4x100 to 4X114.3 :)
roadkill hats rock
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,396
Likes: 0
From: Austin, Texas
as far as which rear end to use, the 7.5" was used in all the stangs without 302's, even the SVO with its sweet *** turbo motor got the 7.5"er. the 8.8" is cheap and readily available and the c clips arent that big of a deal unless you are running 10's in which case you get c clip eliminators.
id say go for the 8.8 man, you can get any brake setup you would ever dream of for it.
any 8.8 from a 79 to 98 mustang gt or lx 5.0 would be fine for you. if you get the 94 and up rear you get much bigger and better brakes and 5x114.3 pattern. but you could get the cheap 8.8 from the eighties for now and always swap up to 94+ brakes if you want 5 lug later on
you need info on fords? ask me hehe
id say go for the 8.8 man, you can get any brake setup you would ever dream of for it.
any 8.8 from a 79 to 98 mustang gt or lx 5.0 would be fine for you. if you get the 94 and up rear you get much bigger and better brakes and 5x114.3 pattern. but you could get the cheap 8.8 from the eighties for now and always swap up to 94+ brakes if you want 5 lug later on
you need info on fords? ask me hehe
Last edited by gamble302; Aug 30, 2002 at 11:25 AM.
Old [Sch|F]ool
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,867
Likes: 573
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
even 302s/5.0's got 7.5s for the longest time... it was either '87 or '89 that they finally started putting the 8.8 in there.
if you were going to run an 8.8, I'd get the rearend from a 2nd-gen Ford Explorer. No, really. It has the 5 on 4.5" bolt pattern (same as FC/FD), BIG disc brakes, and less bracketry to have to cut off in order to weld on the RX-7 brackets.
If you can find a Mazda Navajo, use its rear instead. Just so "TECHNICALLY" you are using a "Mazda" rearend, in case you ever decide to enter any import drag races where they have snooty anti-domestic rules. A Navajo is a rebadged Explorer.
if you were going to run an 8.8, I'd get the rearend from a 2nd-gen Ford Explorer. No, really. It has the 5 on 4.5" bolt pattern (same as FC/FD), BIG disc brakes, and less bracketry to have to cut off in order to weld on the RX-7 brackets.
If you can find a Mazda Navajo, use its rear instead. Just so "TECHNICALLY" you are using a "Mazda" rearend, in case you ever decide to enter any import drag races where they have snooty anti-domestic rules. A Navajo is a rebadged Explorer.
Old [Sch|F]ool
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,867
Likes: 573
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Yes, it's the SUV in those lame "Zoom Zoom" commercials. (You know, "What would happen if you had an SUV that was raised by sports cars?" and the Mazda whatever-it-is weaving in and out of a formation of Miatas)
The IRS if the Escape/whatever is very light-duty. Those are car based SUVs, even the AWD ones are FWD until the front tires slip, so the rearend isn't designed to take power all the time. I don't even think it has gear reduction in it, wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't just 1:1 gears. At any rate, most/all of the "hard points" are part of the unitbody itself.
besides, IRS *sucks* for handling large amounts of power.
The IRS if the Escape/whatever is very light-duty. Those are car based SUVs, even the AWD ones are FWD until the front tires slip, so the rearend isn't designed to take power all the time. I don't even think it has gear reduction in it, wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't just 1:1 gears. At any rate, most/all of the "hard points" are part of the unitbody itself.
besides, IRS *sucks* for handling large amounts of power.
Super Newbie
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,398
Likes: 1
From: Birmingham, AL
IRS sucks *** for the dragstrip. Just the design of it does the OPPOSITE of what you want it to do. Squat=bad launches.
Plus running slicks make it kind of "unpredictable" at the big end.
Plus running slicks make it kind of "unpredictable" at the big end.
Old [Sch|F]ool
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,867
Likes: 573
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Rough pavement, yeah.
Cornering.... well, IRS has its disadvantages for cornering... Remember that cornering is not a steady state thing. You need to be able to accelerate OUT of a corner too. Solid axles are your friends in this regard.
Cornering.... well, IRS has its disadvantages for cornering...
Remember that cornering is not a steady state thing. You need to be able to accelerate OUT of a corner too. Solid axles are your friends in this regard.
add to cart
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,181
Likes: 0
From: Saskatoon, SK & Montreal, PQ
if the solid axle is hopping all over the place (cornering is not a steady state thing, after all, and IRS can flex to keep traction in ways that solid axles can't) you won't get out of the corner - at least not as you planned.
If solid axles were better than IRS for handling you'd see them in far more than older cars and Mustangs & Camaros.
That said, they're better for heavier loads (i.e. the 27 ton trucks I used to drive had solid axles to better bear the weight) and higher torque loads (transport trucks with 187hp Detroit Allison Diesels that are virtually unstoppable by hills, small trees, etc)
If solid axles were better than IRS for handling you'd see them in far more than older cars and Mustangs & Camaros.
That said, they're better for heavier loads (i.e. the 27 ton trucks I used to drive had solid axles to better bear the weight) and higher torque loads (transport trucks with 187hp Detroit Allison Diesels that are virtually unstoppable by hills, small trees, etc)
roadkill hats rock
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,396
Likes: 0
From: Austin, Texas
well if you want different 8.8's they came in the lincoln's and other big ole cars. if you get the one from a lincoln lsc you get 5 lug along with big brakes
if youve got the cash id say get 94 to 98 mustang rear due to the bigger brakes and any upgrade option you could ever want is easy as pie
like cobra brakes
doh peejay you caught me i forgot that even 5.0s had the 7.5 until the late 80's
if you want to swap to a stronger rear irs is a bad idea. most guys that were drag racing their 99 cobras were swapping their irs for solid rears because so many were snapping
if youve got the cash id say get 94 to 98 mustang rear due to the bigger brakes and any upgrade option you could ever want is easy as pie
like cobra brakes
doh peejay you caught me i forgot that even 5.0s had the 7.5 until the late 80's
if you want to swap to a stronger rear irs is a bad idea. most guys that were drag racing their 99 cobras were swapping their irs for solid rears because so many were snapping
Old [Sch|F]ool
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,867
Likes: 573
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Originally posted by Manntis
if the solid axle is hopping all over the place (cornering is not a steady state thing, after all, and IRS can flex to keep traction in ways that solid axles can't) you won't get out of the corner - at least not as you planned.
if the solid axle is hopping all over the place (cornering is not a steady state thing, after all, and IRS can flex to keep traction in ways that solid axles can't) you won't get out of the corner - at least not as you planned.
Stock 1st-gens of course do not have this
Past a certain lean angle the suspension binds up solid because the 4 links are different lengths and not even close to being in plane with each other. But convert it to a 3-link or a torque arm and great things happen. Do that and replace all of the bushings wirh rod ends and you're in suspension nirvana.
