View Full Version : Anyone using a 95-01 Explorer 8.8" rear?


burger
02-14-2006, 01:04 PM
A local guy who sets up rear ends recommended that I use a 95-01 Ford Explorer 8.8" rear in my '54 truck. It seems like a really good option...

1. Stronger than a GM 12-bolt
2. Disc brakes w/ seperate built in e-brakes
3. 3.27 or 3.73 ratio
4. Most have posi
5. Common and cheap (like some people I know!)
6. Approx 59.5" from flange-to-flange

The only downside that I can see is that I'll have to have the axles & hubs drilled for a Chevy bolt pattern (no biggie).

So.... has anyone used (and abused) them?? Any stories to tell??


Thanks!
Ed

spudshaft
02-14-2006, 01:19 PM
It's the same rear end as in a 5.0 mustang, but with disc brakes and 5 on X bolt pattern. They are pretty durable, but I'm not sure if stronger than a 12 bolt. I have an OT '89 Mustang OT and it is fine. They are pretty popular for mustang swaps to get the disk brakes.

A local guy who sets up rear ends recommended that I use a 95-01 Ford Explorer 8.8" rear in my '54 truck. It seems like a really good option...

1. Stronger than a GM 12-bolt
2. Disc brakes w/ seperate built in e-brakes
3. 3.27 or 3.73 ratio
4. Most have posi
5. Common and cheap (like some people I know!)
6. Approx 59.5" from flange-to-flange

The only downside that I can see is that I'll have to have the axles & hubs drilled for a Chevy bolt pattern (no biggie).

So.... has anyone used (and abused) them?? Any stories to tell??


Thanks!
Ed

Fat Hack
02-14-2006, 01:20 PM
Just be carefull when you shop for one. Ford had supplier problems with some Ranger/Exploder rear axles for a while...piss poor quality axles were the result. They didn't make a big stink out of it, just quietly replaced faulty rears when customers experienced a failure. Just inspect your junkyard Exploder rear axle to be sure it isn't here at a bargain price because it was one of the shit ones!

Aside from that, you should be okay...they're kinda ugly...but hidden under a body, who would notice or care, right?!

Beemer
02-14-2006, 01:25 PM
My father has a '00 in his '57 Chevy. They also have fairly large diameter 31-spline axles. He redrilled his to the chevy bolt pattern. His has the 3:73 posi with disk brakes. He's running a blown L88 427 with LOTS of modifications and 18x9 rear wheels. Rear is holding up fine. Swears he'll never go back to a 9" after his success with this rear.

Good story: His friend bought a brand new Z06 a couple years ago and decided he wanted to drag race my father. Long story short, the Corvette lost big through the 1/4, but since the '57 doesn't have overdrive the Corvette could go faster down the road.

Cool car that most here would condemn even though he did all engine, body and frame work (S-10 front widened 4") himself, just paid to have it painted.

spudshaft
02-14-2006, 01:33 PM
It's the same rear end as in a 5.0 mustang, but with disc brakes and 5 on X bolt pattern. They are pretty durable, but I'm not sure if stronger than a 12 bolt. I have an OT '89 Mustang OT and it is fine. They are pretty popular for mustang swaps to get the disk brakes.

A local guy who sets up rear ends recommended that I use a 95-01 Ford Explorer 8.8" rear in my '54 truck. It seems like a really good option...

1. Stronger than a GM 12-bolt
2. Disc brakes w/ seperate built in e-brakes
3. 3.27 or 3.73 ratio
4. Most have posi
5. Common and cheap (like some people I know!)
6. Approx 59.5" from flange-to-flange

The only downside that I can see is that I'll have to have the axles & hubs drilled for a Chevy bolt pattern (no biggie).

So.... has anyone used (and abused) them?? Any stories to tell??


Thanks!
Ed

thehazmatguy
02-14-2006, 02:27 PM
A local guy who sets up rear ends recommended that I use a 95-01 Ford Explorer 8.8" rear in my '54 truck. It seems like a really good option...

1. Stronger than a GM 12-bolt
2. Disc brakes w/ seperate built in e-brakes
3. 3.27 or 3.73 ratio
4. Most have posi
5. Common and cheap (like some people I know!)
6. Approx 59.5" from flange-to-flange

The only downside that I can see is that I'll have to have the axles & hubs drilled for a Chevy bolt pattern (no biggie).

So.... has anyone used (and abused) them?? Any stories to tell??


Thanks!
Ed

I would never have even considered an 8.8 rear end! That is what I love about this forum... that's good info. I belive stock 55 - 57 chevy's have a 60 inch wide rear... so this would be a really nice fit.

I'm just curious... I don't suppose anyone knows if 14 inch wheels would clear the calipers on that rear end? (I had a friend find that out the hard way on some second hand aftermarket brakes.)

