dr bob

I made a mark on the splines at the rack input that lines up with the split in the pinch collar from the steering shaft. Wheel relation to the rack is maintained. It's a little touhg to get the bolt back in the pinch collar when the steering wheel is off by more than a tooth or maybe two on that input shaft.

ROG100

Maybe the difference is that we only lower the rack and do not not disengage it from the spline.
Donald,
Center your wheels using the alignment bolt. Take off the steering wheel and reposition it on the splines.

H2

Here's the old post with 928MotorSports response on hydraulic motor mounts:
=======
I recently bought a set of 928 motor mounts from Rock Auto and heard sloshing in them so traded/sold them to another Rennlister who didn't mind. I then ordered the "solid" mounts that 928 Motorsports sells (non-Porsche). The build quality looked better than the Rock Auto units but the 928 Motorsports motor mounts "sloshed" also when shook. On checking with Carl, below is his response. Based on this, "solid" motor mounts does not mean "Solid." I had found that confusing. Carl didn't mind if I shared his note on this with you.

My question would be this...air, oil or water..if mounts have one of these inside them and the filler leaks out...it would seem to make sense that the motor mount would collapse, whereas a truly "solid" rubber mount would not sag...but admittedly, as Carl points out, a truly solid rubber mount may transfer more vibrations.

The MM changeout is supposed to be such a nasty job, I only want to do this once before I die.

Harvey
==========
This is the message:

All the solid mounts will slosh when you shake them.

In order to have the correct vibration-absorption in a solid (non-hydraulic)
mount, the interior of the mount has a hollow chamber. An air-pocket, if you will.

During the rubber molding process, the manufacturer uses light oil or water to
keep the hollow space as the rubber is cast.

The sloshing you hear is the left-over water within the mount left from the
manufacturing process. That is a solid mount (non-hydraulic)

The hydraulic mounts do not slosh when shook, they are filled completely with
oil, and rely on the oil within to hold their shape and height. That's why, when
the oil leaks out, the hydraulic mounts collapse. The solid mounts are made
differently, and support the weight of the engine without any assistance from an internal fluid.

A few people have been confused and figured that "solid mount" means a solid
block of hard rubber. That would be a terrible mount, and shake the car like
crazy and tear itself apart. The term "solid mount" in the industry means
non-hydraulic. Rubber-only, but not solid rubber.

If you are displeased in any way, return them for a full refund. I think you can
see, because you had the same results from the mounts from Rock Auto, that this is the second set of solid mounts you've tried, and they all "slosh" when
shaken.

But - I'd rather make you happy than anything else, so please just return them
(including the hardware we supplied) for a refund if that is your wish.

I hope we will have an opportunity to serve you again soon.

928 Motorsports
__________________
1994 968 Coupe, Black/Black, 6-Speed, 70K miles
1985 928S, Red/Black, 5-Speed, 67K miles
2002 Audi TT Turbo, Glorified Volkswagen, 20K miles

ROG100

Harvey,
Seen all that, whats the point of repeating it?
Roger

ROG100

The purpose of the MM is to absorb movement and attenuate vibration.
Porsche engineers decided that the hydrulic mount may do this better.
I think they were wrong from a service view point as these MM fail very quickly as we all have experianced.
The solid MM in the pre 83/84 cars did not fail. How many have replaced them only to find they are still good. Here is a picture of the solid - and I mean solid - no added liquid as Carl states.
I have been involved in the rubber molding industry since I was 21 so I have some experiance in this area.