Rear sway bars (anti roll bars) what got them and what didn't?

[Pinger]

True, but combine that backbone with a monocoque, and you get an incredibly rigid chassis.
.

Maybe, maybe not - depends on how substantial the body was (open topped - only the sills could contribute) and how well fixed to the chassis it was. And torsional rigidity only matters if transferring roll from one end of the vehicle to the other and I still believe Chapman arranged the geometry to avoid that. Not something he would say out loud - Europe frowned at the American practice of body on frame. But if body on frame (bodies rubber mounted to frames ) is so bad, how did it endure for so long? Was it because American engineers (and Chapman) actually knew what they were doing and were immune to the fashion trends that would sweep through Europe?

NB. Chapman never got the backbone chassis to work in a mid engined (where transferring roll from one end of the car to the other is essential) open topped car. The road going mid engined cars were roofed and the open top racers best forgotten.

 

[sewlow]

What diameter is that bar you fitted and what diameter of bar is on the front?

I did the install years ago. Can't remember.
But...the front is a stock size for a C1500 with no rear bar. Those are larger than the trucks that came with both Fr/Rr.
The rear is a factory sized GM from an SUV.

 

[Pinger]

It shares the same feature as Jaguars of using the driveshaft as top link (and very wide based lower wishbones). Lotus used rubber 'do-nut' couplings (from Hillman Imps) where Jaguar used all metal UJs. Chapman used drive shafts as top links (with all metal UJs) on his race cars too. He disliked splined shafts as back then they were prone to sticking under torque and locking the suspension mid corner.

That Pinger does talk ****** at times!
The Elan was not double wishbone (with driveshaft as top link) at the rear but Chapman strut (a non-steering MacPherson strut).
The 'do-nuts' accepted axle plunge - and avoided splined shafts.

 

[TheAutumnWind]

What diameter is that bar you fitted and what diameter of bar is on the front?

What I am finding is that the rear bars are 7/8s for a typical suburban. I could be wrong though. That seems so small. I am trying to figure this out now as I have a rear bar in the mail.

 

[SUBURBAN5]

What I am finding is that the rear bars are 7/8s for a typical suburban. I could be wrong though. That seems so small. I am trying to figure this out now as I have a rear bar in the mail.

That may be right. I'll throw a tape on mine to confirm. But the rear bar is small

 

[SUBURBAN5]

Not the most accurate way but I found that my tape measure puts it at about 7/8 pretty darn close to the actual real measurement though I think

My front bar about inch and a 1/4

 

[TheAutumnWind]

I did the install years ago. Can't remember.
But...the front is a stock size for a C1500 with no rear bar. Those are larger than the trucks that came with both Fr/Rr.
The rear is a factory sized GM from an SUV.

So odd that the trucks with rear bars got smaller front bars. Not sure what the thought process would be there. That should induce more understeer right? Anyhow I am looking forward to seeing how my truck reacts with a rear sway bar.

 

[SUBURBAN5]

So odd that the trucks with rear bars got smaller front bars. Not sure what the thought process would be there. That should induce more understeer right? Anyhow I am looking forward to seeing how my truck reacts with a rear sway bar.

From what I see it's the opposite??

 

[454cid]

Rear bars are solid, aren't they?

 

[SUBURBAN5]

Mine are. Front and rear