Beemer
02-14-2006, 02:52 PM
I'm just curious... I don't suppose anyone knows if 14 inch wheels would clear the calipers on that rear end? (I had a friend find that out the hard way on some second hand aftermarket brakes.)

Goin off a shaky memory, I doubt it. They have some fairly large disk brakes. I think even with the Mustang 8.8's you'd have to use 15's.

Beemer
02-14-2006, 02:57 PM
I wouldn't use a Mustang 8.8 in a rod just because of the upper control arm mounts being cast into the rear...not that you couldn't cut them off. Though, if memory serves, all Mustang 8.8's are Traction-Loc since the lesser versions (NOT V8) of the Mustangs, to this day, use the 7.5. My '82 GT had a 7.5, I think that was the last year for them [7.5] in the V8 Mustangs.

Gotgas
02-14-2006, 03:03 PM
1986 was the first year for an 8.8 in a Mustang. They all had 2.73, 3.08, or (autos only) 3.27 ratio.

All Explorers had 15" or 16" wheels, so I'm not sure if 14" would fit. Probably depend on the wheel itself. And I bet you could trim the calipers if needed. There's only a 1/2" difference in radius.

286merc
02-14-2006, 05:32 PM
Another source for the 8.8 is RWD Volvos from 86-97. YES, Volvos! At least they wont have been abused and the prices around here are much less than from any Ford.

Flange to flange is around 54" which makes them a good fit for Model A thru shoebox years where an 8" would often be used.

Ratios mostly found are 3.54, 3.73 (turbo) and 4.10 (non turbo). Discs and traction lock are common on the upperscale models such as 940 with drums usually on the 240's.
The various brackets and coil spring supports are easily removed.

Volvo racing forums figure 400-450 hp max without some rework.

Beemer
02-14-2006, 06:01 PM
Do the Explorer rears have beefier axles? I recall my father saying his had 31spline axles that were large enough to rival a 9". I know his engine is closer to 500-550 horse and the rear's holding up without modification.

blackjack
02-14-2006, 06:08 PM
[QUOTE=286merc]Another source for the 8.8 is RWD Volvos from 86-96. YES, Volvos! At least they wont have been abused and the prices around here are much less than from any Ford.
QUOTE]

Volvo read ends are widely used over here - often with the Rover (Buick) V8. I didn't know that it was, if fact, an 8.8 Ford.

I have an 8.8 Mustang axle in my 27 Modified - do you know if the diff covers from the Volvo will fit straight on to the Ford axle?

BTW - the only problem with the 8.8 is that it is pig ugly (why I want to swap the diff cover).

286merc
02-14-2006, 07:19 PM
[QUOTE=286merc]Another source for the 8.8 is RWD Volvos from 86-96. YES, Volvos! At least they wont have been abused and the prices around here are much less than from any Ford.
QUOTE]

Volvo read ends are widely used over here - often with the Rover (Buick) V8. I didn't know that it was, if fact, an 8.8 Ford.

I have an 8.8 Mustang axle in my 27 Modified - do you know if the diff covers from the Volvo will fit straight on to the Ford axle?

BTW - the only problem with the 8.8 is that it is pig ugly (why I want to swap the diff cover).

Im not sure about European fittment. The post 85 Volvos 8.8's here are all SAE threads wheras the prior versions were a Volvo built metric COPY of the 8.8, nowhere as robust. I believe all that info can be found on EU Volvo forums. Also try www.brickyard.com

As far as years the 900 series went to 1997 to be replaced by the S/V90; I dont know if the current crop of the 90 series are RWD.

BTW, the 8.8 is a Dana built unit, not homegrown by Ford!

sawzall
02-14-2006, 07:46 PM
ed.. check on the cost of rebuild parts for the rear brakes first.. I had to buy new calipers, Rotors and hoses and ended up with the most expensive junkyard rear ever.. the 75.00 investment at shorty's turned into a very pricey rear axle with the 120.00 calipers.. (EACH!)

I say stay with what you have, especially if its not broke..

jeff

burger
02-14-2006, 08:05 PM
jeff,

i'll be using the 4.11 10-bolt that's in there for now... but i'd like something with friendlier gears since i do at least 90% of my driving on the highway.

fwiw, i just checked the autozone website, and the calipers are listed at $41 each after a $57 core. the parts are kinda expensive, but nothing too crazy... anyway it seems like the best option right now. i was quoted around $600 to put an eaton posi in my 10-bolt and change the gears... on top of that it will still be a 7.5" ring gear!


ed

ps- what did you put an 8.8 in? the 40?

