8.8 fitment in 66?

brianj5600 · Jul 9, 2006

What about using the quad shocks? I think they will fit. The tab on the bump stops will have to bo cut or bent straight up. I'm going to try it. The QS mount on the housing will need a little clearancing to give the u-bolt room. I think a 2"x 1/4 " angle iron bracket welded to the frame would make it all work. Would there be any wierd handling characteristics with them?

xoxbxfx · Jul 9, 2006

brianj5600 said:
What about using the quad shocks? I think they will fit. The tab on the bump stops will have to bo cut or bent straight up. I'm going to try it. The QS mount on the housing will need a little clearancing to give the u-bolt room. I think a 2"x 1/4 " angle iron bracket welded to the frame would make it all work. Would there be any wierd handling characteristics with them?

If you can make the mounts, you are good to go. The suspension setups in fox stangs are great but its a matter of fabbing up the mounts in the car. If you can fab up brackets and mass produce them, you could have something going. DVS is doign it for IRS stuff

brianj5600 · Jul 9, 2006

I'm just talking about the extra shocks that are on top of the axle, but using leafs. Two less brackets to cut off. If I could figure out how to use the fox 4 link, I would, but that is a little over my ability.

66Runt · Jul 9, 2006

xoxbxfx said:
Thats some good info... The 99+ driveshaft is 45.5" center to center and Im actually having it lenthened to 49.5".

As far as welding the perches in the car, I just did 4 good tacks per mount and pulled the rear out. Welded the outsides and welded as much as I could on the insides..

I did it the same way you did. When I threw it up on the saw horses to complete the welding, it hit me that I did a bunch of extra work, laying on my back for nothing. And to make matters worse, this is the third time I've done this type of modification. Guess I'm a slow learner.
It would be so easy and cheap to make a jig for this. All you need is a couple of fairly straight 2x4 studs, the use of a table saw and a couple of saw horses.

I'd measure the '86 drive shaft just in case. Although I think xoxbxfx is right, the SN95 does has a longer input shaft and bell housing, but definitely not by 4". So the Fox driveshaft probably is too short. That would suck!

As for quad shocks, you'd have to find some very lightly valved shocks to run quads on an early Mustang. Not a whole lot of weight back there, unless you build an Explorer rear end

That brings up another point. I bagged pretty hard on the Explorer rear end, and it started me thinking about why there is such a difference in weight. With the 3" axle tubes and extra heft (disc brake crap aside), the Explorer rear end might be able to handle more torque than a Mustang 8.8. Unless Ford beefed it up just to handle the excess weight it (and the Ranger for that matter) would carry. Still though, if you're running a T5, it ain't the rear that's going to break from too much power.

So I'm sticking by my previous post that the Explorer differential and it's associated disc brake setup is a big fat pig... with no ears

YMMV,

xoxbxfx · Jul 10, 2006

66Runt said:
I did it the same way you did. When I threw it up on the saw horses to complete the welding, it hit me that I did a bunch of extra work, laying on my back for nothing. And to make matters worse, this is the third time I've done this type of modification. Guess I'm a slow learner.
It would be so easy and cheap to make a jig for this. All you need is a couple of fairly straight 2x4 studs, the use of a table saw and a couple of saw horses.

I'd measure the '86 drive shaft just in case. Although I think xoxbxfx is right, the SN95 does has a longer input shaft and bell housing, but definitely not by 4". So the Fox driveshaft probably is too short. That would suck!

As for quad shocks, you'd have to find some very lightly valved shocks to run quads on an early Mustang. Not a whole lot of weight back there, unless you build an Explorer rear end

That brings up another point. I bagged pretty hard on the Explorer rear end, and it started me thinking about why there is such a difference in weight. With the 3" axle tubes and extra heft (disc brake crap aside), the Explorer rear end might be able to handle more torque than a Mustang 8.8. Unless Ford beefed it up just to handle the excess weight it (and the Ranger for that matter) would carry. Still though, if you're running a T5, it ain't the rear that's going to break from too much power.

So I'm sticking by my previous post that the Explorer differential and it's associated disc brake setup is a big fat pig... with no ears

YMMV,

I just checked... the 79-04 are all the same length 45.5" center to center but they have different size yokes on the ends. The driveshaft will have to be lengthened for it to work in a 66+

blascrw · Aug 14, 2006

bringing up the past...

So can someone lay this out in plain talk???

I am looking for what to do with the rearend...

So a '79-04 rear will basically bolt up? no shortening? just cut off the ears?

but none of those had 5 lug from the factory??

debating on what to do??

9" narrowed to fit and disc brakes?

8" cleaned / sandblasted / rebuilt with better gears and disc brakes?

or 8.8"?

did any come with factory 5 lug and disc??

thanks...

