Her's my .02 worth: Yea the 8.8 will handle morethan some think, but to build one to fit an early Stang, will cost you the same money a 9" will. I bought an Exploder 8.8 a couple years back, paid $100 for the complete deal. By the time I added Strange axles to match the 9" bearing ends (I don't trust C clips or eliminators) and narrowing to 52" to tuck the 10" wheels under the Ranger, I had $800 in it. One other tip, don't order the 7.5" or Stang 8.8" brake pattern 9" style ends. I ended up with these by mistake (that's another story) and I've had nothing but grief from them. The bolt pattern for the brake plates is too small for it to use thru bolts and nuts to retain them and they have a threaded hole in the housing. That combined with the tapered roller bearings (another bad idea for axles) are the biggest PITA that I've ever seen. The tapered bearing's always got the brake plate bolts under a strain and I've had em get loose several times.
8.8" vs 9"
- Thread starter gzminiz
- Start date
$800 into it seems cheaper then a 9" to me, housings are around $300 alone (on ebay) then you have to get a the thid member, axles, bearings, etc and the brake. dunno, just seems the 8.8 is cheaper and for something running 400 fwhp and not a drag car would be a good way to go for the money.
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
Dang, I last replied to this almost a year ago...
The 8.8 vs 9" has been covered already, so I thought I would share:
I just got a 9" from a '58 Ranchero.
I've been sitting on a 9" 3.50 T-Lok center section for over a year now and I finally have something to put it in. My engine combo works so-so with the 3.00 8", but boy is it going to be happier with the 3.50s. 
It's already a fast car......
The 8.8 vs 9" has been covered already, so I thought I would share:
I just got a 9" from a '58 Ranchero.
I've been sitting on a 9" 3.50 T-Lok center section for over a year now and I finally have something to put it in. My engine combo works so-so with the 3.00 8", but boy is it going to be happier with the 3.50s. It's already a fast car......
dennis112
15 Year Member
D.Hearne said:Not true Dave. The 57-59 Ford 9" rear is an exact bolt in forthe 65-66 Stangs. That's the housing the Shelbys and Hi-po Stangs used.
Have to disagree here. Although 57-59 rears are definitely a bolt in (did it), they are NOT the same exact housing used in 9" equiped 65-66 Shelby's and Hi Po's. The true 65-66 housings are rare and sought after by those who are restoring older K code cars with missing rears.
The Mustang units housings taper down smaller than the pumpkin axle snout and it is the size of an 8" housing when it gets to the spring mounting pads and it uses normal 8" sized U bolts--(2 7/8"??.)
View attachment 457700
The 57-59 snout remains the same diameter from the pumpkin axle snout all the way to the axle flanges and require a larger 3" U bolt (which was not available in any 65-73 Mustang.) It also uses a larger diameter axle seal than the Mustang, although the bearings can interchange if the 57-59 is a passenger car and not a ranchero or station wagon. Axle lengths are the same no matter which.
View attachment 457702
For further support, here is a quote from http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm
"Note the taper on this 8" 65-66 Mustang housing, a smaller U bolt and lower shock plate were used originally with these cars.The HIPO 289 cars were the only 65-66 Mustangs to recieve factory 9" axles, the tubes are tapered as well at the end to utilize the same lower shock plate as the regular 65-66 Mustangs. "
Check around on ebay and sometimes you will find the vendor who makes authentic looking 65-66 9" housings using 8" tubes. At least he is honest enough to admit that he did the modification. . . .
So, for anyone considering the swap, be sure to get the 57-59 u bolts and spring perches for a trouble free swap.
Ok, I see your point, but the real thing I was thinking of was him saying Ford didn't have a rear available to fit the Stang. All they had to do in that case was modify the mounting plates and use different U bolts. Seems to me that would have been a bit more cost effective than having to weld different axle tubes.
dennis112
15 Year Member
D.Hearne said:
I guess I read into your post too literally. Your info is indeed correct in that a 57-59 rear is truely a bolt-in for a 65-66. U bolts and the mounting plates are the worst obsticles.
Hell, you can even use the original 8"'s driveshaft since the early 9" has a short yoke.
Good day, sir!
67stangboy
Founding Member
Wow thats an info overload, just read the entire thread and wow lots of great info. Just one question, it seems most every one is talking about 65/66 mustangs, will the explorer 8.8 bolt right onto the 67/68 and not the 65/66, im so confused.
