Has anyone heard of swapping Explorer rear disc brakes onto a 9"?

[68rustang]

Got to remember that the 8.8 does not have a chunk. The bare housing is thicker tubing and the center must have all the strength of the chunk to hold the diff and gears. The 8.8 is not a small rear, and I would imagine that it would not be very light considering that it is a strong rear.
Dave

When I think of a bare housing I think no gears, no axles, no brakes, no wheels, no tires, just tubes and center housing empty. I should have weighed mine before I out it under the car. That 114 number just sounded high according to my carfeully calibrated scale (me lifting it to put under the car)

 

[golf4283]

Thread resurrection:

I was kind of browsing the posts and was wondering if the explorer discs will bolt up to a versailles 9 inch. I have the disc brake components here at my house and I am gonng be picking up a versailles 9 inch. This would be a great deal cause versailles discs are becoming way too expensive.

 

[Edbert]

I'm willing to bet that someone has adapted the late model exploder...err exploRer...brakes to an early flange. But it would be about the same difficulty to bolt an 8.8 in there and wouldn't cost much (if any) more, plus you get the advantages of the modern axle design, mainly higher efficiency.

 

[D.Hearne]

I'm willing to bet that someone has adapted the late model exploder...err exploRer...brakes to an early flange. But it would be about the same difficulty to bolt an 8.8 in there and wouldn't cost much (if any) more, plus you get the advantages of the modern axle design, mainly higher efficiency.

8.8 is a Modern axles design? Who told you that? It's design is older than the 9". I wish Ford hadn't killed the 9 now with the problem I have with the "modern" 8.8 under my 95 E150 van. 140,000 miles and I now have to change the axles, bearings and seals (If I want to keep it and tow trailers) Got under it the other day and there was lube all over the right side brakes. Pulled the axle and the bearing had worn thru the hardened part of the axle. Only way to fix this right is to install 2 new axles and bearings. With a 9" all I'd have to do is change the bearings.

 

[Edbert]

8.8 is a Modern axles design? Who told you that?

it was an assumption, and you know what they say about that. Ford started using the 9 back in the 50s, and stopped (or started stopping ) in the 70s. All of the Fox and SN95 Mustangs had 8.8s (at least the HO/GT versions), so it only lead to that assumption. So when did Ford start using the 8.8?

Perhaps you mean the general design. The 10 and 12 bolt Chebbies are the same with rear cover and c-clips, and they go waaay back. Some of the DANA rears use that general design as well. Is that what you meant, that the rear-cover and c-clip design was older than the removeable carrier versions?

I have always been told that the 8.8 was more efficient (robbed less power) than the 9, but I have neither the time, the facilities, nor the interest to do my own testing. Is that not true? Why do you think Ford stopped using the removeable carrier design?

 

[D.Hearne]

They likely killed the 9" due to production costs. Cheaper to cast a single housing than to stamp the housing, then weld it up, plus cast the center section. Now on the 8.8 I have under my Ranger, I "updated" it to use 9" bearing housings to get rid of the "C" clips. I also strengthened it with a stud girdle rear cover. Onlt reason I went with it over a 9 was it's purchase price and what it had in it ( 3.73's, trac-loc & 31 spline axles) It surely wasn't over it maybe being more efficient.

 

[JMCX]

What master cylinder are you guys using when you do a rear disc swap?

 

[5.0StangRacer]

.

 

[67coupestang]

so what was the concensus on weither or not the expo brakes will mate to the early 9"s?? I have a 98 v8 expo in the drive and after I get the rear end (`73 9") out of my 67 tomarrow, I may tear apart my explorer to find out.

 

[67coupestang]

okay i measured the backing plate bolt pattern and its the same as whats on my '73 9" the flange on the 73 axles is smaller than the opening in the expo disc. I didnt get to measure the distance between the axle flange and the face of the axle on the explorer. I see kits all the time on ebay and some use spacers and some dont. are they really nessacary? I pulled one of the drums off today and found gear oil all over the shoes. and since they are brand new shoes I dont really feel like replacing them, so i guess i'll start hunting yards this week to find a wrecked expo...

 

[iskwezm]

On the Maverick site guys have been using late 90s Exploder rear discs on 8" rears. Same as the small bearing 9".
The bracket is metric and the holes are slightly smaller. They have been reaming them with a drill to fit the standard retainer bolts.
3 or 4 members claim they are a bolt up.
I intend to try.
Dave

When I worked at L/M i got a whole 99 Mountaiuneer axle and swpped the brakes onto my 8".completely bolt on.

 

[bnickel]

i wonder if the later 90's exploders used a different setup that the earlier ones?