Breadfan

Installed the gforce engineering panhard bar last week, had my first event with it this past weekend. If you are into sliding your 1st gen this is a must have part! This is going to most likly require atleast 200+whp, you are going to have to throw the car harder and faster then ever before. Your transistions are so fast, its amazing, from the video it reminds me of ae86. All we need now is more steering angle, and another 75whp. Here is a pic, hope to have some video up soon.

http://www.bradystribling.com/sfs7/c...792_large.html

dj55b

iTrader: (2)

nice pic ... and nice ride ...

dantheman

iTrader: (4)

dang, that is some crazy camber on some of those cars.

trochoid

iTrader: (6)

Have you installed the matching tri-link or are you considering it? I have a panhard bar laying around in the shop and have been debating about installing it. I'm also not sure if/how badly the tri-link is needed to get the full benefit of the panhard.

I realize that the watts link is the biggest problem with the suspension binding, which the panhard will eliminate. I would like to hear the pros/cons of the tri-link and if it's really worth it.

Nice drift pic btw, keep it up and post some vids when you get a chance.

jgrewe

iTrader: (1)

The upper links are where the bind is. A panhard by itself won't fix the bind, the watts link actually moves the rear up and down pretty close to vertical until the extreme ends.

The tri-link replaces the upper links, getting rid of the bind problem. It tough to try to fit the tri-link on a car with a watts link in place(might be impossible). The panhard lowers the roll center as well.

Its worth doing it all if your allowed and you want a fast consistant handling car.

1badFB

iTrader: (1)

The upper links being shorter simply causes the differential to rotate through its vertical range of motion.

You would probably never use the whole range of motion ever, so technically the upper links arent the cause of the bind.
The bind comes when the short lateral arms of the watts link resist the natural rotation of the differential.

A panhard bar remedies the binding problem by spreading the torsional load over a longer area and having only 2 points (often spherical bearings) which would eliminate that problem all together.
Great option IMO.

trochoid

iTrader: (6)

Just the man I like to hear from and have a great respect for your opinion. Thanks very much for your input.

The main reason I asked the question is my suspension set up is so stiff as it is, I don't know if I could tell if it was binding or not. Since this is a street/play car, meeting sanctioning rules are a non-isssue. The only place I might run into a problem is if I get my 1/4 mile times down too low for the roll bar I have, after the planned TII swap.

The other question I should ask is the panhard and tri-link set up good for drag racing?

1badFB

iTrader: (1)

On the flipside, the tri-link allows the rear end to articulate more, allowing an even looser setup in the rear which can also desirable.

jgrewe

iTrader: (1)

You've got a partial grasp of the problem, yes the rear rotates and that will cause problems. Those problems can be shoving the driveshaft into the tranny on lowered car or roasting your rear u joint and/or giving you strange vibes in the driveline.
The upper links are the cause of the bind, not the watts link. The rear will move up and down just fine until it hits the bottom of the car if you have the springs and shocks unhooked. The problem comes in when the car leans in a turn. The upper links aren't parallel with the lowers, they point in toward the front as well as them being shorter than the lowers. As the car leans these upper links are trying to swing in radiuses that don't match and are pointed the wrong way to work.(simple explanation since you can't see how I'm holding my hands,lol) If one travels up, or down, more than the other its trying to be a different length(picture looking straight down at the link as it swings through its arc, it looks very short near the top or bottom of its arc and long when it is at the point the arm is horizontal)
That is where the bind comes from, and that's why it gets worse if you put urethane bushings in all four links. The urethane becomes part of your sway bar system.

Hope this helps.

T_Racer

iTrader: (1)

We run the G-Force panhard/Tri-link on our 82 AP/GT2 racecar in AutoX and Solo I. from the 245/45/13 DOT Hoosiers, to the 12" wide Hoosier slicks we run now, the setup has been wonderful. Very tossable at any speed, as the rear end is predictable. It is very confidence inspiring, good at 100+ speeds. For reference we run 1:21's to 1:22's at Roebling Road. From comparison, that is not that bad.

When you jack the car up, you can see the articulation of the axle from the tri-link setup. For me anyway, I can see that the axle is now free to move with the car and follow the track very easily.
We run a stiff susp setup up front, but somewhat soft in the rear. As I understand things, now that the axle can move, you don't have to restrict it as much with the stock links and watts link. You can let the car work, and the tires can do their job.
I am looking at fabbing a copy up for my street car, or just buying one from Susko, as I like to help support those that help us out. It is just that my wallet sometimes donkey punches me for it sometimes.

Travis

Breadfan

I was running the most worn out bushings in my watts, and on higher speed entry(4th gear) all i needed to set the rear out was a small fient. You could actually feel the rearend moving from side to side. On bumps it felt like you were compressing a large spring that would just unload sending the car into snap oversteer.
Installing the panhard i instantly noticed a alot more grip, the car become more predictable. I was no longer just able to start the slide by a fient, but had to add a large fient with a clutch kick. I know feel im in now more in control of the slide, rather than just along for the ride. Im also able to be alot more aggressive at higher speeds, allowing the car to snap to full lock. Once I have the drift set at i can stay full throttle with little to no steering input.
I do plan on adding the tri-link as soon as they are back in stock, along with rod end lower control arms.
picture for you gangster drifters
http://www.pandamoniumphoto.com/rand...Bdorismall.jpg

Zyrano

Curious what spring rates you are using and whether you are using a above ground or a below ground roll center? I recently picked up a set of trilink/panhard (waiting to get installed), but I haven't figured out the spring rates yet as I been hearing different information as to how I should set it up.