No, the spring perches need to be moved. The width may be right and the offset, & I believe some have gotten by with that aspect, but it's not a bolt right in deal. Like I said before, there are no bolt in 8.8's when it comes to ealry Stangs or other Fords and Mercs that had leaf spring rears. Just about all 60's and 70's Fords and Mercs with rear leafs use the same 43" ctr to ctr. spacing for the spring perches, the Ranger/Explorer spacing is different67stangboy said:Wow thats an info overload, just read the entire thread and wow lots of great info. Just one question, it seems most every one is talking about 65/66 mustangs, will the explorer 8.8 bolt right onto the 67/68 and not the 65/66, im so confused.
D.Hearne said:
The Explorer 8.8 has 4" of offset in the pinion. If you do not shorten the long side the 3" necessary to fit a 65/66 car the offset is far too much for a 67/70 Mustang. Your only choice is to make it 65/66 length and adjust the offest on the rims or run spacers. This is a really bad rear choice for a 67 and up.
Modding the Explorer to fit a 65/66 seems rather straight forward and I have 3 to play with for this purpose. Shortening the tube is not hard, putting new spring pads on is not hard, and bolting in another short side axle in place of the long one is not hard. I can get as many of these rears as I like so if all goes well I will have more to play with.
brianj5600
Active Member
Not if you prefer the older offset mag wheels. Then the 65-66 width is perfect for those. I bolted a 57 Ford 9" under the last 67 I had and it's width was exactly the thing needed to tuck a set of 15 x 9 aluminum wheels in the fender wells with 255/60's on them. Backspace on those wheels was about 3 to 3-1/2 inches.Ronstang said:
brianj5600
Active Member
I hear you. I wanted 15" wheels, but it is too much work to get a combination of axle and wheel to fit. Plus you are severely limited on tire choices. I just change my fox rear end into an SN-95 rear end today to run new MachI wheels. It is easier to find wheels and tires to fill up the available space this way.D.Hearne said:
gzminiz said:
Any year Explorer up to 2001 will have the same housing. 95-up have discs on them. They came with all ratios from 3.08 up to 4.10, some open and some traction lok. Be sure to check what they have unless you already plan to install new gears. The 9" donor housing needs to have a large bearing end with small bolt holes. To make the search simple, any housing 78-up will work. If you don't want to go to aftermarket axles, your donor search is simple. Find a 81-82 F100 (not F150). I think they were only made those two years. They had 31 spline axles and the 5 X 4.5" bolt circle (same as cars). Then just have them cut and resplined to the length you need.
The Explorer rear can be used in 67-70 Mustangs also. When cutting the housing to swap to 9" ends you'll shorten one side and lengthen the other a little. No problem.
There are plenty of places to look in Phoenix. Last year I went to Phoenix in late October for Fun Ford Weekend. While I was there I "toured" several local yards. You can find them all in your phone book. There was Ecology Auto Wrecking on 27th Ave and a late model place right next door to them. Over on 35th Ave off of Broadway there were several places as well. I saw a lot of Explorers.
67stangboy said:Wow thats an info overload, just read the entire thread and wow lots of great info. Just one question, it seems most every one is talking about 65/66 mustangs, will the explorer 8.8 bolt right onto the 67/68 and not the 65/66, im so confused.
No, it will not bolt directly into the 67-8's. You will have to cut/weld the perches on and deal with the offset center section.
I used a fox body 8.8 in mine (67) and it was very easy. Now, I am not going to be running any significant power (stock EFI) and I have had 8.8's good to 450rwhp with good axles.
Now, the part that everyone seems to be hanging on is price... I have about $93 in mine including 373 gears and a rebuilt posi unit. You cant get anything for a 9in for that price. Is is the strongest rear out there... certainly NOT. Is it good for my application, yes. You have to look at the whole picture as well. I wanted the new 05 wheels and they help out on width. I didnt mind having the drum brakes in the rear. This is also a cheap conversion from fox parts as well for the future and I still will not lose any money on the parts I have (they always can be sold off to the fox guys).
Overall, I probably had 8-10 hours in totally rebuilding, cutting, welding, measuring, painting everything on mine and I didnt have to search the junk yards for weeks trying to find one.
Your mileage may vary, but I would do it again if I had to.
OK I must admit I read this thread a couple of days ago, but for the life of me I don't remember reading anything about what I'm going to ask. So if I'm repeating something that was already discussed shame on me 
What's wrong with the stock 8" rear in my 67? It started life behind a 289 with a C4. So if I go through it and upgrade my internals, will it be strong enough to handle say around 400 plus horses and torque?
What's wrong with the stock 8" rear in my 67? It started life behind a 289 with a C4. So if I go through it and upgrade my internals, will it be strong enough to handle say around 400 plus horses and torque?
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
Search, grasshopper. Yeah, you could upgrade it to handle that much, but you can spend just as much on an 8 and you can a 9.
Similar threads
