Best RMM for a DD?

[MichiganST]

Has anyone here compared the COBB to the AWR that whoosh sells? I was looking to get the AWR mount, but have read it can have some unpleasant NVH for a long time. Wondering if the COBB is better for that or not.

 

[ron@whoosh]

Has anyone here compared the COBB to the AWR that whoosh sells? I was looking to get the AWR mount, but have read it can have some unpleasant NVH for a long time. Wondering if the COBB is better for that or not.

I think "the great rear motor mount debate" is very subjective

What is annoying for 1 person is no issue at all for the next
I've had the COBB on my 2017 FIST and was not happy with it as it seemed as if there was no upgrade on the car at all. Yeah there were no vibrations but there was not a lot of noticeable improvement in shift feel after a few weeks. It did feel OK after first installed but quickly disappeared after break in.
On the flip side I had a Mountune RMM on my 2016 FIST that I actually felt performed much better for one of the softer mounts that aren't notorious for interior NVH. I also used a cp-e from time to time on my white 2016 FIST which does generate some NVH but it's a trade off with much better performance.

That's the point I come to with every single RMM conversation
Everyone will have their own likes and dislikes of what interior vibrations are acceptable and not acceptable
Since I've tested these myself I do offer my personal opinions

- If you want want the best performance for the money, you won't find anything better than AWR. The 70a has some minimal NVH and will increase as you upgrade the bushing durometers to 88a, 95a
- If you want a premium product made from billet aluminum parts, cp-e is the choice but there is some NVH attached to this performance choice
- If you have concerns with interior NVH, Mountune is the best RMM that has little to no NVH. I prefer the Mountune over the COBB simply because I did not see the performance change it's characteristics over time as I put almost 15k on that mount. The COBB mount changed/loosened up very quickly in a few hundred miles.

 

[danbfree]

You're only missing out on the sheer torque they have locked up on this car ( still plenty torquey with stock tune) , but it becomes a tire spin monster lol. Tbh on sharp or low speed turns if you step in halfways it just spins tires and understeers horribly ( explains why they limited torque on some gears stock), this car is super dependant on rotating itself especially with no lsd This seemed really absurd to me first because my Si reacted completely different ( again prob due to lsd ) where it would claw itself out of low speed sharp turns with throttle applied. Fiesta is like the complete backwards of a rwd car because you apply brake " or let off the gas on high speed turns " to rotate, and you apply throttle to plant the rear end , its a bit vague but fun . Also it lets you be very stupid without consequences because as soon as you start understeering and go Oh Shit ! Im facing the wall, or the curb , you just tap the brakes and your back in your lane ^.^ Got a bit off topic but oh well =p

I'm gonna have to say between an upgraded RMM, a 2 pt/Traction Bar and some of the traction control options out there (Stratified's enhanced Cobb's or just Cobb's that left enabled by other tuners) there is no problem getting enough traction down with a full torque tune on a stock turbo... If anything, if you are concerned about spinning too much, Cobb's OTS tune do free up a very safe but fun level of added torque that Ford neuters and is easy to control with just a simple RMM upgrade of any kind, so I find this fully part of the topic!

For best value, Whoosh's AWR is an awesome deal, but I would find 70A to be a little soft, so 88a is a good choice if you don't mind medium vibes... I went with a Torque Solutions 75a that has very minimal added vibes, it's in the style of and probably close to identical to Mountune, just because there was an eBay special percent off day, but I find it perfect for my needs. Cobb is the most refined with a dual stage 68a/85a firmness for initial low vibes but stiffer secondary bushing to dig in.

Overall best deal on a least vibes daily: AWR 70a from Whoosh or higher budget for more refinement Cobb, Torque Solutions for a bit stiffer and good value from eBay MAP store, then best deal on stiffer Whoosh AWR 88a...IMHO

 

[ChicaneR]

I'm gonna have to say between an upgraded RMM, a 2 pt/Traction Bar and some of the traction control options out there (Stratified's enhanced Cobb's or just Cobb's that left enabled by other tuners) there is no problem getting enough traction down with a full torque tune on a stock turbo... If anything, if you are concerned about spinning too much, Cobb's OTS tune do free up a very safe but fun level of added torque that Ford neuters and is easy to control with just a simple RMM upgrade of any kind, so I find this fully part of the topic!

For best value, Whoosh's AWR is an awesome deal, but I would find 70A to be a little soft, so 88a is a good choice if you don't mind medium vibes... I went with a Torque Solutions 75a that has very minimal added vibes, it's in the style of and probably close to identical to Mountune, just because there was an eBay special percent off day, but I find it perfect for my needs. Cobb is the most refined with a dual stage 68a/85a firmness for initial low vibes but stiffer secondary bushing to dig in.

