kiyakerz

iTrader: (7)

I've been going through quite a few threads and found a lot of helpful information on this subject. I just want to confirm the mounts I need to order to replace all the engine mounts. I found these two links

http://www.energysuspensionparts.com...sp?prod=7.1116

and

http://www.energysuspensionparts.com...sp?prod=7.1114

That's all I need to order from them to replace all my engine mounts correct? Thanks

zero2sixtyZ

iTrader: (30)

7.1114: These are two of the four mounts that hold the engine. They are mounted on the subframe, one in front of the motor, one towards the back. ES does not make a replacement for the side mounts.

7.1116: These are the bushings on the subframe itself. Where the subframe bolts onto the chassis, there are rubber bushings between the actual subframe and the bolts. These will replace those worn rubber bushings with polyurethane ones.

kiyakerz

iTrader: (7)

What should I do for the side mounts? I was hoping to replace all the mounts so I had a fresh start. Is there a polyurethane replacement for them or should I just get OEM mounts?

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

Why do you think that is? My guess is those bushings don't get as much stress. But still, you think ES would make the whole set.

Unklejoe

iTrader: (6)

I think it is because of the way the engine is mounted. The front and back mounts of the motor have to handle the full torque of the engine while the side ones just stop it from rocking from side to side.

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

Here's the thing... NWP's Torque Link Connector attaches to the top of one of the front-engine mount (passenger-side), and apparently reinforces the engine stability quite well. I personally haven't tried it yet, but that's the gist. I'm getting one this Summer.

So anyway, if this connecting bar has a positive impact, wouldn't solid poly mount inserts do the same or better? This has been bugging me for a while.

On a side note: identifiers like "side", "front" and "back", get all screwed up with a transverse, FWD engine. Nothing much we can do about that.

Unklejoe

iTrader: (6)

I understand what you are trying to say, but you are mistaken on one part.

Even though the NWP torque link mounts to the side of the motor, it prevents movement from front to back (front to back = from the front bumper to the rear bumper), not side to side.

If you have a look at the side mounts, you will see exactly what I am trying to say. The motor only rocks from front to back under load. Very rarely is there any lateral movement.

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

The orientation of the motor is what defines front-to-back and side-to-side, not the car. NWP's torque link mounts to the front of the motor. It's kind of funny, because I just wrote how these concepts gets ef'd up with a transverse engine.

My question is this: if the torque link creates a stabilizing effect by connecting to the front engine mount, then wouldn't solid poly bushings in the front and rear mounts do the same?

Maybe I'm having a complete fail on how I'm visualizing this, in which case I'd be happy to get it straight eventually. I think we're talking in circles now.

knight_yyz

iTrader: (40)

With the engine mounted sideways, realy the engine is moving left and right, but in respect to the front of the car and rear of the car.

I have been told by 2 Nissan Master techs that it is extremely rare for the mounts on the insides of the fenders to wear out. The engine doesn't move in the direction. They are there to help stabilize but there is no torque in that direction. All the torque is on the mounts on the crossmember.

I am sure if enough people called ES and said "hey!! we want side mounts made for the maxima" they just might do it. IIRC that's how they started making the torque mounts for our engine years ago.

As to the nwp torque link, I haven't researched it. I don't think it is necessary on a car with ES mounts. Here's my proof of that.

my car with ES bushings with 252WHP and 249 tq...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7FO-AhN64

this guy needs something (vq35 in a sentra)
http://upload.streetfire.net/video/S...yno_111916.htm

Unklejoe

iTrader: (6)

The second video that knight posted does a perfect job in visually depicting why you would only need the "side" mounts, and not the front and rear mounts.

I say front and rear because most people will find it easier to understand that way. Like the front one is the one closest to the radiator, the front of the car. I know this isn't how it should be, but that is how I refer to them and I find it easier that way.

knight_yyz

iTrader: (40)

I say front and back as well, but the correct terminology is the torque mounts, because that is the direction of the torque. From the back of the car to the front of the car.

kiyakerz

iTrader: (7)

So moral of the story is, I only need to upgrade the two mounts that energy suspension makes since that is where all of the torque goes. Thanks! =)

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

Yes! Funny how we took the round-about to get to that answer.

Good info, Knight. We talked about a Spring/Summer visit down the interstate to Hamilton. I'm also planning on getting the NWP Torque Link this summer. Maybe we can get those events to coincide, and we can install it together, so you can make a hands-on assessment. That's got possibilities, if you're interested.

knight_yyz

iTrader: (40)

sounds good to me.

As to the OP, I would also get the sub mount bushings, for the extra 20 bucks they also help a little bit with the wheel hop. They are a little harder than oem rubber and they also go where all the torque is applied.

Ghost_54

iTrader: (13)

As knight_yyz has pointed out for approx. 20.00 do the sub bushings at the same time pic's below show the front sub bushing, do both ends of the crossmember.

lower view:


upper view:

maxima dude

many people say es makes the side mounts also

Ghost_54

iTrader: (13)

Yes the two on the crossmember: