• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

Are polyeurethane Engine Mounts ok for daily driving?

  • Thread starter Thread starter black143
  • Start date Start date Apr 19, 2004
B

black143

Founding Member
Aug 28, 2001
647
0
0
Renton, WA
Apr 19, 2004
#1
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #1
I have a slightly modified 88 GT. One of my engine mounts is broken so I thought it was time to swap them out. I eventually will have my car where I want it (over 300 rwhp) but who knows when. Until then, are polyeurethane engine mounts (specifically energy suspension's engine mounts) going to be too tight for a daily driver? Anyone have experience with these engine mounts and not like them? Thanks guys.
 

BarnStang

Founding Member
Mar 2, 2001
1,260
3
39
Hagerstown, MD
Apr 19, 2004
#2
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #2
I put in both the motor mounts and thr trans mount. I hardly noticed much. A little more viration but nothing extream. Other people have reported a lot of additional vibration in the chasis, but I haven;t. I't perfectly still at idle. But when you open the TB from under the hood, the motor does not move like it used to, so thats good. I am very happy with them.
 
B

black143

Founding Member
Aug 28, 2001
647
0
0
Renton, WA
Apr 19, 2004
#3
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #3
I'm more concerned of the vibration at WOT. Thats why i want to replace them. I replaced my tranny mounts with the same brand of mount and I'm pretty pleased. I have an aluminum driveshaft so I SHOULDN'T have that much vibration at WOT.

I have another question of topic. Yesterday I did a tune-up on my car. My old spark plugs were gapped at .054". The guy helping me owns an 88 Saleen and he said he's never heard of a gap that big before so we gapped the new ones at .044". My car seems to respond a little better now. I'm just concerned about any reprocusions. Other than detonation, nothing bad could happen at that gap right? thanks.
 

BarnStang

Founding Member
Mar 2, 2001
1,260
3
39
Hagerstown, MD
Apr 19, 2004
#4
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #4
I have little vibration at WOT. And I have the alum DS too.
.054 is way to much for a stock ign. .044 is good. For the stock ign, just gap them to what the shop manual says or the owner’s manual if you have it. I have mine gapped at .054 or thereabouts but that's because I have a Jacobs ign. system and that's what their book says to gap them to.
 
B

black143

Founding Member
Aug 28, 2001
647
0
0
Renton, WA
Apr 19, 2004
#5
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #5
Thanks for the help BarnStang. I used to have an MSD Ignition but I took it out as it was giving me issues. I'm going to recheck the gap this weekend to make sure they're all where they should be. I hope the engine mounts fixes my vibration issue at WOT.
 

cevtv

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2002
1,113
0
37
Massachusetts
Apr 19, 2004
#6
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #6
Double post.......sorry.
 

cevtv

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2002
1,113
0
37
Massachusetts
Apr 19, 2004
#7
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #7
BarnStang said:
I have little vibration at WOT. And I have the alum DS too.
.054 is way to much for a stock ign. .044 is good. For the stock ign, just gap them to what the shop manual says or the owner’s manual if you have it. I have mine gapped at .054 or thereabouts but that's because I have a Jacobs ign. system and that's what their book says to gap them to.
Click to expand...



I know he has an '88, but .054" IS the stock recommended gap for 1991 and up.....
 
B

black143

Founding Member
Aug 28, 2001
647
0
0
Renton, WA
Apr 19, 2004
#8
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #8
I read my Chiltons guide when doing my spark plugs and they tell you how to gap them, but they dont tell you how much to gap them to. I read that the Non-HO 5.0 was supposed to gap to .054 but I have the HO Obviously. Anyway, my car is running better now, so as long as .044 isnt going to hurt anything, then I'm good. Now I gotta start building my engine like I want to.

I have one simple question in regards to engine building:
Will putting an aftermarket upper and lower intake help (or hurt) anything with my basically stock motor (minus exhaust work)? Thanks guys.
 