sawzall
02-14-2006, 08:11 PM
yeah I have a 8.8 from a lincoln.. it works ok.. I think the gears are 3.55 or so.. (i had looked at it one time)

like I said I bought the rear for 75 bucks at our favorite u pull it.. and ran it without doing anything to it for 5 years.. then just before the big trip I did a total redo.. IT hurt $$$

jeff

..
jeff,

i'll be using the 4.11 10-bolt that's in there for now... but i'd like something with friendlier gears since i do at least 90% of my driving on the highway.

fwiw, i just checked the autozone website, and the calipers are listed at $41 each after a $57 core. the parts are kinda expensive, but nothing too crazy... anyway it seems like the best option right now. i was quoted around $600 to put an eaton posi in my 10-bolt and change the gears... on top of that it will still be a 7.5" ring gear!


ed

ps- what did you put an 8.8 in? the 40?

burger
02-14-2006, 09:37 PM
yeah I have a 8.8 from a lincoln.. it works ok.. I think the gears are 3.55 or so.. (i had looked at it one time)

like I said I bought the rear for 75 bucks at our favorite u pull it.. and ran it without doing anything to it for 5 years.. then just before the big trip I did a total redo.. IT hurt $$$

jeff

..

have you ever been to a yard in king of prussia named rossi's? he has two explorer 8.8's for sale, $200 each.

Al T
02-14-2006, 09:56 PM
A buddy of mine was looking at one for his 56. When it was pulled out of the wrecked Explorer the pinion was offset to one side. Does a 4x4 Explorer have the pinion off set for the transfer case? I'm guessing that's the issue? The Explorer rears you guys are using, are they from 2 wheel drive Explorers?

Thanks.


My father has a '00 in his '57 Chevy. They also have fairly large diameter 31-spline axles. He redrilled his to the chevy bolt pattern. His has the 3:73 posi with disk brakes. He's running a blown L88 427 with LOTS of modifications and 18x9 rear wheels. Rear is holding up fine. Swears he'll never go back to a 9" after his success with this rear.

Good story: His friend bought a brand new Z06 a couple years ago and decided he wanted to drag race my father. Long story short, the Corvette lost big through the 1/4, but since the '57 doesn't have overdrive the Corvette could go faster down the road.

Cool car that most here would condemn even though he did all engine, body and frame work (S-10 front widened 4") himself, just paid to have it painted.

KCRodder
02-14-2006, 10:41 PM
I was just getting ready to say that about the offest pinion.... All Explorers and Rangers both 2x4 and 4x4 have those, supposedly the engine and transmission are offest in those vehicles. Ranger 8.8's were 28 spline axles with up to a 4.10 gear unless it was an FX4 then you got 31 splines and up to 4.56, FX4's came standard with a track-lok. Explorers got the 31 spline axles but only up to a 3.73 gear. Only difference between the housings themselves was the 4x2 Rangers and all Explorers had spring under axle pads while the 4x4 Rangers had a spring over pad. Strength wise, realistically your going to have a hard time breaking this axle during street use. The ring, pinion, and shafts are quite large compaired to a GM 12 bolt. The offset pinion has made this axle hard to swap to other vehicles due to driveline vibration from the compound angle the driveshaft is required to operate at (down and to the right). As far as wheel fitment I belive the compact spare was a 14 incher. I know that drum brake models will accept a 14 inch wheel as this was standard fare on all the 80's model Mustangs, Rangers, and Explorers.

Just be careful of the dreaded 7.5 axle... looks similar and uses the same 28 spline axles but has a much smaller ring gear...

asillymick
02-14-2006, 10:50 PM
I didn't read what everone else posted so forgive me if it's been covered already. I am running a 4X4 Explorer rearend in a 54 Ford Sedan with a healthy 302 punched 60 over and the gear ratio in the rear is... I think 3.50. I like it but it is not a drag racing rear. Just newer with available parts. I like it, it does what I need.

Comet
02-14-2006, 10:57 PM
Just an FYI, the aftermarket offers gearing choices from 3.0-6.14 for the 8.8 depending on model.

Henry Floored
02-14-2006, 11:49 PM
That pinion offset should'nt hurt a bit unless you can see the rear in a bare bones car. Don't forget you can put 9" ends on the 8.8 housing pretty cheap then you can have that long axle cut and resplined to match the shorter side. This also allows you to eliminate the c- clips.

fab32
02-15-2006, 03:29 PM
Just be carefull when you shop for one. Ford had supplier problems with some Ranger/Exploder rear axles for a while...piss poor quality axles were the result. They didn't make a big stink out of it, just quietly replaced faulty rears when customers experienced a failure. Just inspect your junkyard Exploder rear axle to be sure it isn't here at a bargain price because it was one of the shit ones!

Aside from that, you should be okay...they're kinda ugly...but hidden under a body, who would notice or care, right?!

