Feeler- Solid Front and Rear Mounts

[dohc v6]

I have been making these for several differnt cars now and was wondering if there is any interest here for them. Basically they would be around $50-70. They would either be solid aluminum or semi-solid meaning they would have some sort of poly built into the mounts. Is there any interest?

[mra32]

what are you mounting???

[dohc v6]

These mount to the car. The part that the shocks go through and mount to the car.

[z34mightymachine]

I have been making these for several differnt cars now and was wondering if there is any interest here for them. Basically they would be around $50-70. They would either be solid aluminum or semi-solid meaning they would have some sort of poly built into the mounts. Is there any interest?

 

Do you have any pictures by chance?

[dohc v6]

Yep I sure do. Here is what mine look like, they are for konis and actually lower the car, the standard ones will look just a little different.

[IRONDOG442]

You make them for W gen II ? $70 a pair?

[dohc v6]

They have a spring isolater correct? If so then those are around $100. If not then yeah probably $70

[IRONDOG442]

if by isolater you mean a notch where the spring curls into so it doesnt spin, yes !

[slick]

Wow, those are pretty freaking nice!!

[dohc v6]

Actually my buddy has a 99 lumina with that type of suspension. I am gonna look at making some for that particular design. Is there anyone that would be willing to spend 50-70 on a solid rear mount?

[BXX]

If you dont want the suspension binding and creating unwanted alignment angles under jounce/rebound, you need to have the upper strut mounting flexible.

[dohc v6]

Humm, I think your incorrect with that. I have made several solid kits and they all dont bind.

[mra32]

Well actually blackturd is right. You're removing 2 degrees of freedom that the strut had in a stock mount. Granted, this joint probably has the smallest amount of movement in the suspension. But basically what you have done limit the allowed movement of the suspension to just the telescoping of the strut and have not accounted for the changes in angle that the strut needs to perform to allow the whole suspension to articulate properly.

 

Basically if the suspension moves at all, there is alot of compression/squishing/bending going on that wasnt happening before to make it happen. This is gonna put a bigger load on your trailing arms & lateral links and a really big load on your mount and the strut tower around it.

 

I'll bet that once the compliance is taken up by the bushings, then your mount is bending to allow the suspension to articulate.

[dohc v6]

Thanks guys for the info, but as i said before that does not matter at all. I have talked to techs at Tein and B&G about this and they all told me the same thing. making solid mounts will not hurt the shocks or car at all, it will just make the connection from the body to the car solid. Meaning that it will just be very stiff.

[mra32]

Spherical bearings, like the ends supplied on racing coilovers, are a solid mount, but they allow the angular motion required by the shock. There is a big difference between a solid mount and a mount that fundamentally fixes the angles in which the shock is allowed to exist.

 

It is to be said that the suspension probably feels tighter since everything is going to be preloaded.

 

You can tell that the rear stut mount needs to flex easily if you bad strut mounts. That typical creaking that you would hear is the angular motion of the strut.

 

Like i said before, your mount is probably bending the most, but its still gonna put more load on the suspension components. It it a little bit scary though, since welded aluminum is not the first choice in material i would make for something that is designed to bend thousands of time daily.

 

How many hours do you have on these mounts on a W-body?

[mra32]

http://www.aurorabearing.com/products/commercial-industrial/spherical-bearings/default.html

 

Aurora are very well respected in racing.

 

Do some simple calcs and see how much the strut needs to move. Measure the lateral links and trailing arms and their angle at full droop. measure the difference between full extension of the strut and full compession. these should be all you need for a very BASIC understanding of the angles of the strut through the suspension travel. If you have access to adams or mitchell or other suspension software, this would be very easy.

[dohc v6]

OK, well I guess its one less part that others wont have cause of your wonderful comments. No worries here, I already have them.

[mra32]

Don't get your panties in a bunch. The only other person i've seen get so offended when asked to do a little work was my roommate. Hey you dont even have to do the calcs. If you get me the measurements, i'll do an adams simulation. It wouldnt hurt to have the suspension of our cars modeled. Once i get the suspension modeled, and enough people are interested, I can also run your part through FEA if you give me VERY accurate drawings.

 

Seriously, My only complaint is that welded aluminum is not known for being very resilient when subjected to repeated stresses. Did you consider this?

[dohc v6]

Dude, its cool. Everytime I do something you get on my thread and go crazy with it. Its just like the brakes. I design bigger brakes, and you bash them. I try and design suspension parts and you bash them. How about you try building something? Your comments dont mean shit. I mean you tell people that bigger brakes dont do anything. I mean come on, seriously?

[IRONDOG442]

[gpchris]

I would be interested in front mounts if they were designed for adjustable coilovers. And actually I dont believe the strut changes angles in a w-body... I could be wrong.

[Dark Ride]

I would be interested in front mounts if they were designed for adjustable coilovers. And actually I dont believe the strut changes angles in a w-body... I could be wrong.

X2, the mount seems like it would be the only difficult part to make for front coilovers.

[BXX]

I would be interested in front mounts if they were designed for adjustable coilovers. And actually I dont believe the strut changes angles in a w-body... I could be wrong.

 

Yes, it does. It has too, simple geometry. If it doesnt, other things will make up for it... Things that arent designed to

[Olds W31]

DOHC V6 I am NOT bashing. I think I understand MRA 32's drift here, though. His concern is focused on what happens dynamically to the suspension and, more importantly to the mount you are constructing out of Aluminum to take potentially hundreds of duty cycles per day.

 

Basically, when a McPherson strut compresses, the angle of the strut WILL change. The bottom is solidly fixed, using two bolts, to the end of a swing arm. Imagine the strut at rest (sitting on the tires) and at full compression (crammed up as far as possible into the wheel well). The top of the strut HAS to be able to swing, as the suspension arm it is attached to pivots up and down.

 

Now this is not a large number, perhaps 4 or 5 deg, as the math would involve knowing the length of the arm, and the mounting angle and travel distance of the strut. One of the things that someone who "solids up" the mount, like you have built/proposed, will notice is that this will, by design, transfer more stiffness or reduce flex. The problem as I see it is that while the mount no longer flexes (you eliminate the rubber in the factory strut mount), that means that either the suspension, the sheet metal the mount is anchored to, and or the new mount itself must, by applying the principles of mechanical engineering be forced to absorb the angular torque applied.

 

I could see if, you have poly bushings, solid suspension pieces, and this solid mount you propose with an attachment bar linking the upper strut tower mounts, that the aluminum the mount you are building is the part that will take the most stress.

 

Could you build one that would not fail? Certainly, but that means you have an unnecessarily bulky component. I would recommend that you might, instead, consider a heim-style joint with provision to thread the strut into, suspended in a cradle. Think of it as a swing-set that bolts to the upper strut mount, with the swing being the Heim joint, and the strut threaded into the swing seat. This would allow the strut to pivot as the suspension moves, eliminate the flex a rubber bushing has, and offer all of the other benefits you might derive from making a solid mount.

 

I have not built this, but I hope you can tell by the above...I have thought about it. Please consider the potential risk of engineering out the flexibility or range of movement required in a suspension. I doubt in a street application you would arrive a the stress-to-failure point, but on a track, with the right tires (limited sidewall), and enough loading in a turn, your proposed mount could sheer from stress, or would tear through the sheet metal structure of the car.

[dohc v6]

Well I guess I will just ahve to put it on my car and find out.