No worries, Alex. I imagine you can still find 1995 - 2001 Explorers in Australia as a donor if you end up going that route much easier than finding an 8.75", and I know how slow and costly freight is from the States. The 8.8" is also an offset pinion, and you can get the front flange yokes in 1310, 1350, and 1410 series u-joints. If you end up wanting more info about the swap, feel free to send me a PM or email.

Mikes2nd, what do you, I, and the larger racing community know since we’re just “poor people with improper axles” says powerflite, LOL. His post betrays a fundamental lack of experience racing with 8.75”, 8.8”, and 9” axles and basic knowledge of the 8.8". Along with the Explorer 8.8” 31-spline shafts that you correctly point out are slightly stronger than the factory 8.75” shafts, the Explorer units use a stronger 3.25” housing that takes far more force to deflect and twist compared to the lighter 3” 8.75” housing that requires aftermarket bracing to match/surpass the 8.8” strength. A huge advantage of the 8.8” is that the cap design and pinion position is superior to the 8.75” in strength and does not have the same susceptibility to flexing and failure and related ring/pinion damage under heavy load. Granted, this design uses up about 10 HP more over the 8.75" because the ring and pinion has a larger contact area, but that's a strength benefit similar to the 9" and Dana 60's design at the cost of horsepower. I have no idea what powerflite is talking about regarding gear ratios and changing gearsets making the 8.8" an inferior choice, but neither does he to be fair. The factory 8.8” gear ratios include 2.73, 3.08, 3.27, 3.45, 3.55, 3.73, 4.10, and 4.56. In the rare case none of those suits the intended vehicle, Strange and Richmond make 8.8” gearsets that cost but a little more ($400) than 8.75” sets ($300) to where a user is in no way limited by gear ratios with the 8.8”. It takes about the same amount of labor to change a gearset in an 8.8” housing than it does in an 8.75” center section, so that's a nonestarter claim as well. He says the 8.8” is inferior because it isn’t a drop-out center section? Move over Dana 60, it looks like you're inferior to the 8.75”, LOL. 

Mikes2nd, a woman named Steph who joined our local racing association got me into the 8.8”. I don't recall her being poor, however, since she had a gorgeous car, newer truck, and bitchin' trailer setup. She ran a posi Explorer 8.8" in her 1969 Satellite that was putting out 660 ft.lbs. torque with a foot-brake 727, 4,200 stall converter, and 10.5" slicks. I saw the engine dyno slips and can attest to the accuracy of the torque output. The only modification she did was to address the primary 8.8” weak point by placing additional welds joining the housing tubes to the center section to reinforce the factory rosette welds that if cracked allow the tube to spin. Aside from that, she swapped in a 4.56 gear set. She said the axle had two race seasons on it without issue, which I questioned internally not knowing her integrity or much about the 8.8” but knowing that a stock 8.75” would explode under those conditions in my experience. At the time, I was running a 1966 Coronet putting out 575 ft.lbs. torque with a four-speed, 10” cheater slicks, and running an 8.75” with Moser shafts, quality bearings, and a rebuilt factory 489 case with 4.10 posi. The season prior, one of the caps broke and subsequently wiped out the factory ring and pinion. I hypothesized that the case might have been the culprit, so I machined another factory 489 case for billet caps and rebuilt it with a new Strange 4.10 gear set and bearings. The season Steph joined our club, I sheared that new Strange ring gear after a few track days launching at 3,500 RPM. By that time, I was in a gambler’s fallacy dilemma with the already large amount of money I had invested in the 8.75,” but from plenty of past experience running 8.75” axles I knew I was past the axle’s ability without dumping a lot more money into upgrade parts. With the car out of commission and me frustrated and done throwing money at the 8.75”, I planned on sitting out the rest of the season and buying a Strange race-prepped Dana 60 assembly. Steph talked me into the 8.8” swap as an experiment to get me back on the track. It was inexpensive and quick enough that I figured I’d give it a try before dropping a stack of money on the Strange axle. I found and pulled from the salvage yard a posi 4.10 Explorer 8.8” that had newer brakes. Aside from the modifications to fit the axle in the car, the only things I did were disassemble and clean the internals to check parts and set tolerances, placed additional welds at the tubes to center section, and installed new bearings and seals. I ended up with about $250 in the axle and another $200 to have the driveshaft modified. I ran the 8.8” for a season and a half without issue before selling the car to my cousin who still beats it at the track a dozen times a year without issue. After that experience, I was done with the 8.75” for anything over 500 ft.lbs. torque or for any vehicle that doesn't already have a good complete axle in it already and regret taking that long to make the switch. If I ever require more out of the rear axle than an 8.8” can handle, I would buy a race-prepped Dana 60 or race-prepped 9".