Date:         Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:14:15 -0800
Reply-To:     Mark Drillock <mdrillock@COX.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Mark Drillock <mdrillock@COX.NET>
Subject:      Re: Was: Should engine mount move... Now: Viewing Image of Fox
              mounts in ETKA
Comments: To: neil N <musomuso@GMAIL.COM>
In-Reply-To:  <c4e7c5f90803251010s3ec08018x273113d84c2ce3bf@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Neil, the way you oriented your mounts was in fact correct as far as the
Fox orientation was done. The Fox subframe has contoured mounting
platforms for those rubber mounts that only allow them to be oriented
the way you did them.

I still think you should turn them 90 degrees now though because the way
the FOX had them was I think a reflection of the fact that it had a
front wheel drive, to reduce steering feedback.

Mark

neil N wrote:
> This is for a Jetta 2.0 engine with Fox mounts and brackets in my Vanagon.
>
> So, ok.
>
> In ETKA I'm viewing:
>
> '89 Fox  "MG": 1   "SG":  99   "Illustration Stock":  199-00. The Fox
> mounts look like they're mounted at 90 degree's to engine crank.
>
> ?
>
> I'm looking at a small image of this.
>
> IF I'm seeing it correctly, then the mount appears to be designed to
> handle fore/aft movement when power applied to wheels. Not side to
> side movement.
>
> Not taking issue with anyones helpful opinions, just curious and want
> to set it up as close to "stock" as possible.
>
> If this isn't too misguided on my part!  --- :^)
>
> Neil.
>
> --
> Neil Nicholson. 1981 Air Cooled Westfalia - "Jaco"
>
> http://web.mac.com/tubaneil
> http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/
>