Engine Mounts incredible difference!

3strokemx
Posts
2408
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
US
5/18/2024 2:00pm
El Capitan wrote:

Has anyone spoken with you about the benefits of running Rotella? 

Yes, it works great as air filter oil. Really helped my arm pump.

3
1
brocster
Posts
4487
Joined
6/9/2009
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
5/18/2024 3:26pm

I was taught in process analytics that if you are looking to measure change, make one move at a time to properly discern cause and effect factually.  There is absolutely no way that one can make 5 changes to a motorcycle and determine engine mounts “made a difference”. Sorry Michael but we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. A subjective test is not the proper test for testing engine mount rigidity and flexion. Anchor that frame to a table and attach some sensors and strain gauges then the proof will be in the pudding. 

6
dansfx
Posts
114
Joined
8/18/2023
Location
Greenville, NC US
5/18/2024 4:04pm
sandman768 wrote:
I would think with a very sensitive test rider, exact same track conditions, no other changes, that test rider may be able to discern a change...

I would think with a very sensitive test rider, exact same track conditions, no other changes, that test rider may be able to discern a change in the chassis. One other change, say, shock/ fork adjustment, tire air pressure, track condition,  I.E. watered vs drier would skew the results IMO… I have thought about drilling large hole’s in the solid mounts of my 24 350SFX but ran out of motivation. What’s interesting is my 23 300Sx has large holes in the upper hanger mounts, while my 24 350SFX has solid mounts. Basically same chassis, so KTM knows something about the upper hanger mounts effecting chassis…… where is Luxon with some proper explanation of these phenomenon….

KTM revised the mounts on the ‘24.5 Factory Editions by adding large holes in them to add more flex. Like the 2 stroke mounts. They are available as a Powerpart for ~$80. I couldn’t justify the price for FCP mounts,  but I put the KTM ones on my ‘23 350 SX-F. 
I can’t say they made a huge difference but I can tell there is a little more compliance from the chassis on the acceleration bumps and other surfaces that have a tendency to beat you up. 

Here’s the revised mount. 

3
1
3strokemx
Posts
2408
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
US
5/18/2024 5:17pm
dansfx wrote:
KTM revised the mounts on the ‘24.5 Factory Editions by adding large holes in them to add more flex. Like the 2 stroke mounts. They are...

KTM revised the mounts on the ‘24.5 Factory Editions by adding large holes in them to add more flex. Like the 2 stroke mounts. They are available as a Powerpart for ~$80. I couldn’t justify the price for FCP mounts,  but I put the KTM ones on my ‘23 350 SX-F. 
I can’t say they made a huge difference but I can tell there is a little more compliance from the chassis on the acceleration bumps and other surfaces that have a tendency to beat you up. 

Here’s the revised mount. 

Have your friends change your engine mounts and see if you can feel it!

Have them try OEM, New, Half and half, then you spin a few laps without looking at which mounts are on the bike.

1
2

The Shop

Taylor415
Posts
410
Joined
1/30/2017
Location
Midlothian, TX US
5/18/2024 6:17pm

I can’t speak for if they work or not, and my comment is really non productive, but there’s something about buying dirt bike parts I absolutely don’t need but buy anyways.  I like reading pro reviews and bike shootouts and always in awe of the “cons” list. I’m amazed at some of the differences crazy fast guys can feel.  
 I’d love to sit down with someone like Chad Reed and just listen to the minor stuff most of us wouldn’t even consider.  Even watching and reading some of Keefer’s stuff is crazy. I always think to myself, how the hell did he feel that? No disrespect by any means as I’m a fan and enjoy his write ups. 

4
1
sandman768
Posts
7973
Joined
3/21/2014
Location
Saratoga Springs, NY US
5/18/2024 6:22pm
dansfx wrote:
KTM revised the mounts on the ‘24.5 Factory Editions by adding large holes in them to add more flex. Like the 2 stroke mounts. They are...

KTM revised the mounts on the ‘24.5 Factory Editions by adding large holes in them to add more flex. Like the 2 stroke mounts. They are available as a Powerpart for ~$80. I couldn’t justify the price for FCP mounts,  but I put the KTM ones on my ‘23 350 SX-F. 
I can’t say they made a huge difference but I can tell there is a little more compliance from the chassis on the acceleration bumps and other surfaces that have a tendency to beat you up. 

Here’s the revised mount. 

Quality post! And 80$ is within my wasting money limits…shocked these are not orange anodized…

2
MX558
Posts
1966
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
5/18/2024 7:19pm

I installed the steel mounts with holes  from a 2016 350 (pairs 25 bucks on eBay ) on my 22 which had cast solid mounts . I will say I could tell a slight difference but nothing substantial 

JM485
Posts
5790
Joined
10/1/2013
Location
Davis, CA US
5/18/2024 9:04pm

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

6
2
wwdiii
Posts
2536
Joined
4/15/2019
Location
League City, TX US
5/18/2024 9:12pm
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

Billy at Luxon is a sharp guy!

