since i decided to get a 9"...do i have to get one that came out of a 1965 mustang or what other "year" N "cars" can i get them from?

 

The debate that will never end, 8 verses 9

 

Go here. They can make you a bulletproof 8" setup. Or 9". The 9" will take more power away from your engine than the 8".

 

I'll bet the two 8 inch rears you blew were the case style prior to 1967.. The newer 8 inch pumpkin from 1967 forward was reinforced.. Here is a good link that talks about 9 inch rears but covers the newer style case of the 8 inch. http://www.maliburacing.com/ford_9_i..._nine_inch.htm

Here is another great link about 8 inch rears http://www.mustangandfords.com/techa...ff/index4.html

 

I'm very much aware of the differences between the early and late cases as I worked in a junk yard at the time. Both cases were the late style with a std. Trac-loc and 4.62 gears. Both cracked in the exact same place. There is nothing wrong with an 8" rear, but it's not nearly as strong as a nine.

 

What was the specs on the engine?

 

A nine from a 67-70 Mustang or Cougar will also fit as the spring perches are the same width but those years are about an inch wider from drum to drum. You may have to change to a different wheel offset to compensate. I put a nine from a 68 Cougar in my 66 coupe and didn't have any wheel clearance problems.

 

It was a 70 302 with a Crane h302 hydraulic cam, dual plane Edelbrock intake, 650 Holley DP, headers. std heads, Top loader, Zoom clutch, 4.62 Zoom gears, Lakewood bars.

 

Humm, I would not think that combo would do more than 300hp at best at the crank. Maybe the 4.62 gears were a factor..

 

It was absoultely less than 300 bhp. The std. transmission probably had more to do with it than the gears. If it was an automatic, I probably would not have broken the 8. I later switched to a very high strung Cleveland but kept the same drive train. It ran mid 11's and I never broke the nine. I wish I could say the same for the Cleveland.....