Originally Posted by chevy1925
Lmao! i constantly stare at a 90% ready to go 89 ford d60 sitting on the shelf at work.... just cant bring myself to that heavy ass axle lol.
the stock rear axle on a second gen is 60" wide wms to wms. i ran 1.5" wheel spacers so front tires would clear the struts, that put the front end at 64" wms to wms and rear was 63". im now on a 2001 f150 full size 8.8 rear axle at 65" and no spacers in the rear and imho, its not as bad as i was thinking. and explorer 8.8 is 59" so would still need spacers to even match the stock zuk axle. i think the 95 and older full size 8.8 are narrower so you could get something even closer. i wanted the width for the LT front end im going to
front needs to be in the 61-62" range to keep it close to stock and under the fenders. IIRC there was a jeep d44 front that was real damn close to that. might have been the wagoneer.
honestly id just go full size axles and run shallow off set wheels. hubs will stick out some but not terrible. you get the best scrub radius and on/off road driving then too.
Dang, I didn't realize they were 60" Wide, that's 2" wider than an ifs Toyota and 5" wider than a stock straight axle.
An Fj80 front axle is 63.5" and is a perfect width for 37s, I ran an ifs rear with 2" spacers and an Fj80 front on my old Sami and 4runner before the 60s. The width is great.
A lightweight rig with bulletproof axles works really well around here on serious crawling trails. Those axles with some 39" stickies under this rig would be a ton of fun.