I have a few questions I have a 88 MGM with stock 2.73 open diff. i have a posi that I was gonna rebuild and put in my stock axle but after reading about a few members upgraded to rear disc now I'm think of doing the same. I tried to look for the tread but can't find it i know its here. 1 What years make and model axle would I need. 2 also what parts do I need to get. 3 I also found a rear swaybar that bolt to my lower rear arms (I believe it's the thin one, I think it came of a 89 cv not the bigger one) will it still work or would the donor cars swaybar be better. 4 would I need a different drive shaft if so what year and 5 would the control arm be the same or are they better thank in advance
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Rear disc conversion question
Collapse
X
-
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)
Originally posted by gadget73
... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.
Originally posted by dmccaig
Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.
-
That swaybar will work for you, as long as your lower arms are drilled. If they're not drilled, just make the holes yourself. Rear swaybar from the car that's donating your rear discs will not work easily, it's doable certainly, but it ain't gonna happen without that magical device that can take make two separate metal pieces into one Stick with the bar you have in that picture, it fits properly.
Driveshaft, there's no need to mess with it at all. Leave it be, unless the U-joints are getting funky, in which case replace them and reinstall shaft after axle rebuild is done.The ones who accomplish true greatness, are the foolish who keep pressing onward.
The ones who accomplish nothing, are the wise who know when to quit.
Comment
-
It is not required that you replace the axles if they are in good condition.
It is often nice to get another axle housing with control arms, do a complete rebuild on the new assembly and then swap in the whole assembly. If you have the space to work this is a convenient way to go. 90-95? (am I right in the year range here guys?) housings are just slightly wider which is a small plus and are a direct bolt in. The 92 & up could be equipped with disks. This procedure has the advantage of less vehicle downtime and it is also a convenient time to replace the control arm bushings.03 Marauder DPB, HS, 6disk, Organizer Mods> LED's in & Out, M&Z rear control arms, Oil deflector, U-Haul Trans Pan, Blue Fuzzy Dice
02 SL500 Silver Arrow
08 TC Signature Limited, HID's Mods>06 Mustang Bullet Rims 235/55-17 Z rated BFG G-Force Comp-2 A/S Plus, Addco 1" rear Sway, Posi Carrier, Compustar Remote Start, floor liners, trunk organizer, Two part Sun Visors, B&M Trans drain Plug, Winter=05 Mustang GT rims, Nokian Hakkapeliitta R-2 235/55-17
12 Escape Limited V6 AWD, 225/65R17 Vredestein Quatrac Pro, Winter 235/70-16 Conti Viking Contact7 Mods>Beamtech LED headlight bulbs, Husky floor liners
Comment
-
90-97 is the direct swap range with the wider axle assembly. 98+ mounts differently.86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley
91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC grandpa spec white and cranberry
1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal
Originally posted by phayzer5
I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers
Comment
-
Originally posted by Elias View PostAlso are the rear ends the same on aero Vic's
Town Cars all had 3.08s for the year ranges that'll work for you. That is except for the Town Car Signature Touring from '95-'97 which would have 3.27s.
CV/GMQ had 3.08s until '94. Starting in '95 with the switch to the 4R70W transmission, they received 2.73s as standard. This is excepting the cars with the factory Handling/Performance Package which like the Signature Touring would have had 3.27s. Also the Aero P71 package which also had 3.27 as standard with the option of 3.55 most years.-Steve
2006 Audi A6 S-Line FWD ~132k miles, stock.
1998 Mercury Grand Marquis LS HPP ~102k miles, slowly acquiring modifications.
1997 Lincoln Town Car Cartier ~145k miles, Ported Plenum, Gutted Airbox, Mechanical Fan Delete, Contour E-fan Retrofit, Dual exhaust, Cats ran away, KYB Gas-A-Justs, P71 front sway bar, air ride reinstalled, Blinker Mod, Projector headlight retrofit, Caddy 4-note horn retrofit, Wood rim steering wheel, rustbelt diet plan..
1996 Mercury Grand Marquis GS 117,485mi. R.I.P. 7/14/12
Comment
-
If its a stock LoPo, 3.55s are a bit much for them. I've been in a few boxes with 3.55s and the engine is just out of its power band too quickly. 3.27 would probably be about perfect, its not going to lug the engine like 2.73s but it'll keep the RPMs closer to where a stock LoPo makes "power". Unless they are modified, 5.0s just don't like to rev, they fall flat on their face past 4k RPM. That all changes when you start tweaking the heads/cam/exhaust of course, they can be pretty lively and could really take advantage of a more aggressive gear.-Steve
2006 Audi A6 S-Line FWD ~132k miles, stock.
1998 Mercury Grand Marquis LS HPP ~102k miles, slowly acquiring modifications.
1997 Lincoln Town Car Cartier ~145k miles, Ported Plenum, Gutted Airbox, Mechanical Fan Delete, Contour E-fan Retrofit, Dual exhaust, Cats ran away, KYB Gas-A-Justs, P71 front sway bar, air ride reinstalled, Blinker Mod, Projector headlight retrofit, Caddy 4-note horn retrofit, Wood rim steering wheel, rustbelt diet plan..
1996 Mercury Grand Marquis GS 117,485mi. R.I.P. 7/14/12
Comment
-
Originally posted by BigMerc96 View PostIf its a stock LoPo, 3.55s are a bit much for them. I've been in a few boxes with 3.55s and the engine is just out of its power band too quickly. 3.27 would probably be about perfect, its not going to lug the engine like 2.73s but it'll keep the RPMs closer to where a stock LoPo makes "power". Unless they are modified, 5.0s just don't like to rev, they fall flat on their face past 4k RPM. That all changes when you start tweaking the heads/cam/exhaust of course, they can be pretty lively and could really take advantage of a more aggressive gear.Last edited by Elias; 08-26-2017, 05:11 PM.
Comment
-
I'd stick with the 3.27s then, you Texans are speed demons so the 3.55s may be a bit too much when you're keeping up with traffic at 90mph.The ones who accomplish true greatness, are the foolish who keep pressing onward.
The ones who accomplish nothing, are the wise who know when to quit.
Comment
-
I was actually being serious tho - nowhere else have I witnessed a 90mph wreck between two pickups pulling trailers the size of some people's houses, them northbound lanes of whatever interstate runs out of San Antone by Austin towards Dallas must have been closed for quite a while to clean up that mess.The ones who accomplish true greatness, are the foolish who keep pressing onward.
The ones who accomplish nothing, are the wise who know when to quit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BigMerc96 View PostIf its a stock LoPo, 3.55s are a bit much for them. I've been in a few boxes with 3.55s and the engine is just out of its power band too quickly. 3.27 would probably be about perfect, its not going to lug the engine like 2.73s but it'll keep the RPMs closer to where a stock LoPo makes "power". Unless they are modified, 5.0s just don't like to rev, they fall flat on their face past 4k RPM. That all changes when you start tweaking the heads/cam/exhaust of course, they can be pretty lively and could really take advantage of a more aggressive gear.1985 LTD Crown Victoria - SOLD
1988 Town Car Signature - Current Party Barge
Comment
Comment