92 explorer full width 8.8 and d44TTB

in the process of building a 92 explorer with a 4inch lift(i think it is) but running the D44 4wd TTb out of the fullsize broncos as well as the rear. Its comes to bout 8inches wider, 4in on each side. anyone interested?

 

[92302expo]

Sweet now I just need a bronco to pull parts from , also if you got any vids jumping I for one would love to see them

 

[raiper]

i dont have any vids yet should have some soon

 

[raiper]

grab the whole axle assembly and steering linkage and sway bar mounts bars ect. dont bother with the coil buckets

 

[cmhaah06]

For those with some coin for a mod like this I found this while lurking around the Giant Motorsports page:

http://giantmotorsports.com/content/view/91/110/

 

[bobby walter]

no its still full width. Hence having to bring out the coil buckets outwards 4 inches on each side of frame.

The drivers side bolts on without a hassle btw.

Im working on the pass side right now as i type this. Im not locked in the front end yet so thats why we may be arguing on this and im running 31's gonna regear for 33s and have it locked up front when i can afford it.

I got the whole axle, front and rear for 50 bucks. the lift for another 13.00

if it makes it any more of a win on my side for the front being full width i also shoved in the fuill width rear 8.8 from the bronco/f150 and i only welded on new perches and the correct pinion angle. the front matchs up with the rear perfectly so id have to say its full width....also the fact that 31.10.50R15s stuck out way past the stock body line fenders

...its simple.

if you have to cut down the axle shafts at neutral phase alignment of the shafts...its not full width, its narrower.


if you have to add to shaft lengths, its not full width...its wider.

if stock shafts pop in and function as designed...its full width.


what you have is wider then stock ranger for sure, i never doubted that or mentioned that, but certainly is less then stock 150. i am talking wms to wms.

simply put 150 pivots are closer together the same distance you removed from your shaft. that is no freak coincidence.

remember, often rear axles are narrower then front axles as well.



time spent modding the brackets to allow stock axle shafts seems a good way to go to me verse custom cutting the axleshafts.

especially with the scenario i previously mentioned.

i am not trying to be a dick, but its not simple semantics here. get your tape out again.

 

[raiper]

ill measure it tomorrow cuz now im curious. whats a good reference point to measure width accurately?

 

[Randall]

The WMS (wheel mounting surface).

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[raiper]

from the outside lip of rotor to the opposite outside lip of rotor is 59.5 inches

that was the easiest place i could measure with wheels on.

 

[Randall]

A stock Dana 44 is 65," if I remember correctly. An Explorer Dana 35 is 59.5" WMS to WMS.

 

[raiper]

retook measurement

inside rotor to rotor 57.5
rotor inside to outside (rotor witdth) 1inch
rotor to hub where wheel mounts 2 inch

57.5+2+2+1+1= 63.5 inchs

rough measurement with wheels and rims still on