Go Back   The Ford Barn > General Discussion > Early V8 (1932-53)

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2020, 01:05 PM   #21
Art Newland
Senior Member
 
Art Newland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Lynden, WA
Posts: 1,514
Default Re: Rear end recommendations

I'm not a 9 inch hater by any means, my 49 F1 has one and it works great. 3.70 gears are a nice trade off. My stock 239 won't ever hurt it!

The numbers published in National Dragster, in a tech article by Evan Smith show:

Dana 60 - 5%
GM 12-bolt - 7%
Ford 9" - 10%

Since the losses are very heavily dependant on the offset of the pinion shaft centerline from the ring gear centerline, the 10-bolt and 12-bolt would likely have similar losses, since they have similar geometry.

With a drivetrain consisting of a steel FW Street Twin, stock T56, 3" chrome moly DS and a Strange 12-bolt w/ 3.73 gears, and 17" wheels with 275/40-17 street tires, we measured total drivetrain losses in the range of 12.2 - 12.5% for power levels ranging from 490 -760 flywheel HP (measured in 1:1 4th gear). Subtracting the nominal 7% value for the rear axle assembly would leave only 5% or so for the rest of the drivetrain. The tranny is not going to have a lot of losses in the direct drive gear, since there is little or no power transmitted through the gear teeth. Its mainly some friction losses in the bearings. The rear eats up power because of the fact the gears are transmitting the power through a 90-deg bend, and involve a lot of friction losses as the gear teeth slide on each other. The trend now is to reduce those frictional losses with the Mikronite treatment of the gear teeth faces.
__________________
"whatever works!"
Art Newland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2020, 02:26 PM   #22
40 Deluxe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: now Kuna, Idaho
Posts: 3,336
Default Re: Rear end recommendations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Newland View Post
I'm not a 9 inch hater by any means, my 49 F1 has one and it works great. 3.70 gears are a nice trade off. My stock 239 won't ever hurt it!

The numbers published in National Dragster, in a tech article by Evan Smith show:

Dana 60 - 5%
GM 12-bolt - 7%
Ford 9" - 10%

Since the losses are very heavily dependant on the offset of the pinion shaft centerline from the ring gear centerline, the 10-bolt and 12-bolt would likely have similar losses, since they have similar geometry.

With a drivetrain consisting of a steel FW Street Twin, stock T56, 3" chrome moly DS and a Strange 12-bolt w/ 3.73 gears, and 17" wheels with 275/40-17 street tires, we measured total drivetrain losses in the range of 12.2 - 12.5% for power levels ranging from 490 -760 flywheel HP (measured in 1:1 4th gear). Subtracting the nominal 7% value for the rear axle assembly would leave only 5% or so for the rest of the drivetrain. The tranny is not going to have a lot of losses in the direct drive gear, since there is little or no power transmitted through the gear teeth. Its mainly some friction losses in the bearings. The rear eats up power because of the fact the gears are transmitting the power through a 90-deg bend, and involve a lot of friction losses as the gear teeth slide on each other. The trend now is to reduce those frictional losses with the Mikronite treatment of the gear teeth faces.

Several internet sites listed the additional loss at 2-4%. One (Strange Engineering, a 9" specialist) said that they had done tests with Ford that showed a 3 to 4% loss. Keep in mind that these losses are at full throttle, full load and peak RPM. In the real world, cruising along at 60-70 MPH, actual losses will be much less (Less power output needed=less friction==less power loss). To maintain 60 MPH on a level road takes about 20 HP, as I recall. So that would be less than one horse power lost to the 9".
40 Deluxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
Old 04-16-2020, 04:16 PM   #23
RalphM
Senior Member
 
RalphM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: North Pole, Alaska
Posts: 2,462
Default Re: Rear end recommendations

Well, I’m still putting a 9” in my 35 coupe, only problem I see is how to fit my wire wheels and still keep them under the fenders.
RalphM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2020, 04:52 PM   #24
bobH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: so cal, placerville, vegas
Posts: 1,101
Default Re: Rear end recommendations

Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphM View Post
Well, Im still putting a 9 in my 35 coupe, only problem I see is how to fit my wire wheels and still keep them under the fenders.
I put a 9-in in a 34... should be similar for a 35. I used a 9-in from a 57-58 Ford station wagon, which provided 'large-flanged' axles (and big bearings). Eric Vaughn (the wheel guy) changed the lug pattern to 5-on 5.5. (Was able to do this because of the large flange used for 57-58.) This should work for a 35 and for 35 wire wheels. Probably would need support rings??
(I've been told that 57-58 Ranchero used the same 9-in as the station wagon.)
bobH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2020, 06:15 PM   #25
V8COOPMAN
Senior Member
 
V8COOPMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: East Shore of LAKE HOUSTON
Posts: 6,713
Default Re: Rear end recommendations

Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphM View Post
Well, I’m still putting a 9” in my 35 coupe, only problem I see is how to fit my wire wheels and still keep them under the fenders.

The early Broncos supposedly had the narrowest 9", plus they had the 5-1/2" bolt pattern. No matter what, if need be, Curry can build you a housing ANY width you want, with axles to match, AND with the correct bolt circle! For bobH above, the Rancheros and wagons BOTH had the big bearings. DD
__________________
T5 W/TORQUE TUBE


LAZINESS is the art of RESTING...BEFORE you get tired!




V8COOPMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2020, 06:23 PM   #26
40 Deluxe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: now Kuna, Idaho
Posts: 3,336
Default Re: Rear end recommendations

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8COOPMAN View Post
The early Broncos supposedly had the narrowest 9", plus they had the 5-1/2" bolt pattern. No matter what, if need be, Curry can build you a housing ANY width you want, with axles to match, AND with the correct bolt circle! DD
The problem with the early Bronco rear end is that the entire drive train (engine, trans, T-case, differential) is offset 1 1/2"-2" to the right. So your driveshaft will have a little zig-zag in it. Not a problem as long as the driveshaft tunnel is wide enough.
Also, they came in both small and large bearing axle shafts.
40 Deluxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 PM.