8.8 fitment in 66?

xoxbxfx · Aug 15, 2006

66StangFastback said:
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?

no... they will stick out about .25/.5" on each side...you need 05+ wheels which suck in another inch on each side. The 99-04 wheels have a 24mm offset (almost 1") and the 05+ have a 44mm offset...these are positive offsets

24mm offset is ALMOST 6" backspacing... the 44mm is 7"

blascrw · Aug 16, 2006

then....

xoxbxfx said:
no... they will stick out about .25/.5" on each side...you need 05+ wheels which suck in another inch on each side. The 99-04 wheels have a 24mm offset (almost 1") and the 05+ have a 44mm offset...these are positive offsets

24mm offset is ALMOST 6" backspacing... the 44mm is 7"

So then you are saying 05+ wheels and a fox 8.8 is what I need? and no fox 8.8's had 5 lug and discs??

xoxbxfx · Aug 16, 2006

blascrw said:
So then you are saying 05+ wheels and a fox 8.8 is what I need? and no fox 8.8's had 5 lug and discs??

correct... fox 8.8 and 05+ wheels... and you will have to convert it to 5lug with disc... you can get a kit for a couple hundred bucks or do 2 ranger axles or something like that.

96 DOHC Cobra · Aug 17, 2006

Will 44mm offset wheels work on a Mustang stock front end? Most of these guys don't want to run spacers. I still feel the Explorer 8.8 rear is the best option for a rear conversion for 65-66 Mustangs. It has to be cut on one side, but then the fit is good. The stock Fox width 8.8 rear is probably the best for the 67-70 models because it's the same width. These allow you to easily use the same wheels front and rear without needing spacers. The 94-98 rear is 1.5" wider than the 67-70 or 79-93 Fox rear. It's a tight fit on 67-70s on the rear even with 94-04 wheels and would probably require spacers on a stock front end.

brianj5600 · Aug 17, 2006

I have a 95 in my 67 with late model Mach1 wheels and everything fits nice, no spacers.

nugget68 · Aug 17, 2006

brianj5600 said:
I have a 95 in my 67 with late model Mach1 wheels and everything fits nice, no spacers.

Got any pics with the mach 1 wheels. I just won a set from ebay I plan on putting on my 68 coupe. What size spacer did you use on the front and what tire sizes are on the front/rear...

xoxbxfx · Aug 17, 2006

brianj5600 said:
I have a 95 in my 67 with late model Mach1 wheels and everything fits nice, no spacers.

that makes sense...the 95 rear is 1.5" shorter than the 99+ and you have 2" extra over a 66....so the difference is only .5" and 1/4" on each side is just fine

brianj5600 · Aug 17, 2006

Nugget, I'll try to get some pics Friday. They have 245/45/17 tires on them. I have 1" spacers on the front and they seem too far out. I did a lot of work and have not aligned it yet, but the fenders will still need to be rolled. The rear is 1.5" wider than stock and I have plenty of clearance w/o spacers.

XO, a 95 is 1.5" wider than a 67, which is 2" wider than a 66. That makes it 3.5" wider than a 66.

96 DOHC Cobra · Aug 17, 2006

brianj5600 said:
Nugget, I'll try to get some pics Friday. They have 245/45/17 tires on them. I have 1" spacers on the front and they seem too far out.

What about your inside clearance? I thought the problem requiring the spacers was the late model wheels hitting the upper control arm.

brianj5600 · Aug 18, 2006

I did not measure the back spacing, but catalogs list it at 5.72". The quote you used says I have 1" spacers on the front, making it 4.72" effective back spacing, which clears thr UCA.

xoxbxfx · Aug 18, 2006

brianj5600 said:
Nugget, I'll try to get some pics Friday. They have 245/45/17 tires on them. I have 1" spacers on the front and they seem too far out. I did a lot of work and have not aligned it yet, but the fenders will still need to be rolled. The rear is 1.5" wider than stock and I have plenty of clearance w/o spacers.

XO, a 95 is 1.5" wider than a 67, which is 2" wider than a 66. That makes it 3.5" wider than a 66.

