VW MK1 Strut top mount- I need a better idea

I'm still in my VW learning curve, so bear with me...

I've got a set of coilovers on the front of my GTI with a conical top spring perch similar to this:

Well, slightly different profile to the cone, and no spacer washers, but similar.

I am using stock style top mounts similar to this:

It doesn't seem right.

Sure, the coilovers will fit up into the mount, but it is essentially metal-metal, with the coilover hold down nut mating up against the bearing of the top mount. Sort of like 2 cones spaced 3/4" apart or so by the nut (with a 2nd jam nut on top of the top mount to hold the whole thing together).

It's not forced, but it feels like the entire weight of the car, which was originally distributed across the metal cone of the top mount is now a point load directly on the nut, straining the rubber of the top mount.

I thought of removing the coilover conical top and seating the spring directly into the cone of the top mount. It fits perfectly, but has no lip to insure the seating of the spring.

What am I missing here?

Do I need a different style top mount?

I would one day like to have camber plates. The only ones I've found are the Ground Control ones like this:

They are gorgeous, and ridiculously expensive. But I still question the mount. In a setup like that, there is no rubber at all (I think), which seems like it would be nice and precise, but terribly harsh, and create horrible strains on the towers.

So, I'm needing a little guidance and basic assembly instruction. Please recommend top mounts, camber plate ideas, etc. Links are welcome.

Thanks!

SVreX wrote: I am using stock style top mounts similar to this: It doesn't seem right. Sure, the coilovers will fit up into the mount, but it is essentially metal-metal, with the coilover hold down nut mating up against the bearing of the top mount. Sort of like 2 cones spaced 3/4" apart or so by the nut (with a 2nd jam nut on top of the top mount to hold the whole thing together). It's not forced, but it feels like the entire weight of the car, which was originally distributed across the metal cone of the top mount is now a point load directly on the nut, straining the rubber of the top mount.

The bearing is what takes the load. Spreading it out on the cone which, iirc isn't mounted on on the rotating portion of the bearing won't change anything. If the my memory is correct and the cone on the strut bearing doesn't turn it would bind everything up. Even if it did turn it would make no difference.

The second best solution to camber plates is to get a set of 75-77 rabbit strut mounts and fit them with urethane inserts.

The problem with the later and only available strut mounts is they can't handle high spring rates for long. The rubber will fatigue and they will collapse in short order

Wait a minute... you're right. The entire contact would HAVE to be on the bearing only (though I need to insure the nut is not binding the bearing).

Why would they design that mount with the conical shape on the bottom side?

Those GC camber plates are still completely metal-metal. Thoughts?

Those are like the strut mounts in my 924 (not surprising)

I modified the strut mounts to hold a spherical bearing.

If you're interested, I can take some pics of the mods. I'd offer you the mounts, but they use a different mounting solution (4-bolts) of course a GRM solution might be to modify the strut towers to use another strut mount. Worked on our ChumpCar (Shadow with STi struts)

SVreX wrote: Those GC camber plates are still completely metal-metal. Thoughts?

The spherical bearings take the load and are wear components. Using the spherical inserts removes the rubber and improves feedback and response at the expense of comfort and noise.

The cone allows the spherical joint to pivot as the suspension moves or the camber is adjusted. In the stock mount, they use the rubber to perform the pivot function and the bearing to reduce the steering effort required at low speeds.

Pics would be interesting.

If your mounts are available, I'm interested.

Tower mount mods are not just a possibility, but a likelihood.

turboswede wrote:

SVreX wrote: Those GC camber plates are still completely metal-metal. Thoughts?

The spherical bearings take the load and are wear components. Using the spherical inserts removes the rubber and improves feedback and response at the expense of comfort and noise. The cone allows the spherical joint to pivot as the suspension moves or the camber is adjusted. In the stock mount, they use the rubber to perform the pivot function and the bearing to reduce the steering effort required at low speeds.

That's good stuff. Thanks!

So, considering I am working with an MK1, when is the point of diminishing returns? I am going pretty far in reinforcing this car, but it is still an MK1. Assuming stiff springs, can't there be quite a bit of shock transferred to the towers?

...yes, I realize the short answer is to not use the mounts as cushioning to make up for the lack of spring.

My friend has been running the gc camber plates on his mk2 daily driver for more than a year, and he says there is no disadvantage to them at all, and they would be worth it at twice the price.

I never got around to trying this out when I was playing with Rabbits, but here is my idea. Cut the strut mount cups off of a junkyard Mk3

You just want the nipple part. A cordless drill and an appropriately sized hole saw would do the trick. Now that you have that fab up a 1/4" steel plate to weld your new nipple to. In essence make a copy of the NLA early strut mount our of the new bits.

Now stuff those new strut bearing mounts with a set of the heavy duty higher durometer rubber MK3 VR6 inserts

Now you have a no cutting mod that eliminates the problem prone factory piece, uses replaceable cheap OEM bits and could be done for $30 or so.

