Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Maintenance & Servicing Panhard Rod 2006 4/4

I was thinking of fitting a panhard rod to my 2006 70 anniversary 4/4 but have read that there can be problems fitting some rods to some Morgans.

If anyone has fitted one to the same model l would welcome their input, l would also welcome any general advice on the subject.

Chris

There's no issues that I know of in fitting panhard rods to any 2 seater Morgan

However there are 2 discreet chassis widths, 2 different axle brands, 4/5/6 and 7 leaf spring variations, with different locating pin locations dependent on year, nearly 40 variations of fuel tank of differing depths, fixing and fuel pipe locations, so you need to buy the right kit to suit...

Chris

I fitted a Panhard Rod to my 2005 Roadster. You can see that here..................

http://www.talkmorgan.com/ubbthread...op-note-fitting-a-panhard-rod#Post550996

This rod was from Suspension Supplies Ltd.........SSL.

In 2005 the fuel tank sits on the floorboards and there is plenty of space between the rear of the diff cover and front of the tank. It's in the region of four fingers, so over three inches.

Look on your car. You can do this from above if you lift the tool tray out. And if you can get four fingers in that gap, a Panhard rod will fit. The SSL one attaches to the U bolts, so this is an extra task over and above the ones which fit by a saddle clamp to the spring.
Drilling the chassis for the cross frame is simple if you use a good quality drill bit.

At some stage after 2005, the fuel tank is placed on a steel framed cradle which holds the floorboards. This version places the tank much closer to the diff cover and on my 2016 Plus 4, the gap is one finger. I test fitted the Panhard Rod to this car using G clamps, but I did not feel confident that there would be adequate clearance. In addition, the fuel tank has changed shape several times over the years, so that clearance will vary.

So if you have four fingers clearance, then you can decide which type of fittings you prefer and crack on with it.

Good Luck!

Without hijacking the thread, I take the liberty of sharing my impressions after my Bergen-Oslo-Bergen trip, aprox. 1000 km with a newly installed SSL Panhard rod. Mostly cruising, good roads, only ocasionally spirited driving. First thing I noted, the car seemed more planted on the tarmac. This was a vague but pleasant feeling, resembled what I experienced when I fitted brake reaction reaction stays, but more pronounced. I felt this even at low speeds including city driving, which surprised me. The real difference was cornering at medium or higher speeds. Turning in was sharper, with a more accurate response to my steering movements. I could maintain the posisjon of the steering wheel much more calm though the corner, with less (or no) need for small corrections all along. I also noted less tendency to understeer (which I cannot explain, regarding what I have understood of the geometry!), almost a slight oversteer - but not a concern, on the contrary. I dislike the Morgan understeer. Consecutive left-right-left-right corners, "slaloming" - were managed with more presision, without the SUV-like feeling of the body shifting laterally.
Would I recommend a PR to just a cruiser like myself? Yes, absolutely. Not something that is needed, but it does make the driving more relaxed. A Morgan is not a relaxing car to drive, you have to be attent and "at it" all the time. Part of the fun, but it gets tiresome after a while. With the steering/suspension mods I have done (brake reaction stays, steering damper and now above all the PR), the car is easier do drive, less tiring, more predictable and relaxing. For a racer a PR is obviously a must, for a cruiser like myself also with a notable effect behind the wheel, very pleasant and more than I expected. With Norwegian garage expences it would have been quite costly though, if I did not manage to fit it myself.
As for fitting, I found it straightforward but quite fiddly and strenous. The space around the diff was no problem, but my car being a six-leaf version, space between the underside of the spring and the chassis was extremely limited. DaveW has commented upon this in his post indicated above. I have fed my fittting experiences back to SSL, if anybody is interested I can copy/paste it in here as a separate post.

Perfect explanation from Robbie.

The Panhard Rod makes the rear end tauter in the same way the Brake Reaction Bars do at the front. I didn't think I needed either but wish I'd fitted both sooner.

In real terms, although I thought the car was good to drive before, I now have more confidence in driving the car even at modest speeds. The car doesn't shudder as much on bumpy roads due to the BRB's, is more stable in a straight line, and has more steering feel especially in corners due to the Panhard Rod, the result of which is that I drive the car faster and enjoy driving it more.

