Rear axel replacements options - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


Drivetrain Tech General discussion of drivetrain for the Ford Ranger.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 11-13-2005
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 2,099
Narrow your 9" and give it to me then.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-13-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
lmao you wish...


buy your own. after all the damn dough youve spent, surely another axle would be nothing...

EDIT: also, i dont think my 9 inch can be narrowed...
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-13-2005
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 2,099
Well i have a 7.5" laying around, i could make a hybrid wannabe rockwell.

31 spline 8.8 output ring and pinion and 7.5" input ring and pinion
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 034x4
Wait, your saying 35x12.50's are pizza cutters!?!?!???

I have 38x12.50's...THOSE are pizza cutters.
Well I want something thats less pizza cutter like(in the long run). You know I would do a SAS if it were easier. There is too much on our trucks that make a SAS hard compared to a TTB truck(or at least thats what I read). Maybe my next truck.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
they are not dana axles. ford axles are not made by dana and dan are not made by ford. they have no affiliation. Although dana/spicer is used in pretty much every OE vehicle, a lot of the times manufaturers will use their own rear axles...
oh ok I think I get it now, ford makes their own rear but uses a dana front.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 034x4
8.8.
9".
Dana 60.
Dana 70.
Corporate 14 bolt.
Rockwells.

I know i didn't mention alot, but i listed the ford axles, and then the axles stronger than them in that order.

Oh ok, where does like a dana 35 and dana 44 fit in.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-14-2005
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1

Oh ok, where does like a dana 35 and dana 44 fit in.
those are front axles, he was just listing rear axles
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
right, well as far as strength, where would they fit in, like is a 44 about equal to a 8.8 or a 9" that kind of thing is my question
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-14-2005
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
im guessing but i dont know that much about axles but i would say

dana 35 == 8.8
dana44 == 9"



only reason im saying that is because they are usually used on the same vehical or matched together.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
wrong. dana 35 and dana 44 can be found in rear axles as well.

the d44 is slighty weaker than the ford 8.8 and the d35 is much weaker than the d44

Last edited by [email protected]; 11-14-2005 at 02:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-14-2005
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
wrong. dana 35 and dana 44 can be found in rear axles as well.

the d44 is slighty weaker than the ford 8.8 and the d35 is much weaker than the d44
hmmm

Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard
im guessing but i dont know that much about axles

im sorry....
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard
hmmm




im sorry....
gotta learn somehow
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
also the d44 has a HUGE aftermarket. which is why its a very used axles...
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
and the stupid hybrid D30/28 thing we have must be even weaker then the D35. Man what was ford thinking using that POS hybrid thing when we have a pretty tough 8.8 in the back. That just doesn't make any sense to me.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-14-2005
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
gotta learn somehow

yep.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Somewhere, XYZ
Posts: 4,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
the d44 is slighty weaker than the ford 8.8 and the d35 is much weaker than the d44
Weaker than the Ford 8.8 w/ 28 or 31 spline axles?
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Somewhere, XYZ
Posts: 4,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
and the stupid hybrid D30/28 thing we have must be even weaker then the D35. Man what was ford thinking using that POS hybrid thing when we have a pretty tough 8.8 in the back. That just doesn't make any sense to me.
I thought we had D35's up front. I thought all 4.0L Rangers had D35's.. (I just looked it up, I'm right. Although it is considered a 'hybrid' D35..)

But ultimately, whaddayah want for < $20k?

They were probably looking at their marketing research when they made that decision. They probably realized that 98% of Ranger owners only wanted a powered front axle to get their sorry asses out of snow banks and maybe up an occasional loose incline.. It should be painfully obvious that the Ranger is not designed to be a massivly heavy duty truck (for that look to the SuperDuty series), nor is it designed to be a uber-capable off-roader (Ford doesn't seem to cater to this market these days).

Quite simply you get what you pay for!

Last edited by NHBubba_Revisited; 11-14-2005 at 03:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
oh my bad yeah Dana 35/28 hybrid is what we have. I guess I have a "things always get better" moto when it comes to cars and technology in general, and I can't say the newer trucks are better then the old TTB trucks. Maybe some aspects the newer trucks are better but as far as how much you can mod them and the options(aftermarket) availible they are not. I realize the ranger is not meant to be a heavy duty truck but they could have at least put a true D35 up front on at least some model(like the TTB trucks some had the 30/28 hybrid and some had a true 35 and it was easy to go to a D44).

Maybe if the aftermarket for the newer rangers would pick up I would have less to complain about. If moroso or somebody would make a more heavy duty front axel shafts and somebody would make a bolt in dana 44 upgrade. You would not hear me complain.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHBubba
Weaker than the Ford 8.8 w/ 28 or 31 spline axles?
haha yes, i went back to work and i was like "oops i forgot to specify 31 spline!!"

thanks for reminding me. yes d44 is slightly weaker that a 31 spline 8.8. d44 is probably a tad stronger than a 28 spline...
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-14-2005
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 2,099
if you are swapping in axles and you look at anything less than a d44, i will slap you.

