ford 9" and 8.8
#1
ford 9" and 8.8
hey guys, well today comin home from my friends truck shop i saw this really old f-150 that wasnt being used and got plowed with snow in the parking lot, now the body is just rusted like crap and there's speed holes EVERYWHERE! but apparently the engine is strong and was re-built a while ago, so i go and ask the guy if its for sale and he wants $500 for it but imo and from knowledge that truck isnt worth $500, $200 at the most! anyways back to the point, since the body is crapped out i was more interested in the nine inch in the back. Now how much wider is the 9inch than the 8.8 in the ranger? and is the 9 inch a whole much better than 8.8? and would it be worth puttin a 9" under the ranger or is the 8.8 strong enough??
Sorry for the long post but i thought i would jus share
Sorry for the long post but i thought i would jus share
#3
I think 9" is a lil overkill......unless you have a Built v8 in it....
Some info....
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~biesiade/Fordrears.html ...... Looks like its 58 3/4" wide flange to flange....
http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm ...<Interesting stuff!
http://members.***.net/quanno/ford88.html
From what I gather, the 9" is and inch shorter? maybe? I thinK...cant find any def info.......
Bolt pattern is different there you would have to get wheels.....
Some info....
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~biesiade/Fordrears.html ...... Looks like its 58 3/4" wide flange to flange....
http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm ...<Interesting stuff!
http://members.***.net/quanno/ford88.html
From what I gather, the 9" is and inch shorter? maybe? I thinK...cant find any def info.......
Bolt pattern is different there you would have to get wheels.....
Last edited by xtremeranger; 02-07-2007 at 07:25 PM.
#4
#5
#8
#9
#10
#11
Originally Posted by xtremeranger
I think 9" is a lil overkill......unless you have a Built v8 in it....
Some info....
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~biesiade/Fordrears.html ...... Looks like its 58 3/4" wide flange to flange....
http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm ...<Interesting stuff!
http://members.***.net/quanno/ford88.html
From what I gather, the 9" is and inch shorter? maybe? I thinK...cant find any def info.......
Bolt pattern is different there you would have to get wheels.....
Some info....
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~biesiade/Fordrears.html ...... Looks like its 58 3/4" wide flange to flange....
http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm ...<Interesting stuff!
http://members.***.net/quanno/ford88.html
From what I gather, the 9" is and inch shorter? maybe? I thinK...cant find any def info.......
Bolt pattern is different there you would have to get wheels.....
in a couple years it will have a nice thumpin v8....
#12
Originally Posted by xtremeranger
I think 9" is a lil overkill......unless you have a Built v8 in it....
Some info....
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~biesiade/Fordrears.html ...... Looks like its 58 3/4" wide flange to flange....
http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm ...<Interesting stuff!
http://members.***.net/quanno/ford88.html
From what I gather, the 9" is and inch shorter? maybe? I thinK...cant find any def info.......
Bolt pattern is different there you would have to get wheels.....
Some info....
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~biesiade/Fordrears.html ...... Looks like its 58 3/4" wide flange to flange....
http://www.kevinstang.com/Ninecase.htm ...<Interesting stuff!
http://members.***.net/quanno/ford88.html
From what I gather, the 9" is and inch shorter? maybe? I thinK...cant find any def info.......
Bolt pattern is different there you would have to get wheels.....
Wow thats a great write up!!! and is now added to favs...
#13
#14
#15
Originally Posted by blackbetty
and is the exploder axle any wider than the one in the ranger?
Originally Posted by sonic_03
nopers..identical..
To clear it up, the explorer axle is in fact wider than the ranger's. Depending on year the explorer is 1.5 - 3 inches wider, or .75 to 1.5 wider on each side.
If you're definately looking for the Explorer axles with disk brakes (95+ I believe, could be 96+), that axle will I believe will be 1.5" wider total than blackbetty's rear end. (I actually forget when the ranger axles got wider, but that info is in my axle swap sticky on RPS)
This actually looks better IMO than the stock rear ends when lifted as it puts the rear track width closer to the fronts. I think it looks silly when you see those huge lifted full size trucks going down the road with the front tires sticking out farther from the fenders than the rear ones... the rangers suffer the same problems. The expo axle drastically helps with this.
#16
#18
Originally Posted by D94R
Did I misinterpret your answer Sonic_03 when I read it as you saying the expo and ranger axles are the same width?
To clear it up, the explorer axle is in fact wider than the ranger's. Depending on year the explorer is 1.5 - 3 inches wider, or .75 to 1.5 wider on each side.
If you're definately looking for the Explorer axles with disk brakes (95+ I believe, could be 96+), that axle will I believe will be 1.5" wider total than blackbetty's rear end. (I actually forget when the ranger axles got wider, but that info is in my axle swap sticky on RPS)
This actually looks better IMO than the stock rear ends when lifted as it puts the rear track width closer to the fronts. I think it looks silly when you see those huge lifted full size trucks going down the road with the front tires sticking out farther from the fenders than the rear ones... the rangers suffer the same problems. The expo axle drastically helps with this.
To clear it up, the explorer axle is in fact wider than the ranger's. Depending on year the explorer is 1.5 - 3 inches wider, or .75 to 1.5 wider on each side.
If you're definately looking for the Explorer axles with disk brakes (95+ I believe, could be 96+), that axle will I believe will be 1.5" wider total than blackbetty's rear end. (I actually forget when the ranger axles got wider, but that info is in my axle swap sticky on RPS)
This actually looks better IMO than the stock rear ends when lifted as it puts the rear track width closer to the fronts. I think it looks silly when you see those huge lifted full size trucks going down the road with the front tires sticking out farther from the fenders than the rear ones... the rangers suffer the same problems. The expo axle drastically helps with this.
Sonic was talking about the 9 inch being wider, the expo and ranger rears being the same.
#19
#21
Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah... I've heard the difference is enough to screw up alignment measurements. As long as you know the Expo's axle is a hair wider, you'll be fine. And I pretty much agree with everything people have said. Unless your getting a V8 dropped in soon, no point in getting a 9" and beefin' it up. The 8.8" will hold up fine against the 4.0.
#23
Originally Posted by Sonic_03
they so damn close youll never notice it..
There was an obvious difference on my 94 lowered ranger.
I would think based on the bigger trucks and how badly it shows the rear tires don't stick out as far, a ranger, lifted with bigger/wider tires on the stock rear axle would definatly show its narrower track in the rear.
#24
#25
Originally Posted by Sonic_03
then you plan for it..get a diff backspacing on a set of rims..or like i said get a level 2 rear end ! 8.8s are in everything they'll handle any $hit and abuse makes sure they have oil in them and your good to go!
Your idea of different back spaced rims would work of course, though you'd never be able to properly rotate the tires.