Rear Sway Bar End Link Length

FINAL SOLUTION (See link on bottom)

Does the stock 91-94 use the eyelet style or the bayonet stud type rear end link? Offset distance and overall length would
be very helpful. Trying to restore the sway bar back to level after a 3" drop. Can't find for sale, pics, or info anywhere. TIA

Pic below is a stock 2001-05 Sport Trac end link after lowering 3 inches. Camera tilt angle exaggerates the comparison, but you get the idea looking at the shock angle differences.


Pics below are 4WD F250/350SD links. (Moog K80268)


------> Rear Sway Bar End Link Question (91-94) <------

I think the rear sways are the same all the way up to 01.

Thanks Jason. I have searched and haven't found ANY info on the Gen 1 rear sway links.
Surprising, since so many have removed the rear bars completely. Read somewhere they
are slightly shorter than the 95-01 links. Still looking for pics of stock links if possible.

The rear end links are the same, or very close, on all the solid axle Explorers up through the Sports in '01. The sway bar changed and 91-94's have a thinner rear bar compared to the 95-01's. There might be slight differences in the actual appearance of the end links, but they should all work and interchange.

The pic on the left is is of a longer, extended length end link (with bushings that don't fit too well in the shorter tubes), with what appears to be an aftermarket sway bar and greaseable bushings. Looks like they did that to make up for the lowering block instead of de-arching the springs and being able to use the stock end links. The stock end links are much shorter height wise, and have wider/taller bushing tubes. The overall style/appearance is the same.

Anime, the stock ST end link is shown on top of the first pic. I replaced them with the 1.25" shorter Moog K80139 (bottom) that are for stock 95-01 Explorers. How does de-arching leafs affect end link length? Currently, the ride quality and handling is superb. Maybe I'm over thinking this, I'm only 1"-1.5" too long of being parallel with the frame. Sway bar is an Addco 633 with added Zerks and 3" iron blocks. Thanks, your knowledge and help is greatly appreciated.

You can see how the the lowering block affects the position of the axle compared to the end link in the second pic - removing the block would put the leaf spring and axle closer, and move the sway bar down with it, effectively leveling the end of the sway bar, probably to the point where you'd want that stock end link back to keep it level.

Overall the effect of de-arching the leaf pack would end up the same, but what you wind up with using blocks is a lot of points moved around in terms of axle geometry. It's better, from an ideal standpoint, to have the axle and leaf spring as close as possible, and not use a block to lift or lower the axle away from the spring pack.

The shorter links were a good idea. Generally you want the ends of the sway bar to be as level as possible. As it is right now, you can see the middle of the sway bar with the bend around the diff cover is a lot closer to hitting the diff if the suspension ever took a big dive. It's only 1 - 1.5 inches from level, but it's that much closer to the diff. If the lower suspension doesn't travel as much this would be fine, but you still have stock suspension travel with just using lowering blocks.

If you wanted even shorter end links you could get some from a Jeep XJ/YJ. A lot of them have very similar style links with eyelets on both ends and the curved shape. I'm not sure on their exact length but if you can find some that are 1-1.5" shorter they'd do great.

You could also have a pair of the Explorer links cut and re-welded, taking a inch or so off the length of the lower part. It'd be easy enough to cut the tube, clean up the detached eyelet, and re-weld it. Definitely only a job for a good welder though, you don't want the welds on end links busting apart.

If you want even better handling, I'd suggest replacing the bushings in the end links with polyurethane ones from Energy Suspension. The stock rubber ones can be pressed out with a socket and C-clamp and the new ones press right in by hand. Looks like the blue bushing in the ST end links might be moog replacements, those might work as well.

Anime, thanks for the lowering block/end link length explanation, it makes perfect sense. Going to try the Ranger rear links, they measure 2.61" shorter than the stock ST length. Need to remove the pressed in studs and use the ES or Moog bushing repair kits.
Amazon product ASIN B000C55ZRQ

Ranger rear links might work great. Those ST rear links also seem like just the thing for Explorers with a small 1.5-2" lift.

You might just keep the stock rubber in them if the Moog end links come with it, especially if you have rubber on the sway bar in front as well. If you have urethane in back, along with that thicker sway bar, and just the stock bar in front with rubber bushings, it might give oversteer. It can be fun and it'll feel like it handles great, but it can also be dangerously twitchy until you get used to it. I say use the same bushing material front and rear. Wait on urethane for the rear until you get it in the front as well if need be.

If/when you press out those studs, DON'T remove the torn up rubber on them.

I discovered only too late that the 4 end link bushings in the Energy Suspension kit with channels on the inside are actually made to press over the rubber crud on the studs so they still sort of hold themselves in place rather than just turn with no resistance. The other bushings have smooth insides with no channels. If you clean them up you'll be holding the stud end with vise grips to tighten the nut.

