Possible to use a Ford Ranger rear end

Ok so say a early Bronco is 58 to the flanges add 1 inch for drum thickness so so 59 inches, is the rear end at 61 inches to the outside of the drums. Is it really going to be a noticeable difference?

 

I do not add anything ... as a general rule ... the edge of the brake drum is parallel to where the wheels bolt on ...

With dealing with a Fenderless Model A ... wheel backspacing can change to width rear end needed ... by as much as 3 to 4 inches total.



It getting the tires under the fenders ... that complicates things.

The difference in a 56 inch wide rear and a 58 inch wide rear end is only 1 inch difference in wheel back spacing ...

 

Can you explain this a little more? Sorry for the dumb question.

 

From ~1987 to present, the only rangers that had 31 spline were the ones built for South American market. Those were essentially Explorer axles, with Drum brakes.

All Rangers built for the United States (during that time), with 7.5 or 8.8 axles had 28 spline axles. So did Mustangs, Crown Vic and Aerostar. The ones with 31 spline were F150 and Explorer.

I'm sorry but I no longer have my little black book with all the axle lengths, etc. So I have go go from memory.

Explorer axles were my favorite. They measure about 57-58" long (mounting surface to mounting surface), later ones (about 1996 on) have disk brakes, but the earlier 10" drums aren't bad either. They have 3" dia. untapered tubes, very strong untapered shafts and 5 on 4.5" bolt circle.

Ranger axles have smaller tubes, and have a step down just inboard of the spring perches. Basically this means they have smaller axle bearings than the Explorer. The shafts are smaller diameter, and tapered. They come with either 9" or 10" drum brakes. they are about the same width ~57-58" as the Explorer. Smaller tubes and tube flanges means that the explorer disk brakes aren't a direct swap. And again 5 on 4.5" bolt circle.

Mustangs were wider axles at ~62". They had even smaller tubes, but used the same bearing as the ranger. Axle shafts were small and tapered, 28 spline, 5 on 4.5" bolt circle, and they all had disk brakes (at least from 94-2004). The diff housing is set up for the Fox 4-bar triangulated suspension, which makes them undesirable in my book. However, the disk brakes might be usable on the ranger, I just don't know if the ranger shafts stick out far enough to make it work.

Again, this was from memory, but I spent 13 years working at the Ford axle plant, and had plenty of time to check this all out.

I was told by the hypoid-experts that the gear geometry combined with the reduced number of pinion bearings make the modern axles waste less horsepower than the old 8" & 9" axles. Remember, those 8" & 9" have three bearings on the pinion. That is what makes them incredibly strong, but also wastes HP. In NASCAR, they need the strength, in your hot rod, unless you are changing gear ratios often, why waste the HP?

 

Ford 8.8
The Ford 8.8 is the current high torque spec axle found in V8 Mustangs, F-150s and 4.0 V6 Rangers. This makes it easy to find and, because of the Mustang and growing popularity a****st offroaders, is supported by a huge aftermarket that allows it to be a good candidate for swaps. It has been around since the early ’80s, and therehave been very few changes, so matching parts is no problem. Also, there is even an IRS version.
Pros:

• Current production
• Strong aftermarket
• M***ive numbers in junkyards
• Affordable limited slips, including Torsen T2R from Ranger FX4

Cons:

• Differential unit built into housing makes servicing harder
• C-clips require replacement for use with fixed calipers
• Lack of needed factory pinion offset and width combination would require custom work

