Don't bother with the gasket those things are useless. What you do is pull the motor... ;) Drop the oil pan and let the car sit overnight so ALL the oil that's going to leak down... leaks down. Than re-seal said pan with The Right Stuff.... make sure you use the right stuff... and it's actually called, Right Stuff. Make absolutely sure everything is clean and wipe it down with some acetone. Put that shit together and let it cure for at least 24 hours in the warmth before adding oil.

If we're talking about comparing it to the stock OEM ISOLATION type mount, then it's garbage...

Remember the old adage?
If it's too good to be true (i.e. cheap), then it is...

The stock type mount (this goes for the engine and trans mounts), are two studs attached to two plates of metal with a rubber sandwich in between them.
This allow both compression and pull forces to be absorbed by the mount itself.
All these cheap-ass vendors who sell this crap built these mounts that can only handle compressor forces; they do not isolate the pull forces, as you're asking against the bolt / fastener.
What does this all mean?
You get increased vibration through this cheap-ass mount...
It could possibly damage something else, as now your mount does not isolate tension forces...

You get an inferior mount, because they are too cheap to build a proper mount...
Anyone can get a block of (insert fav...rubber, polyurethane, nylon, UHMW plastic, aluminum, hockey puck) and drill a hole in it and slap on a nut and bolt...


-Ted

Ha Ha, that summed it all up right there in one concise answer! :biggthumpup:

He forgot to add BDC's preferred material for engine mounts...... a block of scrape 2x4 from home cheapot.

You all laugh because you think I'm joking. He actually defended it.

Fair enough. I had Banzai poly mounts in my last car. I actually really liked them. I didnt get too much extra vibration from them surprisingly. But they discontinued them. I guess if the Himni version ends up being bad i can always go back to stock or mazdaspeed version. But like i said, i really based the decision to buy more poly mounts off of my last experience with them.

I'll always value your words Ted.

I guess you're still running all factory mounts then Zach?

Im not laughing.... after all I've read about him I'm not surprised....


On another note.. i just finished the install of my short shifter. Yummy:biggthumpup:

I forgot how much i liked it. and it feels SOOOOOOO much better than the stock one. although its much stiffer. I guess i just need to drive it an break it in some. Or maybe add some more gear oil to the shifter hole? any suggestions on that?:Wconfused:

I am, definitely all new components including the crossmember but as far as whether or no I got the stiffer version, I cant remember.

Yes, you should have added oil to the shifter housing.

ok cool. Yeah who knows... i may end up right there with you. We'll see. My guess is that since I'm not driving the car every day, even if it does wind up vibing more than i remember I won't be bothered.


Shoot.. it looked like it had enough in it. Looks like I'm making a trip to buy gear oil today then. Luckily its not hard to take apart all of that.

It doesn't need to be overflowing, there just needs to be some in there. . I assumed that with the cars age it would have been dry

agreed. According to mazdatrix it wasn't quite full enough but there was still a decent amount in there it seemed. The stock shifter didnt really feel notchy at all but it was like a floppy sausage. Now the new shifter is obviously nice and tight but also pretty notchy. Do you think adding more fluid will help that?

May just be the feel of them, I have the same shifter in mine. . you have new upper and lower bushings matched with decreased leverage so it is definitely gonna feel different than what most 2nd gen owners are used to which is a floppy sausage lol

Actually, Mazda does not fill the shifter extension housing with any fluid from the factory...
So, all stock cars which have never had the transmission serviced should be dry.

IIRC, even the FSM does not instruct you to do so?

Most of us do - it doesn't hurt anything.
One negative is that if you DON'T have good shift boot covers (all THREE of them! - well, at least the most expensive, inner one with the metal flange), it's going to make a mess!


-Ted

Good to know Ted! Luckily before I ordered the short shifter (which comes with the inner boot) I checked the condition of the other boots as well. They were gone. So I now have all new boots down there :)

Very interesting. . . I thought I had read somewhere (don't remember where though) that it needs oil poured in it. Good to know, thanks.

Just checked my old Haynes manual I use (I knew I wasn't making this up lol) and found that instruction. .
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7452/...57e43360_k.jpg

Haynes?
What's that?
:D


-Ted

:rofl: I'm not sure if impressed or embarrassed that I have a somewhat impressed that I have parts of the fsm of all three gens memorized

Im impressed for you?:ugh2:

So i just got to thinking... I'm making a parts list so i can keep track of the stuff i need/want. Since the GTUs has the turbo suspension components wouldn't that mean that id need to buy Coilovers and such for the turbo car? Or does are the mounting points the same for turbo and non turbo cars?

