Z28_DAD

iTrader: (18)

would it be safe to remove this for a few weeks till i can get the bmr one? im going to run duals over the axle and it doesnt look like the pipes will clear

Rebelord

iTrader: (2)

Edit: I thought he was trying to remove the mount thing.

BackinBlack02SS

iTrader: (7)

Yes, the panhard "brace" is not needed at all.

Dustin

iTrader: (13)

Yah the upper peice is not needed as far as I have ever known. I dont run it and I have no problems.

Genesis_26317

iTrader: (2)

So what the hell is it used for then???

Just extra side to side sway elimination???

Z28_DAD

iTrader: (18)

thats what i thought.
i thought i read about someone taking it off a third gen when i still had mine.
thanks for the replys and any more input would be appreciated, especially if you have had problems, i would like to know if there are any downsides to this since my kids are in the car quite often

thanks
jay

Fulton 1

iTrader: (9)

I disagree that its okay to remove it and have stated so in the past. The brace triangulates the support for the PHR and reduces the moment seen at the attachment of the primary PHR clevis bracket to the body. There is really no lateral support for the F-body rear suspension beyond the PHR so if you weaken this connection you are jeopardizing your safety. If you want to pull it off to save weight at the dragstrip (not sure why this would even be a concern, but hypothetically speaking...) then you'll probably be fine. I certainly wouldn't daily drive without it, though.

Of course there are many folks braver than I so take my input with a grain of salt...

98_1LE

iTrader: (17)

If you are not side loading the car, as it taking corners fast with grippy tires, I don't think removing it is much of an issue.

mrr23

iTrader: (3)

i really can't even see how it supports the brace it bolts to in keep in from moving around. hell, just put a spacer in it's place where the bolt goes through, or weld the brace up if you want to stiffen the mounting area for the panhard rod.

trackbird

iTrader: (4)

Well, many years ago, I actually bent one of those (on the car) on my 3rd gen. So, it can see loads from somewhere because I had to replace the one I bent. Without it, I might have had a failure of the PHB bracket that holds the PHB on the chassis side. I'm not a fan of removing those and would prefer to see you keep it on there.

Jeremiah

iTrader: (5)

The brace devides the side loading between both frame rails, if you remove it all together you only have the one rail taking all the abuse. If you ever hit a curb ect. your going to tweak twist that rail. With the age of our cars a frame rail replacement is enough to easily total it. I can also see the rail eventually cracking out around the mount due to the constant torsional loading back and fourth due to the mounting point being approx. 6-7 inches off the rail. The unitized rails arent very strong and dont hold up to tosional twist very well.

98Z28CobraKiller

iTrader: (17)

Would I remove? No.
Why would someone remove it? In order to take true duals over the axles and out the back.

Fulton 1

iTrader: (9)

Not sure exactly what the hell you're talking about here, but essentially the comparison is something like this:



Its pretty clear that without the brace you have nothing but the rigidity of the PHR attach bracket to resist the moment induced by the side load. With the brace you replace most all of that twisting load with either a compression load (as shown) or tension load in the brace depending on the direction of the applied load.

subtlez28

iTrader: (15)

Please, for your own safety, and especially your children's leave it in! The triangulation explanation above is right on! If it was not necessary GM would have saved the, say, $20 a car by never putting it on! If you had excessive axle movement in a hard corner, like an on/off ramp at speed, the tire would hit the inner fender---->bad times!