Hot Rods 9" Rear Have the Right Look?

Just use whatever ya want. This is hot-roddin' - it's full of opinions, but the only one that matters is your own.
Use the 9" if you've got it, get a QC if you can afford one and it means that much to you.
This seems waaaaay too close to a flathead vs SBC argument.
Whatever you do, enjoy your car.
Cheers.

 

Geez, took 61 posts this time...

 

Another interesting tale about Q Cs VS whatever, although OT, will illustrate another factor in this debate.
In the days @ Indy that were towards the last, and finest tuned, RWD, Frt. engined cars, mostly Offy, cars would use a quick change during practice till they were sure of the best rear ratio. Then when the last little fraction of a sec. was wrung from the combo, the most competitive teams would install a straight rear axle with a gear just a tad taller than the best Q C gear ratio. This took advantage of the horsepower saved by friction reduction with the elimination of 2 more gears and 4 more bearings.
Just illustrates that the Q C does have another downside other than noise, and that's increased frictional drag.

 

Boy am I getting an education Thanks guys................

 

DOM, Do you know what type rear end they replaced the QC with?

Smokey Yunick said the QC took about 10 HP to run. He didn't specify any parameters. My assumption would be that this was the net loss to the 4 bearings and two extra gears at full song in a race car.
<O</O

Remember, the QC runs a spiral ring and pinion while the Ford 9” uses a hypoid R&P. I would bet that the frictional loss between the two complete units would be negligible, maybe less for the Quick Change.
<O</O

Not trying to argue, I just find this stuff fascinating.<O</O
<O</O

After building QCs for 35 years, I still think this is the ultimate hot rod tuning tool. And no electricity involved.<O</O

To the OP: I’m sure you would be happy with the Ford 9”, but it will never be quite the same as having a Quickie out back.<O</O

 

Gearhead, I'm not at all sure what rear they used for the replacement of the QC, but I do know Frankland made a center section that was non QC and bolted right in in place of the QC centersection. I assume some of the other companies did the same.
Agree that hypoid rears lose more power to friction than spiral, and the Ford 9" is prolly the most extreme in pinion offset below ring gear centerline. Could well be that a 9" would use up that 10 hp same as a QC.

 

Very interesting!
If there were a center section that bolted into the QC wouldn't that put the pinion well below even what a 9" would be? Like 3" below center?
Anybody have a picture of one?
The power loss is still an issue, for instance Strange Engineering makes a 12bolt center section that bolts into a 9" housing - it isn't as durable and can't handle high horsepower launches but it is more efficient.
OK i wandered a bit but we are all learning something. right?

 

That bolt in 12 bolt is pretty tough, meant to replace the 9" and provide higher gear efficiency. FWIW, the top fuel center sections used to be 12 bolt "geometry", but don't know if they still are. Even with increased strength and efficiency, the last time i inquired they're still only good for 4-6 full passes.

Another kool application for a 9" would be to chrome the housing and surround it with painted stuff for some offset. Maybe vice-verse, chrome everything else and do a bitchin paint job on the housing. Ya know, mix it up a bit like the old days?

 

I like 'em pin stripped even on a lowered car where you have to get under to see them.

 

As I was reading this, I was thinking the same thing, i would bet the 9" probably consumes as much or more power than the QC, due to the high hypoid angle.

Preach it! The world needs more chromed smooth back 9", drop out chunk 10 bolts and early Olds rears! Bring back the sixties hot rod!! Can I get an AMEN??!!

 

When a car is being built for looks over performance none of that really matters. Even if it did few of us actually measure parasitic loss by hundredths of a second and those that do are not allowed to run a quicky. So that brings it down to 12 bolt of 9" and the nine will make more passes as a rule before catastropic failure. Hell I have broken 12 bolts with my wimpy small block.

 

I have broken 12 bolts and 9"'s. Personally, my gut reaction is a typical auto wrecker 9" with a single rib or WAR carrier is not as strong as a typical auto wrecker 12 bolt. A buddy of mine tore the nose right off a WAR case with a low 12 second, 4 speed, small-block fairlane. Its actually on one of Larry Pfisters "Horsepower Heaven" videos. If you are talking about a nodular carrier with the big pinion support, thats a different story, but I haven't seen one of those in a junkyard for 25 years.

