The Forward Look Network
The Forward Look Network
Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Chat | eBay | Calendars | Albums | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Rear axle housing replacement.
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forward Look Technical Discussions -> General Technical Discussion and TroubleshootingMessage format
 
Alex
Posted 2024-02-26 10:56 PM (#633910)
Subject: Rear axle housing replacement.


Veteran

Posts: 253
1001002525
Location: Victoria Australia
Hi all,
I am wanting to move away from the standard tapered axle setup on my 1961 Chrysler Newport Sedan.
I am wanting to have an assembly that I can fit disc brakes to and not have the hassle with the tapered axles every time I need to do maintenance.
Can someone tell me what rear axle assembly I should be looking for to take it's place please.

Thanks.
Alex.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
mikes2nd
Posted 2024-02-27 2:47 AM (#633913 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.


Expert 5K+

Posts: 5006
5000
i put ford explorer 8.8 posi's in my 57-58... width was perfect. drive shaft is off two inches though it doesnt hit.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wizard
Posted 2024-02-27 2:52 AM (#633914 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Board Moderator & Exner Expert 10K+

Posts: 13045
500050002000100025
Location: Southern Sweden - Sturkö island
Alex, the easiest way is to separate the drums from the hubs. I've done this both on the front and the rear drums. This way, I only have to back off the adjustments and pull off the drums for a smooth access if something should happen on our long roadtrips.
Changing the rea axle means also that you need to modify the parking brake.
Perhaps theres discs that fit directly to the rear hubs.
If you want I could send you some instructions for separating drums from hubs.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
mikes2nd
Posted 2024-02-27 10:36 AM (#633920 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.


Expert 5K+

Posts: 5006
5000
Yeah, I don't think it's worth the axle changes just for maintenance.

It's a lot of work to swap the axle And I have 4 wheel discs but I am not using the rear parking brake. im using the original trans mounted one.

I could hook them up though with a lot of extra work to hook a cable up to the rear.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Alex
Posted 2024-02-27 4:35 PM (#633930 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.


Veteran

Posts: 253
1001002525
Location: Victoria Australia
Hi Wizard,
Yes please, send through instructions on separating drums from hubs.
Thanks.
LX.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Powerflite
Posted 2024-02-27 5:41 PM (#633931 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9654
5000200020005001002525
Location: So. Cal
If you have a '65-'69 C-body rear, which aren't very expensive, it's a direct bolt-in. You don't have to change anything if you don't want to. The only change you will need to make is to either move the brake hose inlet further outboard or get a longer hose for it. I wouldn't call that a lot of work.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PolyJ
Posted 2024-02-27 7:39 PM (#633934 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Veteran

Posts: 143
10025
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA
Alex, I second the Ford Explorer 8.8" modification mikes2nd mentions, which is what I put in my 1956 Dodge Coronet. The 1990 - 1994 use 10" drum brakes like the Mustang and Ranger, and 1995 - 2001 use 11" disc brakes. They are stronger than a factory 8-3/4. They can be had in many nice gear ratios and either open or posi. My salvage yard charges $140 for the entire unit with a warranty, and they are easy to pull. I have one in my 1940 Ford (4.10 posi out of a 2000 Explorer) and now one in my 1956 Dodge (3.73 posi out of a 2001 Explorer. If you go that route, I have a complete write up about the rear ends and my swap at https://poly318.com/1956-dodge-plymouth-ford-rear-end-swap/
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Alex
Posted 2024-02-27 11:41 PM (#633935 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.


Veteran

Posts: 253
1001002525
Location: Victoria Australia
Thanks for the reply's guy's, much appreciated.
I would like to see what is involved with Wizards separation instructions before I make a decision.
Thanks for the other details which has given me other options.

Thankyou.

Regards,
Alex.

Edited by Alex 2024-02-27 11:43 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wizard
Posted 2024-02-28 4:53 AM (#633938 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Board Moderator & Exner Expert 10K+

Posts: 13045
500050002000100025
Location: Southern Sweden - Sturkö island
Email sent Alex.....
Top of the page Bottom of the page
57chizler
Posted 2024-02-28 2:11 PM (#633942 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: RE: Rear axle housing replacement.



Expert

Posts: 3776
20001000500100100252525
Location: NorCal

I'll second what Nathan said, go with the '65-'69 C-body rear...keeps it all-Mopar and no worries about pinion offset, u-joints, etc.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Powerflite
Posted 2024-02-28 8:30 PM (#633951 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Expert 5K+

Posts: 9654
5000200020005001002525
Location: So. Cal
PolyJ: I take issue with the myth that the Ford 8.8 is stronger than the Chrysler 8 3/4. There's a similar myth that the Ford 9" is stronger than the 8 3/4. Both of these are incorrect in stock form. In fact, the 8.8 is weaker than the 9" Ford, so it can't be stronger than the 8 3/4. But even if you believe this myth, strength certainly won't be the limiting factor in any of these builds, but gear ratio changes likely will. That's where the Ford 9" and Chrysler 8 3/4 really shine. The Ford 8.8 is for poor people that can't afford a disc conversion on a proper rear axle IMO. Make sure you get the ratio you will always want because it's cheaper to swap to a proper Chrysler 8 3/4 than to change the gear ratio in an 8.8.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PolyJ
Posted 2024-02-28 9:59 PM (#633957 - in reply to #633935)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Veteran

Posts: 143
10025
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA

Alex - 2024-02-27 9:41 PM Thanks for the reply's guy's, much appreciated. I would like to see what is involved with Wizards separation instructions before I make a decision. Thanks for the other details which has given me other options. Thankyou. Regards, Alex.

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.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
mikes2nd
Posted 2024-02-29 3:27 AM (#633959 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.


Expert 5K+

Posts: 5006
5000
lol the 8.8 is weak? You realize the posi is a 31 spline and handles easily 500 horsepower?

is it cheap? yeah because there are so many produced... they are not cheap quality though... so why pay more for the same thing?

They are essentially also a clone of 12 bolt chevy rear axle... nearly identical and just as strong.

the 575 Hp Roush Mustang uses a 8.8 axle... And handles it fine. I dont see many Fwl cars that high of hp...

The 8 3/4 are certainly not up to the 8.8 strength... they strip ring gears and twist is why all the real mopars upgrade to the dana 60...



Top of the page Bottom of the page
mikes2nd
Posted 2024-02-29 3:32 AM (#633960 - in reply to #633910)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.


Expert 5K+

Posts: 5006
5000
oh the shelby Gt500 puts out 662 and the 8.8 handles it...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PolyJ
Posted 2024-03-01 10:54 PM (#634000 - in reply to #633959)
Subject: Re: Rear axle housing replacement.



Veteran

Posts: 143
10025
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA

mikes2nd - 2024-02-29 1:27 AM lol the 8.8 is weak? You realize the posi is a 31 spline and handles easily 500 horsepower? is it cheap? yeah because there are so many produced... they are not cheap quality though... so why pay more for the same thing? They are essentially also a clone of 12 bolt chevy rear axle... nearly identical and just as strong. the 575 Hp Roush Mustang uses a 8.8 axle... And handles it fine. I dont see many Fwl cars that high of hp... The 8 3/4 are certainly not up to the 8.8 strength... they strip ring gears and twist is why all the real mopars upgrade to the dana 60... oh the shelby Gt500 puts out 662 and the 8.8 handles it...

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". 

 

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

* * * This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated * * *


(Delete all cookies set by this site)