Rear rod

Excuse my stupidity but what is the rod that sits behind the rear shockers, is it the rear panhard rod or an anti roll bar ???

Yes, that's panhard.

Paul4x4 wrote: Yes, that's panhard.

Cheers mate, just needed to know what it was called as I bent mine laning yesterday, thought it was solid metal but it's only tubing . Can get a 2nd hand one from Cam Suzuki for £20 .

Weld a length of 1" angle along the panhard rods that will make it stronger.

Gromit wrote:

Paul4x4 wrote: Yes, that's panhard.

Cheers mate, just needed to know what it was called as I bent mine laning yesterday, thought it was solid metal but it's only tubing . Can get a 2nd hand one from Cam Suzuki for £20 .

Tubing is stil stronger than solid.

TomDK wrote: Tubing is stil stronger than solid.

Only if they have the same mass, then the solid bar would have a much smaller diameter.

Are you sure about that ?

I know that rollcages, bicycle frames and with other things. The weight of these things are reduced by increasing the outer tube diameter and decreasing the wall thickness, and by that making the tube much lighter but stronger.

So i don't think mass equals strenght.

A tube is usually stiffer than than a rod of the same material and outer diameter. Where a solid rod tends to bend more easily.

Try this: get a 1/2"diameter mild steel tube, say 0.6 mm wall thickness. bend it round your knee.
Now try with a 1/2" bar

There are lots of nasty formulas that I don't have a clue about, but strength:weight ratio is better for tubes. If you make a tube with half the mass of a solid bar of the same diameter (by boring the middle out) then the tube is more than half as strong as the bar. Within reason, the greater the diameter, the thinner the wall can be for the same strength, until you reach the point that you can squash the tube walls inwards, then it will bend easily.

If you made a roll cage from solid bar of the same diameter it would be loads stronger, but impossibly heavy. If you made one of the same weight from solid bars, the bars would have to be very thin, and would bend easier than the tubes you have now.

Strongest panhard rod on the market IMO.

I won't get into the argument about what's stronger with tube vs pipe vs solid bar as that is a massive topic

facade wrote: Try this: get a 1/2"diameter mild steel tube, say 0.6 mm wall thickness. bend it round your knee.
Now try with a 1/2" bar

There are lots of nasty formulas that I don't have a clue about, but strength:weight ratio is better for tubes. If you make a tube with half the mass of a solid bar of the same diameter (by boring the middle out) then the tube is more than half as strong as the bar. Within reason, the greater the diameter, the thinner the wall can be for the same strength, until you reach the point that you can squash the tube walls inwards, then it will bend easily.

If you made a roll cage from solid bar of the same diameter it would be loads stronger, but impossibly heavy. If you made one of the same weight from solid bars, the bars would have to be very thin, and would bend easier than the tubes you have now.

I get your point

I have tried google with this question, and loads of info turns up. One of the things mentioned is that tube has two surfaces, the outside and the inside, where solid rod only has one surface.

So, I'm not convinced that any of the two are stronger than the other. but I'll let you get the benefit of the doubt on this one

Buy maybe some solid (ha ha) facts will turn up eventually

Monkey wrote:

Strongest panhard rod on the market IMO.

I won't get into the argument about what's stronger with tube vs pipe vs solid bar as that is a massive topic

Which ones are they Monkey?
Anything would be better than the standard ones which appear to be made out of chocolate!!!
John.