So, What was the FAILURE? Housing, axle shaft, bearings,differential? Also what was the cause of the failure? Heat treat, component fracture, dimensional tolerance specification, etc.?

Frank

Gotgas
02-15-2006, 03:34 PM
have you ever been to a yard in king of prussia named rossi's? he has two explorer 8.8's for sale, $200 each.I've never paid more than $85 for an 8.8, and I usually seek out Lincoln and T-bird disc rears. The only benefit to a Mustang rear is that it is slightly narrower and always has a (easily rebuildable!) limited slip diff. T-bird TCs from '87-88 do too, and they have 3.55 or 3.73 ratios. Lincolns are basically junk except that they are 5-lug; they have 2.73-3.27 ratio and are all open rears. Bleh.Only difference between the housings themselves was the 4x2 Rangers and all Explorers had spring under axle pads while the 4x4 Rangers had a spring over pad. Nope, all Explorers and Rangers are spring on top of rear. You have to do a flip kit to get a reasonable drop.

KCRodder
02-15-2006, 05:22 PM
Nope, all Explorers and Rangers are spring on top of rear. You have to do a flip kit to get a reasonable drop.

Hate to breat it to you... but... your wrong. (actually... that felt kinda good! :D ) You can argue the subject if you like, but I'd rather you read a book, or a webpage, or just go look at them first. I don't want to have to prove to you that the sky is blue, the grass is green, and the spring pads on an Explorer are under the axle. :rolleyes: ...Also, the trac-lock (Fords version of the limited slip) is common between all 8.8's. And the fox body (car versions) of the 8.8 are off topic. Unless Burger wants to install a triangulated 4 link, discussing them is just unnessesary information.

BTW, did anyone post about the Explorer & FX4 8.8's being 1.5 inches wider than the standard Ranger 8.8's? ... I couldn't remember so I thought I'd mention it.

Beemer
02-15-2006, 05:31 PM
Hate to breat it to you... but... your wrong. (actually... that felt kinda good! :D ) You can argue the subject if you like, but I'd rather you read a book, or a webpage, or just go look at them first. I don't want to have to prove to you that the sky is blue, the grass is green, and the spring pads on an Explorer are under the axle. :rolleyes: ...Also, the trac-lock (Fords version of the limited slip) is common between all 8.8's. And the fox body (car versions) of the 8.8 are off topic. Unless Burger wants to install a triangulated 4 link, discussing them is just unnessesary information.

BTW, did anyone post about the Explorer & FX4 8.8's being 1.5 inches wider than the standard Ranger 8.8's? ... I couldn't remember so I thought I'd mention it.

While you're right about the spring under issue (my Ranger rear was spring under anyway), I disagree about the Fox body issue. It is not that off topic, and anyone who needs a Trac-Loc diff might like to know where to get one. It is also not that hard to cut off the upper control-arm mounts or just not use them. Just because they came from the factory in a 4-link setup doesn't mean thats how they have to be used in a rod.

oldcarmike
02-15-2006, 05:38 PM
Ratios mostly found are 3.54, 3.73 (turbo) and 4.10 (non turbo). Discs and traction lock are common on the upperscale models such as 940 with drums usually on the 240's.
..

The 240 Series did NOT come with drum brakes. I had a '69 142 and a '73 245 and both had disc brakes from the factory with built in E-brakes inside the 'drum' of the rotors.

sawzall
02-15-2006, 08:42 PM
It is also not that hard to cut off the upper control-arm mounts or just not use them. Just because they came from the factory in a 4-link setup doesn't mean thats how they have to be used in a rod.

i have the upper mounts on the rear under the 40

um.. if your worried bout where the spring pad is located... your on the wrong forum.. hack.. i thought my linc rear was a 3.55? maybe i am remembering wrong thou...

ed.. my pal duncan got one of those rears for his 53 ford panel.. from rossi.. good deal round here if you dont have the time to pull one..

Jeff

born2late
02-15-2006, 11:15 PM
I just narrowed an explorer rear for my buddie's A roadster. Cut like 4" out of the long side tube and went to the pick a part and got a second short side axle for $13.00. Now the pinion is centered. The 31 splines are beefier than a 9". Fits real nice. Can't remember the overall width at the moment. Cleaned all the mounts off the rear and put Speedway hairpin mounts on. Slick as shit. Won't see the ugly thing cuz the car is channeled. Cheap and easy!!

Gotgas
02-16-2006, 04:59 PM
Hate to breat it to you... but... your wrong. (actually... that felt kinda good! :D ) You can argue the subject if you like, but I'd rather you read a book, or a webpage, or just go look at them first. I don't want to have to prove to you that the sky is blue, the grass is green, and the spring pads on an Explorer are under the axle. :rolleyes: ...Also, the trac-lock (Fords version of the limited slip) is common between all 8.8's. And the fox body (car versions) of the 8.8 are off topic. Unless Burger wants to install a triangulated 4 link, discussing them is just unnessesary information.

