Offroad Tech Discussion pertaining to additions or questions which improve off-road ability, recovery and safety, such as suspension, body lifts, lockers etc
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

the truth about panhards

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 07:58 AM
  #21  
Robinhood150's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,033
Likes: 3
From: Wandering around Phoenix
Originally Posted by BruceTS
I haven't done a thing to mine yet and have never had any rubbing issues with my tires, as for the skid plate I simply hammer formed the portion that the driveshaft hits and installed a flush mount allen head screw where the zerk fitting was.
I think it's mostly the people with the giant limited flares. There was a thread about it a couple years ago when the last panhard fad went through here.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 08:02 AM
  #22  
Napoleon047's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: Columbia, MO
Originally Posted by Robinhood150
Words of caution:

Let's not be hasty and start throwing things away. Trends come and go, one day it's tundra coils, the next day it's revos.
i wasnt suggesting that everyone throw away their current setups and change....yet.

with IFS up front with the engine's weight holding everything down, the difference in sidehill ability may not be that much.

i was personally just tired of everyone's attitude that its either leaves or move the gas tank to make the rear suspension work properly. when in fact, you dont need all 4 links and the panhard. 2 lowers and 1 upper + the panhard will work just fine (provided the bracket on the axle can take the added stress from the single upper. some bracing can probably fix this issue)

Last edited by Napoleon047; Mar 7, 2006 at 08:04 AM.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 08:17 AM
  #23  
BruceTS's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Napoleon047
i wasnt suggesting that everyone throw away their current setups and change....yet.

with IFS up front with the engine's weight holding everything down, the difference in sidehill ability may not be that much.

i was personally just tired of everyone's attitude that its either leaves or move the gas tank to make the rear suspension work properly. when in fact, you dont need all 4 links and the panhard. 2 lowers and 1 upper + the panhard will work just fine (provided the bracket on the axle can take the added stress from the single upper. some bracing can probably fix this issue)
2 lowers + 1 upper leaves no safety margin, you break a link and you come to a stop and if it happens on the highway your in a world of trouble. The stock 5-link, you can limp home with one broken link and same with a double triangulate 4-link.

As for moving the tank, that's purely for breakover clearance.......
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 08:24 AM
  #24  
Robinhood150's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,033
Likes: 3
From: Wandering around Phoenix
Originally Posted by Napoleon047
i wasnt suggesting that everyone throw away their current setups and change....yet.
No, not you, others were hinting at this.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 05:16 PM
  #25  
tc's Avatar
tc
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,875
Likes: 3
From: Longmont, CO
I'm reading this thinking of Lysmachia's Tippy Bi@tch and how horizontal her panhard rod is, meaning a very low roll center. How much increase in roll center provides a noticeable improvement?
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 06:42 PM
  #26  
dragr1's Avatar
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 1
From: Auburn, AL
Subscribing to read all the info.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 08:07 PM
  #27  
Flygtenstein's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,216
Likes: 1
From: Fort Collins, CO
I got rid of the panhard because it makes the axle move laterally unnececessarily under articulation. Is this a problem that stopped me? No, but when you snapped the truck around the corner, it was noticable.

For the average reader here with an average suspension height, the goal is to limit interference between components. A regular drop bracket/bar is adequate for that considering cost/benefit and making the truck track straight.

There was some internet wisdom about the "right" way to fix this. Apparently it was such a good idea nothing came of it.

Roll center adjustment is not a practical parameter for most, the gain versus the investment is not worth it.

I had a dropped longer than stock bar in my 95. It worked TITS. No rubbing anywhere. Truck was stable and I loved it.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2006 | 08:34 PM
  #28  
SEAN_at_TLT's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
From: USA
Adrian, I must have missed your new rig somehow. Got any pics?
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 04:50 AM
  #29  
Flygtenstein's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,216
Likes: 1
From: Fort Collins, CO
Same truck, new parts.

www.sonoransteel.com
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 05:40 AM
  #30  
SteveO's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
From: NM
Originally Posted by Napoleon047


above we see a typical panard setup on a lifted 4runner. the panhard locates the axle side to side in a suspension, most know this. what most people dont know is that it also determines the height of the suspension's roll center.
Good observation Pete.