1
1
mxcrzy
Posts
83
Joined
6/21/2019
Location
MI US
5/18/2024 9:56pm

Jm485 my man you are terrible at marketing you won't sell anything like that 

 

What you have proven here is a 15% difference in flex! 

 

15%!!!!!! What other item on your bike can you change for as little as a months rent to achieve a whole 15% difference!!!

 

Lol maybe take a bolt out next time and see if you notice. I bet I won't haha

7
2
3strokemx
Posts
2408
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
US
5/19/2024 4:00am
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

Thanks for sharing!  
 

1
1
3strokemx
Posts
2408
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
US
5/19/2024 4:02am
mxcrzy wrote:
Jm485 my man you are terrible at marketing you won't sell anything like that    What you have proven here is a 15% difference in flex! ...

Jm485 my man you are terrible at marketing you won't sell anything like that 

 

What you have proven here is a 15% difference in flex! 

 

15%!!!!!! What other item on your bike can you change for as little as a months rent to achieve a whole 15% difference!!!

 

Lol maybe take a bolt out next time and see if you notice. I bet I won't haha

I had an engine mount bolt fall out once, I noticed it when washing the bike not while riding.

5
2
ADynes
Posts
275
Joined
5/26/2011
Location
IN US
5/19/2024 5:44am Edited Date/Time 5/19/2024 5:56am

Once of my favorite stories from a podcast was (if I remember correctly) from Dungeys mechanic. Ryan wanted to try 2 clicks on the suspension. He came back in after riding and said how much better the bike was. Then Goose told him they hadn't actually changed anything.  

I would love to make a moto myth busters style video. Get all the top test riders together. Spend an entire day making multiple test rides with the product in question being swapped on and off the bike randomly without the tester knowing. I bet few (if any) would agree to participate.

1
1
ML512
Posts
16891
Joined
12/28/2008
Location
Wildomar, CA US
Fantasy
5/19/2024 7:52am
ADynes wrote:
Once of my favorite stories from a podcast was (if I remember correctly) from Dungeys mechanic. Ryan wanted to try 2 clicks on the suspension. He...

Once of my favorite stories from a podcast was (if I remember correctly) from Dungeys mechanic. Ryan wanted to try 2 clicks on the suspension. He came back in after riding and said how much better the bike was. Then Goose told him they hadn't actually changed anything.  

I would love to make a moto myth busters style video. Get all the top test riders together. Spend an entire day making multiple test rides with the product in question being swapped on and off the bike randomly without the tester knowing. I bet few (if any) would agree to participate.

"I bet few (if any) would agree to participate."

Sign me up.

4
1
5/19/2024 9:29am
It changes the flex by using different material or thickness.    It changes engine position with different mount(s).    Sitting in garage most that don’t know...

It changes the flex by using different material or thickness. 
 

It changes engine position with different mount(s). 
 

Sitting in garage most that don’t know think it looks Factory. 

BobPA wrote:
How does an upper engine mount change the engine position? Last I checked the engine is anchored via the swingarm bolt AND a bolt through a...

How does an upper engine mount change the engine position? Last I checked the engine is anchored via the swingarm bolt AND a bolt through a welded mount on the frame....sometimes two welded frame bolts.

 

The only aftermarket engine mounts that actually changed engine position (via memory) were the 2010ish Yamaha 450 mounts...

That’s why I used plural for mount(s). 
 

You most definitely can change engine position by changing engine mounts. 

1
Luxon MX
Posts
1373
Joined
11/6/2017
Location
San Diego, CA US
Fantasy
5/19/2024 11:00am
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%... 

 

(heavy sarcasm, just in case that was unclear)

8
1
soggy
Posts
8509
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
UT US
5/19/2024 11:03am Edited Date/Time 5/19/2024 11:04am

we need the Luxon X Keefer Inc test day

1
2
JM485
Posts
5790
Joined
10/1/2013
Location
Davis, CA US
5/19/2024 3:03pm
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

Luxon MX wrote:
The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%...        (heavy sarcasm, just in case...

The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%... 

 

(heavy sarcasm, just in case that was unclear)

Damn it, I'll do better next time I promise Laughing

1
TeamGreen
Posts
36713
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA US
5/19/2024 3:25pm
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

Luxon MX wrote:
The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%...        (heavy sarcasm, just in case...

The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%... 