BTW, did anyone post about the Explorer & FX4 8.8's being 1.5 inches wider than the standard Ranger 8.8's? ... I couldn't remember so I thought I'd mention it.Wow, 35 posts and you're already a verified prick.

I did look it up, and you are correct, late model 2wd Explorers are spring under axle. Kudos. However, YOU'RE wrong when you say 2wd Rangers are too - want me to snap some pics of the axle under my '99 Ranger for you? Can't tell you how good it feels to correct your facts and your spelling all in one post.

And idiot, no one would ever consider running Ford's poorly designed four-link under the rear of their car. If you can't cut and weld spring perches, this ain't the place for you.

In fact, if you're always such a dick, this place DEFINITELY isn't for you.

Beemer
02-16-2006, 05:53 PM
Wow, 35 posts and you're already a verified prick.

I did look it up, and you are correct, late model 2wd Explorers are spring under axle. Kudos. However, YOU'RE wrong when you say 2wd Rangers are too - want me to snap some pics of the axle under my '99 Ranger for you? Can't tell you how good it feels to correct your facts and your spelling all in one post.

And idiot, no one would ever consider running Ford's poorly designed four-link under the rear of their car. If you can't cut and weld spring perches, this ain't the place for you.

In fact, if you're always such a dick, this place DEFINITELY isn't for you.

Dont the 2wd Rangers use the 7.5"? Thats what I got out of a '97 Ranger anyway. I could have sworn that it was spring under (not that it matters).

Godzilla
02-16-2006, 06:17 PM
Well if you are still interested in testimonials...I was running a 8.8 Explorer rear in Godzilla. The disc brakes worked really well...there were only a few things I did not like about it. Gears drop out back like 12 bolt, C clips and difficult to get a mini-spool in and out.

My axles were 31 splined and had "tiger stripe" heat treatment. I was prepared to run a blown BBC with them...but then put in a spool and c-clip eliminators.

Plan "B"...I was going to run it till I killed it and then cut the center out and weld in a 9" Ford center. They are cheap and easy to find...and with any luck I would be able to use the axles too. Hope this helps....Good luck. Ron.

dragrcr50
02-16-2006, 06:47 PM
I know you aint gonna believe this but i have used like ten of them and have a brand new one in stock, I bought all of them compete new from aerial group in okc one is in godzillas 55 gasser runs high 11s with full on slicks and never broke it..... they have the 4 1/2 bolt pattern and brakes have the e brake inside the rotors , very nice unit and 31 spline axles .... :cool:

286merc
02-16-2006, 06:51 PM
.

The 240 Series did NOT come with drum brakes. I had a '69 142 and a '73 245 and both had disc brakes from the factory with built in E-brakes inside the 'drum' of the rotors.

Nobody is talking about antiques.
The subject is the Dana 8.8 rear end which didnt debut on the 240 until 85-86 when drums were standard and discs optional.

burger
02-16-2006, 11:10 PM
some of you guys are getting pretty pissy about this
it's just the internet
anyway thanks for all the testimonials and advice
if i replace my rear this is the route i will go


ed

MattB
02-17-2006, 02:18 AM
Dont the 2wd Rangers use the 7.5"? Thats what I got out of a '97 Ranger anyway. I could have sworn that it was spring under (not that it matters).

I'm pretty sure that just the 4.0 Rangers got the 8.8" rear. Since all 90's Explorers have at LEAST a 4.0 in them, they all have 8.8's.

bcarlson
02-17-2006, 06:05 AM
A local guy who sets up rear ends recommended that I use a 95-01 Ford Explorer 8.8" rear in my '54 truck. It seems like a really good option...

1. Stronger than a GM 12-bolt
2. Disc brakes w/ seperate built in e-brakes
3. 3.27 or 3.73 ratio
4. Most have posi
5. Common and cheap (like some people I know!)
6. Approx 59.5" from flange-to-flange

The only downside that I can see is that I'll have to have the axles & hubs drilled for a Chevy bolt pattern (no biggie).

So.... has anyone used (and abused) them?? Any stories to tell??


Thanks!
Ed

I haven't put mine in yet (just got the old axle out on Tuesday (how's that for a valentine?! :) ), but it's sitting in the garage. I haven't set it next to the old axle, but if memory serves, it's about two inches narrower than stock. I am planning on putting on 15" or 16" smoothies, so I haven't tried it with 14" wheels, and I don't have any around, but boy is it close to the disc backing plate with the 15's... 16"-ers seem very comfortable... plenty of room.

I got one from a 2000 exploder, with the discs... most people won't even know since it'll have the aforementioned smoothies... and it was the same price as the drum version.

