I have 600 hours on Lord mounts purchased from Vans. The store now shows both Barry and Lord products at $185 vs $270. Is this a case of price equaling quality or not? Spruce has "aerobatic" mounts for Vans at $493 each. RV4, Lyc 0-360, parallel valve, dynafocal mount. Most every local flight involves aerobatics between -1.0 and +3.5 G. Thanks for any input.
Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Lord or Barry engine mounts ?
- Thread starter grahambo
- Start date
Lord engine mounts are built by Parker Hannifin and comes with a 5 year warranty.
Barry engine mount are built by Hutchinson and comes with a 5 year warranty.
Vibration isolators are normally tested and approved to the environmental tests appearing in MIL-STD-810 or MIL-E-5400.
They may be used in a temperature range of -65°F to +300°F (-54°C to +149°C) for BTR® Silicone and -40°F to +300°F (-40°C to +149°C) for BTR® II Silicone.
In general aviation, Minimum Performance Standards is what FAA require to certify a product.
Is there a difference, other than the price, between Barry or Lord ? I don´t know.
In general, mounts that are intended for aerobatics are stiffer and will cause more vibrations in the aircraft.
Good luck
Barry engine mount are built by Hutchinson and comes with a 5 year warranty.
Vibration isolators are normally tested and approved to the environmental tests appearing in MIL-STD-810 or MIL-E-5400.
They may be used in a temperature range of -65°F to +300°F (-54°C to +149°C) for BTR® Silicone and -40°F to +300°F (-40°C to +149°C) for BTR® II Silicone.
In general aviation, Minimum Performance Standards is what FAA require to certify a product.
Is there a difference, other than the price, between Barry or Lord ? I don´t know.
In general, mounts that are intended for aerobatics are stiffer and will cause more vibrations in the aircraft.
Good luck
Dan 57
Well Known Member
we had a good thread about different types of isolators here.
Desert Rat
Well Known Member
Lord Mounts have gel filled dampening inserts inside them. Barry mounts do not.
It's strictly how you want spend your money. Lord mounts are arguably more vibration free, but they can fail via leaking the gel out and they're quite a bit more expensive. Barry costs less but don't dampen vibration as well. Some people claim they can tell the difference. I'm not one of those people so I went with Barry mounts and saved myself $350. That's more than the cost of a dynamic prop balance, which I think is probably a better way to invest in vibration damping and which I'm planning on having done right after phase 1.
I had Berry mount on my 7 and did a dynamic balancing on my prop and added some weight, can't remember how much and it end up around .02x IPS or possibly more
I have had Lord mount on both of my 14 and tried to do dynamic balancing and he could not add any weight as it was already at .017 and .013
I can not attribute this just to the mount as my engine on the 7 was a IO-360-M1B and the engine on the 14 is a IO390 Thunder Bolt .
I have not had any issues with any of the mounts.
I have had Lord mount on both of my 14 and tried to do dynamic balancing and he could not add any weight as it was already at .017 and .013
I can not attribute this just to the mount as my engine on the 7 was a IO-360-M1B and the engine on the 14 is a IO390 Thunder Bolt .
I have not had any issues with any of the mounts.
KeithB
Well Known Member
I replaced 2 Lord mounts on my RV14A when I replaced my Superior XP400 with a Lyc 390 - at 500 hours. Both had silicon insert seal leaks. Vibration has always been an issue with this aircraft (In spite of counterweights on the 390 crankshaft, and yes, the prop is very balanced). I again went with Lords for replacement because I wanted maximum vibration isolation.
I just recently replaced another Lord - small amount of damage to the compression rubber biscuit - turned out to not have a silicon leak (just some engine oil accumulation) and the “damage“ was not as great as I feared (just gun shy), so it really didn’t need replacing, but I’d already bought the replacement and put it on during May annual. 4 weeks later, there was a recall by Parker/Lord - mis-manufactured lot with an internal metal disk missing. Spruce said contact Parker/Lord, Parker/Lord said deal through Spruce, Spruce said “huh? - we’ll get back to you, but Parker/Lord doesn’t have any replacement parts and don’t know when they will”.
I’m still waiting...
I just recently replaced another Lord - small amount of damage to the compression rubber biscuit - turned out to not have a silicon leak (just some engine oil accumulation) and the “damage“ was not as great as I feared (just gun shy), so it really didn’t need replacing, but I’d already bought the replacement and put it on during May annual. 4 weeks later, there was a recall by Parker/Lord - mis-manufactured lot with an internal metal disk missing. Spruce said contact Parker/Lord, Parker/Lord said deal through Spruce, Spruce said “huh? - we’ll get back to you, but Parker/Lord doesn’t have any replacement parts and don’t know when they will”.
I’m still waiting...
RV8JD
Well Known Member
Keith,
Do you have a link to the recall info? I did a quick search but couldn’t find anything. I replaced my engine mount isolators last year, purchased from Van’s in July 2023 (J-9613-40, with cure dates of 03-22 and batch # 0012232226) and want to make sure I don’t have any from the bad batch.
Thanks,
Last edited:
KeithB
Well Known Member
I was emailed the service letter (after multiple contacts with ACS). PM me your email and I can forward it (6 pages long). Relevant info:
”Lord has determined that a small number of components (J-7763-1) shipped between April and May of 2024, were incorrectly manufactured without a metallic shim. The impacted Lord J-9613-series engine mount kits and associated batch numbers that contain the J-7763-1 with the missing component are documented below. Kits should contain two different rubber mounts (one single-layer mount and one two-layer mount). Visually, the J-7763-1 component may appear correct, however, close examination will identify that the affected components do not contain the metallic shim used for achieving the intended compressive stiffness of the engine mount. An example of a J-7763-1 without the shim is shown in Figure 1. A cross reference of the Lord part number with the applicable aircraft model and engine is shown in Table 1.”
They indicate “no safety of flight” issue. I have been traveling this summer (non-flying) since dealing with Spruce and will be following up in Sept.
My part was J-9613-40 from batch no. 12407153.
RV8JD
Well Known Member
Appreciate the info. It sounds like mine are not affected by the SL, but I’d like a copy of it for my records. I’ll send you a PM with my email address.
Thanks!
Last edited:
Hi Carl. No time, no see. Are the parts above specific to the 8/8A? And are all 4 mounts (parts assembly) the same?
RV8JD
Well Known Member
The parts (Van’s P/N: EA DYNA VI-STD LORD; Lord P/N: J-9613-40) fit Van's standard large cup Dynafocal engine mount used on the RV-4/6/6A/7/7A/8/8A/9/9A/14/14A (per Van’s). They come in pairs (1 pair for each mount cup), so you need 4 pairs. See this Van’s Store link for more details:
I installed new hardware when I replaced mine:
Yes, all 4 mounts are the same, but installed differently. Note the difference between the upper and lower mounts and bolt lengths. Here is how they go on (my notes on the drawing):
“Gold Takes the Load” (Pic stolen from somewhere!):
Hope that helps.
Last edited:
