8.8 rear in a 70 - Page 2 - Vintage Mustang Forums
Vintage Mustang Forum
HomeForumGalleryClassifiedsAbout UsAdvertiseContact Us
» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
Go Back   Vintage Mustang Forums > General Discussion > Mod and Custom Forum
Vintage-Mustang.com is the premier Ford Mustang Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-10-2012, 08:49 AM   #16 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hudson fl gulf coast north of tampa
Posts: 1,482
Default

+2 on Exp 1995 $100 and use the alum driveshaft from the exp pay $20 at JY LOL my welder change the spring area . ready to install ooops now to S.b the coupe
hughnews1 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-10-2012, 09:31 AM   #17 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
j persons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Natchitoches, La
Posts: 632
Default

One thing that hasn't been mentioned, the 8.8 consumes less HP than a 9". So theoretically, you will be faster in a quarter mile using the 8.8 assuming everything else is equal, gears, brake drag, etc.
__________________
John
'97 TBird project. AED supercharger, forged bottom end. Runs high 11's, when it runs.
j persons is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2012, 12:25 PM   #18 (permalink)
I won a special award
 
Maxum96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 6,392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by j persons View Post
One thing that hasn't been mentioned, the 8.8 consumes less HP than a 9". So theoretically, you will be faster in a quarter mile using the 8.8 assuming everything else is equal, gears, brake drag, etc.

How do you figure it uses less HP? The ring gear is only .2" smaller. If there is any less parasitic HP loss, it's very minimal. And unless you doing serious drag racing, who cares if there is minimal HP loss?

If you can't find a 9" out of a Mustang, it's not hard or expensive to modify a 9" out of a full size ford car or truck to work in a Mustang. I took a 9" out of a junkyard F150 and narrowed it to fit in my car. By reusing the axles and center section out of my old rearend, it cost me only about $250 (including cost of buying the pickup 9") to build a heavy duty 9".


Stock housing on left, truck housing with back brace on right






__________________
1970 Fastback (to be finished outside as a Boss 302 clone)
393 Windsor AFR 205 heads with 11.5:1 compression
Tremec TKO 5 Speed
Link to my Hub Garage and blog about my car http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/maxum96






Last edited by Maxum96; 11-10-2012 at 12:55 PM.
Maxum96 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2012, 12:41 PM   #19 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
j persons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Natchitoches, La
Posts: 632
Default

The 8' and 9" rear ends use a deep hypoid gear angle, where as the 8.8 doesn't. The deep hypoid angle is about 10% less efficient, depending on the gear ratio, than a non hypoid gear, and that directly translates in to increased performance and fuel millage. You can see this your self by turning the pinion flange on a 8.8 by hand then try the same thing with a 9". The 9" will be harder to turn than the 8.8

The deep hypoid angle axle was introduced to offer a flatter floor and less of a drive line hump in passenger cars.
__________________
John
'97 TBird project. AED supercharger, forged bottom end. Runs high 11's, when it runs.
j persons is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2012, 01:04 PM   #20 (permalink)
I won a special award
 
Maxum96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 6,392
Default

You're right about the hypoid gear angle (where the pinion gear sits in relation to the ring gear). I forgot about that. I was only thinking about parasitic drag. But even then it's not that great. Saying that you can feel the difference by turning the pinion flange is not a good indicator. You can have two identical rearends and one can easier to turn than the other. Newer bearings, different gear ratios, etc can all effect how easy it to turn a pinion by hand. The numbers i've seen is that the 9" rear uses 3%-5% more power to turn than a 8.8" rearend and then that's at higher driveshaft speeds. But the 9" is stronger and less likely to break than the 8.8 rearend.

If power loss was so great with a 9", why do all the professional racers (Pro Stock drag racers, NASCAR racers. etc) use 9" rearends instead of GM 12 bolt or 8.8 rearends? They're always trying to squeeze out ever bit of power out of their cars.
__________________
1970 Fastback (to be finished outside as a Boss 302 clone)
393 Windsor AFR 205 heads with 11.5:1 compression
Tremec TKO 5 Speed
Link to my Hub Garage and blog about my car http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/maxum96






Last edited by Maxum96; 11-10-2012 at 01:18 PM.
Maxum96 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2012, 07:33 PM   #21 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northeast
Posts: 1,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by higher power racing View Post
64-70 Mustang

This is the kit I'm using I havent installed it yet but it uses a mustang 8.8

That AJE kit looks pretty damn nice... especially for the money. Found this old thread on VMF when googling for more info on it.
AJE Rear Subrame Kit and other rear suspension parts
__________________
http://home.comcast.net/~stangg/vmf/stangg_sig_2009.jpg

'68 Highland Green, custom built tubular chassis, Fox rack & pinion steering,'89 HO/331, Cobra intake, E303, AFR 165 heads / T5z spec transmission,
8.8" rear end w/ 3.27, Auburn limited slip, triangulated 4 link, QA1 coil overs front and rear, Cobra 4 wheel Disk brakes. '01 Silver Bullit wheels.
Was a coupe, now with a fastback roof. First run 13.3 @ 107.
stangg is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-11-2012, 11:21 PM   #22 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 789
Default

The reason PS and NASCAR use 9" rear ends has little to do with my car. That is why I chose an 8.8. NASCAR likes the near unlimited ratios and quickess that they can be changed if you have several chunks ready to go. The PS guys need the strength and have no parts that interchange with a stock unit.

The weakness with the 8.8 is the fact that there are not any pro gears made for an 8.8. Pro gears are made of a different alloy that will stand up to higher shock loads, but wear quickly on the street. There are guys on small tires putting over 2000 hp to 8.8s and gears are a maintenance item changed on a regular basis before they fail.

I have about $1100 in my 8.8 and don't think I could build a 9" to take the same power for the same money. It is an f-150 housing with 9" ends, 35 spline axles, spool and girdle. I am thinking it is not breaking a sweat under 1000hp. I plan on testing it to about 900.
__________________
67 coupe Turbo Blow-thru 351w, C4, 8.8 http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2435094
brianj5600 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 12:32 AM   #23 (permalink)
I won a special award
 
Maxum96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 6,392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianj5600 View Post

I have about $1100 in my 8.8 and don't think I could build a 9" to take the same power for the same money. It is an f-150 housing with 9" ends, 35 spline axles, spool and girdle. I am thinking it is not breaking a sweat under 1000hp. I plan on testing it to about 900.

If that was the case, then why aren't all the serious racers using 8.8 rearends? It's not because of a lack of selection of gear ratios. If racers started using 8.8 rears, every gear maker in the world would make tons of different ratios just like the 9". And they'd make them out of the softer higher nickel content steel race gears are made of. But because not as many people run 8.8 rears as 9" rears, there's not as much money to be made.
__________________
1970 Fastback (to be finished outside as a Boss 302 clone)
393 Windsor AFR 205 heads with 11.5:1 compression
Tremec TKO 5 Speed
Link to my Hub Garage and blog about my car http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/maxum96






Last edited by Maxum96; 11-12-2012 at 12:35 AM.
Maxum96 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 12:54 PM   #24 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 789
Default

There are a lot of people that wonder why there are no pro gears. No body will know the weak link of the 8.8 until pro gears are readily available. It will likely be the 35 spline axles. The carrier bore being the limitation. If you venture over to yellow bullet you will see sub 5 second 1/8 mile and some low 7 second or even high 6 second 1/4 mile cars running 8.8s. Several threads in drivetrain tech. The generally accepted rule is stock gears are good to about 1.20 60' times at 3000 pounds. I still say an 8.8 will out live a stock case 9 inch.
__________________
67 coupe Turbo Blow-thru 351w, C4, 8.8 http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2435094
brianj5600 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 01:07 PM   #25 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: QUEEN CREEK AZ
Posts: 1,227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MustangChuck View Post
The SN95 rear is about 1.5" wider (hub to hub) than a 70 rear. If you are planning to use aftermarket or late model rims, this shouldn't be a problem. I am planning to use the rear from my 94 GT donor. I am running 97 GT rims and with the old rear end, needed 1" spacers. With the new rear, I should only need 1/4" spacers.

Chuck
Are you sure about that?

Factory Axle Widths

I am asking because I bought a fox rear axle I am converting to sn95 for a 67. I thought the were the same width exactly.
__________________
Sense is not as common as you think.
17" MB Old School wheels from discount tire (a lot of people ask)
http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i5...l/DSCF3220.jpg
OCHOHILL is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 01:48 PM   #26 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 789
Default

the housings are the same length and interchange. Each axle is 3 quarters of an inch longer for 1994 to 1998 axles. I believe they call that brake stick out. At least strange engineering does if I remember correctly.
__________________
67 coupe Turbo Blow-thru 351w, C4, 8.8 http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2435094
brianj5600 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 01:49 PM   #27 (permalink)
Supporting Member
Just some guy
 
GypsyR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: SC foothills, USA
Posts: 12,684
Default

Funny to be discussing the whys of nine inch rears when it was figured out like 30 years ago. A Nine is TOUGH. And relatively easy to change gear ratios in the pits. A GM 10 bolt rear and an 8.8 share a bunch of design similarities. So a 10 bolt is also more efficient than a nine. But the GM guys for years have been swapping their 10 bolts (and 12 bolts) out for Ford nines. The Dodge guys tend to have pretty good luck with their Dana rears in the durability department but you will still see nines under Dodges where they need to change ratios from time to time.
For many years nines have been the go-to rear to handle power and for quick ratio changes on a reasonable budget. A nine inch rear may be one of the best all-around pieces Ford ever designed. It doesn't hurt that there is a ton of aftermarket support for them either.
And they don't need "c-clip eliminator" jury-rigs either when you have a car faster than 10 seconds in the 1/4.
You figure it out pretty quick drag racing. If you've been regularly running a 10 bolt or 8.8 against Joe Bob with a nine it doesn't take too long to notice that Joe Bob has been running the same nine all season where you've just blown up your third (expensive) rear end. And that's about all it boils down to. At certain power levels a nine inch rear is money well spent. Drag racing is an expensive hobby.
GypsyR is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 01:53 PM   #28 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OCHOHILL View Post
Are you sure about that?

Factory Axle Widths

I am asking because I bought a fox rear axle I am converting to sn95 for a 67. I thought the were the same width exactly.


Reread the link. The second post clarifies it.
__________________
67 coupe Turbo Blow-thru 351w, C4, 8.8 http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2435094

Last edited by brianj5600; 11-12-2012 at 04:46 PM.
brianj5600 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 05:42 PM   #29 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GypsyR View Post
Funny to be discussing the whys of nine inch rears when it was figured out like 30 years ago. A Nine is TOUGH. And relatively easy to change gear ratios in the pits. A GM 10 bolt rear and an 8.8 share a bunch of design similarities. So a 10 bolt is also more efficient than a nine. But the GM guys for years have been swapping their 10 bolts (and 12 bolts) out for Ford nines. The Dodge guys tend to have pretty good luck with their Dana rears in the durability department but you will still see nines under Dodges where they need to change ratios from time to time.
For many years nines have been the go-to rear to handle power and for quick ratio changes on a reasonable budget. A nine inch rear may be one of the best all-around pieces Ford ever designed. It doesn't hurt that there is a ton of aftermarket support for them either.
And they don't need "c-clip eliminator" jury-rigs either when you have a car faster than 10 seconds in the 1/4.
You figure it out pretty quick drag racing. If you've been regularly running a 10 bolt or 8.8 against Joe Bob with a nine it doesn't take too long to notice that Joe Bob has been running the same nine all season where you've just blown up your third (expensive) rear end. And that's about all it boils down to. At certain power levels a nine inch rear is money well spent. Drag racing is an expensive hobby.
I am guessing you don't get to the drag strip very often.
__________________
67 coupe Turbo Blow-thru 351w, C4, 8.8 http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2435094
brianj5600 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-12-2012, 06:14 PM   #30 (permalink)
Supporting Member
Just some guy
 
GypsyR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: SC foothills, USA
Posts: 12,684
Default

Ok.sure.
__________________
11. If thou be not absolutely sure of thy facts, thou shalt Google before posting thine answer.
GypsyR is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may 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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.