Overall best deal on a least vibes daily: AWR 70a from Whoosh or higher budget for more refinement Cobb, Torque Solutions for a bit stiffer and good value from eBay MAP store, then best deal on stiffer Whoosh AWR 88a...IMHO

If you dont have issues with traction especially with a tune you either have some super sticky tires or very lenient with throttle application. We make around 270wtq at around 2000rpm with a tune that's 4.6 modular power ( at much lower rpm)to the front wheel! My mustang spun tires all day with that power..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[felopr]

I wonder if someone who have done the powerflex inserts on the rmm can shime in

 

[felopr]

I think "the great rear motor mount debate" is very subjective

What is annoying for 1 person is no issue at all for the next
I've had the COBB on my 2017 FIST and was not happy with it as it seemed as if there was no upgrade on the car at all. Yeah there were no vibrations but there was not a lot of noticeable improvement in shift feel after a few weeks. It did feel OK after first installed but quickly disappeared after break in.
On the flip side I had a Mountune RMM on my 2016 FIST that I actually felt performed much better for one of the softer mounts that aren't notorious for interior NVH. I also used a cp-e from time to time on my white 2016 FIST which does generate some NVH but it's a trade off with much better performance.

That's the point I come to with every single RMM conversation
Everyone will have their own likes and dislikes of what interior vibrations are acceptable and not acceptable
Since I've tested these myself I do offer my personal opinions

- If you want want the best performance for the money, you won't find anything better than AWR. The 70a has some minimal NVH and will increase as you upgrade the bushing durometers to 88a, 95a
- If you want a premium product made from billet aluminum parts, cp-e is the choice but there is some NVH attached to this performance choice
- If you have concerns with interior NVH, Mountune is the best RMM that has little to no NVH. I prefer the Mountune over the COBB simply because I did not see the performance change it's characteristics over time as I put almost 15k on that mount. The COBB mount changed/loosened up very quickly in a few hundred miles.

would you compare the mountune one to the awr 70A as a close match/the same? performance wise and vibrations?

 

[ChicaneR]

would you compare the mountune one to the awr 70A as a close match/the same? performance wise and vibrations?

I heard the mountune one is the most subtle , honestly this is kind of a which oil should I use type of thing . Here is a easy way if you're dailying get the cobb if it's mostly track get 88a . It's not gonna make a world of difference in performance it's just a motor mount after all . Mild rear mount should be good enough , if you get real serious on racing you should be doing the other mounts anyway . It doesnt help to have a real stiff rear mount when the rest is gummy...

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

Well, with a tune you do have Cobb TC by default, when you disable Ford factory TC/go sport mode and I have no intention of disabling that, so no, never driven with TC completely disabled so I wouldn't know

If you dont have issues with traction especially with a tune you either have some super sticky tires or very lenient with throttle application. We make around 270wtq at around 2000rpm with a tune that's 4.6 modular power ( at much lower rpm)to the front wheel! My mustang spun tires all day with that power..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

 

[speed_easy]

I'm using the cpe mount and still happy with it. Going to install the (street version) powerflex side engine mount inserts soon too.

 

[danbfree]

I heard the mountune one is the most subtle , honestly this is kind of a which oil should I use type of thing . Here is a easy way if you're dailying get the cobb if it's mostly track get 88a . It's not gonna make a world of difference in performance it's just a motor mount after all . Mild rear mount should be good enough , if you get real serious on racing you should be doing the other mounts anyway . It doesnt help to have a real stiff rear mount when the rest is gummy...

I wouldn't really say that it's like oil when there are clear specs one can look for to get exactly what one wants. With as much low torque these engines make, there is definitely room for improvement and some brands seem to be overlooked too, like my Torque Solutions, which I think is a cheaper version of the Mountune. But the one thing is, some don't disclose their durometer, like Mountune, but I know that mine is 75a, which is a little stiffer than the AWR 70a and can be found pretty cheap.

 

[ChicaneR]

I wouldn't really say that it's like oil when there are clear specs one can look for to get exactly what one wants. With as much low torque these engines make, there is definitely room for improvement and some brands seem to be overlooked too, like my Torque Solutions, which I think is a cheaper version of the Mountune. But the one thing is, some don't disclose their durometer, like Mountune, but I know that mine is 75a, which is a little stiffer than the AWR 70a and can be found pretty cheap.

