Front wishbone rear bush

mbev51 · 23rd January 2017, 07:22

Hi,
A year or so ago I renewed my wishbone rear bushes with ebay purchases marketed as Delphi. They felt lightweight when I compared them to the original ones I took off. I've since developed a judder whilst braking. I'm going to renew both the front discs and these bushes. What I want to know is if these are the real original part.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROVER-75-M...MAAMXQjWtRMGXI

marinabrian · 23rd January 2017, 07:33

They are a SLP ie a pattern part, and looking at the size of the void in the bush pictured, I wouldn't fit that to my car

Have you actually checked there is a problem with the ones fitted to your car? if you are sure it has failed, have a word with Jules to get a quality replacement

Brian

mbev51 · 23rd January 2017, 16:56

Thanks Marinabrian, thinking about it they were too cheap to be genuine.

Mickyboy · 23rd January 2017, 19:16

I thought the original part number was RBX101771 from memory ?

DMGRS · 24th January 2017, 13:38

The absolute best ones I've found are the MG production line items from SAIC - they're really weighty, the rubber is of decent quality and we've sold over 500 sets with none failing in service.

Front Lower Arm Bushes - 75 / ZT

Give them a try, if for any reason you don't like them you're welcome to return them.
You'll love them though.

Plenty of others on here have these fitted, I'm sure someone will have feedback soon.

23rd January 2017, 07:22	#1
mbev51 Banned Removed Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Removed Posts: 1,343 Thanks: 171 Thanked 315 Times in 223 Posts	Front wishbone rear bush Hi, A year or so ago I renewed my wishbone rear bushes with ebay purchases marketed as Delphi. They felt lightweight when I compared them to the original ones I took off. I've since developed a judder whilst braking. I'm going to renew both the front discs and these bushes. What I want to know is if these are the real original part. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROVER-75-M...MAAMXQjWtRMGXI

23rd January 2017, 19:16	#4
Mickyboy SERVICING AND DEALER DIAGNOSTICS MG ZT CDTI 135 + & MGZT CDTI AUTO 160 & ROVER 75 TOURER CDTI 160 TROPHY YELLOW Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Hernebay Posts: 4,331 Thanks: 818 Thanked 2,414 Times in 1,141 Posts	I thought the original part number was RBX101771 from memory ? __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] T4 Owner Jobs done : new UBP, Spy hole mod, Rear hub(wheel bearing),plenum cleaned and emptied, Inline thermostat fitted,Full service, In car Digital tv/DVD Bluetooth Satnav etc, Replaced UBP, Restored headlights,Fixed airbag connection.replaced HP pump,replaced rear light seals,changed intercooler O rings. Jobs to do: ,replace drivers lock,.[/SIZE]

24th January 2017, 13:38	#5
DMGRS Discount MG Rover Spares Rover 75 CDTi, 2x MG ZS180 Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Hythe, Southampton Posts: 11,320 Thanks: 456 Thanked 3,377 Times in 2,027 Posts	The absolute best ones I've found are the MG production line items from SAIC - they're really weighty, the rubber is of decent quality and we've sold over 500 sets with none failing in service. Front Lower Arm Bushes - 75 / ZT Give them a try, if for any reason you don't like them you're welcome to return them. You'll love them though. Plenty of others on here have these fitted, I'm sure someone will have feedback soon. __________________ Your trusted MG Rover specialist! Tel: 02380 001133 / Email: [email protected] We now have a 'chat' function on our site for even quicker replies. Give it a try! Remember - discount code FORUM5 for 5% off

23rd January 2017, 07:33	#2
marinabrian MG ZT Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne Posts: 20,151 Thanks: 3,565 Thanked 10,837 Times in 5,718 Posts	They are a SLP ie a pattern part, and looking at the size of the void in the bush pictured, I wouldn't fit that to my car Have you actually checked there is a problem with the ones fitted to your car? if you are sure it has failed, have a word with Jules to get a quality replacement Brian

23rd January 2017, 16:56	#3
mbev51 Banned Removed Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Removed Posts: 1,343 Thanks: 171 Thanked 315 Times in 223 Posts	Thanks Marinabrian, thinking about it they were too cheap to be genuine.