|
05-14-2004, 08:08 PM
|
#1 |
|
faster, faster, faster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Houston ,Texas ,USA
Posts: 1,354
|
Rearend widths?
I am looking for a new rearend and I am not certain of the standard widths. A board member has one locally that measures 55" from backing plate to backing plate. I went out and measured mine, and it measured 58" from backing plate to backing plate. What's the deal, am I measuring mine wrong, or were there different widths used these years. I also measured half, and it measured 29, so I think I measured mine right. IDK, you tell me.
__________________
I'm going to Law School, wanna debate? It's good practice. |
|
|
|
05-14-2004, 11:02 PM
|
#2 |
|
its all about the +6 inches
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hilliard Ohio
Posts: 2,693
|
The 60 - early 70 were not as wide as the mid/late 1970 - 72 rear ends. (I don't know the widths) If your rear end is the original one, then either you or the other board member mismeasured.
There is the chance that you have a 70 rear in your 68, or if it has 5 lug rims, it is probably a 71/72 rear...and the one you are looking at buying is an earlier one. Just seems odd that you already have the wide one. If memory serves, about 3 inches is right for the width difference. Last edited by Longhorn Man; 05-14-2004 at 11:04 PM. Reason: Moronic oversight |
|
|
|
|
05-14-2004, 11:04 PM
|
#3 |
|
faster, faster, faster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Houston ,Texas ,USA
Posts: 1,354
|
I am pretty sure mine is from a 72. I know my cab and frame are 72, but titled and vinned as a 68. That may be the reason for the difference.
__________________
I'm going to Law School, wanna debate? It's good practice. |
|
|
|
|
05-14-2004, 11:05 PM
|
#4 |
|
its all about the +6 inches
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hilliard Ohio
Posts: 2,693
|
I modified my post as you were replying...the 72 parts explains the problem here.
|
|
|
|
|
05-14-2004, 11:16 PM
|
#5 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: missouri city, tx
Posts: 4,486
|
im the other board member in question... im guessing the rearend i measured is the not so wide one. i measured 55" from backing plate to backing plate i dont see a way i could get another 3"
__________________
70 longbed 496/th400/Ford 9" |
|
|
|
|
05-14-2004, 11:42 PM
|
#6 |
|
its all about the +6 inches
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hilliard Ohio
Posts: 2,693
|
dinnut, your rear is a 67 - 70 isn't it?
After rereading my post, and your responce...I guess it would take an idiot to mismeasure it huh? |
|
|
|
|
05-15-2004, 12:56 AM
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Jose Ca.
Posts: 3,335
|
The rearend I just put in my truck was from a 70. it is 58 inches from the back of one hub to the other.
|
|
|
|
|
05-15-2004, 05:15 PM
|
#8 |
|
Fabricate till you "puke"
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ill
Posts: 9,403
|
Back plate to back plate measures will screw you up! the 67 to 70 diffs should be 1 1/2" narrower than the 71-72.....if you go into 73 -up, the diffs will be the same width as the 71-72, but the later diffs had a wide brake option that used a different backing plate. just a little "fruit for thought", you need a flange to flange measure on the axles to make a compairison. Good l
 uck,crazyL
__________________
69 longhorn,4" chop,3/5 drop, 1/2 ton suspension/disc brakes,1 1/2" body drop,steel tilt clip, 5.3/Edelbrock rpm intake/600 carb, Hooker streetrod shorties,2 1/2" exhaust/ H pipe/50's Flows , 6 spd Richmond trans,12 bolt/ 3.40 gears.... |
|
|
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
