HOW MUCH WIDER IS THE REAR END FROM A 1995 CROWN VIC COMPARED TO MINE(1987 CV) AND WOULD IT BE STRONGER, WHATS THE SPLINE COUNT ON THE AXLES. A FRIEND HAS ONE AND I MIGHT BUY IT AS LONG AS ITS NOT WEAKER THAN THE ORIGINAL 8.8 , ALL I WANT IT FOR IS THE REAR DISCS LOOK, I KNOW IT WONT BOLT UP BUT IM THINKING ABOUT PUTTING IN A FOUR LINK SUSPENSION. IF ITS WIDER WHICH I THINK IT IS, ITLL LET ME PUT ALITTLE WIDER RIMS THAN THE ONES IM RUNNING NOW. ANY INFO HELPFUL.

A wider rear end will not allow any wider tires than what you can fit into the wheelwells, which with what I have worked on, with the sedans, a 9 inch wide wheel is about all you need, and with a wagon, I had a pair of 12-inch wide weld draglites bolted on( a friend had set with close to the proper offset) for a look to see how they would fit, they fit great, but needed a bit of outer fender lip tweaking. Skip the rear disc brakes, and save your cash, the rear drums will provide all of the stopping power you can handle, any more braking power would be wasted motion. The Crown Vic has a Mustang fox body style rear suspension, and also has the Mustangs poor rear suspension geometry. What happens, under hard braking, the rear end tries to rotate forward, and in doing so, pitches the rear of the car into the air, unloading the rear tires, and causing a skid(most might think it is nose dive). Better shocks calm it down a small bit, but not very much. I am working on a rear suspension setup that will stop this, and use already available parts, and let you be able to put more brake on the rear of the car.
You will also need to switch the master cylinder and proportioning valve to a disc unit, and retrofit a newer unit onto your car.

I KNOW THE DRUMS HAVE MORE SUFACE AREA AND ARE BETTER FOR STOPPING, I JUST WANT THE REAR DISC LOOK. AS FOR THE SUSPENSION IM THINKING OF HAVING AN ADJUSTABLE FOR LINK PUT IN, WHILE STILL BEING ABLE TO USE THE ORIGINAL SHOCKS AND SPRINGS. OF COURSE ILL ALSO HAVE TO USE AND PANHAND BAR TOO. ALL THIS STUFF IS AVAILABLE FROM SUMMIT AT REASONALBE PRICES.

its a bolt-on.. the rearend is not wider by any means because the wheel offset has been the same from 1979 until 2002. however dont think the rearend on a '98 will work.. the trailing arms are different on those, so only '92-97s work

I know 90-91 rears are about 3" wider than 79-89. USLYDAWG tried to use axles out of an 89 in his 90 and couldn't.

I don't know anything about the newer ones, but all 28-spline 8.8s are the same strength.

kevin

In order to use rear disc brakes and not kill yourself, you also need a different master cylinder and proportioning valve meant for a 4 wheel disc brake CV...
the rears are all 8.8" even in 2003, and are all 28 spline axles.

I'm going to be doing a '92-'95 rear axle swap later in the spring. I haven't heard anything about different widths, and it wouldn't make sense that they would make the axle wider. Even if it is wider, it just means that the rear wheels would just stick out more right? In case anybody is wondering why I'm doing it, I'm going to be getting some 17x9 5-spoke wheels, and they'd look godawful stupid with drum brakes.

At the time I'll also be replacing the master cylinder, possibly all of the brake lines, doing a '98+ front brake conversion, Getting N-code springs for the front, Bilstein HD's on all four corners. Before I install the axle I'm going to rebuild it and install a new T-Lock and 3.73 gears. This will probably all be done in May when it's warmer out.