I am having trouble finding wheels for my 66 coupe. It has the lincoln versillas(?) 9" rear with discs. I know this rear end is wider than the factory so I need wheels with more backspacing than the front. I was thinking 4.5" backspacing for the front and 5.5 for the back. On 17x7 front and 17x8 rear. The problem is finding the same wheel with such different offsets. Anyone else run into the same problem with their 9" swap? Anyone got wheel suggestions that work?:SNSign:
trouble finding wheels with 9" lincoln rear
- Thread starter Nosboss
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
65up2d8
Member
Subscribing. Not to steal your thread, but I also have some questions about the Versailles rear that may best be answered in the same thread for everyone who's interested sake. In have the same rear, 8" wheels with, I believe, 4.5 inches of backspacing, rolled rear fenderlips, BFG Radial TA 265/50x15 tires (rear, of course, which admittedly rub over pretty harsh bumps), and room to spare to the inside. I would also be willing to modify my rear wheelwells, if necessary, for maximum clearance, and would consider tasteful flares. In essence, has anyone "maxed out" a 65-66 this way, in a tasteful manner? What were you able to get under the car in terms of tires, wheels, backspacing, etc? Thanks in advance.
I have a Lincoln rear in my 68. The 67-70 cars had an axle that is about 2" wider than the 65-66 cars and my Versailles axle. I always thought the Lincoln axle was very close to that of the early stangs. Anyways, I have Boyd Coddington wheels and had them built to my specifications. My rear wheels are 18*9 with 5" BS which would be equivilent to 6" bs on stock Mustang rear end of my year. In front I have 17*7 wheels with 4" bs. I don't think it looks weird or anything. It is just what happens when you go with staggered wheels. Most wheel manufactures have a custom division that can make the wheels you need for your application. It shouldn't cost you much if any more than the off the shelf ones. You will just have to wait longer of course.
I am no expert on 9" rears but on ultrastang.com they have the Lincoln and 65/66 rears as the same width, 52 1/4". If that is the case then it should be as simple as finding a wheel that will fit a stock 66. That shouldn't be to difficult. You can look at dodgestang.com for a wheel fitment chart.
The Ford 9-inch Rear End
http://www.dodgestang.com/Tire Fitment Guide 65-6.pdf
The Ford 9-inch Rear End
http://www.dodgestang.com/Tire Fitment Guide 65-6.pdf
They are not the same. I used the same wheels from before the swap on the new 9" and now I get a little bit of rub on one side and the other side is very close to touching. I measured both axles and if memory serves me right the 9" was about 3/4" longer from wheel mount surface to wheel mount surface.
Another obstical I have is the global west upper control arms in front. Last time I tried using the bullitt wheels with 1" spacers they hit the control arms about half turn.
I was trying to avoud using spacers, but will if I have to.
Another obstical I have is the global west upper control arms in front. Last time I tried using the bullitt wheels with 1" spacers they hit the control arms about half turn.
I was trying to avoud using spacers, but will if I have to.
The housing itself is the same width, but the overall width (axle flange to flange) is different, making that measurement 1" different. That's where the confusion comes in with the various axle width charts out there today. Some list the axle housing width, some give the axle to axle measurement. 52.25 is the housing measurement, it doesn't factor in the brake offset with the axles installed.
That makes sense. Sorry for the incorrect info you guys. I guess you learn something every day. Today I learned two things. 1) axle width on a lincoln rear end and 2) 4 year olds LOVE Barbie doll house's that Santa brings.
2) 4 year olds LOVE Barbie doll house's that Santa brings.
+2, agree with you 100% on this observation and my own.
Similar threads
