Guest fordguy57 Posted June 21, 2001 Share Posted June 21, 2001 The 8.8" has some advantages; as does the 9". But there are also tons of Ford 8" out there still and those are reasonably strong and comparatively cheap. Many have widths probably compatible with Z's. (Can be found in Mustangs, Mustang II's, Mavericks, Fairlanes, Comets, Pinto's, etc...). some were even posi-equipped and similar design to 9" (no c-clips..). Was an article recently in Fords & Mustangs(?) entitled "eight is enough" and many opine that these are capable of handling up to 400 hp, so might be as good a candidate as any other. I'll have to measure up a couple Fairlane housings I have out back.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 22, 2001 Share Posted June 22, 2001 I think your right, for a moderate street engine the 8" er would probably do fine. Many of the light cars like the T-buckets and such use the 8" with much success. Some of them were pretty narrow as I recall, maybe 57" being one of the narrower? Regards, Lone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordguy57 Posted June 22, 2001 Share Posted June 22, 2001 There are quite a few cars with swapped in 8"s running around w/o apparent problems, and most are at least as heavy as a Z. All the 57 & 58 fords had same fairly narrow 9" rear housing. Not sure when 8" came out. 1962?... Supposedly in 1957 the Ranchero and Wagons were even narrower housings, but never had one to compare with and spec's I have found various places showing width come out to virtually same width as other models. I have one 1957 9" housing with posi in a 65 Fairlane Thunderbolt clone that was previously 8" - equipped) The only reason I took out the 8" is 460 engine & CJ 4 speed toploader, rather than SBF. (9" fit, with exception of spring pads needing re-location. Interesting observation on comparative ring diameters. But does the diameter of the ring gear alone determine the strength of the whole unit and it's maximum torque capacity? I would suspect that the independant aspects themselves in the Datsun rear introduce some vulnerabilites - as it does in the Corvette independant. What are the torque ratings for the 180, 200 & 230 Datsun rears?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted June 23, 2001 Share Posted June 23, 2001 ...a Ford 8" ring gear is only 203.2mm diamter, not a whole lot bigger than a R-200. Aside from the availablility of different ratios, and cheaper posi units...If you have to go with a live axle, at least make sure it stronger than the stock part. a 9" dia. ring gear is actually smaller than the 90+ Nissan R-230. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.