MML vs Low Profile Transmission Mount

Squatch

Squatch

Master Thread Derailer
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2017
Messages
11,495
Location
Everett, Wash, United States
I'd like to get some idea as to why an individual would choose an MML over a low profile transmission mount. The advantages of the MML have been discussed at great length, but what about the second option? If an LPTM lowers the transfer case 3/4"-1.00", it has the same potential to help eliminate driveline vibration issues as an MML, does it not? Additionally, couldn't you use that to your advantage when doing a tummy tuck by possibly eliminating the need for a body lift? Both Nth Degree and UCF carry their own versions of these mounts. Why do we not hear more about them being used, I'm curious to know? It seems to me that the MML would effectively be using the transmission mount as the pivot point for the change in the angle of things, whereas a low profile tranny mount would be using the motor mounts as the pivot point to alter things. Is there an advantage to one over the other? And would the LPTM be better or worse for the potential problem of a manual shifter having interference issues with the center console?

These are just some questions I've got. Look forward to hearing what some of you think. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I originally put in a MML to help alleviate vibes from a 3" suspension lift and offset it with a BL at the same time. Not long after, I got an SYE when I went to 4" springs but I left the MML installed though since it gives me an additional inch of clearance under the jeep at the oil pan allowing my engine skid to be higher than it would otherwise. My plan is to eventually tuck the transfer case up where I'll likely utilize a lo-pro as well just so I can go flatter on the belly.

I'm still not sure what mount I'll use or skid, but I do hear some people have issues with the UCF mount not buffering vibrations enough from the engine/tranny since it reduced bushing size. (https://wranglertjforum.com/threads/feedback-wanted-ucf-transfer-case-skid-lo-pro-mount.10220/)
 
@LiftMore quoted my thread
I'm trying to learn more on whole MML, BL, Tummy tuck process myself.
I'm really focusing on getting the factory skid up higher as my first goal. I'm kind of leaning toward the UCF products. But theres nothing wrong with Rokman either.

Also: I don't like when a seller goes off the grid after they charge your card....so this narrows the supplier choices down!
 
I've done both mml and low transmission mount. I did it go with a flat belly though so I had to go with botg of those and the 1.25 body lift. But having said that, the flat belly was one of the best mods I've done for offroad performance. I hated that shovel they put under our jeeps. Now I'm dead flat frame rail to frame rail.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: ac_ and Chris
Steven_Olson said:
I've done both mml and low transmission mount. I did it go with a flat belly though so I had to go with botg of those and the 1.25 body lift. But having said that, the flat belly was one of the best mods I've done for offroad performance. I hated that shovel they put under our jeeps. Now I'm dead flat frame rail to frame rail.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Who's parts did you use?
How are the vibrations?
Was it on a regular TJ? Rubicon? LJ?
Driveline mods?
Sorry to ask so many questions!!
 
I contemplated the UCF Lo-Pro mount and under armor to get some clearance under the skid. However, I decided on a MML because the Lo-Pro mount is known to increase vibes in the idle range of our TJ's (500-800rpm). Note how much your TJ vibrates when sitting at a stoplight, magnify that, and ask yourself if you're willing to live with that on a DD. Further, you won't gain much, maybe an inch, because if you try to get more clearance, by, say, getting one of their lower clearance skids that doesn't need a BL, it's really a total guess as to whether you'll get driveline vibes or not. Most likely you will and then you will then have to do a TCase drop on your new flatter TCase Skid Plate. So you won't gain more than an inch or so and you will definitely be transmitting more vibes to the tub through that smaller bushing Lo-Pro transmission mount. You're principles are right, though, good thinking @Squatch.

Ultimately, there is no better way to do it than the MML, BL, SYE and DCDS. Plus, as mentioned before, the MML gives you more clearance at the oil pan. BL gives you other advantages as well.
 
I used UCF's LPM for a few years. It definitely increases engine vibes at idle. Driving around at normal RPM's you don't notice it. It did allow me to take my 3/4" TC spacers off and bolt it directly to the frame without drive line vibes. I removed it and sold it because of my post re-gear fiasco, and the corresponding vibes I was getting after the re-gear.(no fault of the LPM, other than it doesn't isolate as well as a stock TM).
 
