8.8 rear

88ranger306 · Post by **88ranger306** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:54 am

Is there an 8.8 that will direct bolt in to the ranger?

MalcolmV8 · Post by **MalcolmV8** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:28 am

Yes many Rangers came from the factory with an 8.8. Get one out a Ranger and it'll bolt right in.

88ranger306 · Post by **88ranger306** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:47 am

Thanks Malcolm, do you know what years by any chance?

Foxracin · Post by **Foxracin** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 10:05 am

Any year will bolt up. 90-92s are narrower then 93 and newer. Depends on what year your truck is to which one you should look for.

Also Explorer rear ends will bolt up but it will be spring under axle which will lower it or just put the perches on top. The Explorer is 3 inches wider then a 83-92 axle and 1.5 inches wider then 93 and newer. With the Explorer axle you can find 3.73 and 4.10 with limited slip all day long. There also 31 spline and you have the option of getting one with disc brakes.

MalcolmV8 · Post by **MalcolmV8** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:23 am

Parking brake does not hook up to the Explorer rear end either, you'll need a custom setup with some lokar cables or what ever. Just FYI.

broncobowsher · Post by **broncobowsher** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:08 pm

The 8.8 was used behind the 4.0
So you want to search for Rangers that rolled out of the factory with a 4.0 to find the 8.8 out back.

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:13 pm

My 8.8" came from a 93 Ranger which is the 1st year of the wider rearend for Rangers. It bolted right into my 89 Ranger and I confirmed, it is wider than the 89 Ranger that I pulled but you can't tell it at all. I can see it only because I know about the difference but nobody else has ever commented that the rear tires looks spaced differently than the front. Based on my measurements, the 93 Ranger rear is 1.5" wider on each side than my 89 Ranger. These are the pics from my 89 Ranger with the original 7.5 still installed. Note the distance from the end to the leaf spring perch:

Here are pics of my 8.8" and again note the difference in length:

If you do the math, the pics would tend to indicate the 93-up Ranger rears are 3" wider than the older Ranger rears. But everywhere I've read on the Internet says they are only 1.5" wider and it's the Explorer rears that are 3" wider. So the different has to be in the axle lengths hub-to-hub.

The 8.8" was also popular to put in 4x4s regardless of being equipped with the 4.0L as well. One guy here on the forum said his 2.3L Ranger came stock with an 8.8". Maybe they were just running low on 7.5"s that day???

Another thing to look for is 8.8" with the anti-sway bar assuming your Ranger doesn't have a stock anti-sway bar to start with.

Next, you'll need the driveshaft yoke from the 8.8". The 7.5" yoke won't bolt to an 8.8" companion flange. The bolt spacing is too small on the 7.5" yoke.

And finally, most 8.8"s are outfitted with 10" brakes. Although I have seen some in the junkyard that only had 9s. The 10" brakes are wider and smooth. The 9" drums are noticeably thinner and have heat sink ridges around the drum. But if your Ranger currently has 9s and you get a rear with 10s, the cables won't work perfectly with your truck. Get as much of the parking brake bracketry as you can from the donor. Even though the rearend bolts right in, the parking brake cables between 9" and 10" brake systems are different and not compatible with each other. Ideally, you'll want to get the cable from the foot pedal too but the main things you need are just the bracket that join the drivers side and passenger side cable together from the donor's setup & the bracket that joins the foot cable to the rearend cables. From there, you can make the rest work using cable clamps Lowes or Home Depot if you had to which is exactly what I had to do. It isn't pretty, but it works just fine and is under the truck where most people aren't looking anyway.

88ranger306 · Post by **88ranger306** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:01 pm

thanks alot guys, very helpful!

Foxracin · Post by **Foxracin** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:54 pm

MalcolmV8 wrote:Parking brake does not hook up to the Explorer rear end either, you'll need a custom setup with some lokar cables or what ever. Just FYI.

Im not sure on a disc brake setup but my 88 parking brake cable worked perfect and were the same for the Explorer rear end with drums.

MalcolmV8 · Post by **MalcolmV8** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:09 pm

Foxracin wrote:
MalcolmV8 wrote:Parking brake does not hook up to the Explorer rear end either, you'll need a custom setup with some lokar cables or what ever. Just FYI.
Im not sure on a disc brake setup but my 88 parking brake cable worked perfect and were the same for the Explorer rear end with drums.

Yes I meant disk brakes.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:30 pm

Ok, this may seem like a stupid question, But why cant you just take your orignal backing plates,brakes, and cables and just put them on the 8.8?? I no having bigger brakes is always better, but I have never had any problems with my 9" brakes and my 5.0 has been in my truck for about 5 years. I dont race it I dont haul with it. So going with bigger brakes on a street truck seems like over kill. Thats just me.

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:09 pm

That's a valid option when dealing with a Ranger with 9" drums and putting a rear in that has 10s on it. But the difficulty of getting the 10s to work with a Ranger that's using 9s is fairly simple as long as you have the metal brackets that join the 2 sides together. But you can make it work exactly like stock by swapping the 10s for 9s.

However one benefit of going with an Explorer rear is to get the stronger 31 spline axles and disc brakes. Unless you are doing serious dragging with a 400+hp plant and some serious traction adders, the 31 spline upgrade is academic at best. But the discs are another story. Drums are not exactly the most attractive thing to see behind a set of rims, but discs on a truck that never had a rear disc option is just another touch to an already unique vehicle. So not only is there a braking performance benefit with the discs, but there's also the aesthetic aspect with making them work. And after doing the other mods required to get an Explorer rear under a Ranger, dealing with cables are a walk in the park.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:15 pm

Boy is this one question I've been wondering about for a long time, going with the 31 or 28 spline axles. I know a lot of off-roaders go to the Explorer for the added strength when running big tires but a lot of them are still running low out-put motors. Just wondering how many of them think to up-grade the u-joints while their at it. Back in the "Old Daze", the only cars that got the 31 spline axles were the 390/427/428 big blocks, usually running about the same weight as todays Rangers and a whole lot more torque. I also think that having rear disc brakes is over rated on a truck, surly not just for the looks or bragging rights. Anybody know of anyone breaking a 28 spline axle on a more or less DD? Just really been wondering.
Dave

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:29 pm

Only people I've ever heard of that sheer or snap 28s are people running serious power adders with slicks at the track. I didn't think about the 4wds with very low gears, but I could imagine 4.10s or 4.56s twisting some big 30"+ mudtracks could seriously stress the 28 spline axles. And now that you mention it, I do recall a guy back in highschool that drove a jacked up 70s F150 4wd with a 400 SBF that he loved to rag out. He stripped one of his axles and had to activate 4wd to get it home. I can't remember the rearend he had but I'm betting it was a 9" Ford given the era of the F150. I've never heard of anybody breaking them in a street vehicle, on the street, with street tires.

And I agree on a truck, the discs braking performance is also academic. But the aesthetic aspect is an upgrade I can appreciate. I would much rather have shiny discs showing through some aftermarket rims than my ugly, rusty drums.

MalcolmV8 · Post by **MalcolmV8** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:46 pm

I don't have any hard numbers but just seat of the pants I can tell you the rear disks on my red ranger made a big difference and the overall braking of the truck was greatly improved.