Panhard Bar
12-17-2007, 06:40 PM
#41
Sam, I’m not really in any debate over a better rod, the main discussion regarding the rod is the end connection to the chassis. You still never confirmed whether the bushings are as stated on the website as an aluminum bushing with a zinc sleeve or is information listed on the website and pictures (not to mention the customers for sale picture I noted)incorrect?
Can any of your customers take the end connections on those rod end sleeves and slip a standard bolt through? If so, the design is in fact inferior as to the fact the incorrect bolts are being used for the application. Tell your customer to use a standard bolt instead…now you have something. But then you wouldn’t be able to tell them that they can ‘reuse the stock bolts’…and you’d have to tell them that they have to drill the holes slightly larger on their frame. Additional end-play with increased noise will be the result with incorrectly suggested bolts. I've seen it before...these are made from many people…heck they are everywhere now. There are write-ups on making them. People making these up for sale and suggesting 'use the stock bolts' for a direct connection. Then you hear people complaining about they make quite a bit of noise etc. These things should not create noise, only transmit it since there's little dampening now. You need to use the bolt that the hole requires...telling a customer they can use a 12mm bolt on a hole that requires a 1/2" hole is a poor choice and the customer is asking for additional noise generated.
The other debate was the fact of your contrast and comparison to other manufactures components when you keep referencing your background as the basis of your proof. As I mentioned, you may drive well, but to make claims that one manufactures piece is structurally and designed better then another is poor…based on the fact you drive your car hard (as if there are no others on the boards who do probably the same.) You do not have to be an auto X winner to beat a car up.
The only leg you’d have to stand on regarding your basis of background would be actually say use a spohn or other k-member and see if you break it. Let’s also compare apples to apples, don’t take a manufactures drag race version and put it next to something that is meant for non-drag racing. Because that particular setup is going to blow away your setup for drag racing. If there is 10-15 lbs lighter then what you have to offer and work well for the application…then what you’re using is the worse of the two designs. This would be the same for our wheels…I would never put our drag wheels up against our road race wheels…two totally different application setups.
Let’s say you road test two k-members (this is the only basis of testing you use) and it didn’t break. From deduction (let’s take any engineering mentioning out of this one), one may conclude both are strong designs BUT the lighter one will be a better choice overall if they both meet your durability test. The lighter one would be spohns I believe. I believe they guarantee against breakage…I’m not positive, I don’t sell their products. This still is not an absolute test as driving conditions change; you may subconsciously try to stress the competitors unit more as you drive as you are biased. Road may be different, quite a few variables that you contend with.
My point is heavier isn’t always better. Building something like tanks because you really aren’t sure of the stress levels nor do you know how to specify what materials are actually needed isn’t necessarily the best choice. Now the excuse of ‘well it’s overbuilt so you’ll never have to worry either’…how much does that hold its water. If you don’t break either…then pick something that is lightest. I would say there are a few advantages on what you’re offering when comparing to other products (the main suspension companies). In many cases, it appears that they are less expensive and for the most part appear to be a copy of others. Heck, sometimes when I see parts…I’m not sure whose part it was…if a label wasn’t on it. Where BMR has been around for many years trying different combinations…tuning in to what they found to be a good result…there’s the ability to now reverse engineer it and make it the same. What BMR made 8 years ago is probably nothing the same of what they make now…but commenting on someone’s older design that has failed or has been stress cycled many times is the way it appears you’ve contended with “our design is better” I beat the cars up so I should know.
Sam, I apologize if I am offending you. It sometimes is difficult to read material and writers intent. I’m sure you are an honest person not wanting to create fraudulent reports. I raised a few issues that you keep pushing your driving skills as the basis for your discussion and comparison to other pieces. Your wins at the track probably has more to do with your driving skills, not these components. Isn’t it true that you can’t use many of these aftermarket pieces anyways? I believe sometimes we all can get carried away with what we do. Sometimes the reader takes it a bit more personal then it was designated.
Can any of your customers take the end connections on those rod end sleeves and slip a standard bolt through? If so, the design is in fact inferior as to the fact the incorrect bolts are being used for the application. Tell your customer to use a standard bolt instead…now you have something. But then you wouldn’t be able to tell them that they can ‘reuse the stock bolts’…and you’d have to tell them that they have to drill the holes slightly larger on their frame. Additional end-play with increased noise will be the result with incorrectly suggested bolts. I've seen it before...these are made from many people…heck they are everywhere now. There are write-ups on making them. People making these up for sale and suggesting 'use the stock bolts' for a direct connection. Then you hear people complaining about they make quite a bit of noise etc. These things should not create noise, only transmit it since there's little dampening now. You need to use the bolt that the hole requires...telling a customer they can use a 12mm bolt on a hole that requires a 1/2" hole is a poor choice and the customer is asking for additional noise generated.
