Date:         Tue, 19 May 1998 00:18:07 -0700
Reply-To:     Mark Drillock <drillock@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <Vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Mark Drillock <drillock@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Left motor mount. (Diesel 1.9 TD Swap)
Comments: To: Martin Jagersand <jag@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU>
Comments: cc: Vanagon@VANAGON.COM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Martin Jagersand wrote:

>         The left motor mount problem.
> 4. Someone got the 1.6 Jetta TD in there by grinding down
> the motor mount. Maybe this (with some reinforcement
> on the other side) is doable. Mark or Craig, what's
> the magnitude of the interference?
>
> /Martin

   The degree of interference appears quite substantial. The waste gate
hits the mount toward the narrow end just below the hole for the rubbber
mount bolt. It may be just possible to grind away enough material to
clear the waste gate without cutting the mount in two. Re-inforcing this
area would be essential. I have been thinking about a couple of ways to
do this but I don't yet have enough data to proceed.

  So far I am considering three possible modification approaches.The
first is to grind away and see how much material is left. Then weld
support sections to the back and sides as needed. This method has the
advantage of not changing the relationship of the mounting holes. The
major unknowns include the suitability for welding of the original cast
mount metal. The next idea is to grind the mount and then bolt a "u"
shaped steel backing plate to the upper end(including the hole area).
This also maintains the hole position but there may be a danger of
weakening the mount by drilling holes to bolt the steel to the cast
section. Finally, one could cut the end off completely, build a steel
sleeve section, and slide it down over the remaining piece. I have
doubts about the long term durability of all these solutions. This mount
is directly below the leaned over engine. It appears to support much of
the total weight. The all steel assembly from Winkler in Germany looks
like the best bet so far. Depending on the delivered cost and time to
acquire, it is what we want. Does anyone know how difficult these would
be to obtain? We may consider an interim solution if the time delay is
very long. Ultimately, a durable and maintainable answer is a must.
Perhaps a pooling of efforts for a more local fabrication would benefit
us.
Thanks for any help you can provide.

Mark Drillock