corerftech
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2021
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 84
- Points
- 28
- Location
- Memphis, TN
- Vehicle Year
- 1987
- Make / Model
- Ford Ranger
- Transmission
- Automatic
Work and life have prohbited me form spending much of any time on my v8 ranger project. Today was good, I got to mock hang my Explorer 8.8 (31 spline) with the actual tires and wheels. I need to get ride height correct as the truck is getting an MII front end and the ride height must be set at back before crossmemebr can be retrofitted.
Anyway...... with the rear end in front of me and mocked in fully, I saw some really good stuff to save money, time, etc. I am planning to use two Cut to Length axles and convert to a 9 inch Torino bearing housing, deleting the C-clips. I have the ends,, bearings, retainers, etc here...... but measure twice, cut one has kicked in.
As I looked at the whole assembly, I realized that I was in better shape than most 8.8 narrowing projects, labor wise, due to use of new CTL axles. I am looking for someone to do a math check (sanity check) on my numbers for cutting.
The process is not one I have read or seen anywhere. The spring perches stay right where they are. My jaw dropped when I had the epiphany. I am running homebrew Caltracs on factory springs with KrySlur sliders instead of shackles. I dont like KrySlur motors.
My Tires mounted to axle (total Overall Width) is 71 inches and that is generous. That measurement will ensure a safety margin for the 275/60R15's (street tires) mounted on the 15x7, ZERO offset wheels. I also have the same wheels in 15x8, ZERO offset, for the drag radials, also M&H 275/60R15. So the OAL (width) will not change regardless of my activities.
The bed width, stock 87 short bed, is a generous 64 inches. That number is also guarded to ensure I can't cut a tire sidewall ever. FYI, the fender tubs will be removed completely so I just need the WIDTH to be right. Ill fab tubs to fill the holes when bed is finally reattached.
So 71- 64= 7 inches to be removed from the axle width in total.
I need to center the pinion as the stock fuel tank is gone via this process as well.
As I have read (not measured), a Stock late model (2001) Explorer 8.8 disc axle pinion is offset by 2 inches to the right. So the pinion/axle must shift two inches left to make it centered.
Therefore I must in basic form, remove 7 inches "unequally" from the axle.
Wheel/tire outside dimensions need 7 inches split equally. So each tire must move 3.5 inches inward.
By shoving the entire axle (theoretically) two inches left, I still need an added 1.5 inches removed in length on the right side. Shortening the right axle 1.5 inches is needed. That accomodates the right side of the rear end.
By moving the entire axle left, I then have 2 inches of extra overhang on the left side. So the left tire which needed a reciprocal 3.5 inches inward movement, now needs 5.5 inches (3.5 + 2 = 5.5 inches).
Therefore by removing 5.5 inches from the left axle will bring the outside edge of the tire inward and correct the pinion centerline offset for me simultaneously.
Where it gets interesting is Im cheap. Id rather not cut off the spring perches. Becasue Im using custom axles on both sides, I can on the right side, section the 1 inch out from behind the perch and leave perch at factory angle and attached. Likewise on the left side, I can section 5.5 inches from behind that perch and leave it attached.
As long as I section each side at precisely the same point with reference to the bearing/backing plate flange, then the spring perches will be symmetrcal to the tire/wheel mounting surface and be symmetrical overall.
Now that creates a mess of the perch spacing. But my perches have moved inward exactly 3.5 inches on the right, 3.5 inches on the left when all cuts and shifts are made. Fortunately I have to move my leaf springs inward as well and my intentions were to fab mounts to hang them directly under the frame rails. Since the LEAF SPRINGS are the wildcard, by altering the perches to a GIVEN width (could be very arbitrary and still work), then installing leafs at that new spacing makes the leafs fit regardless. If I was NOT moving the leafs (I have to, they are very much in the way), Id be screwed. That is the magic combo. Moving the leafs in conjunciton with custom axles.
So the math is I have a 71 inch tire to tire, needs to fit into a 64 inch wheel well opening so as to not shred the side of the tire and not have to bend any part of the bed metal. Narrow rear 7 inches total. Move right and left 3.5 inch inward. Move right by shifting entire housing 2 inch and center the pinion, cut an added 1.5 to make the full 3.5 adjust. Left side, cut 5.5 from housing, thereby relieveing the 2 inch from centering pinion, 3.5 inch tire relief.
Does anyone else follow that logic?
I have Torino ends for big bearings to add to the equation. I dont think that will be a bother as long as they remaing symmetrically installed/welded.
Factory perch width: 38.5
New width: 31.5
RH axle stock: 27.625
LH axle stock: 30.500
Total axles: 58.125
New RH: 26.125 (1.5 shorter)
New LH: 25.000 (5.5 shorter)
New Total axles: 51.125
58.125-51.125= 7.000 inches.
