I guess not or you wouldn't have to ask so here goes.
On a panhard rod do the eye tube centre lines run longitudinally to the chassis centre line and parrallel to each other.
Or do they just run parrallel to each other regardless of the chassis?.
In the book they are square to the end of the tube but I need to angle the panhard rod to clear the diff and reckoned they need to be as my first statement.
Anyone got photo's of their's ( oerr).
Sorry it's a live axle if you hadn't guessed

I beleive it can be angled, If you were to use rose joints they have their limits of angled use
Hope this helps
Jason

It's not critical, but if you keep the joints in line with the chassis it would help as the sideways movement will be slightly reduced.

I think the ideal would be the rod being parallel to the ground at the average on ride height between roadgoing compression and droop.

I raised the chassis mount on mine to make this about right, if left to book chassis, the rod would have pulled the axle 3mm to the LH side on full compression

?

If you've got the space a better bet is a Watt's linkage. Completely removes sideways movement of the axle by using two shorter bars which pivot on a rod/bar mounted to the diff casing. Can't figure out how to attach a drwaing but someone might be able to do it for me?

I know what you mean Si. Don't think I have the room though

You can also do a Watt's linkage byy fixing the pivot to the chassis and the two arms to the ends of the axle. This should be possible in a locost chassis by locating a plate in front of the tank and fixing it to Y and bracing it to W1 and W2. I think you could omit Z but it is adding more weight.
Also depends if you prefer using an 18th century invention, The Watt's linkage, invented by James Watt for converting the rotational movement at the end of a beam to the vertical movement of the steam engine cylinder, or a 20th century invention actually designed for car suspension, Panhard as in the slightly whacky French cars

Caber

Watt's this (poor pun there, but I'm completely unrepentant). Are you saying that a device designed in the 1800s before the bean counter took over is better than a device that's cheaper to make but less correct in engineering outlook?

Designed for suspension? No. Designed for ease of manufacture? Yes.

Watts link are "better" for cars with a lot of wheel travel. Having said that, they are sort of pointless IMO because most cars with lots of wheel travel are not really concerned with a little sideways movement of the axle. They also move with a slight S shape, not perfectly straight.
In a street toy I generally like to see 6" total wheel travel to suck up the rough roads. If you keep the panhard bar as long as possible there is not much movement over 6" of sweep. The main things to worry about on a panhard bar are: keep it as long as possible, keep it level at ride height, and keep it from binding. Remember that your axle moves in an arc as well when veiwed from the side. The axle is going to move front/back and the panhard bar has to go with it or it will bind. Ideally you mount the panhard bar parrallel to the axle in the middle of that front/back movement at ride height. Not really worth worrying about though unless you are obsessed like me .
Also keep in mind most of my experience is with larger/heavier vehicles than Sevens.
Cheers.