There doesn't seem to be a general consensus on which mounts are recommended. Browsing over at the "other" site, I've noticed that it's mostly been broken down between the Street Units mounts and the CP-E's. Thoughts or suggestions? Still on the fence with this one as just waiting for the powertrain warranty to whittle out before I make a decision.
What rear MM?
- Thread starter Nue
- Start date
A lot of people here run the TRZ Poly mount. Its a good mount and cheap. CPE is also a good mount but its hard to get one since they seem to always be back ordered.
I wouldn't recommend the 2piece from Street unit, or anyone, because I had the Medieval 2 piece and it came apart on me at the center bolts. Ya I know it was Medieval compared to Street Unit but its the design I don't like anymore.
So my suggestion would be the TRZ or the CP-E
I wouldn't recommend the 2piece from Street unit, or anyone, because I had the Medieval 2 piece and it came apart on me at the center bolts. Ya I know it was Medieval compared to Street Unit but its the design I don't like anymore.
So my suggestion would be the TRZ or the CP-E
TheRealDefman
Member
- :
- 2008 MS3
My TRZ is suiting me just fine.
Darth Vader
Member
Stock + Epoxy! (yippy)
SubieKiller3
Banned
- :
- 2008 black mica mazdaspeed mazda 3
whatever you do, dont get a medieval mount. i say go with the trz poly. i have one sitting at home just waiting for me to install. its definatelly a good bang for your buck for what ive heard. you can get one from PG for only 100 bucks when the cpe and the SU mounts are around 120-130.
Yeah I read some of the horror stories with the Medieval's. Definitely not considering those. How is the stiffness on the TRZ? I haven't really come across many reviews for those yet. I was leaning towards the CP-Es as I wasn't looking for an increase in NVH but now I'm intrigued by the TRZ. That and the CP-Es seem to be back ordered as well. Not really looking for inserts as I don't trust the stock mounts and price is a small issue for something that seems to rather crucial upgrade once the warranty runs out.
Actually The 2 piece design, if made correct so not from medievel only SU, is stronger then the 1 piece. By haveing the 2 piece it splites the shear and tensile strength of the mount is split and concentrated at the strongest part of the mount, rather then spreading and multiplying accross the whole mount and effecting either end.
MY sugestion would be the SU mount.
- :
- 2002 BJFW, 2007 BK3P, 1979 SA22C, 2005 BK3P
we've sold over 450 TRZ rear mounts to date with orders pending in the bin right now, so they have to be doing something right 
we've sold over 450 TRZ rear mounts to date with orders pending in the bin right now, so they have to be doing something right
correctly said. I would, if i did it over, buy this mount over the SU just because of the price. But the SU mount is a great product, just like the TRZ. You would be spending more $$, for a stronger product. But not sure if the extra strangth is needed. I will probably even go with the TRZ Trans mount.
But what i said is true about the 2 piece design being stronger. Same concept of welding 2 pieces of metal together. They become stronger, and you have less change of any bracking under extreme load
(but if you break a TRZ mount you really F***ed up the install and should not be working on a car)
funksilver07
Member
- :
- 2007 Sunlight Silver Mazdaspeed 3 GT
I'd like to know what you base your decision on? Some scientific proof or just your own personal preference? I have been using the SU rear MM since day one in my car with absolutely NO issues at all. Please school me on why I'm using the wrong rear MM... I'm wide open to hearing why the 2 piece design is inferior. I autox and DD my car (and I drive hard) so I've put this piece through it's paces, and it's still working for me. PERIOD. Look forward to a response to my question, "why is this design inferior?" By the way which mount are you using?
mr_mazda329
Member
- :
- 97 Mazda Miata; 09 CWP Mazdaspeed 3
TRZ Poly. Hands down. Strong and not that bad on the vibes other than my e-brake button buzz
@djza2u1 and derspi
I see. Thanks for the input. I'm already expecting an increase in NVH but just not a drastic degree like many seem to be bitchin' and moaning about on the SU mounts. It's still going to be my DD, and hopefully nothing that jars my fillings. Are you guys on an aftermarket mount?
@funksilver07
Guess I'll go out of the way and say that he listed his reason for thinking why he didn't like the two piece system, namely, the entire Medieval fiasco. There were some few threads about it on the "other" forums on how they utterly failed and Medieval not backing them up. Nothing was said either about why they were inferior either. I have no issues with the design, other than the supposed drastic increase in NVH due to the (my guess) two piece design in making sure this damned mount stays in place.
But like djza2u1 says, because the extra precaution is somewhat questionable, I'll most likely that i'll be going with the TRZ when the time comes then.
I see. Thanks for the input. I'm already expecting an increase in NVH but just not a drastic degree like many seem to be bitchin' and moaning about on the SU mounts. It's still going to be my DD, and hopefully nothing that jars my fillings. Are you guys on an aftermarket mount?
@funksilver07
Guess I'll go out of the way and say that he listed his reason for thinking why he didn't like the two piece system, namely, the entire Medieval fiasco. There were some few threads about it on the "other" forums on how they utterly failed and Medieval not backing them up. Nothing was said either about why they were inferior either. I have no issues with the design, other than the supposed drastic increase in NVH due to the (my guess) two piece design in making sure this damned mount stays in place.
But like djza2u1 says, because the extra precaution is somewhat questionable, I'll most likely that i'll be going with the TRZ when the time comes then.
Yes, I've been running a CPE 60-duro for a few months now and although the improvement was initially drastic, after it has broken in, the improvement in shift feel and engine movement has decreased a bit. A slight amount of play has returned over the course of several thousand kms. with the break-in. However, the amount of vibration has always been quite minimal - only some increased vibration when taking off from first between 900 - 1,500 RPMs. Other than that, it's smooth and vibration free so it really does make a great DD rear mount. I'm looking to add an engine torque dampener in the very near future to take away that little added bit of movement and further improve shift feel.
BillTheCat
Member
- :
- 2009 Mazdaspeed3 Sport
we've sold over 450 TRZ rear mounts to date with orders pending in the bin right now, so they have to be doing something right
Added my order to the pile yesterday afternoon. Been wanting to upgrade for a while, and it's time. Hoping this will be as easy as the how-to makes it sound. Hehheh.
guy_incognito
Member
- :
- SS MS3 GT
I haven't kept up as much with the newer Medieval mounts - but I didn't think that there really was much of a problem with the 1st gen 2-piece design. We know about Sport6's problem, but that was basically just a fairly isolated incident since they forgot to put loc-tite on it.
Were there many other problems with the 1st gen Medieval rear mm?
For those wondering about strength of a 2-piece design, Medieval did some testing and posted up the results.
http://www.mazda 3 forums.com/index.php?topic=126962.30
(remove the spaces)
