Return-Path:
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 03:50:19 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #232
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Friday, November 21 1997 Volume 01 : Number 232



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 And Newer Trucks Digest
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
fordtrucks80up-digest-request listservice.net
with the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. For help, send
email to the same address with the word "help" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: 3.0 [Bill Morgan ]
Ranger turn lights ["R.L.H.O." ]
Re: SHO in a Ranger - Was Re: Flaming the 3.0 [Bill Morgan
Re: F150 brake linings and components ["Froggy" ]
Re: Chevy Humor ["Froggy" ]
Re: F150 brake linings and components ["Froggy" ]
Re: Tailgates and Mileage [Bob ]
Re: Need Help [bthomas Kollsman.com]
Re: Gas Coupons [bthomas Kollsman.com]
tailgate removal ["Mark H. Neblett" ]
Mileage [Gary Snook ]
Re:2.0L Info [bmrickman juno.com (brian k rickman)]
Polyurethane vs. Rubber [Glen Sholley ]
Trucks [Steve ]
re: I doubt it ["Randy Kindler" ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #230 ["Randy Kindler"
Re: gas mileage [HELOJMPR aol.com]

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 17:34:10 -0600
From: Bill Morgan
Subject: Re: 3.0

David J. Baldwin wrote:

> Bill Morgan wrote:
> >
> > 93 F150 MarkIII Conversion
>
> Bill,
>
> Am I guessing right? Did you stick the 4-cam Mark VIII motor in your
> '93?
> If so, what engine did it replace, and how has it worked out?
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Oh no, no, no...

Wish I could say it was true. Mark III is a conversion specialist, vans,
pick-ups and the like. Arrives on the showroom floor with custom paint,
running boards, 15x10 rims, leather seating, wood trim already installed. I
bought the truck used w/48K miles and in great shape, but unfortunately,
just a 5.O. Sorry to disappoint.

Bill Morgan
93 F150 MarkIII Conversion
sho4go internetwork.net.

> ----------------
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+



- --
MZ

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 09:42:45 -0200
From: "R.L.H.O."
Subject: Ranger turn lights

Hi folks !

I'm looking up for 97 Ranger white turn lights. Any ideas where I could
find it on the net?

Regards,

Rodrigo Heitzmann

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 17:44:41 -0600
From: Bill Morgan
Subject: Re: SHO in a Ranger - Was Re: Flaming the 3.0

>
>
> I don't know about the bellhousing, as the Mazda 5speed in Rangers has
> its housing integral with the rest of the transmission.
>

The issue after the bellhousing is not whether or not the Ranger's tranny
will mount up, but rather, which one will. As for the intake question and
bumpin against the firewall, the mounts for the 3.0 SHO are the same as the
mounts for the Vulcan 3.0 and as such there is already history of a similar
powerplant in a Ranger motor bay. I don't own a Ranger so I am assuming that
there may be issues of cooling the engine since the Taurus is an electric fan
sys. Further, the computer for the SHO motor and wiring harness would have to
be scavenged from the donor car. But, if this swap can be done in a Triumph
TR8, not a fwd product, I am certain a Ranger would be a suitable recepient.
Money might be the key issue.

Bill Morgan
93 F150 Mark III Conversion
sho4go internetwork.net


- --
MZ

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 18:48:50 -0500
From: "Froggy"
Subject: Re: F150 brake linings and components

Mark, since you have a 5 speed, the easiest solution is to make better use
of the slowing power of the transmission. I towed a heavy work trailer
with my ranger 4x4/5.0 and had the same problem with my brakes.
Unfortunately, mine is automatic so the solution wasn't as simple. I never
found a brake combo that could withstand the rigors of the heavy load.
Another solution might be an electric brake for the trailer. Good
luck.....By the way, I sold my company and my truck is much happier
commuting to the Post Office where I now work..........just don't make me
mad!!!!!! (just kidding).....froggy

- ----------
> From: MEB8100 aol.com
> To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Subject: F150 brake linings and components
> Date: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 9:48 PM
>
> Vehicle: 1993 F150 4x4 XLT, Supercab, 5.0 with 5 speed
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions for improved brake linings or other
> components for this vehicle. It is used primarily for towing about 3,500
> lbs. w/o trailer brakes. The front rotors especially warp alot and use
up
> pads quickly. Is the load too high without having trailer brakes? I've
been
> told that there are improved aftermarket front rotors available but don't
> know where to look.
>
> Thanks!
> Mark Biederbeck
> MEB8100 aol.com
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 19:05:21 -0500
From: "Froggy"
Subject: Re: Chevy Humor

