When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
General Car Related Discussion.To discuss anything that is related to cars and automotive technology that doesnt naturally fit into another forum catagory.
Who has fitted the solid beam mounts that Motorsport Developments sell? Is there meant to be any poly bush or anything sandwiched in with them? The stack height looks too small on their own. Does anyone have pics of theirs fitted?
So I had a look at the the height. The steel dowel that came with the poly bushes has 67mm protruding from the thread in the chassis and the solid mounts make a height of 56mm. It seems to need spacing of 11 mm added somewhere. I also notice it only touches the mounting thread and does not seat on the rail itself. Will that put stress on the thread and break it off the chassis rail eventually?
I just thought they fitted in the same way as the std mounts, just without the need to get them pressed in/out!? Don't think they need any bushing to go inbetween?
Sorry, I'm no expert with these, but was looking to get some based on being easier to fit than poly bushes!?
Yeah, I had the beam problem. The guy that worked on my car had removed the mounting threads in the chassis after all and stuffed up when welding them back in. I have had the chassis sorted by another outfit who did the work on a Car o Liner. The chassis measures up perfect now and the beam is mint. It all clamps together completely stress free.
I am only confused about the combined assembled height of the solid mounts in the beam. It doesn't match the length of the steel sleeve that was supplied with the polyurethane bushes. It seems to need an additional spacer for it to match up to otherwise consistent heights.
Yeah, the tube goes up into the chassis alright. it's the rest that come up short. If you offer up the solid mounts to the beam on their own and chuck a clamp over the assembly you can see it is shorter overall than the steel tube that goes through the poly bush that came out.
I have seen pics of solid mounts with a step underneath. The ones I have don't have it so I must need that.
How do you figure? They merely make the total height of the solid bushes the same as the old polyurathane bushes which happen to be supplied at a length that fits perfectly on the car. I guess I could chuck the solid ones away and put the poly ones back in, then there is no problem at all but as I understand it solid ones improve handling. Alternatively I can make a set from scratch that would also fit perfectly, which I probably should have done in the first place instead of being lazy and getting store bought ones.
I agree, I am suprised it wasn't right but there was no way they were going to bolt up without anything added.
It's all sorted now though the extra bits worked a treat. it all looks nice and square and well seated. Interestingly enough the doughnut bit from the old poly bush was about the same thickness as my spacer so I modded that to fit around the outside of it. Can't hurt to have the extra contact area I figure.
Last year I also bought a set of solid beam mounts, not from MSD but someone else. This weekend I was planning on fitting them. But after looking at them closely they seem to have the same problem as those from the OP.
The total height seems too low. On the picture you can see the solid beam mount versus a standard bush and versus the tube from a Powerflex bush. The solid beam mount is about 2 cm lower than the two others.
When you fit a beam bush the tube is clamped between the hole in het chassis rail and the guide plate. But on the solid mount this is much shorter, so the guide plate would go too far up IMO. Are these mounts machined incorrectly, or am I missing something?
Last year I also bought a set of solid beam mounts, not from MSD but someone else. This weekend I was planning on fitting them. But after looking at them closely they seem to have the same problem as those from the OP.
The total height seems too low. On the picture you can see the solid beam mount versus a standard bush and versus the tube from a Powerflex bush. The solid beam mount is about 2 cm lower than the two others.
When you fit a beam bush the tube is clamped between the hole in het chassis rail and the guide plate. But on the solid mount this is much shorter, so the guide plate would go too far up IMO. Are these mounts machined incorrectly, or am I missing something?
Ive literally just fitted my solid mounts
In the pic where your comparing both height of solid and poly
The solid mount when in the beam will have a gap as it will clamp on the tapper
So this will make them taller
Ive literally just fitted my solid mounts
In the pic where your comparing both height of solid and poly
The solid mount when in the beam will have a gap as it will clamp on the tapper
So this will make them taller
I understand what you mean, but that will only be a couple of mm while they are about 2 cm shorter. So it will still be too short.
To me Ajamescs pic shows it is indeed too short. The guide plate is bent because it is pulled upward too far.
The extra spacer that the OP made should be there as standard. And Ive seen other solid mounts that do have it.
There’s plenty running them I’m sure if it had bent the plate Or if something was wrong I’d have noticed as it all went back together. Need someone who is out there driving about with them to comment as mine is engine lessat the moment. Or msd they must have fitted a few sets as they supply them
I think you can see a bend in the guide plate just where the long bolt is going through the beam mount. Plus the guide plate should be flat underneath the beam mount, but you can see that at the front there is room between the guide plate and the beam mount.
IMO this is how it should fit (pic stolen from someone's build thread):
They bolt up and fit fine we need to here from msd they must have fitted and driven a few of them your picture looks like a different bush design completely
Well mine are not actually from MSD, but they seem to be the same design as the MSD ones.
The mount in the last picture I showed is not that much different, it just has a small 'step' in the mount at the bottom to make it the correct height. The OP added a spacer to his MSD mounts to make them the same as these. But IMO that should be there from the start.
I guess we'll agree to disagree whether the MSD ones fit correctly. At least I will not fitting them this way.
If it drives and adjusts up to the setting you require when set up with the new beam it makes zero difference lol. And as I say msd will have to comment they had them engineered and fit / sell them if there happy with the product and say it dose it job again the issue makes zero difference
It will clearly make a difference if the bolt is bending the plate in order to take up the slack, the head of the bolt will be in shear as a result rather than just clamping the plate to the bodyshell and such forces acting on it could snap the head clean off that bolt, especially as there is no rubber suppressing any vibration.
I would not even consider driving a car in that situation.
There is clearly an issue here that needs resolving with these items, not just hoping its ok.
Its one of the big problems these days with the more recent availability of cheaper cnc kit, people start copying and selling things without the engineering knowledge, they then replicate faults without realising it.
I see so much for sale out there now that I would not fit to a wheelbarrow never mind a high performance road car. It looks pretty so the sheep then fit it anyway!
The fact is there is a significant gap and that's how it gets filled, whether you will admit it or not.
I have had plenty of these plates with that twist in them around the bolt hole from cars where the rubber beam mounts deteriorate and the plate bounces as a result.
From memory you are a hgv mechanic I hope you don't have the same attitude and make the same obvious bodges when you send fully loaded wagons out onto the highway.
It will clearly make a difference if the bolt is bending the plate in order to take up the slack, the head of the bolt will be in shear as a result rather than just clamping the plate to the bodyshell and such forces acting on it could snap the head clean off that bolt, especially as there is no rubber suppressing any vibration.
I would not even consider driving a car in that situation.
There is clearly an issue here that needs resolving with these items, not just hoping its ok.
Its one of the big problems these days with the more recent availability of cheaper cnc kit, people start copying and selling things without the engineering knowledge, they then replicate faults without realising it.
I see so much for sale out there now that I would not fit to a wheelbarrow never mind a high performance road car. It looks pretty so the sheep then fit it anyway!
So you wouldnt fit any of my parts to your wheel barrow? My mounts look the same as the OP and this is the first Ive ever heard of anybody not being happy with them. My mounts dont just go on road cars there on rally cars over in Ireland that have terrible roads and there has never been an issue,
There also my mark wrights RS500 Touring Car that wont silverstone classic last year and again no problems reported back.
Ive called Mark Wright today asking what he thought about the plate and Dominic over in Ireland that had bought them for rally use, both say there perfect for the job.
Ive offered Marc on here his money back as Im an honest guy and I wouldnt sell something that isnt fit for use I dont operate like that people in the Ford world who buy my parts know how I operate.
Whether they physically fit or not is not what has been identified, there is a clear and significant engineering discrepancy between the solid mounts the OP and others have purchased, and the original Ford rubber ones.
A solution to that issue has been provided by the OP.
Facts are facts whether people like it or not, the factory beam plates are not mounting parallel to the integrated beam mounts in the chassis using those solid mounts, and that will be putting an incorrect engineering load into the large main bolt.
The other issue to consider when anyone fits such solid mounts is that Ford designed the rear suspension of the Sierra based on the 3 legged stool principal, these mounts work directly with the rubber mounted diff hanger, and all 3 work in conjunction to provided NVH and an element of road movement/ compliance. When any of those 3 points are not consistent to the others then the suspension will not work correctly, this usually happens when the rubber degrades on one of those points more than the other 2.
If you are using such solid mounts you also need to solid mount the diff otherwise they are working against each other. I imagine a 3 point, solid mounted rear beam is not very comfortable on a road car.
Ford fitted what was required for a road car James, with a designed life, this was then improved with greater shore hardness rubber for the cosworth versions, and with all rubber components they degrade over time.
It's not just Ford, Ferrari have the same problem with rubber in its suspension even with recent models, In Fact Ford went out of there way to improve the cosworth versions further still by using spherical bearings in the arms rather than just solid rubber of the lesser spec Sierra. People are actually making their suspension worse on cosworths by then swapping these out for poly bushes, another example of doing something for the sake of it rather than understanding the engineering behind it.
Mark has indeed offered me my money back, what I really appreciate.
I do believe the fact that they are fitted to several cars and have not caused problems in any case. But to me it is not the correct way of doing this and I would not like to see a failure because of this.
11-05-2015, 07:54 AM
MSD Solid Beam Mounts