My understanding is that with a low profile transmission mount, you open up the possibility of a lot of vibration and harshness. I believe @bobthetj03 had one at one point, so he can testify to this. I think the reason that you see people running a MML much more often than a low profile transmission mount is largely because of this, but there may be other reasons as well. I'd be curious to hear from people like @David Kishpaugh or @mrblaine, who build Jeeps for a living. I'd be curious to hear what they think as to why a MML seems to be more frequently used than a low profile transmission mount. I honestly don't have the answer.
 
Chris said:
My understanding is that with a low profile transmission mount, you open up the possibility of a lot of vibration and harshness. I believe @bobthetj03 had one at one point, so he can testify to this. I think the reason that you see people running a MML much more often than a low profile transmission mount is largely because of this, but there may be other reasons as well. I'd be curious to hear from people like @David Kishpaugh or @mrblaine, who build Jeeps for a living. I'd be curious to hear what they think as to why a MML seems to be more frequently used than a low profile transmission mount. I honestly don't have the answer.
Click to expand...
What will be the end result, height-wise, of your installation of the Rokmen skid, and what is involved in making that work on your TJR?
 
I believe Rokmen claims 2.5" of additional clearance with their skid, so He'll be raising the drivetrain up 2.5". Actually, probably closer to 3" since Rokmen uses a plate welded to the inside of the skid so that the TC mount bolts sit flush with the bottom of the skid. The MML will help a little with clearance, as will the 0.5" BL. I think the biggest issue will be the exhaust. At some point, it's going to get in the way of things. Having the larger 241 TC won't help matters either.
 
glwood said:
What will be the end result, height-wise, of your installation of the Rokmen skid, and what is involved in making that work on your TJR?
Click to expand...

With the Rokmen skid I needed a 1" MML, a 1.2" body lift, a CV driveshaft, adjustable control arms, and the Savvy transfer case shifter.

You gain 2.25" of clearance over stock (on Rubicon models), which is equivalent to increasing the tire size by roughly 4+ inches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MuleSknner
Chris said:
With the Rokmen skid I needed a 1" MML, a 1.2" body lift, a CV driveshaft, adjustable control arms, and the Savvy transfer case shifter.

You gain 2.25" of clearance over stock (on Rubicon models), which is equivalent to increasing the tire size by roughly 4+ inches.
Click to expand...
Similar with Savvy.

2003 Rubicon
 
jjvw said:
Similar with Savvy.

2003 Rubicon
Click to expand...

I think the Savvy skid may be a little flatter than the Rokmen one, but it requires a 1" body lift, where as the Rokmen only requires 1/2".

The other thing is that I'm not entirely sure how flat you can tuck the Rubicon transfer cases either, because they're a lot bigger than the 231 transfer cases in the non-Rubicon models from what I understand.
 
Chris said:
With the Rokmen skid I needed a 1" MML, a 1.2" body lift, a CV driveshaft, adjustable control arms, and the Savvy transfer case shifter.

You gain 2.25" of clearance over stock (on Rubicon models), which is equivalent to increasing the tire size by roughly 4+ inches.
Click to expand...
Is that supposed to be 1/2"?
 
Chris said:
I think the Savvy skid may be a little flatter than the Rokmen one, but it requires a 1" body lift, where as the Rokmen only requires 1/2".

The other thing is that I'm not entirely sure how flat you can tuck the Rubicon transfer cases either, because they're a lot bigger than the 231 transfer cases in the non-Rubicon models from what I understand.
Click to expand...
Mine hangs down about 1.75" in the middle and slopes up to the frame rails.

With the 241, the tub needed some denting in addition to the 1.25" body lift in order to fit

2003 Rubicon
 
jjvw said:
Mine hangs down about 1.75" in the middle and slopes up to the frame rails.

With the 241, the tub needed some denting in addition to the 1.25" body lift in order to fit

2003 Rubicon
Click to expand...

I this the Savvy skid? Jeff at Rokmen told me that all that's needed is a 1/2" body lift for the Rokmen skid plate. He never mentioned anything about having to dent the body at all.
 
Top Bottom
Back