Hopefully someone can post pics or something.

In the first year & half of running HC, we broke 12 motor mounts.(Every single mount broke, usually all, but always more than 1 went at at time, including the rear/to tranny one which actually pulled out a huge chunk of the engine block with it.)
Not only is this bad, but unsafe to replace track-side (& the stock mounts, as you can't just buy the rubber insert from Honda & have to buy a whole new mount gets really expensive.) At the time we did the obvious & switched to un-breakable Hasports...problem solved.

Now with us returning to IT, we can't run the Hasports, and it is illegal to run any sort of insert as well. It has to be 100% stock mounts. This has us very concerned.

The rules do allow the use of "ONE engine stayrod" though, which we assume is what we need to do to keep the stock mounts from failing.

We want to be 100% legal. No fear of protests, dqs, etc..

Can anyone post an explanation (preferrably w/ a pic) of a stayrod that would help us with this? We've searched all over the internet (yep even outside H-T) & can't find any real usable info on the subject....just a plethora of posts of people like us asking wtf!?

If there isn't anything available for our car, we can easily have someone "make one" but we at least would like some guidance on what has worked for others, what one even looks like.

Any insight anyone?

 

hi danielle and lyonel.

i'll try to give a little help here, if i can....

now, this is from a drag racing perspective, many moons ago, before i was even doing auto-x.....

some of the more powerful FWD drag guys at that time were breaking all kinds of stuff related to the mounts. some went to the "stay rod"; this generally was an adjustable, heavy duty steel rod that went from the cylinder head to the firewall, and kept the motor/tranny combo from rotating back and breaking chit. lots of guys put them on their Turbo Omnis, which is what i was running at the time....

you will need to fab up the rod, with some kind of adjustment capability (turnbuckle, etc) and a mounting tab on the cylinder head and a mount for the firewall.

this is all assuming (***-of-u-and-me!) that the SCCA is using the same definition of "stay rod" that we were way back then....

hope that helps some
todd

 

thanks todd- that sounds like what we're looking for- we'll try looking on drag related sites as well.
But if you think of anywhere we can "see one" please point us there- we have a guy here (RPM Engineering) that is willing to make us anything we need, but likes pics & lots of guidance in "what we need/want"

btw: SCCA definition of stayrod: A rigid reinforcement bar or rod interconnecting opposite sides of a car at structurally significant locations.

 

i'm not sure how to "mount" it exactly but couldnt you use two peices of "all-thread" with a long cupler in the middle to tigten it down... i think the 3/8 inch stuff goes up to 2500lbs and the 1/2 inch stuff is +4000lbs.

the 1/2 inch would really work for the forward and back movement of the motor with issues mounting. the 3/8 might flex when the motor pushes back.

my only real experience with the stuff was hanging bars/oven hoods from the roof rafters at my old job. it shouldnt be too hard to get ahold of for you guys though.

 

Ingalls Engineering has this little gem...





Read more about it here... http://www.ingallseng.com/parts/93021.htm

It would not be hard to make a rigid version of the "stiffy" (is that redundant? )if needed. HTH

 

what the hell are you doing to the car to break the REAR mount? i've done a couple years of pro solos on the same mounts and thats doing 6000RPM launches and trying to spin really heavy street tires. the clutch wasn't happy, but the mounts look 100%. i'm not really friendly on the drivetrain ripping into 2nd gear either. sorry, nothing to contribute to the thread, just curious if you guys know how or what is causing the failures. (isn't it usually a wheelhop thing? are you guys getting THAT much wheelspin?)

nate

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by solo-x &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">what the hell are you doing to the car to break the REAR mount? i've done a couple years of pro solos on the same mounts and thats doing 6000RPM launches and trying to spin really heavy street tires. the clutch wasn't happy, but the mounts look 100%. i'm not really friendly on the drivetrain ripping into 2nd gear either. sorry, nothing to contribute to the thread, just curious if you guys know how or what is causing the failures. (isn't it usually a wheelhop thing? are you guys getting THAT much wheelspin?)

nate</TD></TR></TABLE>

Maybe watching Lyonel drive would explain this better? (he he )

Wasn't happening during "launches" (standing starts) b/c he would come in from a practice/qualifying session to discover ah-ha broken mount (again) also wheelspin hasn't ever been a problem for us either...(we are talking about breaking stock mounts-never broke an "unbreakable" hasport)
Also when the rear mount went- it wasn't the only mount broken (so probably front 2 went first during the session, thereby putting undue stress on the rear one causing it to take the chunk-o-block with it.)

