|
8 members (gmcn, B&C Morgan, Julian BB, cerealsurfer, WR142LLJPN, JohnHarris, +8Rich, Strathaven),
328
guests, and
70
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Wales
by Joske Vermeule, September 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums39
Topics49,864
Posts837,581
Members9,596
| |
Most Online1,063
Jun 14th, 2026
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 52
Just Getting Started
|
Just Getting Started
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 52 |
Hi Dave
With your fitting of the attachment point of the panhard rod to the spring base, will that bolt that attaches the rod not hammer out on the chassis cross brace on rebound. Just looking at your first picture of the rod laid out is it not designed for the cross brace to be mounted approximately 25mm further back so that the bolt head will clear the cross brace. It means that the panhard rod will then be at a slight angle to the Chassis brace.
I admit I am not privy to the installation instructions so I may be totally out of order. Hopefully this makes sense. Comments from PGB.
Doug
From deep deep downunder.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,364 Likes: 353
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
OP
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,364 Likes: 353 |
Hi Doug. The crossmember is meant to fit hard up against the rear floor timber. It could be mounted further forward on cars with this fuel tank but not on later cars with much less space. The six leaf springs make the bottom plate much lower than the four leaf springs. Static test shows minimal clearance so I think it will be fine. If it knocks, I'll insert some spacers between the chassis and crossmember and file a bit away from the crossmember at the point of contact. 
DaveW
'05 Red Roadster S1
'16 Yellow (Not the only) Narrow AR GDI Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,258 Likes: 318
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,258 Likes: 318 |
Panhard rod is a must on a trad I would agree. After the SSL front conversion, this is the best mod one can make to improve handling.
Tim H.
1986 4/4 VVTi Sport, 2002 LR Defender, 2022 Mini Cooper SE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,814 Likes: 749
Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,814 Likes: 749 |
It made a huge difference to my +4. Can't say on the Roadster as it had one fitted & I then added anti tramp bars to keep it all in line.
JohnV6
2022 CX Plus Four
2025 Renault Scenic Alpine etech "Yvette"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,442 Likes: 133
Black Rat Charter Member
|
|
Black Rat Charter Member
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,442 Likes: 133 |
You do know that if you bought a +4 Supersports all your wished for modifications and performance updates would have been fitted at the factory !!!
Says the man who hasn't stopped modifying since he bought it ! 
Keith
2013 narrow bodied + 4 Ruby.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 6,958 Likes: 117
Talk Morgan Sage
|
|
Talk Morgan Sage
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 6,958 Likes: 117 |
Says the man who hasn't stopped modifying since he bought it ! Does he mod the rocker?
Best Regards
Lang may yer lum reek
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,274 Likes: 41
Talk Morgan Expert
|
|
Talk Morgan Expert
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,274 Likes: 41 |
I’ve noticed SIFAB are now manufacturing Panhard Rod kits (in Miscellany) It’s on my wish list to have one installed this year. 
Craig Jezz
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 411 Likes: 9
Learner Plates Off!
|
|
Learner Plates Off!
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 411 Likes: 9 |
Personally I'm not keen on the idea of clamping the leaf springs with the bracket arrangement that the SIFAB uses, I do like the SSL method with the plate under the mounting though.
Paul
2009 4/4 Sport in Red
2022 Harley Davidson FXLRS Low Rider S
1977 Triumph Stag
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,678 Likes: 492
Just barreling along Needs to Get Out More!
|
|
Just barreling along Needs to Get Out More!
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,678 Likes: 492 |
Dave, top job as ever !
I had a Mulfab one on the S1 and it definitely made a difference
Jon M
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,799 Likes: 4
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
|
|
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,799 Likes: 4 |
Personally I'm not keen on the idea of clamping the leaf springs with the bracket arrangement that the SIFAB uses, I do like the SSL method with the plate under the mounting though. I've been thinking about which is the better clamping method as I'm going to be fitting one soon. The Sifab (and Mulfab) method of clamping directly onto the spring will in theory alter the movement of the spring but as it's right against the axle mounting I doubt it will have any noticeable effect. It's also well tried and tested over many years and fitments. My slight worry with the SSL method (and remember I'm a great fan of the SSL front suspension system) is that it might induce some twisting moment into the axle clamping U bolts and I don't know what long term effect that will have on the U bolt tightness. I think I'll go with the Sifab spring clamping system and see how the SSL method develops.
Last edited by IvorMog; 02/01/19 06:19 PM.
Bob
2009 Black Roadster
1999 4/4 2 litre Zetec
|
|
|
|
|