John, let me first say that I wouldn't have the truck repaired
either....but.....there are body shops that are absolutely capable of
dissecting and reassembling a frame. It requires a sophisticated jig and a
competent welder, but it can be done . If done properly it will track just
like new. If the work is done right your friend will have a practically
new body that should last awhile. Maybe he's not so stupid! Anyway, my
truck was wrecked but I challenge you to find a nicer riding, driving,
perfoming truck anywhere. I have 130,000 miles on (wrecked at 27,000) and
I wouldn't trade it for anything. 92 Ranger 4x4 xcab AT, 4.0 Black w/limo
tint, custo built 1 piece aluminum wheels with Bridgestone A/T's. Showroom
condition......froggy

- ----------
> From: Cassis, John
> To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Subject: Chevy Humor
> Date: Thursday, November 20, 1997 3:00 AM
>
>
> Well the kid is not nuts......stupid yes. Talked to him yesterday
> afternoon. The bodyshop is going to cut his frame between the cab and bed

> and weld in new frame. I would be screeming at my insurance to total the

> truck out. It just kills me. This kid realy believes that the truck will

> be "good as new". Now I know that welds are considerd the strong point or

> something on that affect, but the kid believes that his frame will
> actualy be stronger than befor. What a LOOSER. But what realy kills me is

> it a freakin' chevy, not like it a rare bird or anything. If he is so
> stoked on it total, the truck and buy one just like it. Anyway I thought

> you guys would get a good laugh out of this. Oh by the way they had to
> take a few weeks to locate parts for the truck. Bet the bed new/used bed

> comes off a burned truck....hehehehehehehe.
>
> John Cassis
> The Danger Ranger
>
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 19:21:03 -0500
From: "Froggy"
Subject: Re: F150 brake linings and components

This is me again...I just read my own message and before someone makes a
snide remark...my motor is a 4.0 not the 5.0 (boy would I like that 5.0)
and I couldn't care less about gas mileage!...froggy

- ----------
> From: Froggy
> To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> Subject: Re: F150 brake linings and components
> Date: Thursday, November 20, 1997 6:48 PM
>
> Mark, since you have a 5 speed, the easiest solution is to make better
use
> of the slowing power of the transmission. I towed a heavy work trailer
> with my ranger 4x4/5.0 and had the same problem with my brakes.
> Unfortunately, mine is automatic so the solution wasn't as simple. I
never
> found a brake combo that could withstand the rigors of the heavy load.
> Another solution might be an electric brake for the trailer. Good
> luck.....By the way, I sold my company and my truck is much happier
> commuting to the Post Office where I now work..........just don't make me
> mad!!!!!! (just kidding).....froggy
>
> ----------
> > From: MEB8100 aol.com
> > To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
> > Subject: F150 brake linings and components
> > Date: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 9:48 PM
> >
> > Vehicle: 1993 F150 4x4 XLT, Supercab, 5.0 with 5 speed
> >
> > Does anyone have any suggestions for improved brake linings or other
> > components for this vehicle. It is used primarily for towing about
3,500
> > lbs. w/o trailer brakes. The front rotors especially warp alot and use
> up
> > pads quickly. Is the load too high without having trailer brakes?
I've
> been
> > told that there are improved aftermarket front rotors available but
don't
> > know where to look.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Mark Biederbeck
> > MEB8100 aol.com
> > +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> > | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> > | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> > +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> +----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com -----------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 16:01:00 -0900
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Tailgates and Mileage

>In light of recent postings relating to Rangers doing 100 m.p.h., your pass
>at 135 makes them all seem rather insignificant...also, when you say it
>breaks loose at 2000 rpm, are you talking about the tranny, the tires or
>the tailgate? Heh, heh, heh...

