Dumb question regarding 8.8 rears

splogan

Founding Member

Mar 31, 2002

127

3

19

Jun 20, 2005

#1

• Jun 20, 2005

• #1

Ok I know an 8.8 from an explorer will fit if one axle is shortened. Can you use you existing axles and just use the pumpkin. Just a thought but I may be over simplifying things again.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#2

• Jun 21, 2005

• #2

If it will fit after shortening the long side to match the short side, I have a short side 31 spline axle to sell you, if you need one. I narrowed one for my 89 Ranger.

 

9

96 DOHC Cobra

Founding Member

Oct 14, 2001

542

0

16

Cerritos, CA

Jun 21, 2005

#3

• Jun 21, 2005

• #3

If you're planning on installing it in your 70 Stang, you probably don't want to shorten it. The method whereby you shorten one side and use to two Explorer short axles works best for 65-66 model Mustangs. For your car, it may come up too short. It would be about three inches shorter overall than your stock rear. The stock length Explorer rear is already about 3/4 - 1" shorter than your 70.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#4

• Jun 21, 2005

• #4

The measurement that I'd worry about after shortening it is the distance between the brake backing plates. The Stangs ( and I think all small-medium size Fords) had the spring perches at 43" centers, I've wondered how that fit into the equation after shortening the long side to match the short.

 

9

96 DOHC Cobra

Founding Member

Oct 14, 2001

542

0

16

Cerritos, CA

Jun 21, 2005

#5

• Jun 21, 2005

• #5

D.Hearne said:

The measurement that I'd worry about after shortening it is the distance between the brake backing plates. The Stangs ( and I think all small-medium size Fords) had the spring perches at 43" centers, I've wondered how that fit into the equation after shortening the long side to match the short.

Click to expand...

A good point to consider, but I think it comes out okay. Though my measurements aren't exact, I think they're close enough to determine that it's doable. If you set up the rear using two short side axles, you end up with a rear that's about 56 1/2" overall. Subtract the width of the brake hardware (about 2 1/2" per side) and you end up with a housing that's about 51 1/2" flange-to-flange. The leaf pads are 43" center-to-center or about 45 1/2" outside-to-outside of leaf pads. That leaves about 3" of space between the leafs and the housing flange on each side or about 2" between the leafs and the backing plates. It looks to me like it should work.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#6

• Jun 21, 2005

• #6

I wasn't sure about the distance, on my Ranger, the springs must be farther apart than the Stangs, the pads on mine are almost right up against the brake backing plates, but then again, mine's narrowed to 52" axle to axle.

 

splogan

Founding Member

Mar 31, 2002

127

3

19

Jun 21, 2005

#7

• Jun 21, 2005

• #7

So basicly I should be able to drop in an explorer rear.

 

shotsy

New Member

Apr 8, 2005

233

0

0

Oklahoma City

Jun 21, 2005

#8

• Jun 21, 2005

• #8

96 DOHC Cobra said:

If you're planning on installing it in your 70 Stang, you probably don't want to shorten it. The method whereby you shorten one side and use to two Explorer short axles works best for 65-66 model Mustangs. For your car, it may come up too short. It would be about three inches shorter overall than your stock rear. The stock length Explorer rear is already about 3/4 - 1" shorter than your 70.

Click to expand...

Is this correct!!! Almost to good to be true as I have a 70 Coupe and I'm looking at getting the exploder rear for pretty cheap?, Figured that the pumpkin had to be right i9n the middle? If it is the correct width without shortening is it OK to run the thing with the offset, Now I'm confused?

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#9

• Jun 21, 2005

• #9

splogan said:

So basicly I should be able to drop in an explorer rear.

Click to expand...

No, it's not a drop in. The spring hangers have to be relocated, and the pinion is offset 4" to the right, and the shock mounts have to be cut off. Then you'll also need the Explorer yoke to adapt your driveshaft to it. Yea, it's do-able, and depending on what you pay for it, you might be as well off narrowing a 9"

 

shotsy

New Member

Apr 8, 2005

233

0

0

Oklahoma City

Jun 21, 2005

#10

• Jun 21, 2005

• #10

Ok by dooable do you mean that the offset would be ok? I can handle the rest pretty easily but the offset thing concerns me? will the drive shaft still line up in the tunnel or am I going to have clearance issues

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#11

• Jun 21, 2005

• #11

I've heard of a few that used them as is as far as the pinion was concerned, but me personally, I'd at least narrow it a couple inches on the long side to at least bring it over some.

 

shotsy

New Member

Apr 8, 2005

233

0

0

Oklahoma City

Jun 21, 2005

#12

• Jun 21, 2005

• #12

Sorry to pester but I guess that it would look a bit goofey from the rear anyways? None of the JY's near me want to part with their 8.8 or nines for that matter if they still have them. The peg leg 8 thats in it might stay, but the cost for a locker and an set of 3.55's is up there, but i'd guess that the machine work wont come cheap either on the exploder rear. Thanks for the advice!!

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jun 21, 2005

#13

• Jun 21, 2005

• #13

Just keep looking, the deals are there for rearends. Try Sam at Sunman Classic Ford over in Seminole. He's got over 800 old Fords and I'm sure he's got a few 9's that will bolt in without cutting or welding. He's easy do deal with too. he won't pass up a good trade either.

 

9

96 DOHC Cobra

Founding Member

Oct 14, 2001

542

0

16

Cerritos, CA

Jun 22, 2005

#14

• Jun 22, 2005

• #14

The stock Explorer width is okay for a swap into a 67-70 Mustang, but as stated above, the brackets need to be relocated or removed and the pinion is offcenter. I've read that some have used them without any problem and others have had occaisional rubbing problems on lowered cars or on hard bumps. I think if you swap the Explorer pinion flange for a smaller diameter one off a Mustang it would solve the rubbing issue.
A lot of people will tell you to keep looking for a 9" and that there are still deals to be found. I'm one of them. However, it also depends on how patient you are and how long you're willing to look. In my opinion, though, you won't likely find or be able to build a similar 9" rear for the same price as an Explorer rear. Explorer rears are everywhere in junkyards for cheap. The majority are 3.73s w/ traction lok ("posi" to some), all are 31 spline, and all 95-up models have disc brakes. The disc brake models can be bought for $250 or less, and the earlier drum brake versions can be obtained for under $100. Grind off the old brackets yourself, pay a shop $100 to weld on new spring pads in the proper location and you're done. I seriously doubt anyone can duplicate this with a 9" for the same amount of money.