 

(heavy sarcasm, just in case that was unclear)

JM485 wrote:
Damn it, I'll do better next time I promise 

Damn it, I'll do better next time I promise Laughing

Add washers…maybe some grease…Laughing

1
cwtoyota
Posts
2389
Joined
3/11/2013
Location
Tacoma, WA US
5/19/2024 4:05pm
ADynes wrote:
Once of my favorite stories from a podcast was (if I remember correctly) from Dungeys mechanic. Ryan wanted to try 2 clicks on the suspension. He...

Once of my favorite stories from a podcast was (if I remember correctly) from Dungeys mechanic. Ryan wanted to try 2 clicks on the suspension. He came back in after riding and said how much better the bike was. Then Goose told him they hadn't actually changed anything.  

I would love to make a moto myth busters style video. Get all the top test riders together. Spend an entire day making multiple test rides with the product in question being swapped on and off the bike randomly without the tester knowing. I bet few (if any) would agree to participate.

ML512 wrote:

"I bet few (if any) would agree to participate."

Sign me up.

This is something I'd love to do as well. 
I feel like you learn a lot doing this kind of thing.
 

1
cwtoyota
Posts
2389
Joined
3/11/2013
Location
Tacoma, WA US
5/19/2024 4:10pm
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

Luxon MX wrote:
The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%...        (heavy sarcasm, just in case...

The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't take into account reducing the bolt torque by 5%... 

 

(heavy sarcasm, just in case that was unclear)

On the torque thing...

I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used.

That Harbor Freight Tools 1/2" drive torque wrench I'm using on my triple clamp pinch bolts is probably within 0.1% of NIST traceable calibration, right? Laughing

1
2
TeamGreen
Posts
36713
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA US
5/19/2024 4:43pm

About torque and chassis set-up:

Fresh bolts (OEM)

A specific wrench/calibration lab.

Even a specific lubricant and/or thread sealant. 

I once heard of a set of Carbon-fiber motor mounts made for a certain KTM rider. They worked. Sometimes …too much. 😂

3
Hasletjoe
Posts
602
Joined
7/29/2013
Location
Haslet, TX US
5/19/2024 6:03pm

Okay, this definitely shows my old age, but trying to figure out why you want flex in the motorcycle...Is there a simple explanation?

JM485
Posts
5790
Joined
10/1/2013
Location
Davis, CA US
5/19/2024 6:17pm
cwtoyota wrote:
On the torque thing... I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used. That...

On the torque thing...

I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used.

That Harbor Freight Tools 1/2" drive torque wrench I'm using on my triple clamp pinch bolts is probably within 0.1% of NIST traceable calibration, right? Laughing

Also of note:

 

Are the threads clean?

Are the threads lubricated?

Is the surface under the bolt head lubricated?

If any of these questions are unanswered or not considered you're wasting your time, actual bolt tension variability will be a lot higher than the 5% difference you’re trying to induce with a torque change, which doesn’t even effect material stiffness in the first place. . .

1
cwtoyota
Posts
2389
Joined
3/11/2013
Location
Tacoma, WA US
5/19/2024 7:05pm
cwtoyota wrote:
On the torque thing... I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used. That...

On the torque thing...

I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used.

That Harbor Freight Tools 1/2" drive torque wrench I'm using on my triple clamp pinch bolts is probably within 0.1% of NIST traceable calibration, right? Laughing

JM485 wrote:
Also of note:   Are the threads clean? Are the threads lubricated? Is the surface under the bolt head lubricated? If any of these questions are...

Also of note:

 

Are the threads clean?

Are the threads lubricated?

Is the surface under the bolt head lubricated?

If any of these questions are unanswered or not considered you're wasting your time, actual bolt tension variability will be a lot higher than the 5% difference you’re trying to induce with a torque change, which doesn’t even effect material stiffness in the first place. . .

Yeah, all of that is significant I'm sure.  It's not a bottomless rabbit hole, but it sure seems to be a deep one...

Another item for that list...
More than likely, the change a test rider can feel comes from loosening and re-torquing the engine mounts and swing-arm pivot because the chassis is bound up after some hard riding.

That creaking / ticking sound when a bike is cooling down on the stand, or when you back out your engine mount bolts and swing arm pivot after a month of hard riding for some maintenance is the most direct evidence of a chassis that is bound up a bit.

2
cwtoyota
Posts
2389
Joined
3/11/2013
Location
Tacoma, WA US
5/19/2024 7:18pm
Hasletjoe wrote:

Okay, this definitely shows my old age, but trying to figure out why you want flex in the motorcycle...Is there a simple explanation?

Let's say you had a set of super-rigid wheels and tires.  The tire carcass is made of titanium and so are the knobs. 
That tire could never flex enough to grip the ground and it would feel like you were riding on ice.

The entire motorcycle from tires to foot-pegs is under enormous stress and strain as you hit bumps and ruts, apply throttle, brakes, land from jumps, etc.  The motorcycle flexes in directions and in ways that the suspension motion cannot absorb an impact.