 

I found the hambr that makes them, 'R.C.' he has a shop in Texas and makes the QC 'Speed Demon'

 

I actually know where there are 2 or 3 of those rare not in a junk yard anymore cases. They are remnants of a fellas junkyard endevor and he doesn't even know what they are. he just grabbed all the 9" rears when he closed it down and they are laying in a pile out by his barn.

I have never tried a wrecker rear. I do like a spicer-60 still and it is good old time gasser stuff. But I think that the OP is actually wanting to copy someone else's building style and so it is all about the look and not much more then that.

 

I should be a little more clear as to what I am talking about when I say "autowrecker" rear. I am saying that if I buy typical autowrecker 12 bolt and a typical autowrecker 9", and install new bearings, ring and pinion, and rebiuld the posi, the 12 bolt will be stronger. I am not talking about dragging a rear out of the wreckers and putting it in a car and running it. If you build the 9" with a nodular iron case, the big pinion support and a detroit locker, it will be stronger than an equivalent 12 bolt, but in my experience, the single rib and WAR cases are not as strong as a 12 bolt.

And with typical fifties era, bias ply tires, the relative strength of the two rears is irrelevant, you will never hook hard enough to even break a single rib case.

 

You are talking about a junk yard rear some how I totally missed that.

I just don't particularly care for the GM rear. I do think that with either or any rear for that matter that setup is key. there is a difference between you and I and the common everyday hot rodder. We don't think that setting up a rear is majic, we are mechanics. e don't know any better than to tear it apart replace what needs replacing, machine what needs machining and throwing it back together.

It would be difficult to come up with a percentage but I would bet dollars to donuts it is high on this site alone that people are afraid to even tackle one. how many times have we read my rearend is making a noise what can I replace it with?

Now before everyone gets all upset this is not to make anyone any smaller, few of you are small in my eyes. It is just stateing a truth. Face it the unknown can be a little intimidating.

 

Know I'm late to the story, but I have a Frankland rear with a Gleason locker,,,,needs axles,etc. but clean, and has cross spring mounts. Full floater. Would trade for a complete clean 9" ford unit, if that would work for you.

 

I know a few guys that run quick changes, they never change the gears. It's all show & tell.
Run the 9",who cares?

 

I do!

 

amen...

 

Looks like I'll run what I got. Seeing as I have everything for the 9' and it's an early one.

Thanks for all the info

 

Kool. Just read the story on "Sylvester III" in HOT ROD. There's a 9" Ford under it, and I'll bet everyone who read this would love to own that car. Good for you bud...

 

I'm running the early olds poncho in my coupe,because I had one and a couple of center sections to choose from not to mention their very strong. The early 9" is alright too, if I read the thread right you have a tubular crossmember in the frame. If that's the case run whatever you want it's not like it's a period correct frame anyways. I think the ladder bars came into the scene in the 60s so that's not exactly lakes era.

 

Well, I fully intend to change gears in my QC for trips, running at the HAMB drags, Bonneville and around town running. Got a few different sets and plan to install an oil tank in the side of my trunk to fill the quickie after gear changes.
That's the appeal that originally brought me to wanting a quick change in the first place. I doubt I'll be competitive [getting a record] at either the drags or B'ville but I'll damn sure be in there swinging and having fun!
Hell, if my rear axle was only for show, I'd chrome a round-back 9 inch, which I also have..less the chrome job.
The appeal of fast gear swaps overcomes the down-side of big quick changes...massive weight. One part I do not look forward to is that heavy old Champ quicky, bouncing around under my light coupe. I fully realize the heavy weight of the quick change is going to hurt my car's ride quality but it's a penalty I'm willing to take...
I think....but if the car rides too damned "jerky" I always have my 57 ford pickup 9 inch waiting. It's 3.89 gears should work ok with my T-5s .83 overdrive for a fair compromise in gearing.

 

Hit the post button on my phone by accident. Seeing you already have everything I would run it. I'm sure it will be a kickass car when done. Unless you are set on building a total trad era car, but you would have to change a lot. I say put it on the road and drive the shit out of it.

 

OK Thanks for all the input I'll keep the 9" rear set up Besides I have all of it already