Return-Path:
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:25:34 -0600 (MDT)
From: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks80up-digest)
To: fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #82
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks80up-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks80up-digest Thursday, August 28 1997 Volume 01 : Number 082



=======================================================================
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:F250 powerstroke VS Dodge 2500 Deisel [KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J ]
Wiring ["Casey Vandor" ]
97 Ranger 4.0L V-6 Engine racing [silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)]
RE: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #81 [Larry Smeins ]
Tranie Problems [meadjr minotafb.ndak.net]
Re: 97 Ranger 4.0L V-6 Engine racing [James Federline
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #81 ["C. E. White" ]
Re: 97 Ranger 4.0L V-6 Engine racing ["J. Martin"
Manual Transmission Choices F150, F250 [Lou Mallia ]
FW: 1998 Ranger Tranny [Brian Pynn ]
3.0L V6 [fwise juno.com]
Re: Wiring [Charles Cohn ]
Re: 3.0L V6 [Max Dooley ]
E4OD [Steve ]
Re: 3.0L V6 [Chris Kelly ]
Re: Bronco II stuff [DanHolmes9 aol.com]
Re: 90 Ranger Clutch Problem [DanHolmes9 aol.com]
Re: 90 Ranger Clutch Problem [Chris Kelly ]

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

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:11:11, -0500
From: KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)
Subject: RE:F250 powerstroke VS Dodge 2500 Deisel

Hi,
I would suggest the F-250 over the D**ge any day. The frames on the
Fords are much more rigid and strong. I heard many stories of frames
braking on the little Rams. If I were you, I would stick to the
tough looking and built tough Ford. The Power Stroke vs. Cummins
Turbo is another story. They both are evenly matched, so take the
Ford.
As for options, it depends on what you want to do and how much luxury
you like. The XLT package is great because you get AC, cruise
control, power windows/locks, aluminum wheels, and a cassette player.
Trailer tow is always nice, same with rear sliding window. If you
are going to pull a lot of weight, I would get 4.10 gears. If this
truck will cruise more than tow, the 3.55s will work great.

Josh
KNBD87D prodigy.com

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 06:30:40 -0800
From: "Casey Vandor"
Subject: Wiring

I was cleaning out my truck (first time for everything) and when I was
>pulling stuff from under the seat, I found a large grey box with about
>15-20 wires in a big bundle hooked into it. The truck is an 83 F-250
351W.
> It has Duraspark ignition, and the brainbox for that is on the driver
side
>wheelwell. Does anybody know what this box is for? I don't have any
>special options like A/C or anything, so what could this be for?

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:40:48 EDT
From: silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)
Subject: 97 Ranger 4.0L V-6 Engine racing

This is a MIME-encapsulated message

- --IAAAA11308.872686180/m8.boston.juno.com

The original message was received at Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:47:05 -0400
(EDT)
from silent.bob juno.com

----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
fordtruck80up listservice.net

----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to listservice.net.:
>>> RCPT To:
... User unknown
550 fordtruck80up listservice.net... User unknown

- --IAAAA11308.872686180/m8.boston.juno.com
Content-Type: message/delivery-status


On 25 Aug 1997 22:43:50 CDT hharkins mindspring.com writes:

Hi:

I've got a 97 Ranger, 5 speed, 4.0L V-6 engine. When shifting at "low"
RPMs about 80% of the time, the engine races 200 to 1,000 rpm for several
seconds (usually clutch is reengaged before rpms drop). This problem is
not noticable at higher rpm shifts - 2,800 or higher. The engine also
races about 50% of the time when clutch is depressed a vehicle is allowed
to coast to stop. Typically the rpms "stick" at about 2,000 rpms and
will
not drop to normal idle (about 900 rpms) until vehicle comes to a
complete
stop or clutch is reengaged.

This is not an operator error. I've been driving manuals for more than
30
years and have never experienced this phenomenon before.

