V8-Ranger.com

Is it possible the improved braking performance was due to better performance tires? I ask because when I upgraded my 9" drums to 10" drums, I can't say it behaves any different. Maybe it did, but I can't say I could feel any difference while normal driving. However I did notice that the braking force using the parking brake is much better than with the 9s. Frequently with the 9s, I would roll backwards with the parking brake pushed all the way in on moderate inclines. Tightening the brakes in the drums would work for a while, but eventually, the shoes wear and it'd be back like it was. Parking so the truck would roll forward was not much problem. To keep the truck from rolling backward required both the brakes and being in gear. The 2.9L had trouble holding the truck on steep hills too. When in gear, even 1st, it would occasionally spin the engine. On really steep hills, both the engine and brakes had a hard time keeping the truck from rolling backwards. I always just assumed that was due to engine wear and low compression not being able to hold.

With the 10s, the brakes can hold the truck on hills noticeably better. And with the 5.0L, the engine doesn't turn with or without the brakes. But it's nice to know that between the two, the truck will stay stationary regardless of whether I'm parked up or downhill.

Honestly I wouldn't have expected any improvement from 9" to 10" drums. I'm not impressed with drums at all and can't believe in this day and age they still put them on vehicles.

Well, the 10" drums are not only a larger diameter but they are an inch wider. Being an inch wider alone doubles the braking surface area. But when you take into account the larger diameter which gives the shoes a further distance from center, that gives them an even bigger advantage. You can think about it as though they are given more leverage to stop the vehicle being an inch further away from the center. So there's no doubt that the 10" brakes are a significant upgrade purely from a physics standpoint. And the way drum brakes are designed, reverse is not their "preferred" braking direction. Reverse is where they are at the most disadvantage based on their design and thank goodness because forward is the direction you need them to work best.

But that aside, I fully agree. Disc brakes can't be that much more expensive to manufacture if any more today. It doesn't make sense to make them anymore given the superiority that discs have proven themselves to be on passenger vehicles. Although there are still arguments for using drums on really large vehicles like semis. But I believe the decision to keep semi trucks using drums has more to do with heat dissipation, which the drums can do far better than discs due to more cooling surface area. And electronic trailer brakes are far easier to make as drums than as discs.

Ok, another stupid question. I am not a transmission man nor a rear end man. How do you tell if its an 8.8? Is there some thing that at a glance you can tell its an 8.8 and not a 7.5?

The back plate is the easiest way to tell. They are shaped different. Notice:


For more info on Ranger rears, check out this site:
Ford Ranger Rear Axles

thats a good web site to get so very usefull information. But......, from what I can tell the weight rating on the 7.5 and 8.8 are the same and realy dont offer any strength differance, or did I missunderstand something? Is it realy worth it to swap in an 8.8? I have had no problems with my 7.5 in my Ranger, but I dont race it and dont dump the clutch. Every once and a while I will let the tires talk but I dont beat on my truck.

just bite the bullet and put in an explorer rear, its and 8.8 it has good gearset ( 3.55,3.73,4.11) from the factory, disc brakes, larger axles,limited slips, and larger axle tubes, and you can get them for 300 at the junk yard, but thats up to you, for all the aggrevation put into drum brakes you can swap the whole rear and have a way better setup.

I wouldn't say the adaptation of 10" brake cables from 9s is a huge headache. It's a cable clamp or two if you go on the cheap. If you go all out, it's the replacement of the cables all the way up to the pedal. But otherwise, the 8.8" is an absolute bolt-in. Shock mounts, leaf perches, brake line connection, everything that matters is an absolute swap with no headaches. The 8.8 goes in just like the 7.5 comes out. Add to that, Ranger 8.8s also come in limited slip, can be gotten with rear anti-sway bars that will bolt into a Ranger as long as you get all the linkage hardware off the donor's frame. And it's an 8.8". The most common Ranger ratios are 3.55s and 3.73s, but I've heard of 4x4s with 4.10s stock. If you don't like the ratio rear you get, you can replace the gears with standard 8.8" parts. I got my 3.27s off eBay for around $40 used. The headache of relocating leaf perches, shock mounts, and adapting the brake lines as well as dealing with parking brake cables just sounds like a much greater task. The only way I'd consider doing that myself is if I really needed the 31 spline upgrade OR I just really wanted the discs. For me, the discs would be the most likely drive.