Thanks for the tips, glad you mentioned leaving the rubber in the new links. I planned on heating the bushings with a torch which obviously won't work. The Ranger link studs are facing opposite of the OEM and must be removed.

Both my front and rear sway bar frame and end link bushings are ES poly graphite. Below is the best cheap mod I've ever done. Blew out three sets of the soft Moog K7275 thermoplastic rubber grommets. Reused the 7/16" Moog bolts and replaced the blue grommets with larger 1.25" ES 9.8103G bushings. Excellent feel and durability.

how did the end links for the ranger work?
I have 1 3/8" blocks and would like a shorter links in place of the explorer links.

Jasonx521 said:

how did the end links for the ranger work?
I have 1 3/8" blocks and would like a shorter links in place of the explorer links.

Click to expand...

Interesting you should ask, just ordered for $9 each, then the price went up. They're 1 3/4" shorter than the stock Explorer links we're using, and if the offset is correct, should work well for your drop. I'll post results and pics when done.

Also keep in mind you can get shorter end links for the front as well, if that looks like it would put the sway bar back to the stock position.

Anime said:

Also keep in mind you can get shorter end links for the front as well, if that looks like it would put the sway bar back to the stock position.

Click to expand...

I previously shortened the front end link sleeves 2.5" to match my drop. Proceeded to blow out bushings three times after I cut the sleeves down.
The front sway bar was parallel with the LCA , but the eyelets were pointing down. Don't recall seeing another sway bar where the ends are angled down.

You definitely don't want the eyelets pointing down, they should be parallel to the control arm. It looks fine in the pic, so maybe the stock eyelet bend was excessive and it works better with the stock length endlink and 2.5" drop. The rubber bushings allow for a lot more leeway in terms of the eyelet angle, so whatever keeps the eyelets parallel with those poly bushings is what you want.

Here's how the 2WD Ranger rear end links compare to the stock Sport Trac. Don't know if I should laugh or cry. Lucky me they were only $9 each.
Going to try them. Main concern is bending or flexing when compressing up in turns. Options are cutting or 4WD F250 links. Thoughts or advice?

What's the matter with them? If you're worried about the thickness of the center part, don't be. It might even be stronger if it's a solid bar instead of a hollow tube. They are likely plenty strong for the application and you don't really need ultra-heavy duty endlinks unless it's for track or off-road use.

Anime, thanks for the reassurance. I was one click away from ordering the F250 links. The shaft diameter is significantly smaller yet they weigh about the same. I suspect the OEM links are hollow. You've probably saved me a lot of work by not buying the larger F250 links. Waiting for the other link to arrive due to Amazon's split shipment.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=amazon moog k80268&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CE4QFjAA&url=http://www.amazon.com/Moog-K80268-Sway-Bar-Link/dp/B000V53QBE&ei=JR4fULW2OqS8igLk0YHQDg&usg=AFQjCNF0djEtWk3hQnsWpZRVxgWtS9osVQ

The thinner, solid links are actually better, or at least from what I've seen, that's what the harder race/offroad applications use. Keep in mind what the Ranger and first gen Explorer were designed for compared to the later Explorer and ST. Some of the end links on some really high performance vehicles are a lot thinner than that, because they are solid and heat treated.

Believe it or not, anti-sway bars suffer from this too. There are lots of larger-diameter anti-swaybars that are actually hollow, and a much thinner solid bar is a big jump up in performance.

The hollow endlink rods are somewhat stiffer due to the larger diameter, which can be good in some ways, but the solid rod has more 'give' and is better from a 'bend without breaking' angle. Of course with rubber bushings, those would be the soft point anyway and the hollow rod is just for appearances.

Looks like the Ranger eyelets are smaller, you will have to either track down urethane bushings for them, or measure the eyelet inner diameter and get 4-bar bushings for that size.

Forgot to mention another issue regarding lateral shifting on the sway bar. Don't know if the new end links increased flex will cause even more shifting. Grease marks show about 1/2" of movement to the left. Have 1" split collars, but the Addco 633 axle mounts don't allow them to seat flush on either side.

It's probably just the Addco sway bar. Their stuff is okay, but not designed all that well, or their production is just sloppy.

Lateral movement is the fault of the bar being straight on either side of the axle bushings, and the bushings not being wider. The stock bushings are much wider than the aftermarket offerings. It's not a big deal though, you don't want a system that has zero slop, as it will bind and break things, and the anti-sway bar works best when it inhibits body roll but doesn't limit suspension movement otherwise.

Also keep in mind this sort of bar and endlink setup is more of an on/off road hybrid system, which allows the rear axle to travel a good bit on 4WD vehicles compared to a system that would be street-specific and reduce suspension travel accordingly. You could improve the design for street use a good bit, but just using poly bushings on the endlinks and maybe wider bushings on the axle is all you need on the street.