I was just under my car, putting it away for the winter, and noticed that my panhard bar is not parallel with the ground. I'm asking what the "ideal" angle for the PHB is because I thought I remember reading somewhere that it should be parallel to the ground. Is this correct?

If that is wrong, how can I improve/fix this? I don't recall ever seeing a PHB relocation kit that lowers the body mount so I'm not sure what to do...

Help/comments appreciated,
Mike

 

WTH?!?! Putting it away for winter? Are you high? lolz

 

Yeah, it's going away. Us northern folk get all kinds of little white stuff that dumps out of the sky about this time of the year. The snow isn't bad... it's the salt that leads to rust, which leads to time with a welder, which means lots of work. That and my car has absolutely no traction at all with even the littlest of snow.

I must have been high because I somehow managed to let my car roll forward into a boat trailer and now I have a decent sized dent in the front of my hood with all kinds of peeled paint... not pretty at all. Thankfully my uncle is a body man so there is a good chance I won't have to get a new hood. I really don't want to have give up LS1 brakes for a new hood.

Anyway... any info on the PHB angle?

 

Which side is higher? The body mount side or the axle mount side?

 

Yes...Level at ride-height is the target. Ground Control has a weld-in panhard relocation kit.

 

I believe the body mount side is higher but I will check in the morning.

After some searching I found that Jegs has a PHBRB for sale for $73... about half the cost of ground controls kit.

I also found this info on another website (end of page 2 is when they get to the good stuff)... you might have to log in to view it but it is worth the time to create an account. If you don't want to create an account... it seems as though the "just" of this part is to lower the rear roll center which basically makes the car more predictable/consistent and allows for more rear grip by reducing the jacking effect (I believe that is described to be where the rear lifts slightly while accelerating out of a turn). I guess it allows you to keep a big rear swaybar (good for long sweepers) but lowers the PHB to provide better transitions. Seems to help give the best of both worlds.

It's late and I wasn't able to mentlaly digest all the info in the above link so I'll try and take another look at it tomorrow.

Any other thoughts?
Mike

 

You want the bar horizontal with the rear end axle tubes when the suspension loaded (vehicle siting) they sell relocation but its not hard at all to fab a bracket up

 

the panhard need to be level at ride height.

the piece form jegs to lower the driverside mount works, but it is a real piece of crap. I contacted Jegs about it when i bought mine and they never responded, but my god the quality of the piece is pathetic.

the holes are not even drilled, they are cut with a plasma cutter and are quite rough and not round.

I ended up using it anyway, and it works fine, but im less than thrilled with it.
It was also al hair too small on the inside and i really had to beat my panhard bar to get it in.

I made my own as a temp fix on my old 10 bolt, just some 1/8" flat stock with the appropriate holes drilled in it at the right height, and i welded them to the factory mount, they worked great for a few months, then i trashed the rear.

looking back, i should have just spent the couple hours and made my own bracket again.

 

I'm not sure why everybody is talking about relocation brackets and stuff....assuming he is going for stock ride height then something is obviously wrong and it needs to be corrected to factory specs. This doesn't mean adding some aftermarket relocation bracket to try and get it back level again.

Figure out which side is higher and tell us, and by how much. If the body side is higher then your car is sitting too high and this could be due to improperly seated springs or something structurally bent or otherwise damaged.

If the axle side is higher then you've either intentionally lowered your car, or your springs are sagging, or as above something is damaged.

Pictures along with measurements would be good.

 

obviously he is not at stock ride height, he probably has a prokit since its listed in his sig. that would lower the car and set the panhard bar at an angle.

 

Ignore me!

 

its ok, we are all allowed a brain fart every now and again

 

Are you less then thrilled with the quality, or the product? Since you have used a PHBRB... what did you notice after the install? Was what I wrote correct?

I completely forgot about checking when I put the cover on my car so I'll try and check Tuesday if there isn't a bunch of snow. I know all my springs are seated properly and the "frame" is not bent. I have intentionally lowered my car with Eibach Pro-kit springs.

I can't provide any pictures because someone sat on my camera so it is out of commission.

 

Don't know if it's been covered, but lowering the PHB lowers the rear roll center IIRC and that leads to more torque being aplied on the roll of the rear suspension. You'll need stiffer springs and larger sway bays to compensate for it. My memory of this is sketchy, but I'm sure Dean will be able to explain it alot better.
I was tired last night or I would have mentioned it then lol.

 

I was not thrilled with the quality/craftsmanship. I mean, for 70 bux, i expect to get something that looks nice, especially for such a small part.

As for as noticing anything, i cant say that i have noticed anything different as far as the handling impact, but it did what i needed it to do, level the panhard, and keep the panhard from hitting the upper panhard bar, im using a upper panhard relocation bar from UMI, for exhaust clearance. It lowered everything so the "off" angle of the panhard was exaggerated a bit. The car already handles quite well, im kinda surprised with it actually, but im sure it can be a lot better with some "tuning".

I would like to know more about the issues and fixes involved in lowering panhard and the rear roll center. hopefully Dean will see this and find some time to chime in.

 

i have the jegster PH relocation bracket as well, my car is lowered about 2" this bracket made a huge difference everyone that been in the car noticed as well. my car used to be scary during transitions like the rear was connected the the chasis with rubberbands and this fixed it. although i was pissed when i got it and i saw thoose ugly non round holes, i was about to drill them out and make new inserts for them at my work but i didn't want to wait weeks for machine time so i just installed as is. i agree for $70 bucks for .50 cents worth of material it better atleast be made well.