A very worthwhile modification and not too expensive to have both BRB's and Panhard Rod fitted. The only downside is that one thing leads to another I now feel I need a performance chip as I'm driving the car faster and feel the chassis can now handle more power...... which equals more expense!

This is a very interesting thread, and thank you Robbie for your very impressive and tangible description of the effects of PR. Your report may lead to me having a PR installed on my 2014 4/4.
So far I was hesitant and ambivalent due to different experiences with PR. On the 2010 Roadster the retrofitted PR was very uncomfortable. Probably it was the wrong geometry when it was installed by the workshop? or simply the wrong PR? Either way, every bump was translated into a very disturbing strong lateral movement. After a week I had the PR removed again.
It was completely different with the Plus4 SuperSport. The PR was newly installed ex works. The car drove very well and controlled, without annoying lateral movement.
I think Simon is right there. It must be exactly the right PR. If possible, one that other drivers in the same 4/4 type with BTR axle, since about 2011, have already had positive experiences with.

One more question on this. Despite the 4-seater 4 leaf springs, the spring will coil in first gear if the throttle is too high. Does this damage the PR and do I need additional anti tramp bears?

Hi Heinz

On my 4/4 I first went down the route of AVO adjustable shocks as the font end was crashy and shuddered on bumpy roads. These improved the ride but in hindsight I would have been better fitting BRB's first. I also changed my 7 year old tyres to T Trac2's.

It was a ride in Craig Jezz's 4/4 that convinced me to get BRB's and a Panhard Rod. The BRB's improved the shuddering front end on bumpy roads. I might have been happy with just the BRB's however I was glad I later fitted the Panhard Rod though my initial reaction was that the rear ride was firmer (though I don't see why it should be). Not uncomfortable though and the car is more stable and probably easier to driver. Mine is a SiFab Panhard Rod by the way which as you are probably aware are similar to the Mulfab PR.

I'm definitely driving faster on roads I know would have had the car shuddering and I'm not so worried by the poor road surfaces in the UK.

Rob, which model year is your 4/4? Around 2011 they changed from Salisbury to BTR rear axles. Good to know it works so good with your 4/4. So I will go this path. In my view the rear ride is firmer with a PR because it is the PR which controls the rear axle against lateral movement. So without the PR the chassis moves sidewards before you feel the connection to the road and therefore the forces which build up when cornering, if this makes sense. It is always a short period of time where one feels uncomfortable before the car „bites“ when you slide above the rear axle with the chassis.

Just a thought regarding Robbies‘ experiences with under and over steel behavior. When the chassis has lateral play at the rear without using the PR could it be possible that the relation of the angle and/or the track between rear axle and front axle varies and so the willingness to turn in is weaker when the rear axle is wandering to the inside of the body, e.g. to the right in a right curve or in other words the rear of the car tends to go left in this curve, and with it the corresponding angle of the front axle.

Heinz, My car is a late 2012, 2013 model with the Mazda box and alloy inner wings so should be the same as your 2014 model.

Agree without a PR the cars body moving laterally on bends car will cause a 'lurch'. The PR stops this lateral 'lurch' and therefore removes the vagueness in the steering which makes the drivers steering input imprecise ie over/understeering

I've been out in the car today and the steering is much sharper. I'm driving faster and one handed more. Easier to drive as Robbie says whilst before I was hanging on with both hands on bumpy roads!

Hi Rob, thanks for confirmation. So I will be happy to make it a nice winter project to fit the PR. All the other measures I did 5 years ago, the adjustable AVOs front and rear, the 4leafs 4seater rear springs, the Mulfab steering bearings and the BRB. So I am looking forward to add the PR.
Another winter project - for another thread!, no drift intended here - is that I am thinking about a Mazda NC 6 speed gearbox, which can „emulate“ the 4.1 rear ratio plus the benefit of a sixth gear which offers the same cruising revs as the fifth gear of the 5 speed box does in combination with the 3.7 axle. I just have to check if I can change it easily.