Panhard & Tri link
Panhard & Tri link
03-02-07, 03:52 PM
#2
www.gforceengineering.net
I bought a panhard from Jim recently to replace the broken one on my car. The one in my car is an earlier design I was able to repair and reinforce the broken mount. This was considerably easier than cutting the old one out and replacing it with this new one. The new design is a trick piece.
I bought a panhard from Jim recently to replace the broken one on my car. The one in my car is an earlier design I was able to repair and reinforce the broken mount. This was considerably easier than cutting the old one out and replacing it with this new one. The new design is a trick piece.
03-02-07, 06:05 PM
#3
Yea Jim is a standup guy, I have his tri link and panhard in my project car. Real nice pieces. pics of my install can be seen in my thread: https://www.rx7club.com/1st-generation-specific-1979-1985-18/project-83-s-restoration-t2-swap-update-624258/
03-02-07, 06:24 PM
#4
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Wauwatosa Wisconsin
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OVRREVD, the g-force center link is a nice piece. A bit of a pain in the *** to install but a great piece which I have in my 1st gen road race car. For a Pan hard bar I went with the iscracing.net unit because the bar can be mounted to either side for the chassis mount. The Pan hard kit comes all loose parts, with nothing pre welded. IIRC the g-force bar can only be mounterd to the right hand side of the chassis. The Pan hard bar is what determins your rear roll center height & the roll center height changes as you make a turn. If you road racing you should analize your track./tracks to determin which side of the chassis you want to the bar to.
03-02-07, 07:38 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Might also try ISC Racing. I installed their third link and panhard setup on my EP racecar, and I'm pretty impressed with it's design and strength. It's a nice piece (as is Jim Susko's Tri-Link) and pretty straightforward to install. Keep in mind that panhards handle a lot of force, and you need to take a look at it regularly if you intend to use it on a streetcar. A free floating rear end as a result of a broken panhard can ruin your whole day.
http://www.iscracing.net/
http://www.iscracing.net/
Trending Topics
03-04-07, 11:11 AM
#9
The stock watts link is pretty good actually. The linkage ratios keep the rear moving straight up and down over a pretty wide range. The bind is from the upper links. The problem with the stock watts link is the roll center location.
Go with the GForce parts, there is a lot more time modeling the mounting locations on thousands of dollars of suspension programs. Its not a copy like the ISC parts.
My car was the first Tri-Link equiped car Mike at ISC had ever seen about 10 years ago. First he said "thats not legal", then he's selling parts just like what he saw under the car.
This happened after I sold the car and he did some work for the new owner.
Go with the GForce parts, there is a lot more time modeling the mounting locations on thousands of dollars of suspension programs. Its not a copy like the ISC parts.
My car was the first Tri-Link equiped car Mike at ISC had ever seen about 10 years ago. First he said "thats not legal", then he's selling parts just like what he saw under the car.
This happened after I sold the car and he did some work for the new owner.
03-04-07, 01:00 PM
#12
Originally Posted by 13BT_RX3
I like the watts link that total control makes for early mustangs. It mounts to the bottom of the diff to keep a low roll center.
03-04-07, 01:16 PM
#13
Originally Posted by elwood
A few years ago, I saw an Aussie setup that used a Watts link with corrected geometry to harness the benefits of zero lateral motion without binding. Anybody know anything about this?
03-04-07, 03:04 PM
#14
Originally Posted by 13BT_RX3
I like the watts link that total control makes for early mustangs. It mounts to the bottom of the diff to keep a low roll center.
One reason I prefer a watts to a panhard is that it keeps the axle perfectly centerd and does not allow for any side to side movement where as a panhard will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J4xkHuP7QY
Notice the axle stays perfectly centered through it's range
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMsiiZvZXDk
03-04-07, 03:21 PM
#15
A watts link can be verticle or horizontal in how it swings. That total performance set-up could be a view from the bottom. Now that would be awesome to have all the spring and shock weight below the rear end.
When Jim was first doing the FB suspension he did all kinds of modeling to see if a watts link (which can be better most of the time) was worth it on these cars in a better location. IIRC there was not enough variation in tire loading or roll steer to go through the trouble.
If the panhard is long and level at normal ride height the lateral movement is maybe 1/16th of an inch when the car leans.
When Jim was first doing the FB suspension he did all kinds of modeling to see if a watts link (which can be better most of the time) was worth it on these cars in a better location. IIRC there was not enough variation in tire loading or roll steer to go through the trouble.
If the panhard is long and level at normal ride height the lateral movement is maybe 1/16th of an inch when the car leans.
03-04-07, 05:39 PM
#17
[QUOTE=jgrewe]That total performance set-up could be a view from the bottom. Now that would be awesome to have all the spring and shock weight below the rear end.
That pic is from the bottom, pretty wild setup.
http://www.mustangdepot.com/graphics/RPSS-FD_DS_WEB.pdf
Bwaits, is what youre talking about the 3rd pic Hyper4mance2k posted?
I couldn't figure it out till you posted.
So the outer ends of the links mount to the axel?
That looks like it woudn't add too much weight.
Here,
That pic is from the bottom, pretty wild setup.
http://www.mustangdepot.com/graphics/RPSS-FD_DS_WEB.pdf
Bwaits, is what youre talking about the 3rd pic Hyper4mance2k posted?
I couldn't figure it out till you posted.
So the outer ends of the links mount to the axel?
That looks like it woudn't add too much weight.
Here,
Last edited by Stevan; 03-04-07 at 05:46 PM. Reason: add pic
03-04-07, 07:22 PM
#20
[QUOTE=Stevan]
Bwaits, is what youre talking about the 3rd pic Hyper4mance2k posted?
I couldn't figure it out till you posted.
So the outer ends of the links mount to the axel?
That looks like it woudn't add too much weight.
Here,
Yes, the outer ends connect to the axle. The roll center is at the center pivot point. That point does not change durring bump nor droop like stock set up.
-billy
Originally Posted by jgrewe
Bwaits, is what youre talking about the 3rd pic Hyper4mance2k posted?
I couldn't figure it out till you posted.
So the outer ends of the links mount to the axel?
That looks like it woudn't add too much weight.
Here,
-billy
03-05-07, 07:37 AM
#23
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rocket City, Alabama
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The height of the roll centers of a car's suspension are VERY important. The stock Watt's linkage center pivot point is the rear roll center, and it is too high for track use. A G-Force Engineering panhard bar can give you the badly needed lower rear roll center without loosing all your rear ground clearance. Those alternate funky Watt's link designs are either too heavy, have too little ground clearance, or if they do have ground clearance then their roll center is too high. For performance use the Panhard bar has not been beat on a road race track.
03-05-07, 08:36 AM
#24
Originally Posted by elwood
Can't find them -- do you have contact info?
As i understand, some people like banzai Racing and Rotaryshack have acquired their header rights, so they might of aquired some other rights with it too. They also did really great headers as shown (this is my own):
Last edited by dj55b; 03-05-07 at 08:45 AM.
03-05-07, 09:13 AM
#25
The General RE
From what I have heard a low connection point for the panhard rod or watts linkage is very desirable for the first gens. It can reduce or eliminate roll oversteer. If the rear roll axis points down from back to front you will get roll oversteer causing the rearend to get loose when the body leans over. The shallower the angle the better. A slight upward angle will give roll understeer and improve rear stability. I believe the rear roll axis is defined as the line that connects points representing the side view of the panhard rod(or watts pickup) to the instant center (convergence point) of the axle links.