Can you take out that picture? It screws up the page sizing.
The whole reason I didn't go into structural building design and work with utility/transmission poles. :lol1:Bingo :beer:
The whole reason I didn't go into structural building design and work with utility/transmission poles. :lol1:
Anyways, I spoke a little bit with Tad at Freedom Racing Tool and Die earlier through email. He basically said that for any cars putting down 500+ HP to the wheels, he personally recommends going with a steel PHB. For a daily driven street car, you can go either route, just a matter if you feel the lost weight is enough for little bit of added cost.
i would like to know how having more power would change which PHB to get.
I volunteer to be the official svtperformance.com aluminum panhard bar test dummy. If you don't see me post at least once per week, you can just assume my aluminum panhard bar broke and I crashed.
I just installed my aluminum bar a few weeks ago and made a short post about it. The bar I have has high-durometer rubber bushings vs the poly/rod-ends talked about in this thread. I'm 100% confident with it for my use, which includes highway driving, twisty roads on my way to work and the dragstrip every six months or so.
It will.
CCS86 said:Spherical bearing and heim joint are the same thing Tob.
CCS86 said:Yet again...
Well I ended up ordering heim (axle) and poly (chassis) bushing on my Aluminum PHB, and the fact that my car is a daily driven car, hardly ever pushed through corners hard, at all, I should be fine in regard to strength and durability, correct? I've read that the above setup of bushings I mentioned provide the least amount of increased NVH over stock.You missed my point. The bushing will destroy itself (poly or factory rubber). The torque applied at the pivot, in this case the bushing, will overcome (in short order) the excess friction within the joint. Better yet, cite me an example of an S197 chassis aluminum panhard bar failure due to a bound joint.
And three rights make a left. The only way I'd have given you props were you to also include 'rose joint' in your lesson plan.
There's always an out.
I think that in concert with any discussion such as this, should be the inclusion of bushing choice. I agree with your earlier comment "If I ran an aluminum bar, I would never use one with double poly. One or both ends would be a del-sphere joint or spherical bearing" (less the del-sphere mention, anyway). If choosing aluminum over steel has more to do with weight loss than near OE levels of durability then one is likely willing to sacrifice at least some NVH in the name of performance. To use an aluminum bar with polyurethane bushings would be counterproductive in my book. Hence heims (or sphericals or roses:-D). At that point I see no performance benefit in utilizing a poly bushing at one end. Thus, heims at each end.
Bind gone. Problem solved.
At that point I see no performance benefit in utilizing a poly bushing at one end. Thus, heims at each end.
I have been fabricating, machining, and welding for over 7 years, then went back to school and was at the top of my Mechanical Engineering class at UT Austin.
Derek, I've sent out the PHB so you should be getting it Wed. If you have any trouble with the heim joint, let me know. They do create higher NVH so if the extra noise becomes an annoyance just let me know.
I don't understand you Tob.
You attempt to pick my posts apart and debate them, yet you haven't actually disagreed with anything I've said.
CCS86 said:At best, you've just twisted my words into something I never implied, then argued that fictional point. Every time I reply, you just side-step.
CCS86 said:If one of the bushings starts to bind, it will put a bending moment through the bar. This could weaken it quite a bit. Fatigue issues could come into play too.
I went steel.
Tob said:If a bushing were to bind? The lever arm acting through an 'S197 chassis length' panhard bar wouldn't be stopped by a polyurethane or rubber bushing. It would instantaneously tear or shred it, were it unable to rotate about the sleeve.
Tob said:Regarding fatigue 'issues', did you model them as well?
CCS86 said:It's not about having "an out". This is an open discussion about the pros and cons of an aluminum panhard bar. I mentioned some entirely valid points (which you have yet to actually refute), but in no way said aluminum is just a bad idea, just that you must take extra precautions in design.
Is it possible to design an aluminum panhard that has a high safety factor (even with a binding bushing), and will outlive the vehicle? Absolutely. But...
Ry said:what Tob is saying as that a rubber/poly bushing is made of material that is significantly weaker than aluminum. the effect of a seized bushing on the strength/durability of an aluminum panhard bar would be negligible at best.
CCS86 said:Now push only half that hard, but use the other hand to put a very small force downwards in the middle. It fails.
CCS86 said:I don't know what your background is, but you seem to dodge the technical points. I have been fabricating, machining, and welding for over 7 years, then went back to school and was at the top of my Mechanical Engineering class at UT Austin.
Tob said:...cite me an example of an S197 chassis aluminum panhard bar failure due to a bound joint.