Aren't the SMG shifting hydraulics mounted on the transmission? If so, I don't see how stiffer mounts than stock could make it perform any better.
If the above is true, I'd stick with stock.
2005 IR/IR M3 Coupe
2012 LMB/Black 128i
100 Series Land Cruiser
Neither did I... but I’m subscribed because that theory doesn’t actually make sense to me... I’ve a bunch of auto shift cars and never have I heard that transmission mounts are rendered meaningless therefore... especially in this one where it’s the same manual transmission just mated to a hydro-electro shift actuator.
So far, I’m hearing OE and Rogue... what’s VT?... if there’s n improvement to be had over OE, I’m in for it... not that this thing needs to shift any firmer than DSC off +6.
maw
Vibra-Technics...I sponsored a GB on M3F back in the day on their engine/trans mounts. Most folks were happy w/them, although some ppl mentioned experiencing an increase in NVH from the engine mounts. I raised my idle by 75rpms and if you sat in my car, you couldn't tell the difference between these and stock @ idle. They still utilize a natural rubber insulator element (albeit firmer than stock) to dampen harmonics.
Aren't the SMG shifting hydraulics mounted on the transmission? If so, I don't see how stiffer mounts than stock could make it perform any better.
If the above is true, I'd stick with stock.
Yep, but I'm not lying when I say that there was def a more direct (for lack of a better word) feel to the shifts, and an overall transfer of power to the wheels.
Comment