JakeRobb

Does the rear suspension in a fourth-gen qualify as a "four-link" suspension?

I was chatting with a friend of mine who is big into autocrossing and cars in general, but doesn't know much about F-bodies. He wanted to know what my plans were for my car, and among many other things, I mentioned upgrading the panhard rod.

"That thing has a panhard rod?" He's surprised. He goes on to tell me about the wonders of a "four-link" suspension, which he claims doesn't use a panhard rod. He says he doesn't like panhard rods because they cause the axle assembly to move left to right as the suspension travels up and down (true, although not necessarily a bad thing, and not necessarily unique to systems using panhard rods). I've heard of this setup, and I know it's a pretty common upgrade to the rear leaf spring suspensions used on old muscle cars. I even found some four-link kits for first-gen Camaros. Then I discovered that these kits have panhard rods?

I am now under the impression that the factory suspension on a fourth-gen is indeed a "four-link" suspension, and my friend just doesn't know much about LRA setups.

Somebody fill me in here. Thanks!

Injuneer

No, the 3rd and 4th Gen rear suspensions are not 4-link. They are a "torque arm" rear suspension. You can eliminate the issue of the side-to-side movement with the panhard rod by adapting a "watts linkage". They make them for Mustangs.... never seen one for an F-Body.

This site shows the various types of suspensions.

http://www.susprog.com/susptype.htm

torque arm:



4-link with panhard rod:



torque arm with watts linkage:

JakeRobb

Fred, I was hoping you'd answer! Thanks for the info.

JakeRobb

Are there technical advantages which make four-link setups appropriate in certain situations, and torque arm setups appropriate in others?

Is there any disadvantage to the Watts linkage?