PJx5x · Aug 14, 2006

94+ came with 5lug and discs. but isnt the width different between 79-98 and 99-04?

xoxbxfx · Aug 14, 2006

blascrw said:
So can someone lay this out in plain talk???

I am looking for what to do with the rearend...

So a '79-04 rear will basically bolt up? no shortening? just cut off the ears?

but none of those had 5 lug from the factory??

debating on what to do??

9" narrowed to fit and disc brakes?

8" cleaned / sandblasted / rebuilt with better gears and disc brakes?

or 8.8"?

did any come with factory 5 lug and disc??

thanks...

ok...here is the skinny...

94+ cars had factory disc brakes
fox rear ends fit better than 96-04 rear ends but there is a difference between 96-98 and 99-04 rear ends... The housings are the same but the axles are different (lots of debate on that but I promise they are... I just ordered a custom set of Moser axles and the tech guy told me there is a difference in length)

basically what it comes down to is what wheels are you going to run? That will solve a lot of the questions... Here is how I personally think it would be best

Fox rear end with 05+ wheels...they have 1" more positive offset than the typical bullitt or cobra set of wheels for the 99-04 cars...

Next opinion would be freshen the 8" rear...no new axles, no shortening...it just fits right and no fabbing

Next...its a tossup due to the fact of money. With a 9" or 8.8 from a 94+ car, you will have to shorten the rear, new axles (9" axles could be cut and resplined)... with the 8.8 you will need to pull the gears which is not like a 8 or 9" rear, it does not have a pumpkin you can pull out of the case. You will need to pull the whole differential and if you dont know how to re-set it up, you still have to pay someone. The benefit is you already have disc brakes. With a 9", you have to shorten and new axles or respline. The advantage is not having to redo the gears, you can pull the axles out and pull the whole pumpkin and just put it back together yourself... so, you chose which one you want, its about the same... cut tabs and weld perches and pay someone to fix the gears, or source some disc brakes for the 9".

I just got my 8.8 from a 03gt back from a guy...he shortened it 2" on each side. Moser axles coming, rear end rebuild kit, axle bearings and somoene to fix it...oh and i messed up the pinion gear smashing it out so, new ring and pinion gears for me..

Costs:
Narrow: 150
Axles: 275 (shipped with studs pressed in)
Rebuild Kit: 70
Axle bearings: 20
Assembly: 100
Gears: 70

A 9" would be close to the same

PJx5x · Aug 14, 2006

xox:
it seems like you know a lot of the details... right now im running 17" Bullitt wheels from a 99-04 stang, and i want to get a new rearend for my '68 coupe. will i need to shorten or extend the rearend at all if i get a stock 99-04 8.8"? i really dont want to run spacers again. it seems like the IRS on a 67-68 is the perfect width for late model rims, so shouldnt a solid from a 99-04 be the same?

tweet66 · Aug 15, 2006

Okay, what I've gotten from this thread....more confused I have a 66 coupe and I'm running late model Bullitt wheels on the 8" with spacers. I have an 8.8 out of a 92 Explorer, an 8" out of a 67 Falcon (2" wider than my current rear). I want to use the 8.8 since it has 3.73 gears & locker. I measured it against the 8" out of the Falcon and its the same length flange to flange which allows me to run the wheels without spacers. Can I or can't I use it? Obviously the Falcon rear would be easiest but I have to cut off and reposition the perches as they are 44.5" apart not the 43" required.

blascrw · Aug 15, 2006

I am confused too...

I think I might just pull my original and sandblast and paint it and put it back in

I want better gears and I am really toying with the idea of an AOD...

I want bullitts but looking for some used so not sure what year they will be from.

I want discs but we will see...

what to do...

I can find some 9's on ebay but none are close to me...

xoxbxfx · Aug 15, 2006

PJx5x said:
xox:
it seems like you know a lot of the details... right now im running 17" Bullitt wheels from a 99-04 stang, and i want to get a new rearend for my '68 coupe. will i need to shorten or extend the rearend at all if i get a stock 99-04 8.8"? i really dont want to run spacers again. it seems like the IRS on a 67-68 is the perfect width for late model rims, so shouldnt a solid from a 99-04 be the same?

if memory serves me correct, the 65-68 rear end lengths were the same. Since you are running bullitt wheels with a 8.8 from a new stang, it will stick out like this:

