Panhard drop bracket option? (8 Viewers)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

812EB345-E5CB-4FB1-B5F7-E7BE8C41E2EC.jpeg


Finally got this knocked out. Thanks to @Cruiserhiggs for getting me on the schedule.
 
1F5FFF8B-1707-4D07-BF76-D69B8B335ABA.jpeg
 
Depending on the push it can misalign the axle a bit, as much as the suspension allows. The panhard does not attach to the middle of the axle, therefore any pushing or pulling will create some misalignment

Yes. Just a byproduct of the transverse mounting locations. And the fact they are no longer in plane with axle front - rear articulation during stroke swing.
 
Yes. Just a byproduct of the transverse mounting locations. And the fact they are no longer in plane with axle front - rear articulation during stroke swing.

If it didnt have potential to really damage t-case seal / output shafts, u joints, or rear pinion gear and angle, I woulve already removed mine due to AHC being dynamic and having no real “set point” as a static lift can easily be dialed into.
 
Thanks you just summed up what I was trying to say. Unless the panhard bracket changes the direction the wheels point (I don’t think so) I don’t understand why shifting the axle and thus both wheels left or right would affect the thrust angle. All wheels are pointing forward, they’re just offset.

I think you would agree that the panhard, through its travel, can displace the axle side to side.

The next key thing to understand is that the trailing arms are not parallel, nor square to the rear axle on the horizontal plane. They triangulate inward at the frame.

A way to imagine this is a trapezoid. Imagine the parallel sides to be the axle squared up to the chassis (0 thrust angle) Now imagine the shape pivots on the corners. The parallel sides will no longer be parallel on account of the diagonal sides (some thrust angle).
 
I think you would agree that the panhard, through its travel, can displace the axle side to side.
Yes
The next key thing to understand is that the trailing arms are not parallel, nor square to the rear axle on the horizontal plane. They triangulate inward at the frame.

A way to imagine this is a trapezoid. Imagine the parallel sides to be the axle squared up to the chassis (0 thrust angle) Now imagine the shape pivots on the corners. The parallel sides will no longer be parallel on account of the diagonal sides (some thrust angle).
Ok I kinda follow this explanation. Seems like it's not specifically because the "sides" (arms) aren't parallel (since a trapezoid is mirrored), but really because they are rigid so the lack of them mirroring each other and the fact that their length doesn't change means an arm which is "less square/perpendicular" will seem to pull that axle side towards the front of the vehicle. I need to build that with an erector set to confirm I understand what I just said ;) but I saw thrust angle measurements change on the alignment printouts earlier in this thread so I'll just accept it as fact at this point.
 
Yes

Ok I kinda follow this explanation. Seems like it's not specifically because the "sides" (arms) aren't parallel (since a trapezoid is mirrored), but really because they are rigid so the lack of them mirroring each other and the fact that their length doesn't change means an arm which is "less square/perpendicular" will seem to pull that axle side towards the front of the vehicle. I need to build that with an erector set to confirm I understand what I just said ;) but I saw thrust angle measurements change on the alignment printouts earlier in this thread so I'll just accept it as fact at this point.

What's wild to imagine is what the rear suspension is doing as it cycles. With a large lift without panhard correction, we know the rear end will wag side to side on a big bump. That side to side also translates to thrust angle changing side to side. And all sorts of funny solid axle warp behavior.

Every time I hear someone do a big lift with a shiny new suspension setup and declare it handles great. Well... no it does not. The front is doing not so great things with bump steer too.

Which is why I'm a proponent of less lift, bigger tires.
 
Also basically the most subjective thing imaginable.

Yeah, no. Different facets for sure. But if fundamental geometry is bad, no amount of quality damping will make for a good handing car.
 
Yeah, no. Different facets for sure. But if fundamental geometry is bad, no amount of quality damping will make for a good handing car.
I’m just saying, there is a vast difference in what various people consider great handling, whether it’s actually great or not.
 
My rear passenger side still has the KDSS lean no matter how many times I try the valve reset truck that Sargent recommended. Super annoying, might have to go with a trim packer back there. My only dislike for the system, wish it didn’t do that.
 
My rear passenger side still has the KDSS lean no matter how many times I try the valve reset truck that Sargent recommended. Super annoying, might have to go with a trim packer back there. My only dislike for the system, wish it didn’t do that.
Trim packer is the answer

I don't think this is a KDSS lean. Unless you did a suspension install without cracking the valves, or unless the valves are internally frozen, the KDSS system neutralizes when you open the valves and the truck is on the ground. I've done a few spring swaps in the rear and I think it has to do with spring rate and length. The left and right sides of the truck in the rear are not identical weights, and the passenger's side spring is longer. You either need more weight on the high side or a trim packer on the low side.
 
Trim packer is the answer

I don't think this is a KDSS lean. Unless you did a suspension install without cracking the valves, or unless the valves are internally frozen, the KDSS system neutralizes when you open the valves and the truck is on the ground. I've done a few spring swaps in the rear and I think it has to do with spring rate and length. The left and right sides of the truck in the rear are not identical weights, and the passenger's side spring is longer. You either need more weight on the high side or a trim packer on the low side.

Yea, I know ARB/OME said there weren’t any specific sides to the rear springs because I called and asked prior to install. Looks like the trim packer from Dobinsons is needed. At least it’s a cheap and easy install.
 
Yea, I know ARB/OME said there weren’t any specific sides to the rear springs because I called and asked prior to install. Looks like the trim packer from Dobinsons is needed. At least it’s a cheap and easy install.
Really? Taller OME spring always goes on the passenger's side. If you have more than 1" of lean you might just swap the springs left-to-right in the rear. When I installed my Tough Dog rear springs they were swapped and I had 1.5" of extra height on the driver's side. After swapping them and putting the longer spring on the passenger's side I was within 0.5". When I installed upgraded springs last year I put the taller spring on the passenger's side by default. I still had 3/8" of lean... technically within spec but adding a 10mm trim packer got me within 1/8" level when unloaded.
 
I’m just saying, there is a vast difference in what various people consider great handling, whether it’s actually great or not.

I'll give you that there's a subjective preference to handling tune, but there's also a very objective side to it too. What we're talking about here is not subjective. RE panhard, no one prefers the rear wag from side to side. Many are not able to discern, while some asked why, and it's taken us years for the 200-series to finally get to a correction kit. Doesn't mean the wag wasn't happening all that time and weren't suffering the impacts of bad rear toe steer. Just that there was little understanding, and that is not subjective.

Probably best to blissfully be unaware. For those that have finally installed the panhard correction and feels what a suspension with good geometry feels like, there's no going back.

Pair good geometry with a great suspension and damping, now we're talking.
 
Really? Taller OME spring always goes on the passenger's side. If you have more than 1" of lean you might just swap the springs left-to-right in the rear. When I installed my Tough Dog rear springs they were swapped and I had 1.5" of extra height on the driver's side. After swapping them and putting the longer spring on the passenger's side I was within 0.5". When I installed upgraded springs last year I put the taller spring on the passenger's side by default. I still had 3/8" of lean... technically within spec but adding a 10mm trim packer got me within 1/8" level when unloaded.

I called and talked to them, said no difference and there wasn’t a marked or visible difference. It’s a 3/8-1/2” difference so I’m pretty certain it’s just in the inhernet design and a trim packer will solve it.
 
@Tex68w as @linuxgod said try swapping springs. Most aftermarket springs for the 200 have one longer than the other, annywhere between 10mm to around an inch. I believe this is standard for the OME springs too. Linuxgod created a spreadsheet with the specs for numerous rear springs for the 200. I recall seeing most having a length difference for the L and R.
Also make sure you are measuring on completely level ground. In the end to get my lean within a 1/8” I am running equal length springs (the longer of tough dog springs) plus an OME 10mm trim packer. With my rear bumper with swingouts I think the tire on the driver side is causing a bit of a lean. As expected An extra 80 ish pounds will cause a little squat to that side.
Also anything under 1/2” is considered within spec per Toyota.
 
While 1/2” is within spec I still want it level back there. No drawers, no swing outs, no fridge or LRA. This is completely stock in terms of weight and it’s noticeable even at 1/2” lean to the passenger side.

I talked on the phone with ARB/OME tech support prior to install and they said no discernible difference on the rear springs from one side to the other and I checked lengths and for markings as well.
 
While 1/2” is within spec I still want it level back there. No drawers, no swing outs, no fridge or LRA. This is completely stock in terms of weight and it’s noticeable even at 1/2” lean to the passenger side.

I talked on the phone with ARB/OME tech support prior to install and they said no discernible difference on the rear springs from one side to the other and I checked lengths and for markings as well.
Adding the 10mm OME trim packer/spacer will do the trick. Which side is lower for you? The driver side rear spring is super easy to access. The passenger side takes a little but more effort with disconnecting the kdss sway bar.

Here's that spring data info:

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom