8.8 in a 68 Coupe??

M

MGW1

New Member

Apr 23, 2003

52

0

0

CT

Oct 31, 2003

#1

• Oct 31, 2003

• #1

Does anyone know the width of an 8.8 from a fox body, compared to the width of an 8 or 9" from a 68 Mustang? Obviously leaf spring perches need to be welded to the housing, but I was wondering about width as compared to the classic's rearends. Thanks.

 

golf4283

Active Member

May 30, 2003

1,253

1

39

Orland Park, Illinois

Oct 31, 2003

#2

• Oct 31, 2003

• #2

I think they said the width of the fox body rear is about the width of the 65/66's so thats like 57 inches or something?? the 68 width is 59 i think so if u wanna use it u migh tneed some pretty big backspacing.

 

muh'stang

If I were rich, I'd make sure all the scoops on my

Sep 26, 2003

277

0

0

Quesnel, B.C., Canada

Nov 1, 2003

#3

• Nov 1, 2003

• #3

golf4283 said:

I think they said the width of the fox body rear is about the width of the 65/66's so thats like 57 inches or something?? the 68 width is 59 i think so if u wanna use it u migh tneed some pretty big backspacing.

Click to expand...

You could fit some 315's on the back if you had a 68. On my f150 I plan to stick a 8.8 In the rear so I can get some 33x15.50's on the back without having an overly wide wheelbase, and some 34x9.50's upfront.

 

68rustang

Active Member

Jan 17, 2003

1,537

0

36

Cleveland, OH

Nov 2, 2003

#4

• Nov 2, 2003

• #4

muh'stang said:

You could fit some 315's on the back if you had a 68.

Click to expand...

How do you figure?

 

imshaggy2000

Founding Member

Oct 30, 2002

960

0

0

Orange, CA

Nov 2, 2003

#5

• Nov 2, 2003

• #5

golf4283 said:

I think they said the width of the fox body rear is about the width of the 65/66's so thats like 57 inches or something?? the 68 width is 59 i think so if u wanna use it u migh tneed some pretty big backspacing.

Click to expand...

Can any one conferm this? It doesnt seem right to me.

 

golf4283

Active Member

May 30, 2003

1,253

1

39

Orland Park, Illinois

Nov 2, 2003

#6

• Nov 2, 2003

• #6

There was a post in here a week or 2 ago about this same topic. maybe do a search for 8.8 and see what u find. that will be the easiest way.

 

imshaggy2000

Founding Member

Oct 30, 2002

960

0

0

Orange, CA

Nov 3, 2003

#7

• Nov 3, 2003

• #7

Yes but that was track width, how does that compare the axel width? I'm on a guys fox boy site right now and he says his rear track with is 58.75". What does that mean?

I also found out that Cougar/T-Bird 8.8 are 1" per side wider then mustang 8.8's.
and Lincoln Mark VII 8.8's are 3/4" per side wider then the Cougar/T-bird rears.


also fox axels are 29 1/8" each if that helps anything

 

Dark Knight

Founding Member

Feb 1, 2000

2,578

0

0

Chandler, Az.

Nov 3, 2003

#8

• Nov 3, 2003

• #8

what are you going to do about the driveshaft offset? the yoke is set to the side on 8-9in. rears, in the center on the 8.8..

 

cougar_68

Founding Member

Jun 6, 2001

849

0

0

Garrett, IN

Nov 3, 2003

#9

• Nov 3, 2003

• #9

Dark Knight said:

what are you going to do about the driveshaft offset? the yoke is set to the side on 8-9in. rears, in the center on the 8.8..

Click to expand...

Excuse me for my ignorance, but why would that matter?

 

M

MGW1

New Member

Apr 23, 2003

52

0

0

CT

Nov 3, 2003

#10

• Nov 3, 2003

• #10

Your right about pinion placement. I guess if I were to do it I'd have to narrow the axle to compensate for the difference, and we all know an 8.8 is not worth it that much! Looks like it'll be a nine inch, the envy of all my friends, haha!