Let me know if I can take any measurements or anything for you...

Ben

bcarlson
02-17-2006, 06:14 AM
...all Explorers and Rangers are spring on top of rear. You have to do a flip kit to get a reasonable drop.

Weird, I must have a one-off then, because mine was spring under axle... I just finished cutting the mounts off! :) Oh, and I was going to say, I was on horrible amounts of drugs (back surgery) and got taken, but I ended up paying around $300 for mine. It's a 3.73, and they swore it was a posi, but I didn't think to check (it's not)... the cheapest I've seen them up here (of course after buying mine) was $150. Oh, and be certain to get the calipers/rotors, etc. with it, if nothing else, for the core charge!!

Ben

leadsled01
02-17-2006, 06:19 AM
Just be carefull when you shop for one. Ford had supplier problems with some Ranger/Exploder rear axles for a while...piss poor quality axles were the result. They didn't make a big stink out of it, just quietly replaced faulty rears when customers experienced a failure. Just inspect your junkyard Exploder rear axle to be sure it isn't here at a bargain price because it was one of the shit ones!

Aside from that, you should be okay...they're kinda ugly...but hidden under a body, who would notice or care, right?!
Correct, neighbor had to have his replaced after 20,000 miles.

6-71
02-17-2006, 06:35 AM
Maybe this doesnt really have much to do with this topic, but I have owned 3 4x2 ford rangers, 1988,1996,1998, and I have installed flip kits in all 3 of them. they come with the spring over the rear end. The explorer on the other hand does have the spring under if I remember correctly. just my .02 worth

Godzilla
02-17-2006, 09:17 PM
Well if you are still interested in testimonials...I was running a 8.8 Explorer rear in Godzilla. The disc brakes worked really well...there were only a few things I did not like about it. Gears drop out back like 12 bolt, C clips and difficult to get a mini-spool in and out.

My axles were 31 splined and had "tiger stripe" heat treatment. I was prepared to run a blown BBC with them...but then put in a spool and c-clip eliminators.

Plan "B"...I was going to run it till I killed it and then cut the center out and weld in a 9" Ford center. They are cheap and easy to find...and with any luck I would be able to use the axles too. Hope this helps....Good luck. Ron.Here are a few pictures of the 8.8 in Godzilla. Fit very nicely with a little tire showing at the fender (wheel 10" wide 3.5 backspacing). Good luck. Ron.

163588

163589

163590

kennedy
02-17-2006, 11:40 PM
I tore the one out of my 97 F-150 4x4 awhile back some friends talked me in to going off roading one night. Had it in 2 wheel drive and hammered down on it while going up a hill. I busted the carrier. My buddy tore his out a month before that doing the same thing.

A posi unit is hard to come by , or atleast thats what the junkyard said when i was hunting one for my truck I ended up putting a 9.75 back in it because i couldn't find a 8.8 with the same gear as my transfer case. A 8.8 posi unit can be a little $$$ my friend that tore his gave around $800 for his.

wgaf41971
03-08-2009, 01:08 PM
I just bought an explorer 8.8 for my 1950 chevy coupe. Disk brakes, 31 spline axles, posi, 4:10 gears, complete for $100 from my local junk yard. For all you get you can not beat everything you get with these axles! It even looks like it has new brakes and I can reuse the E-brake cables.

Choptop
03-08-2009, 01:15 PM
From memory.. and this could be wrong....

a downside to the 8.8 is that the bearing ride right on the axle shaft so that they wear the shaft itself. If you have to replace the bearings, you can only rebuild the rear end once as the rebuild kit includes a spacer the moves the bearings to the new part of the axle. After that, its times for new axle shafts.

now... how often do you have to rebuild the rear bearings? Not too often, but just be aware, this may come in to play if you are using this rear end in a high HP application.

slepe67
03-08-2009, 01:53 PM
I picked mine off of a 98 Explorer from the local U PULL IT for $110, including tax. I got everything for it, including the calipers. The truck had been wrecked very recently (front end) and the rear disc calipers were stil shiny. It's getting my transeverse rear spring mounts welded onto it, and I also plan to ad a stud gridle to it, for some added strength. Also, the off-road guys ran a bead around where the axle tube joins up to the pumpkin, so the tubes don't slp/spin. I did this also. Can't hurt, and cost me a few sticks of welding rod. FWIW: 4.10:1, with posi...