Here is some info I gathered from multiple sources (listed whenever possible):
http://members.tripod.com/~grannys/TASAconversion.html
86-’93 Ford Mustang 8.8
59-1/2″ flange/flange width (exact same as the ‘86-’91 RX-7)
4 on 4-1/4″ lug pattern, easily re-drilled to RX-7 4 or 5 on 4-1/2″ pattern
came std w/tracloc clutch style diff
Both L&R axles are 29-1/8″ long 28 spline axles
V8’s came with 2.73 or 3.08 ratios
‘87-’88 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe
61-1/2″ flange/flange width
same housing width as ‘86-’93 Mustangs, but 1″ longer axles to make room for ABS sensors
4 on 4-1/2″ lug pattern (same as the RX-7), easily re-drilled to RX-7 5 on 4-1/2″
came std w/tracloc clutch style diff
Both L&R axles are 30-1/8″ long 28 spline axles
5spd cars came with 3.55 gears, automatic cars came with 3.73
standard w/ disc brakes
‘95-’01 Explorer
59-1/2″ flange/flange width
5 on 4-1/2″ lug pattern
unequal length 31 spline axles (2-3/16″ pinion offset)
std disc brakes w/ 7/16″ x 11.25 rotors
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/Axles.html
Ranger 4.0 1990-1992
Width is same as other pre-93 axles, 28 spline
3.08 (4×2), 3.55, 3.73 and 4.10 (4×4) factory ratios
Either limited slip or open differential
10″ drum brakes
Ranger 4.0 1993+ and B4000 1994+
Width is same as other 93+ axles (1.5″ wider than pre 93), 28 spline
Ratios and differential options as noted above
Ranger FX4 2002+
Width is same as other 93+ axles, 31 spline
4.10’s and Torsen limited slip from factory
Explorer & Navaho 90-94
Width is 1.5″ wider than 93+ Ranger, 3″ wider than pre-93, 31 spline
Spring perches must be fabricated and welded on top
Stock spring perches can be used to lower the truck (like a flip kit)
Shock mounts must be fabricated and welded on
Very common to find ltd. Slip, usually 3.73 or 4.10 (4×4) gears
Explorer & Mountaineer 95-01
Same as above, also has rear discs
All axles listed above have a 5 on 4.5 bolt circle.
OK, so quick math shows
Exploder = 59.5″
Late Ranger < 1.5 = 58&#8243;
Early Ranger 1.5 < 56.5&#8243;
http://jeepsunlimited.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5508606&postcount=1
Explorer 8.8 Measurements
Weight (complete ***embly w/ brakes etc.): 174 lb.
O.D. of tubes: 3.250&#8243;.
Tube thickness: .250&#8243; (some are .188”!)
Ring gear diameter: 8.800&#8243;.
Ring gear bolts: 7/16&#8243; dia. (qty. 10).
Pinion diameter/splines: 1.625 / 30.
Axle shaft/splines: 1.320 / 31.
Rotor thickness (where it mounts to axle is .250&#8243.
Overall width 59.625&#8243; (the F8.8 is .950&#8243; narrower then a TJ Dana 35).
(The F-150 8.8 is drum brake and width WMS to WMS is 65.5”.)
Hole diameter for ABS sensor in top of housing: .811&#8243;.
Bolt size (U-joint flange to yoke) is: 12 x 1.75 x 30 mm
Centerline of housing to C/L of pinion difference is 3.875&#8243; toward the P/S.
Pinion offset: P/S to C/L of Pinion, 27-3/4&#8243; (no rotor on axle), D/S to C/L of Pinion, 31-5/8&#8243; (no rotor on axle).
Specs:
Code Capacity Ratio
43 Open 3200 3.08
41 Open 3200 3.27
42 Open 4.10
46 Open 3.73
45 Open 3200 3.55
D4 Limited Slip 3200 3.73
D2 Limited Slip 4.10
L73 Limited Slip 3.73
L - Limited Slip Differential
C - Conventional Differential
From the above, it appeared that the Ford 8.8 from an early Ranger would have been the perfect width. The problem is the pinion offset is huge compared to the Mazda. The Ford 8.8 I’d need would thus be a custom axle. I found out very quickly that he cost of custom Ford 8.8 axles was much higher than the same work on a 9 inch. So that was what I looked at next.



i fond this on v8****ral and thought it would help i am not sre how accurate it is. the diff that i wold like to find is that 58" ranger one for my 51 ford shoebox

 

Thanks mattcrp1! this is good info. I will have to pour over it before I make a decision.

 

Im using a 8.8 out of a 1988 turbocoupe in my 39 chevy truck build and switching it to drum brakes .You can use two left side axles from a ranger @29 1/4 in length with the drums and backing plates and youll get a 5 on 4 1/2 bolt pattern with drum brakes and it will be roughly 58 1/4 axle mount to axle mount .....Hope this helps Jim

 

Pretty much the same as an Explorer, and I remember seeing those before i moved over here.

 

I have an '84 Ranger with a 7.5" rear, a Fox body with a 8.8" drum rear, and a Lincoln Mark VII with a 8.8" disc rear - I can measure any of 'em if it'll be helpful. The Ranger is narrowest, but as mentioned earlier has an offset diff. The Fox (any '87-'93 5.0 Mustang) axles aren't super wide either though and have 4 link mounts and a centered diff. The disc 8.8's (came in SVO Mustangs, Lincoln Mark VIIs, and Thunderbird Turbo Coupes) are the widest 8.8s. Gear selection for the 8.8 is great and you can find good ge****ts cheap on craigslist or ebay all day long. You can also chuck a mini-spool in a non-posi carrier for under a hundred bucks and it's a real simple install. As far as axles go, the Fox bodies have four lugs, but you can do a cheap 5 lug conversion with two left side Ranger axles. The disc rears are 5 lug.

