Rear diff not a LS???
#1
#3
#5
LS (Limited Slip) was an extra cost option.
1959 thru today:
If the AXLE code stamped on the Rating/Warranty Plate (1959/79) or printed on the Certification Label (1980 thru today):
Begins with a letter: Limited Slip.
Begins with a number: No Limited Slip.
And be aware that the 3rd digit of the AXLE code refers to the front axle, but some 1959/79's may not have a 3rd digit, most 1980 and later don't have it.
The most common 3rd digit for 1973/79's is J = Power Steering.
1959 thru today:
If the AXLE code stamped on the Rating/Warranty Plate (1959/79) or printed on the Certification Label (1980 thru today):
Begins with a letter: Limited Slip.
Begins with a number: No Limited Slip.
And be aware that the 3rd digit of the AXLE code refers to the front axle, but some 1959/79's may not have a 3rd digit, most 1980 and later don't have it.
The most common 3rd digit for 1973/79's is J = Power Steering.
#7
I was referring to the AXLE code stamped on the Rating/Warranty Plate or printed on the Certification Label.
1978/79 Bronco example H2A: H2 = Ford 9" rear axle / 3.50-1 / Limited Slip / 3,750 lbs. capacity // A = Adjustable Steering Column with P/S
Trending Topics
#9
Post #7: I edited in an example of a 1978/79 Bronco AXLE code.
3.55-1 found in 8.8's, not available in 9."
8.8" introduced in 1983 F100/150, Bronco & E100/150 (Econoline), but the 9" was still available thru 1986 F150/Bronco, thru 1987 E150.
3.55-1 found in 8.8's, not available in 9."
8.8" introduced in 1983 F100/150, Bronco & E100/150 (Econoline), but the 9" was still available thru 1986 F150/Bronco, thru 1987 E150.
#10
No, not all Broncos had a LS. In fact, I'd say most of them did NOT have one. Adding one involves swapping out the whole carrier and setting up the gears (backlash, preload, etc). Consider changing the gear ratio while you're at it. 3.55s are terrible in these Broncos IMO.
#11
1.6" taller.
I'm guessing you went from something like a 235 75R15s to 265 75R15s? (~29" to ~30.6")?
A couple things to think about.
Gear upgrades can be expensive.
You probably won't notice too much by going from a 3.55 to a 3.73. It's a pretty small change. (About 5%).
Your tire size increased by about 5%, but they're also now a bit heavier. I went from 31" tires to 32" tires and I think it was around 7 lbs a tire, and rotational mass is what gets you.
4.10s may be more the way to go.
Another thought is your money may be better spent in some engine power upgrades.
I'm guessing you went from something like a 235 75R15s to 265 75R15s? (~29" to ~30.6")?
A couple things to think about.
Gear upgrades can be expensive.
You probably won't notice too much by going from a 3.55 to a 3.73. It's a pretty small change. (About 5%).
Your tire size increased by about 5%, but they're also now a bit heavier. I went from 31" tires to 32" tires and I think it was around 7 lbs a tire, and rotational mass is what gets you.
4.10s may be more the way to go.
Another thought is your money may be better spent in some engine power upgrades.
#13
I was doing the math over the weekend and thinking about which direction to go. Since its not my main vehicle and I want better off road performance I am going to 4.10s. I think this is the better move. I've heard people still get pretty good MPGs on the highway with OD and off road performance was great.
I bought the Bronco with 265 75R16s. I know the stock is 235 75R15s but stayed with the 265 75R16s because of the tires I wanted. Goodyear Wrangler Duratracs with the extra load rating for thicker sidewalls.
I bought the Bronco with 265 75R16s. I know the stock is 235 75R15s but stayed with the 265 75R16s because of the tires I wanted. Goodyear Wrangler Duratracs with the extra load rating for thicker sidewalls.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RenoHuskerDu
1999 to 2016 Super Duty
12
11-20-2017 10:10 AM
ahha-retired!
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
2
03-09-2011 03:43 PM
coplin
Clutch, Transmission, Differential, Axle & Transfer Case
3
08-21-2004 04:23 PM