 

UMI has a Relocation kit that also comes with a new upper bar.

 

not what we ar talking about.

we were talking about the relocation bracket for the driverside axle mount for the panhard. The UMI/BMR relocation kits are for the upper panhard and are for exhaust clearance.

 

I was under the car the other day and the body mount of my PHB is higher by about 1"-2".

I already know it lowers the roll center and that I'll need stiffer springs and a larger sway bar. Since my car always oversteered out of turns I was thinking that the larger swaybar would be capable enough to compensate for the softer springs.

Now, when it comes to making the bracket, what size material should I use... 0.120 steel plate? Does anyone have drawings or plans to share, or is it easy enough to just wing it? Do the holes have to be drilled in an arc like on the LCARB, or doesn't it matter since I have an adjustable PHB?

I too hope Dean will join us...
Mike

 

the body mount it higher? thats not possible if your car is lowered, it would be a 4x4 to have that happening.

as for the axle side bracket, i would say 3/16 just to be safe. On the quickie crap one i made a while back, I just used 2 rectangular piece and drilled a hole in it where it needed to be, welded one on the inside of the stock mount and one on the outside, so the space in the center would remain the same. It needs to be strong, dont want it to bend or fail on you when racing. Holes should be in line, no need for an arc.

 

I don't know... I didn't have that good of an angle to look at it, but it looked like the body mount is higher by an inch or two. After comparing what I saw to what I expected to see from what I read on here I was also surprised. I was thinking maybe it is the taller spring insulators... but even that can't make that big of a difference. I know my rear springs are seated properly.

 

Making the PHB parallel to the ground minimizes the amount of lateral axle motion but allows what lateral axle motion exists to reverse direction as the ride height passes through the design static position. Some people might not like the feel that this could create, given sufficiently large suspension travel.

I'm about 99% sure that the OE design intentionally raises the chassis-side pivot by a couple of inches specifically to prevent vague customer complaints of slightly "unsettled" or "nervous" straight line handling while traveling down a road with lots of heaves in it. Or after a while and the shocks have gotten a little tired. Like so many other compromises, a little bit of ultimate performance potential was traded away to make the car more agreeable to a wider range of drivers and their preferences.

I'm 100.00% sure that the OE height of the PHB in the 2005-2008 Mustang is an inch and a half or so higher at the chassis end pivot than at the axle (and that at the OE level, understanding of PHB kinematic theory hasn't changed since 1982).


Norm

 

Oh well. I thought that the UMI kit lowered the chassis side mount. Ill have to look again.

Edit: Just looked, to me this looks like it lowers the chassis side mount, wouldnt that get it closer to being level?

http://www.umiperformance.com/2024

 

it does lower the chassis side, but originally we were talking about lowering the axle side.

If if the OP has to lower the chassis side now, that setup would work, or you could just make a bracket to lower the bar and leave the upper panhard alone.

 

Not to be an a$$ but he said the body side is 1-2 inches higher, therefore lowering the axle side mount would make it even worse.

 

A couple posts in he posted a link to the jegs mount, which lowers the axle mount and the conversation went from there. To be honest, i missed where he mentioned the body mount in the first thread, i was just commenting on the jegs piece. I apologize for any confusion.

 

No problem. On another note, does anyone actually have a "level" phb on their car? I havent seen one yet. Im sure someone must have done it. And If someone has, I would like to know what the difference in the feel is.

 

Dean here...

I saw this post when first started and the question was basically answered generically best by stating it should be level with the ground- so I did not bother responding.

however, the main stituation is the intended use which 99.9 % is symetrical or road race style cornering meaning you need both left and right turns to respond as close to equal performance wise. Level will keep the articulation angles best in check trough travel to help avoid jacking or squat loading affects by the chassis. In circle track racing where you only turn left, squat loading will require a stiffer RR spring where jacking will require a softer RR spring. This effect will alter the desired yaw angle of the roll axis front to rear and how the rear is leveraged with weight and corner banking. Obviously none of this is a concern for a car that turns both left and right.

Just keep it neutral at center point of articulation travel. With this said, keep in mind that spring packages and shock dampers will differently affect every car when it comes to body roll and how much the inside will lift, while also the outside will squat. Some cars for exaple may get 2" inside lift, and 1" outside squat(an overall 1/2" roll center jacking). Another car may get 1" inside lift, and 3" outside squat(and overall 1" roll center squat). Car # 1 may get loose and require a either a rebound shock damper increase, or maybe a 1/2" rear roll center drop(drop both side equally 1/2" so the bar stays paralell). Car # 2 may require a simply a slightly stiffer rear spring rate to loosen it to a balanced steady state.

So many variables can affect the dynamic movement of the panhard, but statically and dynamically, you want the roll center to remain constant with what rthe front roll center is doing. It is called the roll couple.

In other words, there is no perfect answer to this.
Every car is different. Paralell or chassis side slightly up is best for generic settings when you so not know the variables I dealt with above. Like all things, if you do not know, then play with it and test the results til it feels best to you- just be safe and cautious because this can create a MAJOR difference in car rotation and control.

Dean