Serpentine Belt-- Updated Thread, Clewitt System Install Photos Options

[mb911]

My engine seal, seals fine. It is a newly replaced seal, is supple rubber and stretches no problem. An older cracking seal probably not.

The Naro mount puts the engine 1/2” closer to the firewall

And also lower in the chassis so the engine seal doesn’t seal. Not a fan of that mount for those 2 reasons

So they may have modified directions in the last 4/5 years as we followed directions on a customer car and it placed the engine to low. That mount is now being removed in favor of a stock style mount because it put the fan too close to the fire wall causing cooling issues. We removed the insulation and that helped cooling immensely. Again mistake was following directions for placement.

[Montreal914]

The Naro mount puts the engine 1/2” closer to the firewall

And also lower in the chassis so the engine seal doesn’t seal. Not a fan of that mount for those 2 reasons

@live free & drive , @mb911

These are two very good piece of information. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif) I was wondering about how to know/set the mount to ensure the engine is precisely where it is supposed to be. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

I guess one could bring the engine in the bay but that is quite an undertake. Are there any rereference points/distances that can be measure between engine and chassis that could help this engine mount positioning without the use of the actual engine?

Is there anything preventing shiming out the base of the Naro engine mount away from the firewall? Abeit 1/2" is a lot! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Is there anything preventing the mount to be installed higher so the tin can settle properly with the chassis seal?

I can't see my installation not fitting properly in that seal, this will not look right in my book. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Thank you for the input, sorry for the small drift in OPs thread. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)
The Clewitt upgrade seems really nice but a few picture examples of 914s integration would be helpfull. Obviously designed for the 911 rear engine configuration, seems trickier on 914s especially with the various engine mount options on the market.

[mb911]

The Naro mount puts the engine 1/2” closer to the firewall

And also lower in the chassis so the engine seal doesn’t seal. Not a fan of that mount for those 2 reasons

@live free & drive , @mb911

These are two very good piece of information. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif) I was wondering about how to know/set the mount to ensure the engine is precisely where it is supposed to be. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

I guess one could bring the engine in the bay but that is quite an undertake. Are there any rereference points/distances that can be measure between engine and chassis that could help this engine mount positioning without the use of the actual engine?

Is there anything preventing shiming out the base of the Naro engine mount away from the firewall? Abeit 1/2" is a lot! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Is there anything preventing the mount to be installed higher so the tin can settle properly with the chassis seal?

I can't see my installation not fitting properly in that seal, this will not look right in my book. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Thank you for the input, sorry for the small drift in OPs thread. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)
The Clewitt upgrade seems really nice but a few picture examples of 914s integration would be helpfull. Obviously designed for the 911 rear engine configuration, seems trickier on 914s especially with the various engine mount options on the market.

Nothing prevents you from doing that but ask yourself why would you need to or want to? Do you drive that many miles in a year that simply removing the engine is going to be that big of deal? I just recently tipped my engine down on a stock style mount . Removed the alternator easy peasy.

[Montreal914]

...will discuss this in a different thread. My questions relate more to the installation of the Naro mount. Thanks.

[live free & drive]

Just for some tight numbers onthe Naro mount; if you locate it where they indicate the motor is 0.82" low - this can be rectified by welding the mount upward by 0.82".

The other issue is that the Naro mount puts the engine 0.5" closer to the firewall so you would need to space off the mounts 0.5" from the firewall.

The Patrick mount has offsets too that I have measured that are similar, but not exactly the same - If someone wants those I could dig them up (it's all in CAD).

I had the Naro mount installed, but am going to cut it out and go with the original style mount beefed up per Ralph Meany/Paul Tosi

[ClayPerrine]

This isn't the exact picture I was looking for, but it will do to explain what I am talking about.

I extended the arm on the motor mount so it went up farther. That way I could put the idlers on to be able to mount the compressor over the valve cover on the right hand side. It worked fine, until the compressor mount cracked the timing cover.



If you extend the arm on the mount, and put a dynamic tensioner on it, similar to the one below, you should be able to run your serpentine belt setup.



I will keep looking for the picture of the belt with the tensioner.