Another great analogy is to grab a wood baseball bat and hit a hard object, then grab an aluminum alloy bat and hit the same hard object with the same speed and force.   Many of those aluminum bats will send a painful shock up through your hands and wrists, even into your elbows.   The aluminum has different flex and damping characteristics compared to wood.

Some flex is good because it lends toward rider comfort and compliance to the track.
Extreme chassis flex would be analogous to hitting a professionally thrown fastball with a Whiffle-ball bat.

2
8tensolutions
Posts
3325
Joined
11/15/2009
Location
Salt Lake City, UT US
5/19/2024 9:58pm
cwtoyota wrote:
On the torque thing... I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used. That...

On the torque thing...

I love reading these comments about torque specs without any mention of the quality and calibration of the torque wrench used.

That Harbor Freight Tools 1/2" drive torque wrench I'm using on my triple clamp pinch bolts is probably within 0.1% of NIST traceable calibration, right? Laughing

JM485 wrote:
Also of note:   Are the threads clean? Are the threads lubricated? Is the surface under the bolt head lubricated? If any of these questions are...

Also of note:

 

Are the threads clean?

Are the threads lubricated?

Is the surface under the bolt head lubricated?

If any of these questions are unanswered or not considered you're wasting your time, actual bolt tension variability will be a lot higher than the 5% difference you’re trying to induce with a torque change, which doesn’t even effect material stiffness in the first place. . .

100% agreed.  These guys saying this stuff doesn't matter likely haven't serviced the linkage, pivots, or steering stem bearings since the bike rolled off the showroom floor.....triple clamp bolts likely not to spec....and what about mounting the front wheel properly so it's aligned and straight....maybe?  

Team bikes are essentially framed every week, every part timed out as required, and meticulous detail put into assembly.  In those cases, engine mounts and a few inch pounds of torque can be very noticeable.  For the average rider, simply tearing the bike down a few times a season and cleaning, lubing, torquing everything to spec would make a world of difference,  Only then should you try motor mounts to "feel a difference".  

1
mx_563
Posts
2174
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
CA US
5/20/2024 12:08am
JM485 wrote:
Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout...

Just as a fun experiment, I modeled up a quick engine mount (loosely based on a Yamaha) and did two simulations, one with a small cutout like the aftermarket hangers and one solid like the stock mounts.  Both were simulated using the same material and constraints, the bottom hole was fixed and the top holes had a force of 250lbs applied to them in the downward direction.  Obviously this isn't a sophisticated test, but it's enough for a quick sanity check to see what's going on in principle.  As you can see, maximum deflection (aka flex) hardly changed, a less than .1mm difference (which is about .004in).  

 

Now, granted this is not a high dollar simulation software like Billy runs at Luxon, but this is a pretty simple load case and one I would feel pretty confident this software could handle to a reasonable degree of accuracy.  There are also other load cases that may be considered, such as side loading in some instances, but I think this pretty clearly shows that cutting a small amount of material from your engine hanger and claiming a noticeable change in handling is pretty far fetched.  By the time a load is transferred through your tires, through the rims, through the suspension, and through the frame to engine hangers I would have an extremely hard time believing anyone could realistically notice this difference.    

 

 

I think it's cool that you did this and I'm not trying to poke holes in your simulation but I think the load case is pretty complex. Is static loading the appropriate modelling technique (implicit vs. explicit) for impact loads? Is 250lb the right load value? Other DOF's (torsional deflection, etc).

Again, I'm not trying to bust your chops. I thinks it's awesome that you ran the simulation and I think it's a legit starting point. Somebody needs to throw some strain gages on a dirt bike so we can start getting to the bottom of this. LOL!!!

 

1
1
3strokemx
Posts
2408
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
US
5/20/2024 5:19am Edited Date/Time 5/20/2024 5:19am
mx_563 wrote:
I think it's cool that you did this and I'm not trying to poke holes in your simulation but I think the load case is pretty...

I think it's cool that you did this and I'm not trying to poke holes in your simulation but I think the load case is pretty complex. Is static loading the appropriate modelling technique (implicit vs. explicit) for impact loads? Is 250lb the right load value? Other DOF's (torsional deflection, etc).

Again, I'm not trying to bust your chops. I thinks it's awesome that you ran the simulation and I think it's a legit starting point. Somebody needs to throw some strain gages on a dirt bike so we can start getting to the bottom of this. LOL!!!

 

The simulation answered the intended question, "Does putting a hole in the component change it's characteristics?
 

3strokemx
Posts
2408
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
US
5/20/2024 5:22am
Hasletjoe wrote:

Okay, this definitely shows my old age, but trying to figure out why you want flex in the motorcycle...Is there a simple explanation?

Band-aid fix for poorly set up suspension.

1

Post a reply to: Engine Mounts incredible difference!

The Latest