Check out the rear suspension on this II!

Blue Thunder said:
Cool stuff, except the part about "8.8" should say "9", then it would be indestructible.
Blue thunder, I used the 8.8 rear because it was the exact dimension I needed to use the 99 fox pony wheels. ( NO CUTTING JUST INSTALL & GO )But with so many II's running the 8" rears and All the fox GT's running 8.8's , what is wrong with it? I used an explorer rear, and the tubes are 3-1/4" over the mustangs 3.00" I am not making the horsepower to warrant a bullit proof rear, but I do feel the 8.8 is a good one,if not better than say a GM 10-12 bolt.
 
itsaMustangtoo said:
Blue thunder, I used the 8.8 rear because it was the exact dimension I needed to use the 99 fox pony wheels. ( NO CUTTING JUST INSTALL & GO )But with so many II's running the 8" rears and All the fox GT's running 8.8's , what is wrong with it? I used an explorer rear, and the tubes are 3-1/4" over the mustangs 3.00" I am not making the horsepower to warrant a bullit proof rear, but I do feel the 8.8 is a good one,if not better than say a GM 10-12 bolt.

The 8.8 is a great rear with a huge aftermarket following. It will easily handle 1000 hp when fully built.

Oh, and I just wanted to mention, those are not Fox Pony wheels, they are 99-04 6 cyl wheels.
 
itsaMustangtoo said:
Blue thunder, I used the 8.8 rear because it was the exact dimension I needed to use the 99 fox pony wheels. ( NO CUTTING JUST INSTALL & GO )But with so many II's running the 8" rears and All the fox GT's running 8.8's , what is wrong with it?


In the day I use to like rubbing the GM peoples noses in how difficult to set up and weak their 12 bolts were/ are in comparason to the 9". Use to like pointing out it took a real setup to need a 9" but I guessed their 12s were good enough for a Chevy.

:D

I was a ball buster way before there was an Internet and Toasters.


What's wrong with an 8.8??

Really, nothing. Not now.

The strengths of the 8.8, far as I can figure, is their pretty strong. They'll take more than an 8 but not as much as a 9. To actually need a 9" you have to make some serious twist.

The 8.8 is also lighter than a 9. The Old Unsprung Weight Deamon/ problem/ argument.

And the 8.8 is more efficent than the 9".

I'm not sure where the 8.8 and the 8 compare in these last two.


The main strength of the 8 and 9 inch is the removable carrier and the ability to have multiple chunks on the shelf ready to go.

Granted this was most important in the years between Over Drive (Dad ran an OD in the 50's). In those years a racer would drive a pretty good distance to get to a deacent track, swap gears and run. Then swap back.

I'll finish this later. Theres a symphony of Thunder and I need to be outback to hear it.
 
itsaMustangtoo said:
Blue thunder, I used the 8.8 rear because it was the exact dimension I needed to use the 99 fox pony wheels. ( NO CUTTING JUST INSTALL & GO )But with so many II's running the 8" rears and All the fox GT's running 8.8's , what is wrong with it? I used an explorer rear, and the tubes are 3-1/4" over the mustangs 3.00" I am not making the horsepower to warrant a bullit proof rear, but I do feel the 8.8 is a good one,if not better than say a GM 10-12 bolt.

I just have memories from working in a general repair shop and working on those 8.8 (7.5 similar?) type rears. Anytime I changed noisy wheel bearings, I either had to get a specific pair of off-set "repair" bearings or I had to replace the axles, since the bearings don't have inner races, they run right on the axles. I hated the C-clips, I hated having to lay under the car when I replaced the carrier bearings, spiders, or ring/pinion. Years of aggravation got to me, I guess.
A lot of guys are racing the 8.8s, and they seem to hold up OK when built-up or when in mild street applications, but I'm set in my ways.
 
Blue Thunder said:
I just have memories from working in a general repair shop and working on those 8.8 (7.5 similar?) type rears. Anytime I changed noisy wheel bearings, I either had to get a specific pair of off-set "repair" bearings or I had to replace the axles, since the bearings don't have inner races, they run right on the axles. I hated the C-clips, I hated having to lay under the car when I replaced the carrier bearings, spiders, or ring/pinion. Years of aggravation got to me, I guess.
A lot of guys are racing the 8.8s, and they seem to hold up OK when built-up or when in mild street applications, but I'm set in my ways.
I hear ya' , I used to rebuild corvette rears and am not a fan of c-clips myself . I had a narrowed 9" w/33"x 19.5 mickey 's in my 79 pro streeter w/a stout 460.It wasn't till after 2 rears and alot of whining that I pulled the whole thing out and had a 2x3 box tubing brace welded accross the housing.This ended my whining rearend problems ( guess I was flexing it pretty good) All I am saying is the 9" rears cannot be a whole lot better without the proper mods.BUT they are alot easyer to work on.
 
78Mach1 said:
I thought we had seen pics of that front end before. Sorry to see you're selling it after all the time and work you put into it.
I just thought I would see if I could sell it. I do not have high expectations. It is hard to justify what I want for it, for someone to just buy it( It is easier to sink the money in a car over time )But I will keep it and enjoy it if I don't sell it. I was just thinking I might like to get a 65 or find a nice original cobra or better yet a king !!PLUS I love the looks I get every time I drive it. I was just at a local show last weekend and was the ONLY II there, and got alot of good response.
:)
 
jeffnoel said:
itsamustangtoo, what year exploder did the rear come from?
A 94 two wheel drive. I think the rangers are the same in width when I was checking. Only one problem- offset is to the right instead of the left. Small mods to the floorpan where the driveshaft and pinion flange meet are all that was required though. A mustang 8.8 would probably work( I think they are centered)but I could not find one.