Say goodbye to this all to familiar sight under the hood

SVreX wrote: Pics would be interesting. If your mounts are available, I'm interested. Tower mount mods are not just a possibility, but a likelihood.

PM me your address and I'll send them along via USPS. I've got eBay camber plates on the 924, so they're just collecting dust and I'd like to help a fellow GRM'er out.

BTW, the fleabay plates for the 924/944 are about $100. They use cheap spherical inserts, but those are meant to be replaced and Aurora makes good replacements for when they do.

SVreX wrote:

turboswede wrote:

SVreX wrote: Those GC camber plates are still completely metal-metal. Thoughts?

The spherical bearings take the load and are wear components. Using the spherical inserts removes the rubber and improves feedback and response at the expense of comfort and noise. The cone allows the spherical joint to pivot as the suspension moves or the camber is adjusted. In the stock mount, they use the rubber to perform the pivot function and the bearing to reduce the steering effort required at low speeds.

That's good stuff. Thanks! So, considering I am working with an MK1, when is the point of diminishing returns? I am going pretty far in reinforcing this car, but it is still an MK1. Assuming stiff springs, can't there be quite a bit of shock transferred to the towers? ...yes, I realize the short answer is to not use the mounts as cushioning to make up for the lack of spring.

Yup, Rabbits kinda started the strut owner brace craze and for good reason. Firewall and strut tower cracking. The steering racks also mount to the firewall, which can become damaged with lots of racing with big nasty slicks and power.

In reply to turboswede:

PMed you

turboswede wrote: BTW, the fleabay plates for the 924/944 are about $100. They use cheap spherical inserts, but those are meant to be replaced and Aurora makes good replacements for when they do.

Hmmm... I haven't found anything anywhere near that price range. I'll keep looking.

Can't wait to see it Paul. My parts are starting to roll, gonna try and keep up with you.

In reply to VWguyBruce:

I'm thinking you might have missed this thread:

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/please-carry-the-torch-you-dorks/54828/page1/

SVreX wrote:

turboswede wrote: BTW, the fleabay plates for the 924/944 are about $100. They use cheap spherical inserts, but those are meant to be replaced and Aurora makes good replacements for when they do.

Hmmm... I haven't found anything anywhere near that price range. I'll keep looking.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Porsche-924-944-968-Front-Camber-Caster-Adjustment-Plates-Kit-/120962337576?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&fits=Make%3APorsche|Model%3A924&hash=item1c29eacb28&vxp=mtr

And the caster adjustable versions:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CASTER-Porshe-924-944-968-Camber-plates-top-mount-pillow-ball-ADJUSTABLE-/180825985365?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item2a1a119155&vxp=mtr

plus others:

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p5197.m570.l1313&_nkw=Porsche+924+camber+plates&_sacat=0

My 'rolla has solid duralumin camber plates on the front, the ride isn't especially harsh (considering the spring rates) and surprisingly the towers haven't deformed from all the damn potholes I've hit.

turboswede wrote:

SVreX wrote:

turboswede wrote: BTW, the fleabay plates for the 924/944 are about $100. They use cheap spherical inserts, but those are meant to be replaced and Aurora makes good replacements for when they do.

Hmmm... I haven't found anything anywhere near that price range. I'll keep looking.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Porsche-924-944-968-Front-Camber-Caster-Adjustment-Plates-Kit-/120962337576?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&fits=Make%3APorsche|Model%3A924&hash=item1c29eacb28&vxp=mtr And the caster adjustable versions: http://www.ebay.com/itm/CASTER-Porshe-924-944-968-Camber-plates-top-mount-pillow-ball-ADJUSTABLE-/180825985365?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item2a1a119155&vxp=mtr plus others: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p5197.m570.l1313&_nkw=Porsche+924+camber+plates&_sacat=0

Uhhh... why can't i find plates that cheap for my car?!?!?!

There are also the Eurosport camber plates that I had on my first track car, pretty pricey compared to those 924 ones. Most guys backdate to the early style strut bearings and fill them, no MKI strut bearing last very long on a hard driven car.

ditchdigger wrote: The bearing is what takes the load. Spreading it out on the cone which, iirc isn't mounted on on the rotating portion of the bearing won't change anything. If the my memory is correct and the cone on the strut bearing doesn't turn it would bind everything up. Even if it did turn it would make no difference.

That was the tidbit I needed.

Turns out the bushing that fits inside the bearing was missing, so the top nut was seated against the cone, and pinching the cone/ rubber against the bottom nut. Without the bushing, the bearing was effectively immobilized, creating serious binding (as you suggested).

I'll still do camber plates, but that helped me think through that particular problem.

Thanks!

Part #9 was missing, as well as washers #10 and #11:

So no more binding? I never got it worked out quite right on my red car with the EuroSport camber plates.

Gonna miss you man, the Metro is really starting to tighten up after our work tonight.

Can't attest to the binding yet. Gonna be on the lift for a few more days. I'll let you know.