Same.

Sweet. Thank. You. Brian.

Yep, as TTT said, it's the same...
In fact, the base models had the "special" suspension and brakes.

GXL is the "loaded" model, and the turbo (i.e. Turbo II) is a GXL + turbo engine.

The 1998 "GTU" + 1989 / 1990 "GTUs" are just GXL models minus all the heavy (i.e. powered) shit and some special features (i.e. no sunroof, but amazingly there are some that did come with sunroof).
The 1986(?) and 1987 has a "Sport" model available, and this was a precursor to the 1988 "GTU."

The brakes are standard across the board with the exception of the base models; this is for the 4-pot fronts with vented disc and 2-pot rears with vented disc.
This big brake or heavy-duty brake package were on all GXL, turbo, and convertible models + the abovementioned 1988 "GTU" and 1989 / 1990 "GTUs" models.

Brakes on base models - 1986 / 1987 "base" + 1988 "SE" - had the 2-pot(?) front with vented disc and single-pot rear with NON-vented disc; these were obvious due to the 4-lug wheel lug pattern.
In 1989 - 1991 base models, all FC's were 5-lug wheel lug pattern, but the base models had different brake calipers and discs.
(Forgot some of the specifics here...)

Let's see how long before the corrections come flying in... :D


-Ted

LOL, I got nothing ;)

89 91 S5 GTU, single piston vented front, non vented rear brakes. Rest should be all the "heavy duty" style brake/suspension package.

Werd. And AFAIK there was never a 2-pot rear, nor front.. They were single piston sliding.

All the mounting points are the same though.

Even the swaybars were the same MOUNTING point, although the diameters are different between SE and basically all others, including 'vert.

Rear brake calipers are the same too, only the bracket being different. Front brake mounts are the same from single to four pot. Only difference being the brake lines. Four pots have hard lines vs soft on the single's.

That's true of all the Zenki / S4 FC's...

I believe the Kouki / S5 did have a vented rear disc brake rotor?
Most catalogs does list them as 5-lug, rear vented for those base models...?
These damn things are rare enough...
i don't get too see too many of them down here nowadays in person!


-Ted

This all sounds correct to what i've read about the GTUs.

Well today started off well...

Plans were to wet sand and polish my tails. Driver side went off without a hitch. Pulled the passenger side and mid polish i knocked it off the table and broke the corner... :banghead:


So... I finished it all and put them back in. Ill just need to find another passenger light in the near future. They look great. It will probably be hard to tell in the photos but they polished up amazingly.

I'll be ordering new seals for them soon though. They are all sorts of nasty.

I found it odd that there were twisty wire caps in the harness though. It was like that on both sides.. I don't remember ever seeing that before.

By the way .. the photo that has both lights shown is an attempt to show the polished driver side and the unpolished passenger side.

D'oH!


Looks good! Glue that chunk back on and sand it.


http://www.hobbylinc.com/htm/dev/dev...FQmVfgodLnUFyQ


I made a trade for that nose candy on your bumper...Bag it up!

It broke off in multiple pieces and i think i know where i can get another set of lights so I'm not gonna bother with it.

whats this nose candy you speak of?:dunno:

Unrelated to the tail lights....


I have plans at this point to send my steering rack to ChipsMotorsports to have it rebuilt and depowered.

But i just had a thought... couldn't i just get a manual rack from another car and use that instead of going through the depowering process?

Oh that is faded white...

There is a very large difference in the ratios between the manual and the power racks. As a comparison on the Dragon with a de-powered power rack your arms will never cross. With a manual rack there are some turns that will have you almost going hand over hand

So it will work, there just might be some instances where i have to turn the wheel more?

Of course it will work. The only difference between the steering knuckles is whether or not there's ABS, and the subframes are all the same, I believe even for the 'vert

Cool beans.. I was just doing some research in the mean time. I found out that Chip does do it the same as you (depowering the rack). Found an old post from someone who had pictures of it. I'll probably just hold out and have that done.

I love Chip, and he does awesome work... I sent you my thesis via text ;)

You're just so smart.... I knew I had reason i loved..... i mean.... kinda liked you.

Dude. He bought a VAG. How smart is he?

Rather buy one than new owned by one :fawk:

grammar!!!!