14 bolt clearance issues with Massive control arms

[Trail X]

From what I recall, I believe you have to make the rear tire hug the front portion of the fender in order to clear the top-back portion. That's where people often rub with the larger tires, is the upper rear when their tire gets squished into the body.

I'll still make the recommendation, remove your panhard and springs, and flex the axle around, stuff it up into the body. I think you'll find your 1.75" stretch will lead to bad things when the tire gets stuffed. But hey, I also haven't done this myself. Just trying to make a helpful recommendation.

[mikekey]

That's where people often rub with the larger tires, is the upper rear when their tire gets squished into the body.

At TECORE and on our trip in KY, this is where we stuffed the tire, into the upper rear. I haven't had it rub the front yet. However, we don't wheel as hard as others.

[dvanbramer88]

Maybe the problem is an Envoy.... :

I expect your just trying to be a smart ass, but I don't find it amusing. I have said all along that my wheel wells are different than the Trailblazers. OF course by your logic here we should all be driving Jeeps, right?

Nope, I hate Jeeps.

And yea, I'm just breaking your balls.

[Regulator1175]

I will pull the track bar off and flex it to see where the contact is. I haven't been to concerned about the rear clearances. It hasn't been an issue for me.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4

[K STYLEZ]

To me, Jason's suggestion makes the most sense. Sleeve and box the original frame mount, and than make a new mount in a similar design on the end if the current mount. Use a longer bolt to go through your new mount, than the sleeved original mount. Maintaining a 'double shear' mount and using the strength of the original mount

Does the panhard bar need to be perfectly parallel to the axle?

To me, Massive standing behind their product and ensuring that it fits properly makes the most sense. I shouldn't have to modify the truck to make parts fit for their intended and advertised use.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4

We design these to work on lifted and lowered TBs - my main impetus for making tese originally was my 05 TB that is lifted.

We cannot however foresee every modificaiton. You have alot of lift AND a 14 bolt. This is not a standard TB rear axle. I'd have to imagine it's larger, and that you've made your own control arm and panhard mounting tabs which may or may not be in the OEM location.

I'd be happy to help in offering solutions, but I call that "being a fellow car guy", not standing behind our product.


In the case of the S197 chassis Mustang (05+), the OEM panhard bar is mounted at a somewhat pronouced angle for reasons unbeknownst to me. Massive and several other aftermarket firms have been correcting this oversight for years by relocation the bar to the back side of the axles bracket (sounds like what you guys were talking about earlier). A panhard should ideally be perfectly parallel to the rear axle that it is designed to locate.

Our version consists of a billet slug that fills the orginal mounting location and a longer bolt. You will note this big purple guy in the inset portion of the following photo. We've tested this in many a high HP / road race vehicles and have found 100% success.




I could make something of the sort for you.

[Regulator1175]

To me, Jason's suggestion makes the most sense. Sleeve and box the original frame mount, and than make a new mount in a similar design on the end if the current mount. Use a longer bolt to go through your new mount, than the sleeved original mount. Maintaining a 'double shear' mount and using the strength of the original mount

Does the panhard bar need to be perfectly parallel to the axle?

To me, Massive standing behind their product and ensuring that it fits properly makes the most sense. I shouldn't have to modify the truck to make parts fit for their intended and advertised use.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4

We design these to work on lifted and lowered TBs - my main impetus for making tese originally was my 05 TB that is lifted.

We cannot however foresee every modificaiton. You have alot of lift AND a 14 bolt. This is not a standard TB rear axle. I'd have to imagine it's larger, and that you've made your own control arm and panhard mounting tabs which may or may not be in the OEM location.

I'd be happy to help in offering solutions, but I call that "being a fellow car guy", not standing behind our product.


In the case of the S197 chassis Mustang (05+), the OEM panhard bar is mounted at a somewhat pronouced angle for reasons unbeknownst to me. Massive and several other aftermarket firms have been correcting this oversight for years by relocation the bar to the back side of the axles bracket (sounds like what you guys were talking about earlier). A panhard should ideally be perfectly parallel to the rear axle that it is designed to locate.

Our version consists of a billet slug that fills the orginal mounting location and a longer bolt. You will note this big purple guy in the inset portion of the following photo. We've tested this in many a high HP / road race vehicles and have found 100% success.




I could make something of the sort for you.