THanks,

Alvin

jgrewe

iTrader: (1)

First, unless you have a mumford link your roll center can't be below ground. It will be a the hieght of the panhard bar(if its horizontal like it should be)

When you both the tri-link and panhard bar installed you can go way up on the spring rates from the stock suspension set-up. 300lb/in is easily done if you have around 450 in the front. When you go that high on rates you can run into problems with shocks not being able to damp the spring. The manufacturers valve the off the shelf shocks for a car for the springs that are most likely to end up on it. Until Jim started selling the tri-link that was in the 175lb/in range even on race cars. Some of the good adjustables will handle the 300's but they are struggling and they in turn don't give you a lot of head room to stiffen things up in rebound.

Zyrano

Sorry, I should have been more clear, I was referring to the front setup being below ground. Basically, I'm trying to figure out spring rates I need for the rear. One of the things I've been told, is that if I"m running the front rollcenter below ground, IE, the car being fairly low, I should run ~500 lb rates up front and run ~175 in the rear, this is because the effective spring rate is low if roll center is below ground.

The alternative is if I raise the front ride height so that the roll center is above ground, then I could raise the rear spring rate with the trilink/panhard. I'm currently running 375lb fronts right now and 175 rears with the stock rear components, I'd debating on the two setups. and ordering the springs and trying it.

I'm just trying to get some additional information based on people experience as a source of reference.

P.S. I do know that shocks will be a problem. I intend on mailing my konis to Koni NA and having them revalved for whatever spring rates I end up deciding on...

Thanks!

Alvin

jgrewe

iTrader: (1)

It sounds like your on the right track then with rates. If you are allowed to do it I would get the spacers that go on the bottom of the strut. If your rules say "any strut" somewhere, they are legal. If no rules to worry about then go for it. There are a couple versions out there, I think Racing beat has them and of course GForce Eng. The Gforce units also help with steering geometry.

When you have such a huge difference in rates front to rear don't you wonder why? If the car is almost 50/50 weight balance and the biggest difference is the 200 or so pound rear end that is unsprung weight those weird rate combos are telling you something is wrong. Your right that you will need 500 or so on the front to keep the car off the bumpstops in a turn if the roll center is too low. The 500/175 combo is like having one foot stuck in a bucket and shoving your other one in a bucket to feel balanced when you walk.

I would fix the rear with the GForce parts and get some 250lb springs to go with your 375's up front. If you have the money and can get all your springs at one time you have other options and can go stiffer in the rear.

Zyrano

Thank you! that helps a lot. I can't run spacers, but I'm going to see how high the ride height needs to be for me to have a above ground roll center...

Thanks again!

Kentetsu

I have the RB rear springs, stock sway in rear with a RB in front, urethane bushings in all of the rear control arms and stock bushings in the watts linkage. I have no issues at all with predictability or oversteer. My theory is that with the stiffer springs in the rear, you get less movement and therefore less opportunity for binding.

I'm very happy with my current setup, so I would need some serious convincing before spending the money on the tri link/panhard bar setup. Maybe if I ever run out of other things to upgrade....

1badFB

iTrader: (1)

I think often, binding can be the wrong word.

When I think of binding, I immediately picture something that moves coming to a point where it physically cant move anymore.
This is why I said that the bind is in the watts link.
IMO the watts link is the only part of the rear suspension that actually causes a true "bind".


I understand the geometry of the 4 unequal rear links, but from my experience they dont cause a true bind, they just limit the angle the rear end can reach.

Once the differential is at the greatest possible angle in relation to the body, it doesnt just completely bind stopping suspension travel, it forces the opposite wheel up with it similar to a swaybar as Jgrewe said.

This is why I feel that the watts link is a bigger problem than the rear links. I definately agree that they both are issues that hold the suspension back, but I think of it as the watts link causing a bind, and the unequal links limiting the differentials articulation.

Just thought Id throw that out there.

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

what kinda tires do you have? the stickier the tires, the more the car will lean, and worse the suspension will bind.

your setup works, mine was setup like that for years and i loved it

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

have you aked mr ko? he's got the bible....

jgrewe

iTrader: (1)

The watts link is actually pretty good at moving the rear in a straight line up and down. The unequal length links are made to work by having unequal length arms on the pivot link.

The rear will actually freeze up when you try to make it go into a 'lean' with spherical bearings in all four links. If you don't have any latteral locating device the rear will try to move sideways as it tries to twist. Having urethane is just a softer version so it becomes a spring in your suspension or more accurately a sway bar. The problem isn't with the way you locate the rear side to side, its with the upper links. A panhard bar just lowers the roll center.

I don't want to pull out the trump card, but I was business partners with Susko when he started developing his suspension kit. We raced a couple FB's that we used to test the stuff. I've seen the modeling programs he uses and I did the second tri-link installation ever on a car. Jim and I probably put them on the same day but we lived 40 miles apart and had the cars in each of our shops. I'll give him credit for installing it first since he designed it. lol

Kentetsu

215/50/13 Sumitomo. I just had them put on, replacing 205/60/13 Sumitomo tires. Not the greatest tire, but hard to beat for the price...

Zyrano

No, not really, since he's in Hong Kong... but I plan to discuss this with him when he gets back, however, I think I do know what i'm going to do, I just need to order some springs and find someone to install the trilink/panhard... I've decided I will get some 250/275 lb springs to go with my 375 front and try it out. I'm also going to try to raise the height of the front to get a above ground roll center... The car might sit high, but since I can't use the spacers in street prepared, I don't have much of a choice...

Jeezus

iTrader: (4)

I know the guy with the purple miata..

speedturn

iTrader: (1)

Trochoid,

like jgrewe says, the panhard bar is one kit designed to fix one problem (high rear roll center); and the tri-link is a seperate kit designed to fix a seperate problem (binding.) I have been racing both for 5 years now, and they are wonderful. Too noisy for street use though.