 

Check your axle length before you buy those Ranger axles, the factory disc rear in my Mark VII has longer axles than my Mustang or Ranger, and I think the TC uses the same rear as the Mark.

 

What is the bolt pattern on the Toyota rearend you're using? Hub-to-hub width?

 

I can tell you from the two rears that I have and am trying to make work are that the 96+ Explorer 8.8 axle is 31 spline and is much beefier than the 28 splines. I've read that it's as strong as 12 bolts. It measures 59 3/4" from wheel mount to wheel mount. The 91-95 exploders have drums but still have the 31 splines. I'll be getting rid of my 8.8 soon if you're interested. I know you're a ways away but just thought I'd ask.
Also, I picked up a 67 Bronco 9" axle with drums. It's 58" from wheel mount to mount. It has 5 x 5.5 axles though, which it sounds like you're looking for those anyways.
I'd keep your eyes open for a bronco rear if I were you...

 

SinisterCustom- Which Toyota rear is that? 5 or 6 Lug (and if it's 5, can I swap to 6 lug axles)?

 

Mine's 5 lug...out of an '82 2WD.....5 on 4.5. Width, (if I remember correctly) was @ 54"...drum face to drum face, pretty narrow....I'm using 1.25" thick wheel adapters to get the old Ford wheels to mount, which keeps the tall tires from hitting the top, bed rail...however, I do have some shorter WWW slicks that mount up just fine without the adapters and don't rub....more offest on the ET wheels.

Some later 2WD's and all 4WD's are 6 lug....'86 and up axles are @ 2" wider than '85 and older. Most 4WD's are 4.10's, with a few @ 1981/2? that could be 3.91, however I've never come across one. 2WD's had a few more ratios to pick from from the factory....mine's a 3.73, which is perfect.

I would think you could swap 5 lug to 6 lug axles, as long as the axles were pulled from an 8" Yota and going into another 8" (Some 2WD's are 7.5, axles may still swap, never messed with the 7.5), and from either '85 and older....or '86 and up. But really, Toyota axles are so cheap and plentiful, it's easier just to get what ya need without swappin' parts.

 

The Ranger is offset to one side, the Aerostar is offset to the opposite side, and the Fox body is centered. The axles interchange between the 7.5 and 8.8 as long as the right lengths are used. All are C-clips, and pray that you don't break off the retaining bolt for the pin.

 

Ford Ranger 8.8 rearend
left axle 30 1/8" plus right axle 27 1/4" plus 1" for the spider pin = 58 3/8". The length is measured at tip of axle to wheel face.
A guy could get really brave and shorten the longer side to use two right side axles.
Axle lengths from my axle spec and part number book.

 

I've heard that a lot of 800 series Volvos have a Ford 8.8. Anybody able to verify this and provide details of which cars and widths?

 

I would doubt seriously that a Volvo would have an 8.8 Ford diff in it. If Ford and Volvo got together on something, it would be news to me. No shots or disrespect intended.
All of the Volvo car stuff I have seen over the years has used European style driveshafts with three finger outputs on the trans and similar stuff at the rear to accept what I know to call as a rubber drive buscuit instead of having a conventional cardan style universal joint. The "drive biscuit" resembles a piece made with a big hole saw and a bias ply tire. Most of the European stuff with cardan type u-joints, BMW, Mercedes, Merkur, use a swedged type u-joint and flange bolt circle/pilot patterns that don't match anything ever built on this side of the pond. Exceptions are out there.
Then, for some reason, I think there is some stuff out there with 5-4x Hardy ****er 1300 series u-joints.

 

He's right.

 

I'd like to know more. Another thread with pics and dimensions possible? Is this something that made it here too?

 

So there I was, in the middle of ****ty little town, my rear end in pieces. The drivers side bearing cap failed and since it's cast out of ductile, it flexed a bit before breaking in the second spot. Once that happened, the whole carrier was free to move when torque was applied, and the gears shredded.

"[SIZE=+1]Finally, the Ford 8.8 is somewhat prone to bearing cap flex. These diffs are found behind V-8's in drag racing type situations (Mustangs) so it's probable that the bearing cap flex would not be a problem under a Jeep. However, the cover that came with my Ford 8.8 was completely rusty so I bought a bearing support cover for it. I chose a unit from LPW...their Ultimate 8.8 cover. It's around $140 bucks, but it's better than putting a cheapo chrome jobby on it. Besides the two Grade 8 bolts for putting pressure on the bearing caps, the cover somes with a drain and fill plug as well..."

[/SIZE]I can't stress that advice enough.