RE: Q Sport pan/derivation?

["Glen Powell" <gpowell@acacianet.com>]

<snip>
One thing that I've heard about the windscreen angle is that the more 
sloped one, (ur-q), had too much glare while driving at night. I don't 
know if that was actually a contributing factor or not, but sounds 
interesting.

This I can confirm as true.

As far as the q/non-q pan, tough to say. They could have used the 4kq 
pan, but this too is different than the ur-q. I took a good long look and 
a few pictures of a sport while at Andersons, and there is something very 
interesting about the pan for the sport.
That car uses control arms that have a ball joint at the outer end, and 
then 4 adjustable length rods that attach to the chassis. 2 of those rods 
bolt into the subframe like the 4k/ur-q, but then the other 2 (which are 
on the outsides of the normal 2) attach to very heavily reinforced 
gussets in the floor pan. I don't know the exact reason or theory, but 
would guess that it allows for adjustment of suspension travel in 
relation to the adjustment of the vehicle's ride height.
<snip>

The full-race Pro Rally ur-qs also have those same 'extra' suspension pieces.

Now, I won't swear to which rear pan section they started with, but I can 
tell you that the rear section is not identical to either the q or non-q
pan that is found in the early chassis.
<snip>

Todd Candey

Anyone know fer sure what pan the Q Sport was based on?
That $200 Q Sport book must speak to this point.....

-glen