The stock mounts have to be the failure though, thats the only thing we had problems w/- no breaking other stuff like axels/driveshafts (knock on wood) etc.

But seriously we aren't the only one breaking tons of stock mounts (including the rear one) on track.... hence why Hasport makes the unbreakable ones.
The stresses you put on your car in road racing are way more than in pro solo. Back in our pro solo days we didn't break nearly as much stuff as we do now.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RexRacer19 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ingalls Engineering has this little gem...
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Have you (or anyone else here) used this?
Just curious about feedback from someone who has..did it help?
It looks pretty neat though...
thanks

 

just wondering were you using stock rubber or poly bushing in the motor mounts that broke?

Has anyone ever used a solid stay rod set up? Would that be too ridged? How much play do we need to keep things from shacking apart. The stiff piston looks like a good idea but the price seems a bit high to me.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 577HondaPrelude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">just wondering were you using stock rubber or poly bushing in the motor mounts that broke?

Has anyone ever used a solid stay rod set up? Would that be too ridged? How much play do we need to keep things from shacking apart. The stiff piston looks like a good idea but the price seems a bit high to me.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Stock rubber is required in SCCA IT. Otherwise, they'd use the HaSport, or poly inserts.

 

yes, but they used the car in HC were poly is ok for the mounts and this is when they broke them. I was just wondering what they had in the car back then, when they were braking the mounts.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 577HondaPrelude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yes, but they used the car in HC were poly is ok for the mounts and this is when they broke them. I was just wondering what they had in the car back then, when they were braking the mounts.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Back when the mounts were breaking (prior to hasports) they were 100% stock mounts (so yes Honda rubber not poly or delrin).

The "stiff piston" idea is interesting to me - but yea seems high though.
The only thing I wonder is by the scca definition of "stayrod" if it would have to be more solid bar/rod rather than pistonish like the "stiffy".

And we too are wondering about anyone running a soild bar- we are worried about being too rigid as well- in that placement/mounting would have to be very "thought out" so that its rigidity doesn't cause other things to break- the mouting location of the "stiffy" concerns us if it was re-made in a solid configuration. This is why something seemingly easy (the stayrod) became so complicated to us once we started trying to design something.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Lyonel 13H4 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Have you (or anyone else here) used this?
Just curious about feedback from someone who has..did it help?

</TD></TR></TABLE>

I have not used it. I just remember seeing it not to long ago and thought it was similar to what you wanted to do...

I do have a good friend who specialized in preparing Neons for both drag and RR and he usually put in an upper stay rod on the real modded up cars to both save the mounts and help with traction. I think that MOPAR even sells one just for the Neons, if I am not mistaken.

Another thing...my engineering brain tells me that the stay rod might be even more effective if mounted on the other side (distributor side) of the head. That puts it more in line with where the torque you are trying to controll is actually being applied. It may be harder to find two good attachement points over there though...just thinking out loud.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RexRacer19 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
...just thinking out loud.</TD></TR></TABLE>

please do... thats what we need right now...!

 

I don't think that a solid version would be too stiff if designed right. Using heim (spherical) joints on both ends would eliminate any binding that it could potentially cause. The motor mounts will still absorb the fore-aft and right-left movements of the engine and tranny. Also, the further away from the point where the torque is generated (in this case where the axles exit the transmission) the less "force" the stayrod will actually see.

I have a complete Z6 engine in the garage...I will take a look at it tonight and see if I have any good ideas. Meanwhile...maybe someone has already solved this and could post it up.

 

Lyonel,

are you guys using the 2 lower torque mounts too? Those do definitely help to stabilize the engine. A lot of people toss the driver's side torque mount when they ditch the A/C but you need to use A/C mount to attach it to the torque mount. What about filling the mounts with glue? I know the rules don't mention it but that might be an option.

Another thing people do is use chain to stop the engine from moving. The secure one end to the frame/car and the other to the engine somewhere. And they can work good because they allow slack in one direction but yet will stop movement in the other.

As for stayrods what I've seen people do to is use it in conjusction with a front strut tower bar. They'll mount a solid rod to somewhere on the engine and the rod will attach with heim joints at both end and be bolted to the strut tower bar.

hope that helps.

steve

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by stevel &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Lyonel,

are you guys using the 2 lower torque mounts too? Those do definitely help to stabilize the engine. A lot of people toss the driver's side torque mount when they ditch the A/C but you need to use A/C mount to attach it to the torque mount. What about filling the mounts with glue? I know the rules don't mention it but that might be an option.

