I may have found it.

http://www.sealsit.com/sealflex_rodend.asp

The 1/2" shank and 1/2" hole matches the existing parts. I've asked for some dimensions to confirm compatibility and strength/material info.

These guys also sell the seals that I bought elsewhere.

 

That sounds like the ticket right there man! I might have to try some in my rear bar, which is really noisy right now...

Great find!

 

Just got off the phone with the sealsit guys, Jim Smith. They supply parts to dirt track cars often. He is making a couple of parts for me with a little harder durometer than what they offer in the catalog. I'll report back when I get the parts in a week or two.

 

I've thought about using these poly bushings for a panhard in the REPU: http://www.ballisticfabrication.com/...63_p_1646.html

If the heims aren't sealed tight and I mean tight they'll last about 6000 miles in the wet northwest.

Good luck either way, I like those beveled washers. Are they hardened steel?

 

You finally put it on?!?!

 

I don't see any of the standard bushing rod ends like that one with the right dimensions. They also don't have much in the range of side to side motion so they can stress the clevis.

It will be interesting how long the ball joints last. My car is a summer and fair weather car, so they'd probably last over a decade without the seals so I'm thinking this may be a lifetime solution. There are also rubber covers available that enclose the entire end of the joint. Sealsit sells them.

http://www.sealsit.com/rodendboots.asp

The washers are not hardened, but they are strictly in compression, so hardening shouldn't be necessary.

 

That's "rear swaybar" Chris.

 

Oh... : (

 

The Sealsit rod ends came in today. They're wider than they told me and won't drop into the chassis bracket. I'm going to have to get the bracket space widened by 1/8 inch or so.

 

i'm posting this here because following this thread got me shopping again...

not to derail thread but i have a chance to get a used g force panhard but the owner thinks in may have been shortened. could you measure yours please.

 

The actual rod is 29" long.

 

The rubber rod ends are wider than the ball joint ends. The body of the rubber end is 1/8 inch wider than the ball joint version and the overall width is about 0.185" wider. Here's the difference in widths as shown in CAD.



I plan to use one rubber joint on the chassis mount for the tri-link and one for the chassis mount of the panhard. On the tri-link, the clevis has just enough width for the ball joint. I'm first going to see if I can get the body and shaft of the rubber rod end ground down to the same dimensions as the ball joint. Then it's a drop-in. Otherwise, I'll have the clevis rewelded to accommodate the wider rod end. If I change the clevis, I'll have to get a longer bolt to hold the rod end and have it's head ground just like the one that comes in the kit.

On the panhard, the location of the rod end is fixed in a slot by tightly bolting the joint to the clevis. This won't work for the rubber rod end since there has to be some slack in the attachment of the shaft through the rod end and the clevis to allow the rod end to rotate. I think what I'm going to do is use bolts in the slot to position the ball joint and then tighten the ball joint just enough so that there is still some rotation allowed. The bolts will be tight against the washers along sides the rod end to hold it in place. I'll use smaller washers on the outside of the clevis to allow the nuts to rotate. Hopefully the rod end won't need to sit at the extremes of travel in the slot. If so, I'll need to have the slot extended. 4 bolts might be overkill. Here's a CAD assembly of my intended solution.



I have a buddy making the axle side trilink bracket this week.

 

I'm going to make a plate that will carry the bolt and hold against the bracket instead of trying to wedge against the washers. I may have to put the nut on the inside of half of the assembly instead of the outside, but everything should fit.



I'm debating on if I should use carriage bolts instead of hex heads. Gives the rod end more freedom of rotation.

 

Damn you're thorough!

 

I don't want to do this twice

 

Keep good track of this stuff so you can put a package together for us after you work all the bugs out.

 

I thought the reason Mazda chose a Watts linkage is that it doesn't cause the rear axle housing to move side to side as the suspension goes through its travel with a panhard bar or is the amount of travel so small, it's a moot issue?

What problem did you have with your Wats linkage? I know the stud welded to the housing can snap off, Mazdatrix even sells a band aid for the problem.

 

Mazda failed in the mounting of the Watts linkage. This causes the rear to shift side to side with height changes (along with the traditional binding issues caused by the links). A properly set up Watts is a great way to go.

With a Panhard bar, the roll center will change up/down with cornering forces from what I understand.




.

 

Just to back up that point, if you're car is lowered, you can actually measure the offset of the axle by the distance between the wheel on either side and the fender. My car is on RacingBeat springs and I'm 1/8" off center.

So the watt's doesn't exactly work as a watt's should. I've read that just replacing the watt's with a panhard makes a big difference in the tail happiness by itself.

 

yeah there are three problems with the stock watts. the first is that the pivot isn't centered, so the axle moves side to side.

the second problem is that the pivot bracket is 2D, it only moves around in its circle, but due to the short upper links on the axle housing the pivot bolt/stud actually travels in an arc (the pinion angle changes with travel, and it'll also point side to side in roll), so it'll bind just because the watts link doesn't bend in that direction!

the third is that the stock watts link roll center is really high.

so the panhard fixes the watts binding, by not caring if the pinion angles changes when the axles moves, and its also long enough that the side to side movement is smaller than the stock stuff, while moving the roll center down.

on the car i had the panhard on, it seemed like the rear was much less "snappy" and when the tail comes out, its much easier to control

 

Any update? I'm thinking about doing a pan hard bar on my car soon and I'm trying to do all my research first.

 

Waiting on my replacement axle clevis. It's taking my buddy a long time. That and I picked up another project. Will update when the clevis arrives.