The other debate was the fact of your contrast and comparison to other manufactures components when you keep referencing your background as the basis of your proof. As I mentioned, you may drive well, but to make claims that one manufactures piece is structurally and designed better then another is poor…based on the fact you drive your car hard (as if there are no others on the boards who do probably the same.) You do not have to be an auto X winner to beat a car up.
The only leg you’d have to stand on regarding your basis of background would be actually say use a spohn or other k-member and see if you break it. Let’s also compare apples to apples, don’t take a manufactures drag race version and put it next to something that is meant for non-drag racing. Because that particular setup is going to blow away your setup for drag racing. If there is 10-15 lbs lighter then what you have to offer and work well for the application…then what you’re using is the worse of the two designs. This would be the same for our wheels…I would never put our drag wheels up against our road race wheels…two totally different application setups.
Let’s say you road test two k-members (this is the only basis of testing you use) and it didn’t break. From deduction (let’s take any engineering mentioning out of this one), one may conclude both are strong designs BUT the lighter one will be a better choice overall if they both meet your durability test. The lighter one would be spohns I believe. I believe they guarantee against breakage…I’m not positive, I don’t sell their products. This still is not an absolute test as driving conditions change; you may subconsciously try to stress the competitors unit more as you drive as you are biased. Road may be different, quite a few variables that you contend with.
My point is heavier isn’t always better. Building something like tanks because you really aren’t sure of the stress levels nor do you know how to specify what materials are actually needed isn’t necessarily the best choice. Now the excuse of ‘well it’s overbuilt so you’ll never have to worry either’…how much does that hold its water. If you don’t break either…then pick something that is lightest. I would say there are a few advantages on what you’re offering when comparing to other products (the main suspension companies). In many cases, it appears that they are less expensive and for the most part appear to be a copy of others. Heck, sometimes when I see parts…I’m not sure whose part it was…if a label wasn’t on it. Where BMR has been around for many years trying different combinations…tuning in to what they found to be a good result…there’s the ability to now reverse engineer it and make it the same. What BMR made 8 years ago is probably nothing the same of what they make now…but commenting on someone’s older design that has failed or has been stress cycled many times is the way it appears you’ve contended with “our design is better” I beat the cars up so I should know.
Sam, I apologize if I am offending you. It sometimes is difficult to read material and writers intent. I’m sure you are an honest person not wanting to create fraudulent reports. I raised a few issues that you keep pushing your driving skills as the basis for your discussion and comparison to other pieces. Your wins at the track probably has more to do with your driving skills, not these components. Isn’t it true that you can’t use many of these aftermarket pieces anyways? I believe sometimes we all can get carried away with what we do. Sometimes the reader takes it a bit more personal then it was designated.
12-17-2007, 08:26 PM
#42
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Palm Harbor, Fl
Posts: 880
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no UMI parts, so I'm not trying to defend them (though they do have a very good recommendation, and I would definately consider them), but I think you should talk to them or have a look at this:
To me it looks like a 1 piece aluminum bushing. As I said, it would be better if there were no spacers, but I don't see this as a significant issue.
In the process of designing parts, certainly the design comes before testing, and should involve at least a basic FEA - no question. I'd be careful about comparing 2 products if you aren't familiar with both, though (this goes to both of you).
Personally, I'd respect each of your opinions, but I think emotion has gotten the better of you here.
To me it looks like a 1 piece aluminum bushing. As I said, it would be better if there were no spacers, but I don't see this as a significant issue.
In the process of designing parts, certainly the design comes before testing, and should involve at least a basic FEA - no question. I'd be careful about comparing 2 products if you aren't familiar with both, though (this goes to both of you).
Personally, I'd respect each of your opinions, but I think emotion has gotten the better of you here.
Last edited by 2002BlackSS; 12-17-2007 at 08:32 PM.
12-17-2007, 09:31 PM
#43
Our double adjustable panhard bar is available in mild steel or Chrome Moly steel. Both mild steel and Chrome Moly feature TIG welded 4130 Chrome Moly tube adaptors, QA1 XM Series rod ends are are available powder coated in Red or Black at no extra cost. The step sleeves supplied are CNC machined from solid aluminum and feature a 14mm hole to except the factory bolt. We recommend to use the factory GM bolt since it is a step bolt with a larger body then the thread.
If I can help anymore with our item please ask and I am glad too.
Thank you,
Ryan
If I can help anymore with our item please ask and I am glad too.
Thank you,
Ryan
12-17-2007, 10:48 PM
#45
Just adding a data point, but there are at least three compaines (counting UMI).
