I would guess that the panhard bar helps for sway of the body on turns. Also,
the typical axle tramp without traction bars jumps to one side, ie....tire burns
on the pavement that jump to the left, pound-skid, pound-peel, pound
skid....etc. It would help to keep the axle housing from moving to the side.
The rotation of the driveshaft/and the loading during heavy acceleration pushes
the housing to the side....the Mk 2 change was probably to help hold against the
throw of the the spin to the axles from the monstrous 164 hp 260V8(from the
opposite side which is more proper)....Just my theory. I believe it to work
pretty much the same on the early and late versions....The real fix for rear
differential stability in Tigers was/is the set-up I saw in the Barker car at
United Eureka. And the Silverman (sp?) car.
Chris in Trinidad
MWood24020@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 12/19/2000 1:35:10 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> theo.smit@intel.com writes:
>
> << I realize that Rootes' motivation for installing the Panhard bar was to
> mitigate axle tramp, but I don't really see how a Panhard bar would help
> that problem (which is caused by leaf spring windup, not lateral
> deflection), except that it helps to keep the lateral load on the spring
> bushings and shackles to within reasonable limits. >>
>
> I also don't know why on earth a Panhard bar would be seen as a cure for axle
> tramp, but that's what it says in Mike Taylor's book. Maybe another
> inaccuracy in what is, mostly, a very entertaining and informative read. I
> was always under the impression that the Panhard bar was installed to
> position the axle laterally.
> I also seem to recall that the SCCA B-prod cars of the '60's ran w/o Panhard
> bar, as, with stock location/angle, it caused significant rear steer
> characteristics.
> The question I have is, wouldn't it make sense to run a correctly configured
> Panhard bar with a torque arm? The torque arm, if it has a single point of
> contact up front, shouldn't help with lateral location, right?
> Mike
|