BarnStang

Founding Member
Mar 2, 2001
1,260
3
39
Hagerstown, MD
Apr 19, 2004
#9
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #9
cevtv-wow. That's a lot of gap for stock. Can't imagine it would cause a problem. If anything it would run worse with less gap on a stock system? Mine must be more than that then. I haven't done plugs in awhile. I know it's about .008 or .010 over stock for me. Thanks!

Depends on the intake. The stock heads are the choke point. I replaced the heads first, and put the stock induction components on top of them until I could afford to replace the stuff up top. If you can't swing the cost of the heads, then get what you can and you can bolt it up but you will probably not see dramatic improvments. And should not hurt anything. Once I got the intake, MAF and TB, my heads really wake up at 3k rpm. Faster than a speeding armadillo...

Found it. 10 min to find the web site, 10 min to sift through all the BS. so mine must be set at .060 than if thats what the instructions said. Not sure where they got the .015-.020 larger than stock numbers from if stock is .054.
Regap your factory recommended spark plugs to .060 (this is larger than stock by 0.015 to 0.020inches).
 

cevtv

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2002
1,113
0
37
Massachusetts
Apr 19, 2004
#10
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #10
black143 said:
I read my Chiltons guide when doing my spark plugs and they tell you how to gap them, but they dont tell you how much to gap them to.
Click to expand...

Chilton's, page 1-26...the chart at the top of the page - "Gasoline Engine Tune Up Specifications".
 

cevtv

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2002
1,113
0
37
Massachusetts
Apr 19, 2004
#11
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #11
BarnStang said:
cevtv-wow. That's a lot of gap for stock.
Click to expand...


The reason is because they went to a higher output coil in 1991. If I remember right, MSD tells you .060" - could be wrong, though.
 

BarnStang

Founding Member
Mar 2, 2001
1,260
3
39
Hagerstown, MD
Apr 19, 2004
#12
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #12
THat would explain why most recomendation favor running the stock ign system unless you get really radicle. Mine is probably borderline overkill, but I got such a great deal on it I couldn't pass it up...
 
B

black143

Founding Member
Aug 28, 2001
647
0
0
Renton, WA
Apr 19, 2004
#13
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #13
I dont have the MSD anymore so I'm back to a stock system. I was getting a lot of problems with a surging and rough idle (all around rough ride actually) so i gapped them at .044" and I'm not having any issues anymore. You want me to go up to .060"?

I really want to liven up my car and I have a little money to save, but not a lot right now. I'm still in school. If I could find a set of heads for $400-500 and could find someone to help me put them on, I'd go for it. I know you could match all your items, but that takes money to match them right away. So if I had to choose, I should choose heads over induction? Thanks guys.
 

cevtv

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2002
1,113
0
37
Massachusetts
Apr 19, 2004
#14
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #14
black143 said:
I dont have the MSD anymore so I'm back to a stock system. I was getting a lot of problems with a surging and rough idle (all around rough ride actually) so i gapped them at .044" and I'm not having any issues anymore. You want me to go up to .060"?
Click to expand...

No, no, no! I meant WITH the MSD, open the gap. Since you have a 1988, the stock gap is .044". You are fine.
 
B

black143

Founding Member
Aug 28, 2001
647
0
0
Renton, WA
Apr 19, 2004
#15
  • Apr 19, 2004
  • #15
cevtv said:
No, no, no! I meant WITH the MSD, open the gap. Since you have a 1988, the stock gap is .044". You are fine.
Click to expand...

Sweet man. Thanks. Any thoughts onto which to go with first (Heads or Induction)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wheels-Tires LS mii swap and rear rim size/axle questions....
  • 78mIIman
  • Feb 2, 2025
  • 1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech
Replies
6
Views
708
1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech May 6, 2025
78 Mach1
F
289 to 302 Engine
  • Fri Guy
  • Feb 13, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
648
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 13, 2025
Fri Guy
F
Engine HELP - 351W Based Build Under Stock Hood
  • thinkfaster
  • Oct 17, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
13
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Dec 31, 2025
Qtrhrse23
Q
E
Alternative IACs?
  • Ethereal_Zer0
  • May 23, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
512
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 7, 2025
CAMTWO1070
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?