View attachment 448213
View attachment 448215

They stick out about 1.25-1.5" on each side... so if Im wrong and the 67-68 rear ends are 2" wider overall than a 65-66 you will be ok BUT it will stick out just a bit. if you are lowered in the back, you will definately need to roll the fender lips. For prospective, I had the 99+ rear end narrowed 4" overall. With 2" in on each side, I haev about .5" or so from rubbing on rolled lips. The 66 im building is slammed and with suspension travel, the rear wheels will tuck. IRS rear ends are 2" shorter overall I belive than solid axles from the same years. If I remember right, the 96-98 rear ends are just a bit narrower, something like .75" on each side, the fox is 1.5" narrower each side than the 99-04

xoxbxfx · Aug 15, 2006

tweet66 said:
Okay, what I've gotten from this thread....more confused I have a 66 coupe and I'm running late model Bullitt wheels on the 8" with spacers. I have an 8.8 out of a 92 Explorer, an 8" out of a 67 Falcon (2" wider than my current rear). I want to use the 8.8 since it has 3.73 gears & locker. I measured it against the 8" out of the Falcon and its the same length flange to flange which allows me to run the wheels without spacers. Can I or can't I use it? Obviously the Falcon rear would be easiest but I have to cut off and reposition the perches as they are 44.5" apart not the 43" required.

Im not sure on the explorer rear ends... but I think they are workable but not with bullit wheels..I think you will need 05+ wheels

tweet66 · Aug 15, 2006

xox,
I know the 67/8 rear is 2" wider than a 65/6, which is why I picked up the Falcon rear as it is the same width as a 67/8 Mustang, of course I wish I'd known about the spring perches beforehand. My biggest concern is the pumpkin offset everyone's mentioned if I use the "Exploder" rear, especially since it's already measures the same width as a 67/8, shortening one side would require me to use spacers again.

xoxbxfx · Aug 15, 2006

tweet66 said:
xox,
I know the 67/8 rear is 2" wider than a 65/6, which is why I picked up the Falcon rear as it is the same width as a 67/8 Mustang, of course I wish I'd known about the spring perches beforehand. My biggest concern is the pumpkin offset everyone's mentioned if I use the "Exploder" rear, especially since it's already measures the same width as a 67/8, shortening one side would require me to use spacers again.

ok..theres no easy swap with these cars unless you are runnin 05+ wheels....

I THINK (only think) that a fox rear end with bullitt wheels will be good setup for you. You will have to do a conversion for the brakes though. From what I ahve read, the fox axle with disc brakes will be 61" mounting surface to mounting surface. I dont know all the exact numbers but heres how I figure it

A 99+ rear end is 3" overall wider than a fox rear end... with bullitt wheels and a 99+, I needed 4" out of the rear...well, the 67-68 has 2more inches of clearance, so for a 99+ axle in your 67/68 you would need to only take out 2" overall. With the fox being 3" overall it should work great... hope thats not to confusing.

tweet66 · Aug 15, 2006

I guess its safer if I keep an eye out for a Fox 8.8. Now what to do with the spare Explorer rear???? I hear my 69 Falcon wagon calling my name now

xoxbxfx · Aug 15, 2006

tweet66 said:
I guess its safer if I keep an eye out for a Fox 8.8. Now what to do with the spare Explorer rear???? I hear my 69 Falcon wagon calling my name now

Wish you were around here...they are a dime a dozen. Passed up an offer for an 8.8 with discs and 3.73's for $150

blascrw · Aug 15, 2006

soooo....

A fox 8.8 rear with 05+ bullitts will work on the rear realatively easy with no spacers??

Is this correct?

66StangFastback · Aug 15, 2006

blascrw said:
A fox 8.8 rear with 05+ bullitts will work on the rear realatively easy with no spacers??

Is this correct?

That's what I'm getting from this thread.

Basically, for 65-66 stangs, an 8.8" rear from a fox, and 94+ wheels (bullits, FR500s, cobras, etc.) will fit no problem?

xoxbxfx · Aug 15, 2006

blascrw said:
A fox 8.8 rear with 05+ bullitts will work on the rear realatively easy with no spacers??

Is this correct?

correct... the fox body rear end is 3" narrower and the wheels ahve 1" more positive offset than the 99-04 bullitts so its almost 5" narrower than a 99+ with bullitt wheels. I 4" would have been enough but the extra.5" works great. Now on the front, I dunno. People are running 1" spacers (last I knew) with bullitts...with the 05+ being 1 more inch on each side positive offset... its gonna be sucked waaaay in

8.8 fitment in 66?

brianj5600

Active Member

xoxbxfx

brianj5600

Active Member

66Runt

Member

xoxbxfx

blascrw

Member

PJx5x

Member

xoxbxfx

PJx5x

Member

tweet66

blascrw

Member

xoxbxfx

xoxbxfx

tweet66

xoxbxfx

tweet66

xoxbxfx

blascrw

Member

66StangFastback

New Member

xoxbxfx

Similar threads

8.8 fitment in 66?

Active Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency