Hi everyone! After a long search, I've finally bought 1950 Ford Deluxe! Right now the car is being transported to Europe, and I should be able to touch it somewhere in late June or early July. So there is some time to do parts research and start to acquire them for my future build. Definitely will be doing an engine swap (still haven't decided which one it should be) but I'm sure I want to have ~300HP. So this calls for a rear axle swap too. Been digging this forum a lot, and I see that the most common rear axle swap is either a Ford Maverick or a Ford Ranger. Since those two are not very common in Europe, what could be my other options? I'd love to have brake discs, also I'm planning to get a four-link and air bag system - so modifying is not a problem. Thanks for your help!
The originals were either 3.73 or 4.11 depending on whether or not it had overdrive. Depending on what you run for an engine, transmission and tires the stock rear could be OK if you don't stand on it. The 8" comes stock with several ratios 2.78 on up to the mid-3. You wouldn't have disc brakes but you could probably do a conversion. You need to decide on engine, tranny and tire size first. You will be limited on tire size unless you do some extra work and there are limits on how low you can drop it.
Because the wheel wells in these cars are narrow and the transmission tunnel is small, you are limited in options unless you plan body/floor pan modifications. The WMS to WMS needs to be in the 57" range with a closely centered pinion. Thats why the Maverick 8" rear is so popular for these cars as it has both.
Another option that might be more readily available would be a disc brake rear end from a later model Ford Explorer. It would need to be narrowed to allow the use of the narrow axle in place of the longer one. That should bring the WMS to WMS to around the same as the 56 1/2" of the Maverick 8" unit. Yes, there would be the cost of narrowing the housing but by using 2 narrow side axles no need to cut down an axle. The plus is that many ratios are available including posi type units and disc brakes. JMO
They also came with 3.55 gears. I have two, a '50 and '51, both from cars made at the St. Paul plant (without overdrive).
I ran 3.54 gears and axles from a '54 Ford in my '51 coupe. Those later axles had stronger finer splines and are less likely to break. Dave
How about 80’s or early 90’s Toyota pickup rear axle, they’re narrow, have a drop out center like Ford 8 & 9 inch rears, have the 4.5” bolt circle and have a lot of aftermarket support in the off- road world.
49 (or so) to 56 Ford rear ends are not very strong, and not well supported for parts. When the Yblock came along, the Thunderbirds, wagon, trucks, and police cars all used Dana rearends, typically in the 44 series (the numbers and differences internally are confusing). Lincoln’s and some Mercury’s used Dana 50 series. Up until the 9” came out in 1957. If you’re headed for 300hp, and all the welding/work/ bracket for a 4 link and bags, bite the bullet and do it now. The yblocks topped out about 160 or 180 with those units. There’s got to be some medium truck units in your area that might be a reasonable choice given shipping cost to Lithuania. The mods would probably give you a pass on that. Gear ratio will depend on the transmission choice and engine build. But as said, tire sizes are limited.
I have few ideas on engine/tranny but its too modern to mention on this forum and i'd like to avoid braking the rules I'd like to avoid modyfing it but might have a go if thats my only option Thanks everyone for the input, but i'm looking for more internationaly available options, as mavericks/rangers are not available in my country/europe. Toyota pickups might be a solution, need to do some local scrapyard research!
Volvo 240. Reputedly tougher than a Ford 9". There was recently someone in the UK selling them off cheap. I don't know much about Volvo axles other than I believe they're difficult / expensive to narrow ( if required, they're not overly wide) and the handbrake is peculiar requiring use of the original lever. Try this https://forum.nsra.org.uk/showthread.php?p=622820 Chris
There's lots of Volvos around me, its quite a common car. Will do further investigation, as its 57.5 inch axle width looks promising!!
I snuck over on a Toyota 4x4 forum and found this info. It looks like you have three models to pick from provided that the lug bolt pattern is correct. From there it is strength and gear ratio. Most Americans tend to forget that what is common here such as the Ford Ranger pickup rear axles are non existent in Europe. For you it comes down to the availability of a solid rear axle of the correct width with enough strength to handle the horsepower and the correct gear ratio to match the engine=transmission combo, that is hot-rodding, Use the best option you can find locally. . The 55 and 55.1 width lets you run a slightly reversed wheel while the 57.9 is going to be tight on the outside especially if you run skirts without some critical thinking on wheel choice. Shoebox Fords just do not have a lot of space between the inside of the fender and the inner fender. Toyota Rear Axle Widths: 55" wide, '79-85 trucks/4runners 55.1" wide, '60-83 FJ40 57.9" wide, '81-87 FJ60 58.5" wide, '86-95 trucks/4runners 60" wide, '95.5-up Tacomas/4runners 62.2" wide, '91-92 FJ80 63" wide, '93-97 FZJ80 66.75" wide, '93-98 T100 trucks As far as engine, Remember the Shoebox will be a custom/Kustom and custom cars look terrible with the hoods open breaking up the great lines and you can stick with that story. No need to volunteer the info.
I'm running a 66 mustang 8 inch in mine. Slightly wider than stock but not enough to matter. Easy to find too.
How about an Opel Diplomat axle? Don't know anything about them but if they were available with a Chevy V8, would be worth a look.
When I built my ‘51 I was reading in the little books that the factory rear end could handle the horsepower and torque of the new (1956) Caddy and Oldsmobile built motors. So when I built it I kept the factory rear with the 3:55 ratio and ran a built 347 with 400 shot of NOS. I never killed the rear end but I was running the 670/15 www Firestones on it for the most part. When I did swap out to drag radials it hooked up pretty good for a small tire car and hurt a lot of kids in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
That would sort a few of headaches if i could keep stock rear end and have it reliable. Do you know what max power stock rear end can safely handle?
Sounds like there are a lot of options from Japanese and other European manufacturers with rear wheel drives To give you approximate measurements, take a tape measure and check centerline of rear tires. Most wheels have close to a zero offset on rims.
Since i dont have the car yet, its hard to measure what fits and what dont )) Most of european cars have independent rear suspension, which can be fitted to a shoebox, but only if its right size, and has correct mounting points, track width, etc. At first i thought there might be some almost direct swap like you have maverick/ranger option, but now it seems more like i'll be waiting for my car to arrive, then take tape measure and spend some time going through local scrapyards.
The biggest drawbacks to the stock "Hotchkiss" style rear axle are parts availability and original available ratios. Parts are even a hard find here in the states. Ford realized very quickly when the Y block came out that the axle needed an upgrade, hence the 9" in 1957. Another issue is the narrow wheel wells in the shoebox. An axle in the 56"-58" range would fit the best, but close to that may work using spacers or wheel back spacing changes. The Volvo 240 is 55" and some change according to the net. The Toyota pickup is another good idea.
How narrow are the wheel wells? I dont plan to use OEM wheels, so could this be solved with different wheel ET? Or is just so tight, that no wider tire (for eg. 245) wont fit there anyway, no mattter of axle width?
I think they're pretty tight. I have a stock rear end in my '51 and 225/75R15 tires and they will occasionally scrape on the sides when I negotiate a sharp turn while going up hill (the entrance to a driveway). When I replace the tires, I'm going to try 215/75R15's. (The wheels are later Ford, 1/2" wider than stock.)
After lots of research, 99% i'll go with Ford Explorer 8.8 rear axle (narrowed with 2 short side axles) this should give me almost identical as stock width, already has disc brakes, and whats most important - its available locally Any downsides of this route?
Are they really readily available wherever you are in Europe? In the UK they're now rare and sought after, and thus expensive when they do come up. Chris
The only downsides are ratio and e-brake conversion. The most common ratio being 3.73. The e-brake hookup can be done with an adapter that is available from the flopshop offroad or make your own.
The Jalopy Journal
