Best Rear Motor Mount - Cork Sport Stsge II

[MadMike]

BOLD CLAIM ALERT - It’s the best rear motor mount for the Speed3 period.
Why?
Because it moves the pivot point forward. No other RMM does that.
Basically it turned an elbow into a wrist.
Once you see it in action that analogy will make sense.
Hows the cabin noise?- Barely noticeable increase and what you do hear is pleasing not irritating.
No matter how hard you make the rear disc, that “elbow” design is going to allow way more flex and engine movement than this “wrist” design.
Rear gets bolted in with no rubber or poly mount
Front bolt get a horizontal poly mount and bolts through the bottom of the triangle mount.
You can watch the difference between the two in a video on the product page.
Try it before you knock it.

 

[JohnnyTightlips]

I have the CPE Stg 2 and really like it. If I was to ever replace it or it failed I would look at this mount but there is no way I would switch just to switch. Thanks for the info thought, looks like a solid piece.

 

[Easter Bunny]

The Damond mount also moves the bushing forward

I agree though that this is the superior layout

 

[Mauro_Penguin]

As Easter Bunny said, Damond mount moves it to the same point dude, so no it's not the only one.

Anything will be better than stock, literally any after market mount.

 

[DubC]

I have the CPE Stg 2 and really like it. If I was to ever replace it or it failed I would look at this mount but there is no way I would switch just to switch. Thanks for the info thought, looks like a solid piece.

Samsies. I've been happy with my mount as well. Now that i've done them all it feels very solid.

 

[Awafrican]

The Damond mount also moves the bushing forward

I agree though that this is the superior layout

As Easter Bunny said, Damond mount moves it to the same point dude, so no it's not the only one.

Anything will be better than stock, literally any after market mount.

Definitely damond or CPE stage 2 as top RMM.

As for OP stating that the CS is top, that's a very bold claim that I'll disagree with.

 

[SharksInSpace]

As Easter Bunny said, Damond mount moves it to the same point dude, so no it's not the only one.

Anything will be better than stock, literally any after market mount.

DM doesn't move it as far forward. They do change the stock rear bushing location to solid and place their bushing where the stock pivot point sits on the trans bracket, but the CS mount goes a little bit further with replacing that trans bracket altogether, which allows them to move the bushing/pivot even further forward.

Any of DM, CPE 2 or CS 2 are going to be the best options out there. I have the CS 2 and can attest that it works quite well; definitely better than the stock-style upgraded mounts such as the basic CS race mount, JBR, CPE 1 etc.

 

[John]

Geez. If there's anything I dislike it's brand nut-hugging. Right behind opinions formed from marketing materials and not from experience or actual review of competing parts' designs.

Rotating the bushing to horizontal is the critical element. Pushing the bushing forward may provide marginal benefit, but it is unlikely this reduces NVH as much as the cpe s2 because of cpe's use of a rubber bushing. The DM and CS probably provide slightly higher performance at the cost of a bit more NVH, but I'd be willing to bet it's essentially impossible to tell a difference between those two products when properly installed in the same vehicle.

All that said, it seems clear the only RMM anyone should be putting on these cars is the cpe s2, CS s2, or DM. They are all clearly superior to earlier RMMs for these cars.

 

[Cyclist20]

Just think how awesome V2 will be....

 

[MadMike]

DM doesn't move it as far forward. They do change the stock rear bushing location to solid and place their bushing where the stock pivot point sits on the trans bracket, but the CS mount goes a little bit further with replacing that trans bracket altogether, which allows them to move the bushing/pivot even further forward.

Any of DM, CPE 2 or CS 2 are going to be the best options out there. I have the CS 2 and can attest that it works quite well; definitely better than the stock-style upgraded mounts such as the basic CS race mount, JBR, CPE 1 etc.

View attachment 11635 View attachment 11636

Thanks for posting that picture! I should have taking one before I took the old mount off.

DM doesn't move it as far forward. They do change the stock rear bushing location to solid and place their bushing where the stock pivot point sits on the trans bracket, but the CS mount goes a little bit further with replacing that trans bracket altogether, which allows them to move the bushing/pivot even further forward.