So I have cross checked the math at the housing an axle dimensions and they correlate.
Can someone give me a sanity check on the math? Did I miss something??
I used Rangerstation axle data for the calculations.
Ill write this up when I execute the work.
Thanks in advance
Anyway...... with the rear end in front of me and mocked in fully, I saw some really good stuff to save money, time, etc. I am planning to use two Cut to Length axles and convert to a 9 inch Torino bearing housing, deleting the C-clips. I have the ends,, bearings, retainers, etc here...... but measure twice, cut one has kicked in.
As I looked at the whole assembly, I realized that I was in better shape than most 8.8 narrowing projects, labor wise, due to use of new CTL axles. I am looking for someone to do a math check (sanity check) on my numbers for cutting.
The process is not one I have read or seen anywhere. The spring perches stay right where they are. My jaw dropped when I had the epiphany. I am running homebrew Caltracs on factory springs with KrySlur sliders instead of shackles. I dont like KrySlur motors.
My Tires mounted to axle (total Overall Width) is 71 inches and that is generous. That measurement will ensure a safety margin for the 275/60R15's (street tires) mounted on the 15x7, ZERO offset wheels. I also have the same wheels in 15x8, ZERO offset, for the drag radials, also M&H 275/60R15. So the OAL (width) will not change regardless of my activities.
The bed width, stock 87 short bed, is a generous 64 inches. That number is also guarded to ensure I can't cut a tire sidewall ever. FYI, the fender tubs will be removed completely so I just need the WIDTH to be right. Ill fab tubs to fill the holes when bed is finally reattached.
So 71- 64= 7 inches to be removed from the axle width in total.
I need to center the pinion as the stock fuel tank is gone via this process as well.
As I have read (not measured), a Stock late model (2001) Explorer 8.8 disc axle pinion is offset by 2 inches to the right. So the pinion/axle must shift two inches left to make it centered.
Therefore I must in basic form, remove 7 inches "unequally" from the axle.
Wheel/tire outside dimensions need 7 inches split equally. So each tire must move 3.5 inches inward.
By shoving the entire axle (theoretically) two inches left, I still need an added 1.5 inches removed in length on the right side. Shortening the right axle 1.5 inches is needed. That accomodates the right side of the rear end.
By moving the entire axle left, I then have 2 inches of extra overhang on the left side. So the left tire which needed a reciprocal 3.5 inches inward movement, now needs 5.5 inches (3.5 + 2 = 5.5 inches).
Therefore by removing 5.5 inches from the left axle will bring the outside edge of the tire inward and correct the pinion centerline offset for me simultaneously.
Where it gets interesting is Im cheap. Id rather not cut off the spring perches. Becasue Im using custom axles on both sides, I can on the right side, section the 1 inch out from behind the perch and leave perch at factory angle and attached. Likewise on the left side, I can section 5.5 inches from behind that perch and leave it attached.
As long as I section each side at precisely the same point with reference to the bearing/backing plate flange, then the spring perches will be symmetrcal to the tire/wheel mounting surface and be symmetrical overall.
Now that creates a mess of the perch spacing. But my perches have moved inward exactly 3.5 inches on the right, 3.5 inches on the left when all cuts and shifts are made. Fortunately I have to move my leaf springs inward as well and my intentions were to fab mounts to hang them directly under the frame rails. Since the LEAF SPRINGS are the wildcard, by altering the perches to a GIVEN width (could be very arbitrary and still work), then installing leafs at that new spacing makes the leafs fit regardless. If I was NOT moving the leafs (I have to, they are very much in the way), Id be screwed. That is the magic combo. Moving the leafs in conjunciton with custom axles.
So the math is I have a 71 inch tire to tire, needs to fit into a 64 inch wheel well opening so as to not shred the side of the tire and not have to bend any part of the bed metal. Narrow rear 7 inches total. Move right and left 3.5 inch inward. Move right by shifting entire housing 2 inch and center the pinion, cut an added 1.5 to make the full 3.5 adjust. Left side, cut 5.5 from housing, thereby relieveing the 2 inch from centering pinion, 3.5 inch tire relief.
Does anyone else follow that logic?
I have Torino ends for big bearings to add to the equation. I dont think that will be a bother as long as they remaing symmetrically installed/welded.
Factory perch width: 38.5
New width: 31.5
RH axle stock: 27.625
LH axle stock: 30.500
Total axles: 58.125
New RH: 26.125 (1.5 shorter)
New LH: 25.000 (5.5 shorter)
New Total axles: 51.125
58.125-51.125= 7.000 inches.
So I have cross checked the math at the housing an axle dimensions and they correlate.
Can someone give me a sanity check on the math? Did I miss something??
I used Rangerstation axle data for the calculations.
Ill write this up when I execute the work.
Thanks in advance