From: owner-pre48-list-digest ford-trucks.com (pre48-list-digest)
To: pre48-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: pre48-list-digest V2 #92
Reply-To: pre61-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-pre48-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-pre48-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


pre48-list-digest Thursday, September 9 1999 Volume 02 : Number 092



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1947 and Older trucks and vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe pre47-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear
Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear
Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear
Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear
Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear
FTE Pre48 - Rearends

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 08:25:15 -0400
From: 47Fred
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear

John Lawson wrote:
>
> Well I certainly have to apologize for getting my cars and trucks confused.
> It never entered my mind that Chris was asking about a truck even though the
> message came to me from the truck list. Again, I regret the oversight and
> will pay more attention in the future no matter how "rushed I think I am.
> -----Original Message-----

> > >> Does anyone know if a ford nine inch rear will bolt directly under a 46
> >> >frame or do I need to do any modifications? Thanks
> >> >-Chris
> >
>
> >John Lawson wrote:

> >> You will need to make modifications. The 46 has a transverse spring
> to open driveshaft. Not a Saturday afternoon project.


> From: 47Fred

> > Common guys, pay attention, the '46 doesn't have a transverse spring
> >or any of that other passenger car garbage.

No apology needed, Mr. L., it never occurred to me he might have been
asking about a car and a good reply for that, with all the high points
covered.
What do you feel about using a 8.8 axle VS the 9"? I believe it's a
natural choice for a street rod truck, especially one with a Mustang II
or chrysler type front end.
47 Fred
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 09:06:52 -0400
From: 47Fred
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear

Chris Chambers wrote:
>
> What I have is a 9 inch out from under a 69 Mustang Mach I that I had to part out
> because it was so rough. The ratio is 3.25:1 so that should be a suitable set
> up? So what Fred is saying is that I will have to move the spring perch, right?
> I have plans to use coil overs just to get a smoother ride. Thanks for the
> information!
> -Chris
>
It is my belief that the '69-70 mustang has an axle which may well be
too wide, flange to flange, for a 1/2 ton 42-47 pickup, and may cause
difficulty finding a wheel/tire selection that won't rub or look
strange, I'd advise you to CAREFULLY measure all key dimensions before
you crank up the welder. To use coil springs in this application means
fabricating some sort of 4 link suspension, and will result in no need
for conventional springs. It will, most likely and unless you have a
unique plan, require spring seats on the axle and frame, mounting a set
of trailing arm brackets on both the frame and axle, and fabrication of
some sort of locating bar to prevent side to side motion. As John said
earlier, not a Saturday afternoon project.
A less stressful method is remove two or 3 spring leaves, relocate
the stock spring pads, allowing for correct pinion angle, and use the
stock set up. Keep in mind also that the bolt pattern on the front is
bigger than the 4-1/2 bolt circle on the '69 axle, and that the 9" has a
2" pinion offset. On the plus side, the 3.25 is an excellent axle ratio
for use in this kind of application.

47 Fred
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 08:46:31 -0500
From: Chris Chambers
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear

I did some measuring last night since I now have the 9 inch out and can work a little
better. From backing plate to backing plate, the 9 inch measures approx. 42". My
original rear under the 46 measures approx. 43". I can compensate for the difference
with a carefully backspaced wheel, right?
OK, how about if I forget about the coilovers and just use the shock set up like was
under the Mustang? All I would need is a mounting bar up top on the frame of the truck
because the bracket for the shock is already on the 9 inch rear? I also measured from
center of spring perch to center of the other and there is about an inch and a half
difference. What I thought about doing was grinding the welds to remove the perches
and welding on the perches from my truck rearend in the proper location. Will this
work? I know I am asking a lot of questions but you guys have been extremely helpful.
I am keeping all of this information, this is the first time for me to tackle this kind
of project and so far I am having a ball. Thanks for the help.
- -Chris

47Fred wrote:

> Chris Chambers wrote:
> >
> > What I have is a 9 inch out from under a 69 Mustang Mach I that I had to part out
> > because it was so rough. The ratio is 3.25:1 so that should be a suitable set
> > up? So what Fred is saying is that I will have to move the spring perch, right?
> > I have plans to use coil overs just to get a smoother ride. Thanks for the
> > information!
> > -Chris
> >What about removing some springsleaves as Fred said? what will that accomplish? It
> sounds like I am heading the right direction, I just need a little expertise help in
> getting there.
> It is my belief that the '69-70 mustang has an axle which may well be
> too wide, flange to flange, for a 1/2 ton 42-47 pickup, and may cause
> difficulty finding a wheel/tire selection that won't rub or look
> strange, I'd advise you to CAREFULLY measure all key dimensions before
> you crank up the welder. To use coil springs in this application means
> fabricating some sort of 4 link suspension, and will result in no need
> for conventional springs. It will, most likely and unless you have a
> unique plan, require spring seats on the axle and frame, mounting a set
> of trailing arm brackets on both the frame and axle, and fabrication of
> some sort of locating bar to prevent side to side motion. As John said
> earlier, not a Saturday afternoon project.
> A less stressful method is remove two or 3 spring leaves, relocate
> the stock spring pads, allowing for correct pinion angle, and use the
> stock set up. Keep in mind also that the bolt pattern on the front is
> bigger than the 4-1/2 bolt circle on the '69 axle, and that the 9" has a
> 2" pinion offset. On the plus side, the 3.25 is an excellent axle ratio
> for use in this kind of application.
>
> 47 Fred
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 10:50:55 -0400
From: "John Lawson"
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear

I believe the 8.8 is somewhat more efficient and plenty strong to be
considered for any streetrod project. I haven't used it (the 8.8) because
the local boneyard has 9" stuff and I have accumulated 9" parts and
gear-sets that make me think I need to use them before I switch.
- -----Original Message-----
From: 47Fred
To: pre48-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear


>John Lawson wrote:
>>
>> Well I certainly have to apologize for getting my cars and trucks
confused.
>> It never entered my mind that Chris was asking about a truck even though
the
>> message came to me from the truck list. Again, I regret the oversight and
>> will pay more attention in the future no matter how "rushed I think I am.
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> > >> Does anyone know if a ford nine inch rear will bolt directly under a
46
>> >> >frame or do I need to do any modifications? Thanks
>> >> >-Chris
>> >
>>
>> >John Lawson wrote:
>
>> >> You will need to make modifications. The 46 has a transverse spring
>> to open driveshaft. Not a Saturday afternoon project.
>
>
>> From: 47Fred
>
>> > Common guys, pay attention, the '46 doesn't have a transverse spring
>> >or any of that other passenger car garbage.
>
> No apology needed, Mr. L., it never occurred to me he might have been
>asking about a car and a good reply for that, with all the high points
>covered.
> What do you feel about using a 8.8 axle VS the 9"? I believe it's a
>natural choice for a street rod truck, especially one with a Mustang II
>or chrysler type front end.
> 47 Fred
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 10:58:32 -0400
From: "John Lawson"
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear

Chris let me suggest you call Chassis Engineering at 319-643-2645 and get
their catalog. They make several items which simplify the conversion, and
their catalog will give you some good ideas to help you decide which course
of action is best for your application.
- -----Original Message-----
From: Chris Chambers
To: pre48-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: FTE Pre48 - 9 inch rear


>I did some measuring last night since I now have the 9 inch out and can
work a little
>better. From backing plate to backing plate, the 9 inch measures approx.
42". My
>original rear under the 46 measures approx. 43". I can compensate for the
difference
>with a carefully backspaced wheel, right?
>OK, how about if I forget about the coilovers and just use the shock set up
like was
>under the Mustang? All I would need is a mounting bar up top on the frame
of the truck
>because the bracket for the shock is already on the 9 inch rear? I also
measured from
>center of spring perch to center of the other and there is about an inch
and a half
>difference. What I thought about doing was grinding the welds to remove
the perches
>and welding on the perches from my truck rearend in the proper location.
Will this
>work? I know I am asking a lot of questions but you guys have been
extremely helpful.
>I am keeping all of this information, this is the first time for me to
tackle this kind
>of project and so far I am having a ball. Thanks for the help.
>-Chris
>
>47Fred wrote:
>
>> Chris Chambers wrote:
>> >
>> > What I have is a 9 inch out from under a 69 Mustang Mach I that I had
to part out
>> > because it was so rough. The ratio is 3.25:1 so that should be a
suitable set
>> > up? So what Fred is saying is that I will have to move the spring
perch, right?
>> > I have plans to use coil overs just to get a smoother ride. Thanks for
the
>> > information!
>> > -Chris
>> >What about removing some springsleaves as Fred said? what will that
accomplish? It
>> sounds like I am heading the right direction, I just need a little
expertise help in
>> getting there.
>> It is my belief that the '69-70 mustang has an axle which may well be
>> too wide, flange to flange, for a 1/2 ton 42-47 pickup, and may cause
>> difficulty finding a wheel/tire selection that won't rub or look
>> strange, I'd advise you to CAREFULLY measure all key dimensions before
>> you crank up the welder. To use coil springs in this application means
>> fabricating some sort of 4 link suspension, and will result in no need
>> for conventional springs. It will, most likely and unless you have a
>> unique plan, require spring seats on the axle and frame, mounting a set
>> of trailing arm brackets on both the frame and axle, and fabrication of
>> some sort of locating bar to prevent side to side motion. As John said
>> earlier, not a Saturday afternoon project.
>> A less stressful method is remove two or 3 spring leaves, relocate
>> the stock spring pads, allowing for correct pinion angle, and use the
>> stock set up. Keep in mind also that the bolt pattern on the front is
>> bigger than the 4-1/2 bolt circle on the '69 axle, and that the 9" has a
>> 2" pinion offset. On the plus side, the 3.25 is an excellent axle ratio
>> for use in this kind of application.
>>
>> 47 Fred
>> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:41:40 EDT
From: Brechtjohn aol.com
Subject: FTE Pre48 - Rearends

Since we are talking about rear ends (I am a leg man myself) I have a
guestion. I have a 1940 3/4 tonner. The truck can climb trees with it's
4.875:1 gearing. I would love to change that to a 4.11:1 (optrional that
year) but I can't seem to find one. I would like to take a little load off
of the engine. It doesn't like to do much over 40 mph without protesting. I
use it as a weekend driver, around town. I really don't want to do the
highway speed thing as the suspention is not built for it and I want to
restore it. Any suggestions on what to do? I am beginning to think that
some modifications will be necessary. Should I locate the 4.11 ring and
pinion gears and rebuild my current rearend? Is there a nice late model bolt
up number that can work until I get the truck show-ready ( then put my old
one back in). Would anything under a 4.11 not provide enough torque for my
'40 flathead (85 horse)? I am not after speed so much as I am after making
it easier on the engine and maybe getting another 10 mph added to my cruising....

---

To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.