Another thing people do is use chain to stop the engine from moving. The secure one end to the frame/car and the other to the engine somewhere. And they can work good because they allow slack in one direction but yet will stop movement in the other.


steve</TD></TR></TABLE>

you read my mind....

and to clarify, 'window weld' is the substance im thinking of....available at lowes,etc.
still keep the original mounts, but fill the 'voids' with the 'weld'.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Johnny Tran &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">you read my mind....

and to clarify, 'window weld' is the substance im thinking of....available at lowes,etc.
still keep the original mounts, but fill the 'voids' with the 'weld'.</TD></TR></TABLE>

window weld is 3M's name for it. At lowe's it's usually just sold as a polyurethane glue. I doubt you'll find 3M window weld at Lowe's.

this is it:



steve

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Lyonel 13H4 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">and it is illegal to run any sort of insert as well.</TD></TR></TABLE>
sounds like window weld is not an option.


Mugen mounts (all 5 of them) + a piece of chain is the way to go.
(and no more power shifting).

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Willard &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">sounds like window weld is not an option.


Mugen mounts (all 5 of them) + a piece of chain is the way to go.
(and no more power shifting). </TD></TR></TABLE>

mugen mounts are definitely not legal either. They don't have an OEM honda part #.

s

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Lyonel 13H4 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">btw: SCCA definition of stayrod: A rigid reinforcement bar or rod interconnecting opposite sides of a car at structurally significant locations. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Be very careful! You will not be "interconnecting opposite SIDES of a car" by installing a motor stabilizer.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by stevel &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">mugen mounts are definitely not legal either. They don't have an OEM honda part #.</TD></TR></TABLE>
And the OEM mounts have a p/n on them?
Just wondering.

The chances of someone with a durometer checking the stiffness of a motor mount is slim... but I could be wrong.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Willard &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And the OEM mounts have a p/n on them?
Just wondering.

The chances of someone with a durometer checking the stiffness of a motor mount is slim... but I could be wrong.</TD></TR></TABLE>

i have no idea if the honda ones have a part #. But there is a part # associated with them. That's what I meant. Mugen mounts don't have a honda part #. I would run them because I would hate to keep buying new motor mounts. But, no question they are illegal.

Or, I would go with that ingalls piece up top. Summit racing now sells them for the civics and it's not that expensive. It's basically a shock obviously and if you find it's not enough you could replace that with a solid rod and you already have the nice mounts they give you. I had one on my EK hatch with a b16a motor and it was really nice. Well, worth the money. Don't knock it til ya give it a try!

s


Modified by stevel at 3:24 PM 4/28/2005

 

(Lyonel here) We definitely used all 5 stock motor mounts correctly. What we were breaking on the rear mount was the stamped steel "L-shaped" bracket. In fact, even in the bone stock donor car that we bought for civic ex version 2.0, the stamped steel piece was broken, as well as one of the lower mounts.

The order in which the motor mounts were breaking did not seem to matter. Usually, if one broke, another one would break shortly after. Chains are unacceptible according to IT rules. I would not think the damper type stayrod would be acceptable.

Aaaarg! It is this type of rule in IT that just plain pisses me off about running in the series. If something is an obvious weak spot, that requires constant replacement with an expensive oem part, that gives no performance advantage, why does this have to be such a task to find a suitable alternative. The fact that one must "create" a remedy by devising something as vague as the SCCA's definition of a stayrod, rather than doing something obvious like replacing the mounts with something stronger (like NASA allows in Honda Challenge) is just plain ignorant. SCCA actually doesn't even give a definition of an "engine stayrod". This leaves way too much grey area and opens the door for protest for whatever "engine stayrod" that I come up with.


Modified by Lyonel 13H4 at 10:50 PM 4/28/2005

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by stevel &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

i have no idea if the honda ones have a part #. But there is a part # associated with them. That's what I meant. Mugen mounts don't have a honda part #. I would run them because I would hate to keep buying new motor mounts. But, no question they are illegal.

Or, I would go with that ingalls piece up top. Summit racing now sells them for the civics and it's not that expensive. It's basically a shock obviously and if you find it's not enough you could replace that with a solid rod and you already have the nice mounts they give you. I had one on my EK hatch with a b16a motor and it was really nice. Well, worth the money. Don't knock it til ya give it a try!

s


Modified by stevel at 3:24 PM 4/28/2005</TD></TR></TABLE>

I am not one to promote cheating, but I have been told by countless people who run hondas to not think twice about using the Mugen inserts as nor the stock or the mugen have part number, they are both black and look the same. I personally do not have them on my car as of yet, but its just an opinion and you know what they say about those!