Technical Ranger 4X4 rear end in a shoebox

I have been considering a rear end change in my '51 club coupe for a while. It seems the Maverick rear-ends that fit right are becoming very scarce. If you can find one, they are prohibitively expensive. A friend of mine just told me he is s****ping an '85 Ranger 4X4. I have seen that Ranger rear ends have been used in this application, although everything I've seen seems to center around earlier 2WD units. My friend says his truck has 5 lug drums; what's chances this will fit my car?

 

That rear should be a 5x4.5 bolt pattern. I think the shoe box is 5x5

Been a minute since I’ve owned one, might want to wait for confirmation

 

Follow up! Chances that it fits your car? Great!

Chances that your stock wheels will fit this rear? Not looking good

 

Post '48 Fords are 5 on 4 1/2. 5X5 is Oldsmobile, Pontiac, and some later Fords. I'd like your "Follow up! Chances that it fits your car? Great!" statement better if you had gotten the BP right.

 

Should fit like a shoe in a shoebox !

 

That rear end is 56-1/2" wide, and has a little pinion offset (2" right-of-center). Make sure you have tunnel space.

You will need a special yoke to go on the companion flange, if the Ranger's native one has a different u-joint from the driveshaft you are using.

I have one in my Falcon. It works well.

 

To be fair you didn’t outright ask if your existing wheels would work. You asked if it would fit your car. Which isn’t all together the same question.

I just took 15 seconds and googled what that fords bolt pattern is on the off chance you didn’t and we’re curious if the wheels would fit

I also made a point to say that I wasn’t certain

 

Get real and quit trying to make excuses. You had the BP wrong in your first post. The reason I didn't mention wheel fitment is that I already know the facts.

 

Now boys, don't make me turn this Internet around.

 

What is there to make an excuse for?

I said I think this is the shoe box bolt pattern but could be wrong.

Then I was wrong.

 

The Fords were 5 on 4-1/2" Mercs were 5 on 5" . These Ranger and Ford Explorer 8.8 rears have 5 on 4-1/2" were normally used with OD transmissions or trucks so there are not many with higher gears. 2.74 and 3.08 were the only high gears and are no longer available except used. I'm going to use in a 56 Ford and decided to center the yoke so narrowed another model. Just waiting to pick it up from the shop doing it for me.

There is a yoke flange available to replace the original flat one or the stock that bolts to the flat flange of the pinion nose. These are also available with disc or drum brakes. Lokar makes a kit that will allow you to use your original emergency brake.

 

Since this axle was widely used, it is fairly easy to get a centered pinion, using stock parts, from your favorite self-service yard, and one new housing end.

 

Thanks for the information. I think I'll get the axle, since it will be free.

I hate to get into this again, but Merc's were 5 on 5 1/2, like early Fords.

 

Believe it or not, when I put the 8.8 in my Falcon, the stock parking brake cables just hooked right up, like they belonged there.

Not sure if your's will, but take a good look.

 

One of my old bosses used to say : "It's better to be lucky than smart".

 

8.8" in an '85 Ranger?
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/Ford-8_8-axle.shtml

 

Ahh. It is a 7.5.

Good catch.

 

I hate to get into this again, but Merc's were 5 on 5 1/2, like early Fords.[/QUOTE]
Opps I knew that ...wrote it wrong.

 

Is the 7.5" ranger rear end usable? I am running a mildly modified flathead, so I think it may be strong enough. The problem I am really trying to solve is a tire clearance one. I have a new set of 225/75X15 Coker Cl***ics on the rear, but they are just the tiniest bit too large. The left side occasionally hits the inside of the fender. I have removed and remounted the rear end and tried to center it, but it wants to live where it wants to live. Ideally, I would narrow the original rear end an inch or two, which would solve my problem. I think that idea is a non-starter for a number of reasons. I believe I have read on here that the Ranger rear ends are slightly narrower than the stocker, and I think it would be a lot easier and cheaper for me to deal with mounting and brake connection issues than narrowing the existing rear end. Any suggestions appreciated. I have the tires already, I like the way the car sits, and the Ranger unit would be free.

 

I don't think you're going to break the Ranger rear with a flathead unless you're planning on beating on it.

Those radial tires are 3" wider than similar bias plys. Is your car lowered? I've got 3" lowering blocks and I need to deflate my bias plys to tuck them in. Tight fit.

I don't have the stock width of the shoebox rear in my head or handy. The Ranger is 51" wide...

 

Premature Posting Syndrome..!! ?? .... some young men have a similar ill timed 'event' ......

Ray

 

Denny,

For what it is worth, I think the 7.5" rear end would be plenty adequate for your purposes, ***uming it is good shape to begin with. I think they are at least equivalent to an 8" Ford axle.

As to tire clearance issues....I had a a '50 Shoebox Coupe a few years ago and tried 7" rims, two different offsets, and both rubbed when turning or negotiating a sloped driveway, the tire on lesser back spaced wheel rubbed the inside of the wheel opening lip. When I used the greater back spaced wheel, the tire rubbed the inner wheel housing wall.

The first rear tires I tried were 235/75 and looked great but a definite no go. The next set of tires were 215/65-16 and in both cases the wheels were factory FOMOCO aluminum jobs. I think the wheel housing space is more the culprit than the axle width per se, and of course the combination of tire width, wheel width and back spacing. But with minimum wheel well space it is a difficult dance.

Ray

 

Check out this thread...

https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/49-50-51-fords-lets-see-yours.1116796/

@Eagletucky posted a couple of shots of his coupe with a '91 Ranger rear and similar radials. He might have some answers for you.

 

I found some 6" wide Ford wheels of unknown vintage that I blasted, painted, and used on the rear. I'm real happy with the setup except that about once a month, I make a left turn and if I'm not careful, I make a boo-boo on the whitewall. I have no clearance problems on he inside.

Does anyone have a flange to flange measurement for a stock shoebox rear end? I have searched, but for some reason can't find it.

 

I'll get the measurement for you when I get back to work in about 30min
The rear should have a tag on it stating the ratio and if it's a limited slip something like 3L08 or 3.08 for open
Most 4x4 rears have a 3.73 or 4.11 ratio with limited slip in my junkyard hunts
7.5 is ok rear but 8.8 would be better and later models have disc brakes and an adaptable rear stabilizer bar

Sent from my VS996 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Thanks for the offer, I sure appreciate it. It sounds like the 7.5 4X4 rear will be a pretty good fit with a mild flathead and an OD transmission. Hopefully, it'll be about an inch narrower than stock (here's hoping).

 

52"

Sent from my VS996 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Correct me if I am mistaken, but that looks like a housing flange to flange width, not the more useful wheel mounting surface to wheel mounting surface dimension (WMS to WMS).

Also, I think the width dimension Tubman asked for was not for the Ranger rear end, but for the original Shoebox axle.

Ray.

 

Does anyone have a flange to flange measurement for a stock shoebox rear end? I have searched, but for some reason can't find it.

Sent from my VS996 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app

 

Came up with 57" on 50 ford rear (wms to wms)
Ranger should be 56.5 if I remember right

Sent from my VS996 using The H.A.M.B. mobile app