Any of DM, CPE 2 or CS 2 are going to be the best options out there. I have the CS 2 and can attest that it works quite well; definitely better than the stock-style upgraded mounts such as the basic CS race mount, JBR, CPE 1 etc.

View attachment 11635 View attachment 11636

Thanks for posting that pic so you can see the difference. I should have taken one before I took the old mount off. A pictures is worth a thousand words and trying to explain the difference is kinda hard. But seriously getting rid of that “elbow” made a huge difference in engine movement.
The bottom can no longer shift back and forth. It can only rotate on the axis of the bottom trans bolt. I thought the NVH would be bad. Nope.
I still have stock TMM and PMM though.

 

[John]

My CX-5 made more power after I put in Penn Plat from the factory fill. Also, my speed is faster after I wash it. Much wow.

 

[Awafrican]

My CX-5 made more power after I put in Penn Plat from the factory fill. Also, my speed is faster after I wash it. Much wow.

Weird my car gets faster a wash too.

 

[SharksInSpace]

My CX-5 made more power after I put in Penn Plat from the factory fill. Also, my speed is faster after I wash it. Much wow.

I mean, if he swapped to CS 2 from a stock mount then he definitely should notice a big difference.

 

[John]

I mean, if he swapped to CS 2 from a stock mount then he definitely should notice a big difference.

No doubt. But what I'm really interested in is whether the CS 2 transmits the ~3k RPM throttle-off sound. The DM transmitted it so much I swore I had compressor surge. It drove me nuts enough to switch to the cpe s2. If the CS s2 doesn't transmit that I'd be impressed. But I bet it does, since the geometry isn't really that much different and the basic materials are all the same as the DM.

 

[SharksInSpace]

I'll try to remember to listen for any next time I'm in the car; I remember noticing a tad more noise/vibration when I swapped to the CS2 from their basic rmm on my genjuan, but it was a totally worthwhile trade-off and I very quickly got used to it -- or it broke in slightly after some mileage?

When I traded from the juan to my pu in November, I brought the mount over with me in place of a Cobb rmm that was on the new car; I honestly don't remember noticing any difference in NVH from that swap.

 

[MadMike]

The increase NVH with the CS stage2 is almost nonexistent. I’m not joking or over exaggerating. Is it more than stock? Yes but very slight even at the low RPMs and when the A/C switches on and off. I was shocked at minimal amount. I was expecting much, MUCH more from reading threads and watching/ listening to post of people that changed to a Cobb or DM. But the engine shift is much less then both those and CS other MM of the same design. Making 3rd gear shifts much easier and wheel hop much less of an issue.
Being an engineer, I completely understand how the design kills the engine movement but I am shocked at how little NVH it transmits.
I really think you will be impressed by the improvement of both.
The only thing I can think off is that the reduction of engine movement prevents excess vibration to begin with, that the other designs do not, which in turn reduces the vibrations that the stiffer coupler has to deal with and thus less NVH.
It reduces the amount of leverage/torque/force the engine can apply. Once again, wrist range of motion vs. elbow range of motion.
Sorry for the ramble, hope that helps give a clearer picture.

 

[John]

But the engine shift is much less then both those and CS other MM of the same design.

You can talk about being an engineer (there are many here, frankly) and wrists vs. elbows until you're blue in the face. I'd be willing to bet money the CS and DM have the same engine movement within 5%. And I'd bet the cpe s2 is only a bit more, with all three being an order of magnitude better, especially after some mileage, than the older vertical-bushing-axis designs.

Here is the data available:
cs s2 video is embedded: https://corksport.com/mazdaspeed-3-stage-ii-engine-mount.html
cpe s2 on yurtle the turtle:

Template public:_media_site_embed_youtube not found. Try rebuilding or reinstalling the s9e/MediaSites add-on.

I have never seen a DM video; someone throw up a link if there is one.

Without data there is no objective way to compare between the CS and the DM. But it's easy to look at them and tell they do basically the same thing. What you feel when shifting is not data on engine movement.