 

imshaggy2000

Founding Member

Oct 30, 2002

960

0

0

Orange, CA

Nov 3, 2003

#11

• Nov 3, 2003

• #11

Dark Knight said:

what are you going to do about the driveshaft offset? the yoke is set to the side on 8-9in. rears, in the center on the 8.8..

Click to expand...

I'm with cougar_68 why would that matter? Is the difference anymore then an inch or two? I know few people have put in 99+ mustang 8.8's with out shortening them so they could put late model wheels on with out adapters. I'm really starting to get into this idea because 8.8 traction loc's are easy and cheap to come by, the're many rear disk set ups avalible that arnt very expensive, and they eat up less horse power then a 9". On a 400hp engine I'm guessing could probably gain 8-13 hp or about 2% - 3% just by using an 8.8" vs a 9". I dont have any thing to back that up though, just speculation, based on different things ive read and observed.

 

imshaggy2000

Founding Member

Oct 30, 2002

960

0

0

Orange, CA

Jan 13, 2004

#12

• Jan 13, 2004

• #12

TTT

Still hoping some of the questions in this thread could get answered. I would really just like to know what the width of a fox rear is (wheel mounting surface to wheel mounting surface), and what does track width refer to? Also why would it matter if the driveshaft was off set by an inch or 2 compared to the 9"? I've seen many early mustangs with unmodified (axel leingth that is) 8.8's running with no problems.

 

brianj5600

Active Member

Sep 19, 2003

1,964

2

39

Middle TN

Jan 14, 2004

#13

• Jan 14, 2004

• #13

I have a fox mustang r/e in the garage and it is 59 5/8 inches, give or take 1/8. It is going in my '67. I believe the sn95 is about 2in longer same with the tbird, but don't quote me on that. Lengths are hard to find on the web for these. All I ever see is this one is this much longer than that one.

 

3

3spd on floor

Founding Member

Aug 13, 2002

1,099

0

0

Acworth, GA

Jan 14, 2004

#14

• Jan 14, 2004

• #14

just wonderin, but why on earth would you want to start with a Fox rear? they've only got 4 lug axles and drum brakes. by the time you've put good axles and a decent ratio diff in them, you're at the point where you could have just gotten a 9".

who was it on here that was modifying the explorer rear...hows that project going?

 

6

68DARKHORSE

New Member

Oct 9, 2003

109

0

0

Austin, Tx.

Jan 14, 2004

#15

• Jan 14, 2004

• #15

The best rear to look for is '94-'98.

These are the same width as '67-'70 and Fox bodies, but the '94-'98 has 5 lugs and disc brakes.

 

6

68DARKHORSE

New Member

Oct 9, 2003

109

0

0

Austin, Tx.

Jan 14, 2004

#16

• Jan 14, 2004

• #16

The '99+ rears are 2" wider overall.

 

imshaggy2000

Founding Member

Oct 30, 2002

960

0

0

Orange, CA

Jan 14, 2004

#17

• Jan 14, 2004

• #17

I have a 5 lug 8.8 with disks and limited slip in the back yard. The ring gear housing has F0Z cast into it which means 1990 right? I'ts in a tight spot but is aproximatly 62" from wheel mounting spot to wheel monting spot. Any thoughts? Whats stock for a 67 mustang?

 

6

67efivert

Member

Jan 26, 2003

348

0

16

lincolnton nc

Jan 14, 2004

#18

• Jan 14, 2004

• #18

ok guys im not positive of the total dimensions but i do know the 94+ mustang axles and the t bird axles are 2 1/2" wider than the fox bodies because of the disk brakes and the car 8.8s have the same pinion offset as our cars the exporler/ranger is the axle swith the wrong offset u can actually use the 94+ axles and disk brakes on an older fox housing the axles are the only thing that makes them wider they are 1 1/4 longer from the bearing to the flange hope this helps some

 

brianj5600

Active Member

Sep 19, 2003

1,964

2

39

Middle TN

Jan 14, 2004

#19

• Jan 14, 2004

• #19

by the time you've put good axles and a decent ratio diff in them

Click to expand...

They are close to the original length. 5 lug axles and drums are plentiful and cheap at junk yards. I want 3.08 gears. I am not worried about disk brakes.