 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Saab Cars / January 2006Logevity of Scan-Tech engine mounts?
Four months and 16,000km ago I replaced all the engine related mounts in my 9000 2.0T 5Spd. This included the 2 upper torque reaction bushes, the gearbox mount and the two hydraulic engine mounts with Scan-Tec parts. Bugger me if I am not starting to feel slop creeping back in again. These mounts have not been subjected to abnormal stresses (like clutch dumping), and have no oil leaking on them. Is this normal for the Scan-Tec mounts? > Four months and 16,000km ago I replaced all the engine related mounts in my > 9000 2.0T 5Spd. This included the 2 upper torque reaction bushes, the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Is this normal for the Scan-Tec mounts? Did you restrict the motion of your lower mounts at all? Like this? http://townsendimports.com/Web/engine_folder/motor_mount_mod_9000.htm If not then yes they do fail pretty quickly in manual trans cars. The use of stiffer aftermarket urethane bushings in the upper torque bracket also helps to reduce the engine rocking (and subsequent lower hydraulic mount failures) at the expense of a bit more engine vibration being felt, mostly at idle.  Signature-Fred W > Did you restrict the motion of your lower mounts at all? Like this? > http://townsendimports.com/Web/engine_folder/motor_mount_mod_9000.htm No I did not. > If not then yes they do fail pretty quickly in manual trans cars. The > use of stiffer aftermarket urethane bushings in the upper torque bracket > also helps to reduce the engine rocking (and subsequent lower hydraulic > mount failures) at the expense of a bit more engine vibration being > felt, mostly at idle. I doubt very much that the original (OE) mounts would have failed within 16,000km (10,000mi). I conclude that the Scan-Tech parts of inferior quality. > I doubt very much that the original (OE) mounts would have failed within > 16,000km (10,000mi). I conclude that the Scan-Tech parts of inferior > quality. That wouldn't surprise me, I've had a mixed bag when it comes to Scan-Tech, but sometimes they're the only route you have. > > I doubt very much that the original (OE) mounts would have failed within > > 16,000km (10,000mi). I conclude that the Scan-Tech parts of inferior > > quality. > > That wouldn't surprise me, I've had a mixed bag when it comes to > Scan-Tech, but sometimes they're the only route you have. Elsewhere I've heard less than complimentary comments about polyurethane bushes generally. Graham > Elsewhere I've heard less than complimentary comments about polyurethane > bushes generally. I didn't use urethane bushes. They have their place but in my opinion not in applications where rubber was OE specified for NVH purposes. > > Elsewhere I've heard less than complimentary comments about polyurethane > > bushes generally. > > I didn't use urethane bushes. OK. it was Fred who gave me that idea. Graham >>>I doubt very much that the original (OE) mounts would have failed within >>>16,000km (10,000mi). I conclude that the Scan-Tech parts of inferior [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Graham Scan-Tech makes only the OE style rubber bushes. The urethane bushings are quite superior, but transmit more vibration. I would only use them on the torque bracket. I don't think they make any engine mounts from urethane. Signature-Fred W > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > 16,000km (10,000mi). I conclude that the Scan-Tech parts of inferior > quality. You have not yet determined conclusively that the engine mounts failed. You just said there is increased motion. The whole point of the hydraulic type engine mounts is to allow motion to dampen the generous amount of engine vibration the 4 cylinder engines produce. My guess is the motion is as a result of the torque bracket bushings rather than the engine mounts. As an aside, I have used many Scan-Tech parts over the years and never had any problem with inferior quality. That certainly does not mean that you did not get some bad parts this time though... Signature-Fred W > Four months and 16,000km ago I replaced all the engine related mounts in my > 9000 2.0T 5Spd. This included the 2 upper torque reaction bushes, the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Is this normal for the Scan-Tec mounts? Which one failed? > Which one failed? Since the upper mounts (torque reaction bushes) still look perfect, and the gearbox mount bush looks fine I am guessing it is one or both of the hydraulic mounts that have developed the slack. >>Which one failed? > > Since the upper mounts (torque reaction bushes) still look perfect, and the > gearbox mount bush looks fine I am guessing it is one or both of the > hydraulic mounts that have developed the slack. The engine mounts are *supposed* to be slack. To check if they have failed you have to jack up the engine and see if they have become detatched from the metal. I'll bet that they have not failed at all. Signature-Fred W |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.