Man...im confused now. From all the reading I have done, everything points to the 99+ beind 3" wider than a fox rear and the 96-98 being 1.5" shorter than the 99 and 1.5" bigger than the fox.

nugget68 · Aug 18, 2006

brianj5600 said:
Nugget, I'll try to get some pics Friday. They have 245/45/17 tires on them. I have 1" spacers on the front and they seem too far out. I did a lot of work and have not aligned it yet, but the fenders will still need to be rolled. The rear is 1.5" wider than stock and I have plenty of clearance w/o spacers.

XO, a 95 is 1.5" wider than a 67, which is 2" wider than a 66. That makes it 3.5" wider than a 66.

I thought that maybe I could get by with some 1/4 to 1/2 spacers. I think on one of the dodgestang charts for a 68 it says that one of the front setups someone had, had a 17x8 with 5.5 backspacing. I know tha rear will fit without any spacers...

brianj5600 · Aug 18, 2006

xoxbxfx said:
Man...im confused now. From all the reading I have done, everything points to the 99+ beind 3" wider than a fox rear and the 96-98 being 1.5" shorter than the 99 and 1.5" bigger than the fox.

I think your confusion may be in early lengths. Numbers are close but not exact.
64-66 57.25
67-70 59.25
Fox 59.4
94-98 61.0
99+ 62.5
Again this is NOT exact, but rough numbers. Anyone with exact numbers please post it.

66Runt · Aug 18, 2006

My Fox rear is 59.25"

This came out of a 91 GT.

See web site in signature for install....when the web site comes back up.

xoxbxfx · Aug 18, 2006

brianj5600 said:
I think your confusion may be in early lengths. Numbers are close but not exact.
64-66 57.25
67-70 59.25
Fox 59.4
94-98 61.0
99+ 62.5
Again this is NOT exact, but rough numbers. Anyone with exact numbers please post it.

Thats correct, but thats what im sayin... fox - 99+ is 3" diff.... 94-98 is 1.5 shorter and fox is 1.5 shorter than that.

PJx5x · Aug 19, 2006

so....

for a 65-66:
fox rearend with 99-04 rims

for a 67-70:
fox rearend with stock backspacing rims
or
94-98 rearend with 99-04 rims, possible 1/4 spacers needed?

....right?

brianj5600 · Aug 19, 2006

If anyone wants pics, pm me an email address. When I post pics here they end up too small to get any detail. I have a 95 GT 8.8 with Mach1 wheels in a 67 coupe. They would look better with a small spacer, but don't need one. I would rather not run spacers on the rear unless I have to. I took a pic of the front with 1" spacer to show uca clearance also. The front will touch the fender, but I think lowering the UCA will cure that.

Rusty67 · Aug 19, 2006

The 94-98 axles are what everyone around here uses to convert the fox bodies to 5 lug around here. The axles are the same length. I just went through all this because I swaped the 7.5 in my 99 v6 driver for a 95 gt 8.8. Why did I do it ? Because I wanted the posi and I got 3.55 ring gears for 50 bux. The point is, the 94-98 axle housing should be the same width as the earlier 87+ fox axles. I'm not sure about the earlier fox's axle housings because from what I understand they were running 7.5 until 83 or 84 and I don't know if those earlier 8.8s are different.

So 94-98 8.8s are narrower overall than the 99-04 axle. If I remember correctly it was a 1.75 inch difference.

Red5oh · Aug 19, 2006

The axles are not the same for 87-93 and 94-98. The housings are the same. The SN95 axles are longer due to the antilock brake ring and disk brakes in the rear. You use ranger axles and drums to convert fox body rears to 5 lug.

Markus · Aug 19, 2006

Hello,
i use a 8.8 out from a 89GT fox in my 67. I use a 1 inch spacer with my 8 inch magnum 500 on the rear. I think the 8.8 will fit on your 66 without modification.

Markus

8.8 fitment in 66?

xoxbxfx

blascrw

Member

xoxbxfx

96 DOHC Cobra

brianj5600

Active Member

nugget68

Member

xoxbxfx

brianj5600

Active Member

96 DOHC Cobra

brianj5600

Active Member

xoxbxfx

nugget68

Member

brianj5600

Active Member

66Runt

Member

xoxbxfx

PJx5x

Member

brianj5600

Active Member

Rusty67

Red5oh

Member

Markus

Member

Similar threads

8.8 fitment in 66?

Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency