no_ss

iTrader: (2)

Hahn is a 2 piece hot side pipe?

KMO43

3pcs

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

weird

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

new transmission mounts are in.

FLASH1970

looks nifty

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

looks good, works good

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

I made a signature! finally... lol.

Need to change it now though

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

So after driving on the new mounts, I can definitely say they really help with grip A LOT. Good investment.

63 Nova SS

iTrader: (3)

Powells would help more....

Snail_SS

iTrader: (3)

He's broke can't afford Powell stuff

ECaulk

iTrader: (6)

Burn.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

Im not knocking powell but for running nt555 on the R I dont get very much wheel spin at all in 2nd. Honestly they do the same thing. It raise the rear of the engine up 1/4" and solid rubber mounts are nice. Cant complain what so ever.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

BUT

until someone shows solid proven data, same amount of rear engine rotation, same car, driver, track and actual comparison of times and powells having better times than zzp, youre all just nut swingin.

FLASH1970

is it the raising up that helps traction or just keeping the engine and trans planted and not twisting from the torque and wigglin' about?

FLASH1970

this is what broke people do...

ECaulk

iTrader: (6)

It's a rotation of the entire assembly (engine and trans) to align the axles better to prevent wheel hop due to axle angle. Powell is the one who worked with GM Perfomance in developing a different mount due to the Cobalt platform being initially engineered to function better with automatics.

ECaulk

iTrader: (6)

For awhile (maybe zzp changed their design to match Powells) zzp's mounts where just a direct replacement of the stockers with firm bushings and didn't actually rotate the engine to the position it needs to be.

FLASH1970

good to know. I know they have ss/sc kits but I thought seeing that they weren't listed for the tc ss cars they had fixed the issue.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

zzp has the spacer for the rear that does 1/4" on the gen2 spacer but now I see they have a gen3 spacer that does 3/8"

ECaulk

iTrader: (6)

The arbitrary spacing isn't going to line up the axles right. That's where Powell's comes in, his adjusts the engine, in the front and rear mount, to the correct angle to line the axles up.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

explain your reasoning because it did raise the rear of the engine and rotate the engine forward and it has made a huge difference.

ECaulk

iTrader: (6)

I'm not going to explain geometry to you, let along suspension geometry. I'm not saying it doesn't improve the angle, but there is a sweet spot and Powell has it. If zzp offers different spacers they aren't basing it on lining axles up.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

I completely understand suspension geometry. So really there is no proof that the zzp mounts are worse. Zzp has continually ran fast times at the track with their mounts.

no_ss

iTrader: (2)

Also, the only difference between the 3/8 and 1/4 mounts is the 1/4 is same mount size as stock with a spacer, then the 3/8 is a bigger mount without a spacer.

63 Nova SS

iTrader: (3)

I have had both, and will say I had more vibration with the ZZP mount by far. The ZZP mount was better than factory probably because it didn't allow much movement. The Powell mounts I have now though are better. With the same tire arraignment I could get wheel hop using the ZZP setup, have little to none with powells. ZZP mounts are pretty though.