I don't know the application for that part, but it won't work for a K-series. The Ks use a step in the steel surround that bolts to the frame.
Photo 1. OEM vs. aftermarket junk clamshells for my '88 K1500.
http://hbassociates.us/K1500_Engine_Mounts_03.jpg
You must be registered for see images attach
Yes. The mount has two steel stampings that surround the rubber isolator insert. Even if the rubber deteriorates, the bolt holding the engine bracket to the mount can't "escape" the clamshell, making it a very safe system--the rubber is
never under tension, only compression. The previous design had rubber under tension...and big trouble when the rubber ripped.
The older design had a rubber cushion on the engine side. There was a steel stamping that attached to the frame. A transverse bolt (Chevy) held the two together. The design was poor, with the rubber cushion in tension, or compression depending on engine torque.
Starting in the '70s, the rubber cushion was moved to the frame side, with a stamped-steel bracket on the engine. The frame bracket enclosed the rubber top and bottom (clamshell) so the rubber was never under tension.
I don't know about "less" rubber. What I see is that the steel enclosure for the rubber is made from steel about half the thickness of OEM, and the forming is different, which makes it look like the rubber has more room to move around. I think the more-important visible difference is in the steel enclosure part, not the rubber part. As anything made by the Damned Communist Chinese,
quality of the rubber is entirely questionable. I figure if they can't get the steel part right...what chance do they have of making the rubber part correctly?
I guess "saddle" is an appropriate term. Not one I've heard before, though. For me, the part attached to the engine is the "bracket" since it's a simple steel stamping.
I expected to replace my 300K mile original mounts when I slapped the new engine in a couple years ago. Bought the Poly inserts (didn't fit) and bought the aftermarket replacement mounts (fookin' junk). In the end--although I didn't really want to--I put the original mounts back in. I don't know that the ancient rubber is doing a proper job of cushioning, but I have no concerns about SAFETY. These mounts are
not going to fail in a way that causes any sort of safety hazard. That was not true of the older design, with rubber under tension. One of the biggest recalls up to that time (1968?) was when GM finally acknowledged that the previous mount design was faulty. GM installed restraint cables on millions upon millions of engines because the mounts tore under tension, the engine lifted, and with throttle linkages instead of throttle cables, when the engine lifted, it pulled the throttle OPEN. When the engine lifted far enough, it tore the vacuum hose off the brake booster.
Imagine Grandma accelerating around a left-hand corner, and the throttle pulls itself open at the same time that the brake booster quits working. Folks died. Cars wrecked. Underwear soiled.
