Originally posted by 2phatt@Sep 24 2003, 12:37 AM
I am pretty sure you didn't read the thread you call your "proof" bozo.
The thread is about stiffening the front and rear mounts in order to tranfer torque to the wheels. Try reading the whole thread. I am hoping you can read. Obviously you can sound out words but your comprehension sucks.
No where does that thread say you gain any performance by not having a front
mount. What he says is that you stiffen the front and rear mounts to increase
torque to the wheels. Not get rid of one of them.
Why do you think they use a higher durometer for racing mounts.
Can you say "durometer"
Howyousay
"please dont talk shit if you dont know what you are talking about. thank you. drag through "
Ralph
i know what the thread is about. thats why i only quoted the part where it explained the construction of stock mounts and why they were used rather then solid mounts. i used that thread to prove my point as to why honda/acura use 4 mounts instead of 3, for ride comfort. so they use rubber mounts to absorb the vibration so its not transferred to the car HENCE the need for the 4th mount for engine stability. and i did not say that it says you gain performance by losing the front mount. nor did i say it came from that thread. i stated that with hasport mounts since the durometer of their inserts is higher, the 4th mount is not neccessary. and that hasports mounts hold the engine more stable with its 3 mounts then the stock 4. heres where you gain the performance. less torque is lost through the mounts when the engine torques, and more of the torque is transferred to the wheels.
and that still doesnt change the fact that that bar will not work in conjuction with hasport mounts. so not only will it be a waste of time because it wont help any, but it will be a waste of time becasue it wont fit.