>Bill Morgan
>93 F150 MarkIII Conversion
>sho4go internetwork.net

If speed is an issue, Im sorry to offend. High performance cars and
trucks are built for such practices. And whereas it would take an
eternity for a normal ranger to attain such a rate of speed, I do so
within approximatley 11 seconds. The tires break loose at 2000. Since
my Camino is restored to original condition, I dont want a set of wide
slicks on it, so I stay with what will fit on the stock rims.

Later,
Bob
95 F-150
70 El Camino SS
69 CJ-5
ascbh1 uaa.alaska.edu

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 20:35:47 -0500
From: bthomas Kollsman.com
Subject: Re: Need Help

You are on the right track. If you get the throttle plates too tight, they
tend to stick with cold temperature. Too loose and the air servo can't make
the engine idle slow enough. Try adj. the screw 1/4 to 1/2 turn open from
full tight.
Some F. I. systems have an air bypass screw that allows air to flow around
(bypass) the throttle body. If your vehicle has one you can fine turn the
idle speed with it. However, it is the job of the air servo to keep idle
speed correct assuming all other systems and adjustments are "in spec".


______________________________ Reply Separator ____________________________
_____
Subject: Need Help
Author: davecl superior.net at KOLLSMAN
Date: 11/20/97 5:00 PM




I would assume that most people know about the little screw (idle stop)
.....
.....
P.S. this is on a 1993 F150 XLT Supercab 4x4 5.0L AOD Thank in advance....


- ------------------- Dave Lindsley ---------------------------

- ---------------davecl superior.net-----------------------
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.superior.net/~davecl/index.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 20:38:47 -0500
From: bthomas Kollsman.com
Subject: Re: Gas Coupons

Cool!


______________________________ Reply Separator ____________________________
_____
Subject: Gas Coupons
Author: bryanjor metronet.de at KOLLSMAN
Date: 11/20/97 8:51 PM




B Thomas
In Germany the military & DOD civilians get gas ration coupons.
About 200
liters cost $ 80. OOPs - exact calc comes to $ 1.52 gal. if 3.8
liters per
gallon.
Im signing off for today. About 9 pm over here.
Bryan
+-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer
- --------------+
| Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net,
|
| Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
+----------------- Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com
- -----------------+

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 21:34:37 -0500
From: "Mark H. Neblett"
Subject: tailgate removal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01BCF5FC.19EA9920
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm new to the list, so pardon me if this has already been stated, but =
here's $0.02 worth on tailgate removal: =20

A while back GM (?) did some aerodynamic testing and found that the cd =
of a pick-up was *higher* with the tailgate *up.* Apparently a "bubble" =
of relatively still air develops within the bed, over which the air =
coming over the cab flows (not unlike having a bed cover on the back of =
a Bronco in place of the hardtop). Lower cd =3D higher mileage. The =
tailgate apparently keeps the still air in the bed; when they took off =
the tailgate, the air coming over the cab tumbled into the bed, raising =
drag.

Mark Neblett
'94 F-150 4x4 Supercab

- ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01BCF5FC.19EA9920
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable






http-equiv=3DContent-Type>



I'm new to the list, so pardon me if =
this has=20
already been stated, but here's $0.02 worth on tailgate removal: =20

 
A while back GM (?) did some =
aerodynamic testing=20
and found that the cd of a pick-up was *higher* with the tailgate =
*up.* =20
Apparently a "bubble" of relatively still air develops within =
the bed,=20
over which the air coming over the cab flows (not unlike having a bed =
cover on=20
the back of a Bronco in place of the hardtop).  Lower cd =3D higher =

mileage.  The tailgate apparently keeps the still air in the bed; =
when they=20
took off the tailgate, the air coming over the cab tumbled into the bed, =
raising=20
drag.
 
Mark Neblett
'94 F-150 4x4=20
Supercab

- ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01BCF5FC.19EA9920--

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 20:47:09 -0600
From: Gary Snook
Subject: Mileage

My 1987 3.0L Ranger XLT with 5 speed OD went 100004 miles, using 4717.32
gallons of gas for a average of 21.2 MPG. This was with a recalibrated
spedometer, as the truck as delivered was off, both in odometer and MPH.
My 1992 Aerostar Extended, XLT, 3.0L OD got about the same. I since have
traded, and now have a 1994 Ranger 4.0L supercab, 5 speed OD, 3.53 LS rear
end, but only have 12K miles on it. It gets about 17 MPG, average, but is
mostly city driven. My 1997 Aerostar, 4.0L, extended, XLT, Auto OD, 3.53
LS rear end also gets about 17 MPG. I also noted that someone who posted a
note mentioning low numbers for gas mileage also said he had mounted bigger
tires. That would mean that if the spedometer had not been recalibrated,
the odometer, and hence the mileage could easily be off by as much as 10%.
You don't have to increase the tire size very much to indicate 9 miles
when you actually drive 10. You can see readily where the error comes in.

Thanks,
Gary

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 20:55:49 -0600
From: bmrickman juno.com (brian k rickman)
Subject: Re:2.0L Info

>Actually,
>The 2.3 was introduced in Pintos and Mustang II's in the 1974 model
year. The powerplant was U. S. designed and most units were manufactured
in Brazil.
>However, that model year also saw the last use of the venerable German
made 2.0

What are the origins of the 2.0 in my '87 Ranger?

>and just as you think your 2.3 is a better performer than a 3.0, >so the
2.0 was a better performer than the 2.3, but reliability >was a
problem-solid lifters, overhead cam design.

Not true of the 2.0 Ranger! It makes 80 horsepower and 100 lb*ft
of torque, but mine seems to have held up better than most 2.3's I know
of.
- -----------------------------------------------------------
As I recall, the Ranger 2.0 is a small bore and posibaly destroked
version of the 2.3, and no I don't think you can swap parts and make a
2.0 larger.
Having less power in the same package may be why a 2.0 might last longer
than the more powerfull 2.3.(relatively speaking of course)

Brian Rickman bmrickman juno.com
91 Exp 4X4 EB
81 F100 2wd 351wAOD

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 19:18:09 -0800
From: Glen Sholley
Subject: Polyurethane vs. Rubber

Dave,

True, poly would be less flexible then rubber, but luckily, the
various poly bushing manufacturers take the flexibility of the bushings into
account depending on their specific application such as suspension,
steering, transmission/body mounts etc., and make the bushings more or less
flexible accordingly.
Manufacturers to contact would include Energy Suspension
(www.energysuspension.com); Dick Cepek(www.dickcepek.com); Performance
Suspension Technology (PST). Prices go from around $21.00-$25.00 each for
seperate suspension/body/steering component systems to around $130.00 for a
complete set covering all applications. IMO, you can't go wrong with poly.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:13:58 -0600
From: Steve
Subject: Trucks

Good find by the repair man. When ever I have a froze engine I will pull
the plugs out and turn it over by hand, but I wouldn't have known about
the regulator. File it for future reference, I love learning things like
that.
Anyway, what bothered me is the "check engine light" being mentioned. If
it comes on in your truck fugure it out soon, as it can get a bit
spendy. I fought the check engine light in my F-250 for a year, finally
changing out the 0-2 sensor to get it to go away (about $100). My dad
had a check engine light on and he put off repairing it. It ended up
running the truck too lean and clogged up the Catalic converter. He
spent about $700 replacing it ($100 being the 0-2 sensor) My neighbor
also had his catalic converter clog up too, so this isn't a uncommon
occurance. Just my 2 cents.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 21:25:12 -0700
From: "Randy Kindler"
Subject: re: I doubt it

You mean to tell me that the 2.3(old Pinto motor was designed off an
European motor, I doubt it.

Yup, Its true. The 3.0 is the most American of the lot. The 2.3 is a
derivative of the German built 2.0, and the 2.9 and the 4.0 are both
derivatives of the German 2.6/2.8 V6s that originally made their American
debut in the old Mercury Capri. In fact, the early Ranger 2.8s and some 2.9s
were manufactured in Germany. Personally, I would buy the 4.0. Along with
the extra power, you get the 8.8 rear end instead of the 7.5. They aren't
all that much more expensive, either. I wouldn't consider the 3.0 a slug,
though.
Just my $.02

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 21:38:46 -0700
From: "Randy Kindler"
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #230

>ooooh...skip the 5.0 conversion....*THAT* would be awesome...SHO motor
>in a Ranger......hmmmmmmm.........
>
ooooh, ooooh.....How 'bout a supercharged 3.8 from a T-Bird Super Coupe?
It's even rear wheel drive.

------------------------------....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.