84-87 panard rod

[Motor City Hamilton]

My stock panhard mount to the chassis is bent up and looks pretty weak. It looks like it has been whacked a few times and I gave it a little bend myself by brushing the wall. I am thinking of doing the mount like this photo from Improved Touring.

http://www.improvedtouring.com/images/spec...ild/image25.htm

If I am reading the GCR correctly, this is still legal for ITC. Has anyone tried messing with rear roll center by moving the bar up/down? I'm considering making mine with all the adjustment of the photo, but if these cars don't respond much to roll center changes in the rear, why go through all of the extra work. Anyone had success with this and has found it a worthwhile adjustment to have?

[This message has been edited by Motor City Hamilton (edited July 06, 2005).]

[racer-025]

FYI,

the CRX in that picture is now owned by John Alchorn in Nova Scotia...

[Motor City Hamilton]

So was the effort of building the bar mount worth it? Does he make use of it or is the bar run pretty close to the stock location anyway?

[racer-025]

Thats probably the only setting that we have not changed. When he first bought the car we immediately started changing many of the settings. The car did not handle the way we wanted it to. After all of our adjustments John was able to shave 4 seconds off his lap times and is now biting the ITB cars.

[RSTPerformance]

Is that legal? I don't want to go digging looking for where it says you can change the mounting points of the Panard bar, can someone point it out to me???

Thanks;

Raymond

[Motor City Hamilton]

GCR page ITCS-10
Section 5. c. 1.

Any anti-roll bar, traction bar, panhard rod or watts linkage may be added or substituted, provided its/their installation serves no other purpose. The mounts for these devices may be welded or bolted to the structure of the vehicle.

There's some more about not mounting it in the trunk and that the bars should be solid tube and heim rod ends can be added, etc...

My stock mount is all bent up, split and overall not very sturdy. I'm looking at three options. 1.) Weld in some sheet metal to reinforce the split panhard mount. 2.) Cut the stock mount out and weld in a new stock mount from my parts car. 3.) Build a new mount like the photo from my above post.

My interpretation of the GCR says that #3 is legal. I guess I had better ask the tech guy from my region before I get knee deep in work.

[RSTPerformance]

I guess I was just wondering if the 2 additional braces (are they additional? or does the stock mount look similar to that?) were legal... probably up to interpretation... I wouldn't protest, but I would hate to be a steward making the interpretation.

Remember your local Tech guy is only one interpretation of many... This is most likely a "gray" area...

Just wanted to add the food for thought before everyone went crazy building that!!! Even though it does look pritty cool Great work

Later and good luck MotorCity;

Raymond

[Greg Gauper]

No, the stock mount doesn't look like that, but the rules are quite liberal in this regard. Any panhard rod or watts linkage may be installed or substituted. The mounts may be bolted or welded. Heim joints may be fitted. So you are free to install the mount(s) anyway you want, as long as it serves no other function. The function of a panhard rod is to:

1) Locate the rear axle laterally

2) Locate and define the rear roll center height.

Consider for a moment that you can replace a panhard rod with a watts linkage if you wish (per the rules) and consider how much fabricating would be required to do this. As long as the pickup points perform no other function.

The only grey area I can see would be if you tried to install a Mumford device in stead of a watts linkage. One might be able to argue that it's a variation of a watts linkage but that might be pushing the rules..........