Am I right in thinking that a panhard rod can be attached to the split bone instead of the beam axle itself? If this is the case it will make the job a lot easier and the bar could be a lot longer. Steering is LHD through a Series II Land Rover box - so which wishbone should I mount to?
Not a good idea. You'll put a large bending moment into the radius rod tubing that it's not designed to handle. Plus additional stress into the pin that holds the rods to the axle. Tubing works best pushed or pulled along its centerline, not perpendicular to it. If it were my car, I would not do that. Mike
Thanks for the advice - my mind's not made up on it. It's just that, if I'm going to do it, the best time to do it is now while everything is still in build up.
A rod on the bone will still allow the axle to swing on the shackles almost as if no rod was there. The mounting point on the bone will see un due and un needed stress. A bar is really needed with vega style cross steer. I'd say it could hurt much more than it could ever help
Post #2 is incorrect in suggesting the wishbones, original or split, have any effect on the side to side motion the Panhard is designed to control. Post #3 is incorrect in that the forces involved in the Panhard are not great enough to be any problem for the wishbone material. Many rods have the spring hangers attached to the wishbones in about the same location as your Panhard likely will be, and they successfully handle much greater loads than the Panhard will ever impose. EDIT: I also disagree with the contentions in post #6, who posted while I was typing. Stock Ford front suspension attached the Panhard bar to an extension of the wishbone, ahead of the axle. It matters not, from a geometry standpoint, that you would attach behind the axle. Behind the axle, ahead of the axle or to the axle, it's all the same thing. In my opinion, you are on the right track (no pun intended) in your initial thinking. Post #5 tends to support your inclination.
If the weight of the motor is on the spring in the picture, in my experience a panhard is not needed in your car. The steering puts a front to rear force on the axle, and the shackles are at an angle that shouldn't create a lot of side to side movement at all.
You are correct that with shackles at that position, if the weight is on them, there will be little to no side movement. However, there will be also little to no spring movement. In order for the spring to perform it's function correctly, the shackles should be angled about 45* Good catch.
I attached the panhard to the radius rod and opposite frame rail making a nice long bar. So far no problems and it handles like a slot car
If the drag-link length/ angle is not equivalent to the wishbone length/ angle they have tendencies to get a weird bump steer. have you looking into using a dead perch rather than a shackle on one side?
Yes - they do sit at 45° when the weight is on them. The chassis is on stands at the moment (see the yellow stand in the bottom left of the picture). I very much appreciate all the comments and suggestions of various options. I haven't driven the car to know if it actually needs a panhard bar but they're cheap and easy to do now before I have paint on it. A panhard bar is actually easier to do over here in the UK because things like a Dead Perch and other hot rod specific parts have to be imported. So - I tend to make what I need.
Since your wishbones are almost parallel to the frame it Wont hurt to install a panard rod as long as possible mounted to the wish bone and to the opposing frame rail . Mount it as close to the axle as possible and parallel to it. This will stabilize the lateral axle shift under spring compression. No it will not bend the wishbone or the rod as the spring handles most of the lateral load. Dont even think about that dufus dead perch setup.
Not quite sure which contention you disagree with here but I'd like to talk about it. If im incorrect id sure like to get my thinking straight. My understanding is that the track bar or pan hard bar should be mounted in such away that it eliminates the swing movement found In the shackles and spring lentgening in an uneven fashion. I'm pretty sure that in 1940 ford first issued the sway/anti roll bar which by its design also went a far to controlling lateral movement of the axle as well as body roll on buggy springs. There are no links and it was directly off the perch bolts to the frame going directly thru the axle. Then in 42 the track bar was introduced. This mounted frame perch bolts directly thru the axle also. With the ford set up the spring and wishbones can do what the need to as the road dictates. The spring will act as it always did, the shackles will articulate but not have unequal angles as the cars suspension moves, the pan hard bar forces the shackles to move in unison. A cross steer set up also want to pull and push the axle against the available shackle swing. The track bar stops this also. Having the spring mounted in tension weights the shackles by pulling on them in a hypothetically even fashion. Changing the weight the spring sees with a simple bump allows the shackle movement. With it being mounted in tension there's a capped minimum that the spring will see but only hope and theory keep the weight even and therefore spring length and deflection even side to side until the track bar shows up. Perhaps it makes no difference where the track bar is mounted, and Henry did it the way he did solely for because of the convince or input of his team. I see your point as "control the bone and you control the axle" and please correct my if that's not your point. My point is control the axle and leave the bones do what the need or want or have to do. The entire exercise is to control the axle
I built this 26' T about ten years ago. I used 46 Ford wishbones and cowl steering. As mentioned the steering box was close to perpendicular with the wishbone mount at the frame. I fabricated a steering arm that kept the draglink parallel with the wishbone. The end result had very little if any bumpsteer.
Steve, I disagreed, in particular, with the first two sentences in you post. Also the last one about hurting more than helping. However, your expanded comments seem to state it differently and I am in general agreement with them. And, yes, my main point was "control the bones and you control the axle". As Dick Spadaro mentioned. the side loads on the Panhard bar are relatively modest, as the spring/shackles carry much of the side load, but by their design cannot control all of it and a Panhard bar addresses that. Ray
The Jalopy Journal
