This all jogged my memory. Energy mounts are about an 1/8 taller than a factory rubber mount.(That's 1/4" total) 302/350 rubber factory mounts are interlocking as well. Solid mounts have there pluses and minuses.
What ever became of this ordeal? lol. I have a set of energy suspension mounts with S&P plates and wondering if I will be having the same problem? Any info is appreciated as I am on the fence about the backing plate as well.
Did you ever get this resolved . I'm interested also. I also have the poly mounts on a 454 in a 67 camaro and cant get them down over the mounts, the engine fit perfect with solid mounts and I wanted to calm it down a little bit.
You may have this figured out already, but I figured I could chime in.
You do not use the preload plates when running an LS adapter plate. The adapter plate becomes the preload plate. When we machine our own adapters we put a pocket in for the "bulge" of poly just like the stamped metal preload plate. The metal preload plate is used when you put the mount on a chevy SB or BB, just as has been posted.
Also, I will point out that on ATS mounts, Art Morrison Mounts, and our own mounts the energy mount pad is actually "upside down" in relation to how you normally view the mount. This helps lower the motor.
Make sure your stands that bolt to the frame are for a Chevy too, if one is taller from the bolt hole center to the top surface it won't help your situation
Brian Hobaugh SCCA National Tour June 2014
First Hemi 'Cuda Convertible Ever Built
Short clips: Goodguys Pleasanton autocross and pit videos
Linear Mode
