Why is nobody installing the nelson engine mount?

I was under the impression you were still supposed to run the driver side mount with it.

It's possible I'm mistaken. There's at least one person I've talked to that thought they could get rid of the drivers side mount.

I also went back and looked at some photos of Nelson's car. The mount is definitely gone. But upon closer inspection, I can see there's some kind of custom bracket that goes from the front of the block near where the alternator would be, down to part of his front tube frame. So maybe that's where some of the confusion is coming from.

you lose the trans mount with his setup unless you make it fit (which I would), but the driver side mount is still usable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mehrshadvr4

Engine plates are nothing new. Actually Nelson's plates are a bit thicker than the ones it's used on most high power drag cars. If you don't feel safe with the design you can modify it so you can use bolt to secure it but I don't see this to be necessary. IMO Nelson't plates are designed better than the one used here.
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/9784/hpim0608kh2.jpg

---

Is that welded to the frame? The fu..? What's going on there?

Most of the images I can find show that the engine plate is mounted using bolts through the plate, often with polymer bushings. Not bolts through a welded-on bracket. Some stress analysis or any validation of the design beyond, "itz gud enuff for nelson it gud enuff fer yu!" would be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamVR4

Is that welded to the frame? The fu..? What's going on there?

Most of the images I can find show that the engine plate is mounted using bolts through the plate, often with polymer bushings. Not bolts through a welded-on bracket. Some stress analysis or any validation of the design beyond, "itz gud enuff for nelson it gud enuff fer yu!" would be nice.

---

For some reason I read this- "itz gud enuff for nelson it gud enuff fer yu!" in some kind of Scottish accent.

As far as the mount goes, the real input that's important here would be from those who have used and are using the plate currently. I do agree that the right amount of R&D wasn't put into it. But I understand the concept was to make it easier and to help clean things up.

His setup retains the upper mount but deletes the trans mount. I doubt it will fit even if you wanted it as like stated engine height has changed.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

I usually don't reply one sentence at a time, but I'm bored. so here we go. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff V.

You may as well be comparing apples and cinder blocks. That plate is nothing like Nelson's.

1> Your example plate is on the FRONT of the engine. The rear of the engine is still supported by the transmission, as it was designed to be.
Nelson's plate supports the transmission, and lets the engine hang suspended in thin air.
who said the engine is hanged in the air? the engine is still supported on both sides. The engine is mounted where it was before so it makes no difference if it's on subframe.
2> Your example plate is mounted to the frame rails.
Nelson's plate attaches to the front and rear cross members, which were never designed to bear almost the entire weight of the powertrain.
who said the engine is hanged in the air? the engine is still supported on both sides. The engine is mounted where it was before so it makes no difference if it's on subframe.

3> Your example plate does not relocate driveline parts which have critical geometry requirements.
1/4 of an inch doesn't disturb drivetrain geometry. There is a reason drive shafts have u joint. It takes a very sharp angle for drive shaft to cause problem.

4> Due to the previously mentioned point of suspending the engine by its rear flange, the transmission mount no longer has weight being loaded in a downward direction. The tail end of the transmission is now being forced up into the mount. I can't imagine that changing the stresses on the transmission housing is a good thing. We already have enough problems with these transmissions.
You can still use factory mount on the trans side. You just need to pry it to line up the bolt. Plus you don't know how much of the weight is supported on the trans mount side anyway. IMO the most weight of the engine and trans is on the two center mount. There is a reason why those two usually fail first or are made stronger than other two.

---

here is for a change. A engine that is supported by the rear
http://www.candbmotorsports.com/proj...e/00000187.JPG

If you guys are worry about the weld breaking, I would be worry on the front side only since that is the one seeing pulling up motion on it when launching so you can support it by using two L shape bracket and bolt it on top of the plate and drill hole through the plate to bolt them together. Something similar to this.
http://www.rhphoto.com/images/DSC_1480.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mehrshadvr4

IMO the most weight of the engine and trans is on the two center mount.

---

No, it's not. There's a reason the front and rear mounts are called 'roll stopper mounts'. There's a reason the side mounts are 2x ad big, and attached directly to the frame rail. There's a reason you can remove the sub frame entirely and have the engine still be supported in the car. The front and rear mounts wear out faster because they're smaller and they're tasked with arresting the motion of the engine.

It's common sense. "The little ones carry the weight and the big ones are just along for the ride". Does that seriously make sense to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mehrshadvr4

here is for a change. A engine that is supported by the rear

---

No, it's not supported by the rear. It's supported by those two brackets on either side of the k-frame, AND the transmission mount.

It'll probably work, but normally a u-joint shares the opposite angle with the other end of its shaft. Like if you had a one piece shaft and moved one end of it over then the joint's angles cancel each other and the total angle is always 180. This ensure both ends of the shaft and each yoke piece is trying to turn at equal speeds. Due to our multi piece shaft this isn't the case.

Look at the wobble caused by a one ended u-joint on a ratchet. Now put 2 u-joints spaced by an extension on the same setup and notice it smooths right out.

I absolutly love it! I can pull my engine out and set it back by myself in a couple minutes. I welded v-band clamps in all of my exaust connections which took a lot of set it - pull it - set it - pull it moves and with the Nelson plate all you have to do is lower the engine and stab the bolt through the upper mount. Super easy, and if you think the driveline is an issue, ill let you know if I experience any issues. So far I have not even noticed any more vibrations than my poly mounts provided.
There is really not enough visible to take a picture of once everything is back in the engine bay.