However it's only fair I state I haven't actually gone through the effort of doing an Explorer to Ranger rear conversion, I can't say just how big of a job it is. But I have to admit, it sounds like a huge PITA. It's enough of a pain that I wonder if Explorer discs will bolt onto a Ranger 8.8" pipes without much problem. If so, that would be far easier to attain to get discs on the rear of my Ranger.

Point being, if you are looking for the path of least resistance, that's the Ranger rear. But if you are just looking for a challenge and want the pride of getting an Explorer rear into a Ranger, then go with the Explorer and reap the rewards including the bragging rights AND the pretty discs.

i have an 8.8 disk brake explorer rear in my ranger it was pretty much a bolt in aside from having to move the shock mounts plus on a positive note my truck is lowered with an axle flip and the spring perches were already on the right side of the axle. also my e-brake main cable hooks up to the two e-brake cables off the rear end.

That's a good point. If you are looking to lower, the Explorer rear would save you the relocation of the perches.

87ranger wrote:just bite the bullet and put in an explorer rear, its and 8.8 it has good gearset ( 3.55,3.73,4.11) from the factory, disc brakes, larger axles,limited slips, and larger axle tubes, and you can get them for 300 at the junk yard, but thats up to you, for all the aggrevation put into drum brakes you can swap the whole rear and have a way better setup.

Also good to point out the Explorer rearend is not a bolt in deal. You have to relocate the spring perches, cut the shock mounts off your 7.5 rearend and weld them on to the axle housing tubes of the Explorer rearend and deal with the parking brake hook up. Not to mention flange to flange the Explorer rearend is 3" wider than the Ranger rearend. Well wider than my 92 Ranger's stock rearend, you mileage may vary.

The disk brakes are really nice though. Is there an easy way to get disk brakes onto the factory Ranger 8.8 rearends? I know many years ago I looked around and Wilwood made a conversion kit for the Rangers but it was around $1200.

i got the same year explorer rear as my ranger it measures back plate to back plate the same and the wheels sit in the same place so i think its the same width. will have to check into it once i get it back together i blew 2 aod's in the process and overheated it getting it home in first gear so now im goin with a better 302 and a 5 speed

Currie makes several different kits. The ones for the Explorers will only work with the larger axle bearings, probably explains why you don't see people using/converting Teh Explorer disc set-up. They do have a kit shown below.

Dave

Part #: CE-6011C
Our Price: $499.95

Description: 2000 Model Mustang Cobra rear disc brake kit for use on 8", 9", and 8.8" Ford rearends, as well as 12 bolt GM rearends in most all street and muscle car applications. Kit includes the factory Mustang calipers that come painted red with integral parking brake, 11 5/8" vented rotors with a 2.800" center register hole - specify wheel bolt pattern and wheel stud size, and Currie clockable caliper mounting brackets. Also included are center register hub adapters to adapt rotors to 2.430" register hub. These are a full circle caliper bracket that must be installed on the axles before the axle bearing is installed. Available for small bearing, early large bearing, and late model large bearing housing ends - for common axle offsets. This kit is an excellent replacement for Versailles disc brakes. This kit will not work with 5 on 5 1/2" wheel bolt patttern. It is recommended that you purchase disc brake style wheel studs along with this kit for maximum rotor alignment accuracy.

Unit of Measure: EACH

im not a huge fan of the integral parking brake i like the shoe/disk setup used in explorers altho they have their problems too (shoes falling off and axle seals leaking) and dont forget about the explorer service bulliten that calls for replacing all the bearings and the ring and pinion cant remember the number from when i worked ar ford but it can prob be easily found

prpleranger wrote:im not a huge fan of the integral parking brake i like the shoe/disk setup used in explorers altho they have their problems too (shoes falling off and axle seals leaking) and dont forget about the explorer service bulliten that calls for replacing all the bearings and the ring and pinion cant remember the number from when i worked ar ford but it can prob be easily found

Is this a "re-call" so to speak? I have a 98 Mountaineer that the rear end is very noisy. I know when I worked at a Ford/Lincoln/Mazda dealer about 15 years ago, there where some things, "service bullitens", that if a customer came in complaining about something on this "list" they would fix it, no charge. But only if "you" complained about it being a problem. Several years ago they had a problems with the piston rings in the early 90's Town cars. The rings wernt stagaurd and caused exsesive oil consumption. If you came in complaining of this they would rebuild your engine for no charge. I did a couple of them.