Thank you for your reply. I am using all of the stock mounting locations. The rear axle is the only rear upgrade and it is out of a 2006 Trailblazer SS. I do certainly appreciate all of your assistance in this, By no means did I mean or have I meant for any of this to sound like I was degrading your part or customer service. I only posted this thread here for discussion on potential solutions, nothing further. Your products are certainly top notch and I appreciate it.

Your example with the Mustang is essentially the solution I was originally looking at. I can cut off the end from the stock panhard bar and use it in the bracket with a longer bolt going through both to the original nut. The only concern, and it was brought up here, is that it would essentially be a single sheer location at that point. Will that be strong enough to support our needs?

[K STYLEZ]

We've had them in 1000 HP GT500's with slicks. Should not be any problem.

[Regulator1175]

Karl, Thank you for all your assistance. I certainly appreciate your help in finding a solution.

[ErikSS]

EDIT FOR EXCESSIVE TYPOS (just for the Keys)

A GT500 doesn't bounce 35's sideways against rocks... It may work but the justification is week.
We are much heavier and top heavy. Also, the sideways torque that we could apply is far greater than even a road racing GT500.

[ErikSS]

Sorry. GT500... Autocorrect.

[Karo]

Mathew personally I would extend (raising up) the left side of the panhard mounting point. Lauron has done some similar on the left side mounting of the pan hard, he has lowered the mounting point to correct the angle. You could extend the left side in something like the same kind of way he has done it, doesn´t seem to be very difficult. I dont´know if that is enough to clear the axle. Here is what he has done (2nd post):
http://forums.offroadtb.com/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=3611&hilit=Lauron

I wonder if Hardtrailz had the same Issue even he has a adjustable panhard bar from suicidedoors.com., Didn´t he has the same kind of axle?
Karsten

[bartonmd]

I _HR500 doesn't bounce 35's sideways against rocks... It may work but the justification is week.

That's exactly my thought. (Almost) no matter what you do with HP and tires, a sliding a wheel or axle sideways into a rock is much harder on a panhard. The peak impulse is much higher.

Mike

[bartonmd]

I wonder if Hardtrailz had the same Issue even he has a adjustable panhard bar from suicidedoors.com., Didn´t he has the same kind of axle?
Karsten

He does, but he only went 1/2" longer on the control arms, vs. the 1.75" longer that Matt went.

Mike

[Regulator1175]

I wonder if Hardtrailz had the same Issue even he has a adjustable panhard bar from suicidedoors.com., Didn´t he has the same kind of axle?
Karsten

He does, but he only went 1/2" longer on the control arms, vs. the 1.75" longer that Matt went.

Mike

Kyle recently brought it to my attention that I can't read and that the vendor thread for these sites indicate that they only safely extend to 1 1/4", 1 1/2 at the most.

I will take half an inch out tomorrow and see how that affects things.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4

[v7guy]

I believe the reason there's interference issues is because the mount on the drivers side on the axle is kicked back from stock, so the panhard bar angles forward to the frame mount instead of running at a 90 degree angle . I would think if you ran the panhard from the axle mount at a 90 you'd find it clears the diff cover... But then it's going to be behind the stock mount on the frame.
The single shear mount "might" work, but you aren't exactly gentle when you wheel, so I'd be real hesitant to go that route. If you do go that route I'd keep a close eye on it the first few times you go out bouncing up some rocks lol

I'd also be wary of raising the frame mount to clear the diff cover because then the panhard rod is going to be traveling at a much more severe arc that'll kick the axle to the side on bump/rebound. It may give you some funky reactions/handling.

I would want a good bit of clearance at the frontof the rear wheel well, but like the others have mentioned when the axle moves up, it moves back as well, so be sure you have the room there too. Our control arms aren't that long really so the axle really moves in a tight arc.

I've worked on a couple envoys now and the difference in the wheel opening is pretty surprising when you look at em next to a trailblazer. I hacked a huge chunk out of Matt's fenders to clear the 33s. I can imagine 35s are even more interesting.


Really looking forward to seeing what you end up doing and how it holds up!

[fishsticks]

Matt, I think the solution you've been considering will work. I would move the panhard rod to the outside as you've talked about. Use some 1/4" plate and make an L shaped extension to put the rod end back into double shear. Run a gusset stretching all the way back across the original mount and then another gusset perpendicular which meets the frame.

Hopefully I explained it clearly enough. I'm doing this from memory of what that bracket looks like.