There's improvement over the stock one for sure but how much of a difference is there between a stiff mount and a really stiff mount? And like i said if the rest of the mounts are soft(stock) even a solid rear mount wouldn't be effective. If you upgrade the rest of the mounts than the rear mount becomes less important. I'm coming from the Honda scene from track cars to 9 second Crx's everyone removed the rear mount once they switched to stiffer upper mounts, it just didn't make a difference. Consensus is I think its overrated. As long as you have something other than stock it works fine.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

There's improvement over the stock one for sure but how much of a difference is there between a stiff mount and a really stiff mount? And like i said if the rest of the mounts are soft(stock) even a solid rear mount wouldn't be effective. If you upgrade the rest of the mounts than the rear mount becomes less important. I'm coming from the Honda scene from track cars to 9 second Crx's everyone removed the rear mount once they switched to stiffer upper mounts, it just didn't make a difference. Consensus is I think its overrated. As long as you have something other than stock it works fine.

Not sure why other mounts matter when we are talking literally about a roll restrictor, the engine want to roll backwards under acceleration causing wheel spin and torque steer, on our very torquey car, unlike those Honda's... but I tend to agree, once you start getting really stiff how much real gains are there over the other upgraded ones, so I suppose I see your point there... I'm glad I ended up with the one I did, I see no need to go more. Prob best to worry about 2 braces, springs, and tire upgrades than worrying too much about RMM durometer...

 

[Ptuning_Nate]

If you dont have issues with traction especially with a tune you either have some super sticky tires or very lenient with throttle application. We make around 270wtq at around 2000rpm with a tune that's 4.6 modular power ( at much lower rpm)to the front wheel! My mustang spun tires all day with that power..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

On the custom dyno tunes i have from the shop im at, I put down 318 lbs feet at the wheel and 230 whp on e50, the best thing to do for low gear traction is to add boost by gear for first and second gear. That coupled with launch control makes it so you can get the car out of the hole at an autocross/trackcross with very minimal wheel spin. Now add water to the equation and it will still blow them off all the way through second gear

 

[danbfree]

There's improvement over the stock one for sure but how much of a difference is there between a stiff mount and a really stiff mount? And like i said if the rest of the mounts are soft(stock) even a solid rear mount wouldn't be effective. If you upgrade the rest of the mounts than the rear mount becomes less important. I'm coming from the Honda scene from track cars to 9 second Crx's everyone removed the rear mount once they switched to stiffer upper mounts, it just didn't make a difference. Consensus is I think its overrated. As long as you have something other than stock it works fine.

On the custom dyno tunes i have from the shop im at, I put down 318 lbs feet at the wheel and 230 whp on e50, the best thing to do for low gear traction is to add boost by gear for first and second gear. That coupled with launch control makes it so you can get the car out of the hole at an autocross/trackcross with very minimal wheel spin. Now add water to the equation and it will still blow them off all the way through second gear

What I've learned over the last couple of weeks, and I should have mentioned this sooner too, is that indeed there is a LOT of torque with ANY tune other than stock so indeed you have to look at a combination of ways to control it... Stratified offers a "limit torque in 2nd gear" option, which I'm starting to see the value of, but I also have learned to just go easy in the first 2 gears too instead of WOT, and that's what I meant by my earlier comment of not seeing excessive wheel spin, I had already got so used to just going easy in 1st and 2nd that I assumed that's just what everyone has to do automatically! I didn't choose the limit torque in 2nd option but kind of wish I did now, but I did go with their improved version of Cobb's timing based TC, which obviously annihilates Ford's nanny abrupt fuel cut system, and I have it on by default... But yes, a better way to do it is to get as much traction as you can to begin with: wider stickier tires, traction bar, RMM and maybe even other mount inserts can help when shifting at high load and the car rolls forward too... I'm going to do a traction bar eventually, but for anyone wondering, yes do the RMM, do the TC enabled by default and definitely consider the limit torque in 2nd option if you can't afford or want to do stickier tires and traction bars to go along with it... Good input from a lot of guys here, thanks for the discussion!

 

[danbfree]

There's improvement over the stock one for sure but how much of a difference is there between a stiff mount and a really stiff mount? And like i said if the rest of the mounts are soft(stock) even a solid rear mount wouldn't be effective. If you upgrade the rest of the mounts than the rear mount becomes less important. I'm coming from the Honda scene from track cars to 9 second Crx's everyone removed the rear mount once they switched to stiffer upper mounts, it just didn't make a difference. Consensus is I think its overrated. As long as you have something other than stock it works fine.

On the custom dyno tunes i have from the shop im at, I put down 318 lbs feet at the wheel and 230 whp on e50, the best thing to do for low gear traction is to add boost by gear for first and second gear. That coupled with launch control makes it so you can get the car out of the hole at an autocross/trackcross with very minimal wheel spin. Now add water to the equation and it will still blow them off all the way through second gear

What I've learned over the last couple of weeks, and I should have mentioned this sooner too, is that indeed there is a LOT of torque with ANY tune other than stock so indeed you have to look at a combination of ways to control it... Stratified offers a "limit torque in 2nd gear" option, which I'm starting to see the value of, but I also have learned to just go easy in the first 2 gears too instead of WOT, and that's what I meant by my earlier comment of not seeing excessive wheel spin, I had already got so used to just going easy in 1st and 2nd that I assumed that's just what everyone has to do automatically! I didn't choose the limit torque in 2nd option but kind of wish I did now, but I did go with their improved version of Cobb's timing based TC, which obviously annihilates Ford's nanny abrupt fuel cut system, and I have it on by default... But yes, a better way to do it is to get as much traction as you can to begin with: wider stickier tires, traction bar, RMM and maybe even other mount inserts can help when shifting at high load and the car rolls forward too... I'm going to do a traction bar eventually, but for anyone wondering, yes do the RMM, do the TC enabled by default and definitely consider the limit torque in 2nd option if you can't afford or want to do stickier tires and traction bars to go along with it... Good input from a lot of guys here, thanks for the discussion!

 

[ChicaneR]

What I've learned over the last couple of weeks, and I should have mentioned this sooner too, is that indeed there is a LOT of torque with ANY tune other than stock so indeed you have to look at a combination of ways to control it... Stratified offers a "limit torque in 2nd gear" option, which I'm starting to see the value of, but I also have learned to just go easy in the first 2 gears too instead of WOT, and that's what I meant by my earlier comment of not seeing excessive wheel spin, I had already got so used to just going easy in 1st and 2nd that I assumed that's just what everyone has to do automatically! I didn't choose the limit torque in 2nd option but kind of wish I did now, but I did go with their improved version of Cobb's timing based TC, which obviously annihilates Ford's nanny abrupt fuel cut system, and I have it on by default... But yes, a better way to do it is to get as much traction as you can to begin with: wider stickier tires, traction bar, RMM and maybe even other mount inserts can help when shifting at high load and the car rolls forward too... I'm going to do a traction bar eventually, but for anyone wondering, yes do the RMM, do the TC enabled by default and definitely consider the limit torque in 2nd option if you can't afford or want to do stickier tires and traction bars to go along with it... Good input from a lot of guys here, thanks for the discussion!

Heard great things about the traction bar , not really anything traction related but more of how much it helps with front turn-in and the solid feeling along with keeping the suspension geometry straight. I do have experience with them on older fwd cars and it’s really something you can feel . I wanted to do bracing all around but from the input of some of the very experienced individuals on this forum it’s a waste ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

Heard great things about the traction bar , not really anything traction related but more of how much it helps with front turn-in and the solid feeling along with keeping the suspension geometry straight. I do have experience with them on older fwd cars and it’s really something you can feel . I wanted to do bracing all around but from the input of some of the very experienced individuals on this forum it’s a waste ...

I think with the '16+ thicker torsion and front sway bars that most other bracing isn't much gain for the cost either, unless you are flat out racing/auto-X'ing... but I am hoping that the traction bar does help with actual traction and torque steer by preventing subframe deflection with so much torque in a little car... But at only $129 shipped, even if it just gives better turn in then it will be worth it!

 

[Kalter]

Bracing all around is NOT a waste as they do make a difference, but there are better mods for the same amount of money after a traction bar.

 

[ChicaneR]

Bracing all around is NOT a waste as they do make a difference, but there are better mods for the same amount of money after a traction bar.

Can you reiterate on the better mods? Other than coilovers or spring/shocks or wheel/ tires? I really want to know what else is available for better handling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[alexrex20]

Heard great things about the traction bar , not really anything traction related but more of how much it helps with front turn-in and the solid feeling along with keeping the suspension geometry straight. I do have experience with them on older fwd cars and it’s really something you can feel . I wanted to do bracing all around but from the input of some of the very experienced individuals on this forum it’s a waste ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Braces are not a waste. You need to go back and reread the threads because the experienced folks (the ones that actually have braces) unanimously agree that they help and make a noticeable difference.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk