520

I put a set of race/Auto-x mount savers in the back of my coupe about a month ago....since then I drove the car very little but for what I did, most of it was on track....literally, out of 7-8 days of driving 3 were on track, other was short city distances...but anyways....the car developed a clunk in the back...so I took a look at the strut caps today, took them off and sure enough the mount savers were holding up the strut mount...car was sitting on them and not on the top portion of the mount itself...its hard to describe without a picture though.

So the clunk...it happened to be my bilstein cap...it backed itself up so my shock must of been banging inside the strut housing...I tightene dit back by hand but hopefully in next few days I can pull them out and redo it right...this time with some locktite. I also had to toghten up the little straut mount bushing/nut.

Just wanted to pass it on...these things are holding up well considering the beating...they sit on top of 400# springs too.

VAP

But I also know what you mean that its hard to describe and many/most wont understand even with a pic as I've tried to take pics showing that but without the depth percetion available in a 2 dimensional pic you just cant see it.

But keep tryin to killem. As I just cant improve them without a failure to work with. And (knock wood) out of 4,041 pair in use as of today there still has not been a single reported failure!

520

I/we will have to re-work something as I do bottom out...even on harsh rumble strips But as long as the road is smooth its fine...there is less than 2in of shock travel on current setup, last as you've seen it.
I think the extra depth/height of solid mount+bilstein perch adapter+GC perch design take away a lot from shock travel.

But, everybody...that's got nothing to do with mount savers or anything similar.

VAP

But I'm as stumped as I've ever been about that because there's at least 4 other solid mount users with coilover/Bilstein setups with both stiffer and lighter springs being used that have more travel. Yet I've seen yours and have no good explanation.

squidix9

I can use them in the Coupe, but he 90 is completely different, no go there.

Ok they're officially on the project to-do list.

520

Maybe I'll send you one complete strut to take a look, some time this winter while car is down for heart surgery.

VAP

I'll get a ton of measurements while its up in the air. There HAS to be some reason we're over-looking or missing. While I dont have GOBS of travel I have more than 2" and I NEVER bottom-out. Tho I am running 650# front springs but I did run 375, 400, 425, 450, 475, 500, 550 & 600 before settling on 650's as the spring of choice. However none of those lighter springs even with stock Ground Control perches ever limited me to only 2" shock travel.

I'll take lots of measurements and see if anything jumps out at me while doing this conversion tonight/tomorrow. There's GOT to be a reasonable/logical explanation for this.

520

IIRC, you 'shaved' the bottom of your mounts' body and made your own top perches that were 'flat'/parallel to the bottom of the mount body, while GC ones are curved downwards....if you know what i mean....but it shouldn't matter anyways as you said others use same setup without problems.

VAP

running Mance-Mounts with Ground Control CO's and Bilsteins that have closer to 3" of shock travel and dont have my modified/lowered mounts and/or upper perches. Its also important to note that reducing the thickness of the solid mount in and of itself provides no additional damper travel. The spherical bearing in the mounts that the strut seats against is not or relocated during that machining process. It only allows the new, re-designed and flat upper spring perch to move 7/16" higher/closer to the mount which is impossible with the stock "conical" GC upper perches.

But hey, I love a good puzzle! ;-)

520

ok.