Mkos1980

iTrader: (8)

I was getting vibration without that plate still and I read over on LS1Tech about a few guys who accually sanded off the raised nubs in the middle of the mount. Well I did that last night and its ALOT better. Just letting you guys know.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

The Prothane version is actually a better fit where size is concerned, but even it left vibrations. I went back to OE rubber. Here's the comparison of ES, Prothane, and OE rubber:

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tran...ison-pics.html

JamesC

Guest

I tried the ES and loved it. I've bought 2 more for my current pair of 'maros.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Absolutely hated mine. I hope that your cars are ones that experience no problems--or that you can accept the vibrations.

JamesC

Guest

Seems to me that the problems are the people with the crossmember-over-crossmember, rather than the single-piece design. Probably raises the rear of the trans too high. Those multi-layer versions are worse than junk.
ES is known to have a fail safe steel interlock designed in. Does the Prothane? I think ES patented it, in which case Prothane can't.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

I don't think there's any specific evidence to substantiate that one cross member or another is at fault. In the end, regardless of which cross member the car's equipped with, to include after market, and regardless of which after market mount you use, ES or Prothane, you may very well experience vibration.

While the secondary cross member allows plenty of vibration control (with a total of five rubber mounts), it certainly can't be regarded as a high-performance piece.

JamesC