This is why I moved my pan hard bar up off the axle several inches and braced it. Better Roll Center. As well, the Pan Hard bar is just about the same length as the drag link, eliminating bump steer. (and yes, I repainted the diff cover to black, easier on the eyes)



This high mounted Pan Hard bar allows me to push past 30* on a side hill

Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 12:57 PM
  #31  
TX2RUNNER1997's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
From: Allen, Tx/Stillwater, Ok
this is some great info, becuase for one thing my dad won't let me lift my 97 2wd with just the OME front/rear setup because he says that it will be unsafe because of the higher center of gravity. if it can be proven that this would actually increase the roll center enough to be effective, then i can throw all sorts of techno mumbo jumbo at him like

" the increase in RC height offsets the increase in center of gravity, and it is further stabilized by the increase in track width since the wheels have about .25 inches less backspace and are 1 inch wider"

i know it sounds stupid, but im 18 and he's giving me the rig for college...and i'm absolutely chomping at the bit to give this truck a little more attitude.

keep up the good work guys.

Mark
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 01:45 PM
  #32  
SteveO's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
From: NM
TX2RUNNER1997,

Funny thing you and your dad going at it. I only wish my dad would have given me a ride.
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 03:30 PM
  #33  
99runner4me's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, CA
Originally Posted by TX2RUNNER1997
this is some great info, becuase for one thing my dad won't let me lift my 97 2wd with just the OME front/rear setup because he says that it will be unsafe because of the higher center of gravity.
Your dad must take 90 degree turns at 60-70 mph.

Why does this sound so familiar?!! Parents won't let me do this and that. Seems like I'm having a nightmare!

i know it sounds stupid, but im 18 and he's giving me the rig for college...and i'm absolutely chomping at the bit to give this truck a little more attitude.

keep up the good work guys.

Mark
Seriously, you're very lucky that your pop is giving you a nice rig. Perhaps you should wait until you get to college and lift it on your own when your away from home and do it with your own $$.

Good luck!!


Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 08:25 PM
  #34  
TX2RUNNER1997's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
From: Allen, Tx/Stillwater, Ok
he's actually spun out on I-35 when it was wet, did about a 720, and slid on to the grass median, no hint of rolling whatsoever, so i dunno what his deal is about that.

anyway, if i were to want someone to make this...should i just go to some 4x4 shop and have them fab up something?

also, when measuring how high the bracket should come off the old bracket, i suppose you would measure the height of the bracket on the frame before and after the lift and just have the bracket compensate for that? let me know if i'm not making any sense.

also, i want to convince him to let me lift it now and then maybe add a body lift after i go away to college cause i know that way im sure he wouldnt notice the difference

Mark

Last edited by TX2RUNNER1997; Mar 8, 2006 at 08:27 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 08:29 PM
  #35  
Flygtenstein's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,216
Likes: 1
From: Fort Collins, CO
A good 4Wheel drive place already makes something to do this.

www.sonoransteel.com

You can run square tires or drive without gas, but some things just work so well there is no reason to mess with them.
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 09:06 PM
  #36  
TX2RUNNER1997's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
From: Allen, Tx/Stillwater, Ok
Originally Posted by Flygtenstein
A good 4Wheel drive place already makes something to do this.

www.sonoransteel.com

You can run square tires or drive without gas, but some things just work so well there is no reason to mess with them.
i appreciate your imput and im well aware of the products that sonoran steel offers (panhard drop bracket), but i thought the point of this thread was to discuss the possible advantages of making the bracket come off the axle and increasing the height of the roll center of the suspension instead of using the drop bracket. i'm just curious to see if this would work and how you would make it work. thanks

Mark
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 09:36 PM
  #37  
BruceTS's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
If I get a chance I'll check to see how much of a lift bracket can be installed, before it hits the frame crossmember, otherwise you may need to lower the bumpstops for it to work properly.
Reply
Old Mar 8, 2006 | 09:48 PM
  #38  
grimpy's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
From: SoCal


Is this a 3rd gen? Doesn't look like a 3rd gen...
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 01:43 AM
  #39  
rocket's Avatar
Contributing Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,683
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Originally Posted by BruceTS
If I get a chance I'll check to see how much of a lift bracket can be installed, before it hits the frame crossmember, otherwise you may need to lower the bumpstops for it to work properly.
I'll be lookin' foward to it.
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 03:28 AM
  #40  
dragr1's Avatar
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 1
From: Auburn, AL
Originally Posted by grimpy


Is this a 3rd gen? Doesn't look like a 3rd gen...

Gas tank on the passenger side-I believe it's a 2nd gen.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:21 PM.