Pics to come when the mounts are welded on.

oldebob
03-08-2009, 02:41 PM
I have one in my Zephyr from a '88 Crown Victoria Intercepter They had rear drums. Ford still had the 351W in the cop cars then so it was a complete power train donor deal. I was suprised that the gear ratio this one had ,2.87 to one . With the AOD in thats approx 1700 RPM at 75 mph. Only down side I see is the axle brg rides on the axle. If you run shortn'd axles and have a brg take a crap on the road you got kind of a problem.

oldebob
03-08-2009, 02:50 PM
From memory.. and this could be wrong....

a downside to the 8.8 is that the bearing ride right on the axle shaft so that they wear the shaft itself. If you have to replace the bearings, you can only rebuild the rear end once as the rebuild kit includes a spacer the moves the bearings to the new part of the axle. After that, its times for new axle shafts.

now... how often do you have to rebuild the rear bearings? Not too often, but just be aware, this may come in to play if you are using this rear end in a high HP application.
I started my above post before this one of Choptop. I type slow and ate lunch before I finished it . THEN I read his. I had never heard about the bearing spacer deal being a quick fix. So just to be comfortable on long trips I got 2 more axles shortened and stashed them under the back seat with a couple of brgs and seals. $$$$$:rolleyes:

sdluck
03-08-2009, 03:17 PM
Federal Mogul offset brg repair rp 5707 8.8 inch ford

46fatford
03-08-2009, 03:19 PM
My dad and I got 1 from a 98 Mercury Mountaineer that had 3:73 gears, Trac loc and 31 spline axles, disc brakes all for 150.00. Fit under his 41 Ford perfect. Easier to find than narrow 9 in and a lot stronger than 8".

rusty f100
03-08-2009, 03:55 PM
i've got a 2000 in my 56. shortened 3"
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h72/roodogg/more%20f100/IMG_1340.jpg?t=1236545553

rusty f100
03-08-2009, 03:57 PM
i used 9" ends to relocate the bearings and a clip eliminator

JRODHOTROD
03-08-2009, 05:28 PM
02 explorer rearend, 3.55 trac loc, 62 chevy truck trailing arms. All in a 51 chevy sedan.
The pinion is offset 2.36". Havent driven it with this setup yet.

pompadour
03-08-2009, 07:46 PM
I have a mustang 8.8 in my model a coupe that is the same width but the pumkin in centered

jr9162
04-17-2009, 07:28 PM
What's the wheel lug bolt pattern for those in Thunderbirds and Lincolns?

Width WMS to WMS for 8.8" axles from both these cars? :)

dumprat
04-17-2009, 09:24 PM
I am running two short side axles in one for my 50 shoebox. Comes out to 56.625 wide.

fast Ed
04-17-2009, 09:34 PM
What's the wheel lug bolt pattern for those in Thunderbirds and Lincolns?

Width WMS to WMS for 8.8" axles from both these cars? :)

If you're talking solid axle T-Bird (pre-89), they are 4 on 4-1/4". Lincoln Mark VII up to 92 was 5 on 4-1/2". If you're looking at the IRS in 89-97 Bird and 93-98 Mark VIII, those are 5 on 4-1/4", but can be converted easily to 5 on 4-1/2" using 99-04 Mustang Cobra hubs.

No width dimensions handy, sorry.


cheers
Ed N.

yule16met
04-17-2009, 10:05 PM
I put an 8.8 in my wrangler and knowing how strong they were and how easy they were to set up I put one in my modified. Theres alot of yoke adaptors you can put on the front pinion and they wont break!

You want to look for 95-2001 explorers because of the disk breaks and 31 spline shafts. There are also upgraded shafts for them too if your running more than say 500 HP. Theres more Tech on these axles than any one thing I have EVER seen on the HAMB.

I have never had anyone notice that my diff is off center and its out in the open for everyone to see.

t-rod
04-17-2009, 10:20 PM
My axle is a '92 (so I'm told, it was pulled and on a rack when I got it). It has drum brakes. What I wasn't expecting was the bigger axle tubes. Aftermarket brackets are for 3" tubes, these are 3 1/4. I had to grind out my 4 bar brackets to fit. I also got a pinion yoke from ford racing to replace the flange.

jr9162
04-18-2009, 01:32 AM
Thanks fast Ed.

So the solid axle Lincolns (with the 8.8") were 5 on 4.5" as well. Anybody know the width WMS to WMS of the 8.8" axles in the Volvos and what lug pattern they came with? I'm fishing... :D

sewanhaka62
04-18-2009, 05:21 PM
there is a tec. article at v8s10.com on cutting down a 8.8 rear and using two short axles .. i think it was at the top of there drivetrain fourm
..driver's door code for explorer with 8.8
d1 = 327 posi 41 = 327 open
d2 = 410 posi 43 = 308 open
d4 = 373 posi 44 = 373 open
d5 = 373 posi 45 = 355 open

rears also have a tag 3L73 = posi 373 [no letter] open
leaf spring --- 59 1/2 wide

t-rod
05-29-2009, 06:23 PM
I just got my housing back after having the long side narrowed for a short side axle. I had measured the difference between the two axles and asked the guy to narrow the housing by that much. Measuring that way made the long side about 3/16" longer than the short side. When I put it together for a test fit, it didn't quite fit. The brake drum bottomed out on the backing plate. I don't know if I mismeasured or he did, but the housing needs to be a little narrower. Lesson learned, anyone else doing this, make the long side tube the same width as the short side.