8.8 > d44

true d35's are only rear axles. The dana 30 is the front. 30's are stonger than 35's (ironically).
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-15-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Avon, IN
Posts: 756
dana 35s are almost the same as a 7.5. and a D44 is similar to a 8.8

the year explorer that you want for disk brakes is 95-01.. i have a 91-94 style in my garage but its drum brakes.. im thinkin bout sellin it as i need the $$ i also have a dana 35 TTB that im gonna sell as well
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-15-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 034x4
if you are swapping in axles and you look at anything less than a d44, i will slap you.

8.8 > d44

true d35's are only rear axles. The dana 30 is the front. 30's are stonger than 35's (ironically).
I don't know but I thought some of the TTB trucks had a D35 up front, either way I still believe ford should have put the next step better then the D35/28 hybrid POS up front on at least maybe the fx4l2 or some model ranger.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-15-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big04Ranger
dana 35s are almost the same as a 7.5. and a D44 is similar to a 8.8

the year explorer that you want for disk brakes is 95-01.. i have a 91-94 style in my garage but its drum brakes.. im thinkin bout sellin it as i need the $$ i also have a dana 35 TTB that im gonna sell as well
Disc brakes would be cool but drums are ok too if the price is right, either way I don't have the money right now.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-15-2005
optikal illushun's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Coal Region, MTC to be exact...heart of the coal region.
Posts: 2,232
exploder and rangers with 4.0s had D35 TTBs...ya it gets weird, but its ford...go figure.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-15-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Somewhere, XYZ
Posts: 4,351
After the problems I've had, I can't believe I'm about to defend Ford and the Ranger..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
I guess I have a "things always get better" moto when it comes to cars and technology in general, and I can't say the newer trucks are better then the old TTB trucks.
How about the fact that steering and road handling is far far better. How about the fact that camber doesn't go to hell as the suspension sags, causing unequal, premature tire wear. How about the fact that you can one finger your way down the interstate w/ IFS. Good luck doing that w/ TTB. I hear it's hell, relatively speaking.

Don't get me wrong, I'd have gone for a solid front myself, if I had the choice. In my mind it's more resiliant to damage and easier to maintain. But we'd have to take the downsides w/ that. And those downsides are an adverse effect on handling, and certianly a pretty sizable jump in vehicle costs. The torsion bar IFS system we have on the front ends of our Rangers is compact, handles fairly well, and is relatively cheap. That yeilds an affordable compact truck w/ decent road maners. You've got to give the system credit for what it yeilds. It isn't a complete 'POS'..

Besides, has yours given you any problems? Mine hasn't. While I have seen a guy grenade a hybrid D35 front diff, I'm still not convinced he didn't earn it. He hit that hole pretty damn hard from where I was sitting!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
Maybe some aspects the newer trucks are better but as far as how much you can mod them and the options(aftermarket) availible they are not.
I don't know how you can blame Ford for the aftermarket options. I mean if aftermarket support was of higher priority, you probably should have bought a Jeep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
I realize the ranger is not meant to be a heavy duty truck but they could have at least put a true D35 up front on at least some model(like the TTB trucks some had the 30/28 hybrid and some had a true 35 and it was easy to go to a D44).
Easy to go to a D44?! Is that possible? Is there a D44 IFS system? And what would having a 'true' D35 front have bought you? Additional locker options? I'm not even sure that's the case. (Someone please comment on this!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
Maybe if the aftermarket for the newer rangers would pick up I would have less to complain about.
Truth be told I'm kind of surprised there isn't a greater aftermarket for the Ranger. It seems the 90's X gets a helluva lot more attention here than the Ranger does. I can only assume that that is because there are more X's out there. Or maybe more X owners are interested in modifying them. I am relatively confident that 90% of the Ranger owners out there have no interest in substantial power-train mods. I can only reason that that's why aftermarket makers don't pay careful attention to the Ranger. Although it's still surprising as there are so many Rangers out there.

That said, I bet the real money is in the full-size market.. so I bet that's where the attention goes.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-15-2005
optikal illushun's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Coal Region, MTC to be exact...heart of the coal region.
Posts: 2,232
TTB isnt that bad, as long as everything in the front is tight. adding a lift and aggresive driving it gets worse.

i can steer down the interstate one fingered without major issues (the mudders like to follow the ruts in the road) and the allignment is pretty good. the toe likes to go out more than camber. installing camber adjusting bushing allivates that issue for the most part.

the TTB does ride 10x BETTER than the torsion bar IFS and, IMO, is able to withstand more abuse than the t-bar IFS in most cases.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
need a new rear axel manofak Drivetrain Tech 16 09-13-2008 10:43 PM
Rear Axel Question...1997 ranger thef9est1 Drivetrain Tech 5 01-14-2008 07:15 PM
Front Axel Options? SteveOh Suspension Tech 38 01-07-2007 11:24 AM
Alcoa replacements options Lefty04LevelII Wheels & Tires Semi-Tech 10 10-23-2006 09:50 AM
explorer rear axel conversion hypnoticustoms General Ford Ranger Discussion 16 10-10-2006 07:25 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:28 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.