Panhard bar relocation discussion

[Grant 302]

You have a way of wearing me out....I can't believe the crazy things you think and how you completely deny, disregard or discredit any evidence that disagrees with you. This is not the first time around as you know. You've done this same thing to me multiple times and also other readers....its offensive. Its like arguing with a drunk....no new information gets into your head.

Oh, the irony here.

 

[Fabman]

So you’re never really done when you say you are. Can’t say I expected that to change.

But I ran some calcs and examples last night. Part, I’m pretty sure you’ll continue to disagree with and part that prove you right.

I will stand by my statement witch is true and correct, widely understood and backed up by plenty of sources.
I also have 20 years of designing, building and racing stock cars professionally and have actually moved that panhard bar up and down and measured what it did, so I know with 100% accuracy what happens.

 

[Grant 302]

I will stand by my statement witch is true and correct, widely understood and backed up by plenty of sources.
I also have 20 years of designing, building and racing stock cars professionally and have actually moved that panhard bar up and down and measured what it did, so I know with 100% accuracy what happens.

Yes, yes. I’ve heard all that before.

And yes you are correct that I have unconventional, ‘crazy’ ideas. Theories I am willing to test. And I suppose that would bother you as somebody who already knows it all. Like in the squat thread. It worked for Mad Hatter like I thought it might.

But in context, for his product, Kenny is mostly right. The whole claim works when considering his complete system. Like the whole OEM rear suspension vs. his whole rear suspension.

The the interesting part is that with only the PHB relocation, it does appear that it reduces the need for rear bar. In the calcs I ran, on the order of 1 or 2 bar or step adjustments down in rate.

Wouldn’t have figured that out if I hadn’t questioned conventional thinking. All spurred by the users of his products in this relocated thread.

 

[Grant 302]

From Filip at Cortex:

Drop Ball Joint, X5 2005-2010 Mustang - CorteX Racing

Drop Ball Joint, X5 2005-2010 Mustang

cortexracing.com

Drop Ball Joint, X5 2005-2010 Mustang
$199.00
Drop Ball Joint, 05-10 Mustangs, Steeda X5. These ball joint correct the lower control arm geometry and raise the roll center on lowered vehicle. This reducing the body roll which improves handling.
*Shipping times may vary based on stock status and/or level of customization, if any. Contact us and we are glad to help with more specifics on your product.

• 1x Drop Ball Joint, X5 2005-2010 Mustang
  $199.00
• Subtotal $199.00

Drop Ball Joint, X5 2005-2010 Mustang quantity
Add to cart
SKU: DBJ-X5 Categories: 05-10 S197 Mustang, Suspension Tag: 2005-2010 Mustang

• Description
• Additional information
• Reviews (0)

There’s more irony in you posting this example...I remember you saying you disliked or hated tall ball joints and said they didn’t work for you.

EDIT:
THERE YOU GO:

People have been lowering cars for decades and extended ball joints are relatively new.
I'm just not sure how necessary it really is on a modestly lowered car.
There's a lot of monkey see monkey do in racing. Always has been, always will be.
Raising the front roll center had a definite and immediate affect on my car, and I can't say that I like it, but I am working with it. Back in the day we WANTED low roll centers because it promotes traction. The downside is that it induces body roll, which we would remedy with increased roll couple. Now I'm old school and I'm willing to learn and try new things....but for me the jury is still out on the extended ball joints. If I had it to do all over again, at this point I think that I would leave them out.

 

[Champale]

I think this thread is suffering from the Corona Virus.

 

[Fabman]

There’s more irony in you posting this example...I remember you saying you disliked or hated tall ball joints and said they didn’t work for you.

EDIT:
THERE YOU GO:

Incorrect, what I said was that it made the car feel very stiff...which is the point.
Raising the roll center limits body roll and makes the car stiffer in roll.
So now you are misquoting me...add that to the list. So lets get this straight and I expect a direct answer, none of your deflecting BS. Cortex clearly states that raising the roll center limits body roll. Are you saying that Filip is wrong?

 

[Grant 302]

So now you are misquoting me...add that to the list.

???

I am quoting you directly. And anyone can read it there or go to the thread and see for themselves!

 

[Grant 302]

So lets get this straight and I expect a direct answer, none of your deflecting BS. Cortex clearly states that raising the roll center limits body roll. Are you saying that Filip is wrong?

Nope. Anyone can go to this thread, by clicking the little blue arrow and see my post from back in 2016. It directly follows your post where you say they don’t work for you.

I would pass on these for the issue of reliability of the X-11 ball joints. Well documented among several members here.

As for the benefits of the tall joint geometry, I believe in its benefits. Camber gain properties as well as roll center IMO are better off with the joints when lowered.

Even with coilovers on my GT, I run it at stock Boss geometry up front and lower the car with shorter tires.

That said, I don't have tall ball joints on my car(s). But I would, if I really wanted to lower the front another 1/2". If it were an option and cost weren't an issue, I would choose a lowered spindle first. That's essentially what you get with a tall ball joint and 1/2" of lowering.

 

[Fabman]

???

I am quoting you directly. And anyone can read it there or go to the thread and see for themselves!

What the actual hell?

My statemets:
People have been lowering cars for decades and extended ball joints are relatively new.
I'm just not sure how necessary it really is on a modestly lowered car.
There's a lot of monkey see monkey do in racing. Always has been, always will be.
Raising the front roll center had a definite and immediate affect on my car, and I can't say that I like it, but I am working with it. Back in the day we WANTED low roll centers because it promotes traction. The downside is that it induces body roll, which we would remedy with increased roll couple. Now I'm old school and I'm willing to learn and try new things....but for me the jury is still out on the extended ball joints. If I had it to do all over again, at this point I think that I would leave them out.

***In conclusion, I ended up balancing it out by raising the rear roll center to match and the car became much more balanced.

 

[Fabman]

I'm still waiting for your reply to "Is Filip wrong"...?
Well?

 

[Grant 302]

I'm still waiting for your reply to "Is Filip wrong"...?
Well?

See my unedited post #48.

Reading comprehension issues, I think.

 

[TMSBOSS]

Guys

Believe me or not, this has become personal. There are personal channels you can use. Please consider doing so.

 

[Ludachris]

Guys

Believe me or not, this has become personal. There are personal channels you can use. Please consider doing so.

Agreed. For the sake of civil discourse and the fulfillment of all the other members here, you two need to either A. add one another to your Ignore list or B. take it to PMs (though that wouldn't likely lead to anything positive). I would ask that you two steer clear of each other in all threads. This thread has gone way off course at this point. I'm locking it. If anyone feels we need it reopen to add more info for panhard bars, PM me.