nailhead terry
05-29-2009, 09:06 PM
got one in my old truck make sure no one cuts your hoses or brake cables there not cheap great rear use overdrive trans if you can mine is a 373 gear it buzzes a little hard down the road

uglydog56
05-29-2009, 09:54 PM
I have one I am in the process of putting under my 56 210 4dr. The internet lists width 59 1/2 to 59 3/4. To my eye they are 59 1/2. Stock 55-57 is 59 3/4. I got 3.73 posi rear out of a 95 4x4 complete with ebrake cables, swaybar, brakes, hoses, lines, everything for 100. I have to turn the rotors and put new pads on it, but realistically could get away with not for awhile. The weak spot in these are the carriers, about 500hp limit. The axles are rated to 6500lbs, about the same as a moser for this spline. The only thing I have to do is move the spring perches and fab up something for ebrake.

These are a great cheap rear axle, but only if they are complete, and only if you don't have to change gear ratios or add posi. If you have to change gears, add posi, or replace missing brake parts, they get expensive in a hurry. At that point, you might as well get a 9" bolt in.

X--GASSER
05-29-2009, 10:09 PM
cool info...

big duece
05-29-2009, 10:13 PM
I have a set of brakes of 97 explorer 8.8 for sale in the classifieds. They will bolt up the ford 9 inch with torino style flange. Same brake offset. They are blasted, painted and new emergency brake shoes and hardware, no rotors.

HOT40ROD
05-29-2009, 10:20 PM
I'm pretty sure that just the 4.0 Rangers got the 8.8" rear. Since all 90's Explorers have at LEAST a 4.0 in them, they all have 8.8's.


Your right my 91 ranger has a 8.8 under it. it a 3.73 trac lock from the factory. Its a drum brake rear and has 14 inch rims on it. The truck is a 4.0, 5 speed.

some of the 4 cyl. and 3.0 have 7.5 rears.

HOT40ROD
05-29-2009, 10:32 PM
Check this site: www.therangerstation.com/tech_library

On the center of the page click on Ford 7.5/8.8. There is all the info on the rears.

RatPin
02-24-2010, 09:09 PM
Can someone tell me if the center housing on the explorer 8.8 is cast. I need a rear end I can locate my panhard on, but will not weld to cast. If the explorer is steel like the ford 9" then I'm going to get one.

Thanks!

wheelbilly
02-24-2010, 09:17 PM
The diff housing is cast. Had one in my Jeep based rock crawler buggy. 31 spline, tough as nails, then I put the Superior Super 88 c-clip eliminator kit with alloy 9" shafts in it. What a great axle...thought about getting one for my rod project since I was familiar with them, but ended up with an 8" in a package deal.

t-rod
02-24-2010, 09:29 PM
Can someone tell me if the center housing on the explorer 8.8 is cast. I need a rear end I can locate my panhard on, but will not weld to cast. If the explorer is steel like the ford 9" then I'm going to get one.

Thanks!
Check the pic in post #51. My panhard bar mounting bracket was inspired by that one. By "inspired" I mean I totally ripped it off. Thanks RustyF100!

ol'chevy
02-24-2010, 09:43 PM
I ran one from a 90 town car with a pegleg 3.27. Now I run a 95 tbird IRS, 8.8. The town car was about 61", the tbird is around 58" I think. You have to use at least 15" rims with disc brakes.
To decode an 8.8, look at the metl tag on the gear cover. Ignore the top numbers. On the second line, the first st of #s is the ratio and limited slip or not. Mine says 3 L 08.....a 3.08 limited slip. If no L between #s, it is open. The center 3s will be 8.8, the last 3s don't matter.

I know they come in 3.08, 3.27, 3.73.

A friend runs one in a rambler wagon with a blower, he abuses the shit out of it and hasn't broken it yet.

The t bird hubs are actually metric, at least in the 95. Mustang hubs are supposed to be direct replacement, but I just redrilled mine.

jetnow1
02-24-2010, 10:05 PM
The Mazda suv is a rebadged explorer- just another source for these
rears... Jim

RatPin
02-24-2010, 10:38 PM
Check the pic in post #51. My panhard bar mounting bracket was inspired by that one. By "inspired" I mean I totally ripped it off. Thanks RustyF100!

Do you have any pictures of your? From the front how it bolts up. Would you want to make one for a fellow enthusiast...? I'm pulling my hair out trying to locate a spot to mount my panhard on my big dana 44 with airbags.