Dealer has had the vehicle for correction of this problem 5 times (7days)
and has acknowledged the phenomenon. Advised that "the computer"
find nothing wrong with the vehicle and basically said,"Sorry 'bout that.

Have a nice life."

I commenced the Florida Lemon Law procedure by filing a motor vehicle
defect notice with the Detroit office triggering Ford's right to "fix"
the
vehicle within 10 days. Local dealer (Ernie Haire Ford, Tampa FL) kept
the
vehicle for 5 days, Mon - Fri, and advised the same as above.

This racing between shifts is driving me crazy. I find it disconcerting
that my vehicle chooses to inject fuel into the engine when I have
removed
my foot from the gas pedal; and I intend to proceed with the Lemon Law
process. If an arbritrator finds that this problem substantially affects
the use, value or safety of the vehicle, Ford must refund the purchase
price or provide a new vehicle, my choice. Since the local dealer
advises
that other stock vehicles with same engine and transmission proform in
the
same manner, I don't think a new vehicle will solve the problem.

Question: Do you or any of your Ranger afficianados have any experience
with this particular problem? Is there a fix? If so what is it? And is
there any place to post the problem to see if anyone else is experiencing
a
similar situation?

Thanks.

Harold Harkins
Tampa FL
hharkins mindspring.com

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 09:31:39 -0600
From: Larry Smeins
Subject: RE: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #81

> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 07:42:51 -0400
> From: wiandt coastalfcu.org (Larry Wiandt)
> Subject: Re: F350 Brakes
>
> >
>
>The problem is they just don't stop as well as I think they
should. I
>have plenty of pedal and the booster is obviously working fine
as the
>pedal is easy to push. Of course the 93 model had ABS
>(anti-braking-system) which I believe is crap, so you can't
lock up the
>brakes. Actually maybe that's it, I have never had ABS before,
maybe I
>need to realize that vehicles don't stop as well anymore now
that the
>federal government is the design engineers for cars and trucks.
(Sorry,
>:soapbox off). Anyway what do y'all think.

>Thanks.
>Larry

A comment on your feelings about ABS. First, IMHO a well
designed ABS system is worth its weight in gold. I drive a 10 year old
German car with Bosch 4 wheel ABS and it has saved my ass more than
once. It would take one helluva good driver to approach the braking
control that comes automatically with a good ABS system. The problem
with the US ABS is the accountants forced a compromise. Two wheel ABS
helps keep the back from coming around under lock up conditions but
since most of the stopping comes from the front wheels it doesn't help
in stopping. I was very disappointed to find Ford didn't even offer 4
wheel ABS as an option when I bought my 95 F-250 and have complained to
Ford about their stupidity more than once in their owner surveys. If
you ever experienced good 4 wheel ABS doing its job I think you would
change your opinion. The problem is we were stuck with both poorly
designed ABS systems and 2 wheel ABS on our US trucks and cars for too
long a time. BTW the ABS in my car has a disable switch on the dash and
the owners manual explains the few conditions where the ABS should be
disabled.

Larry
If you don't care where you are, you ain't lost.

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:15:11 PDT
From: meadjr minotafb.ndak.net
Subject: Tranie Problems

Help!!
We were on vacation in the mountains when the tranie on our 92 Bronco started having problems! It wont go in drive, I have to put it in 2nd to get started and then shift into drive at 20-30 mph. The tranie fluid does not smell bad and it looks like new with nothing in it from what I can tell. The fluid level was normal when we left but after this happened it went up about 1 inch past the full line. We went to 4 dealers and none of them could see it so we just drove home as it still works. What happened to the tranie???

JJ

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:22:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: James Federline
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger 4.0L V-6 Engine racing

Funny - I had this same symptom with a 1986 Nissan pickup with the 2.4L
nissan engine with a 2-bbl carb. That particular carb was fairly trashed,
so I cranked the thing up to MAX richness to compensate for loss of power,
and wambo-slambo -> it raced just like you describe between gears
when I lifed my foot off the accellerator.

Maybe someone with some FI knowledge can apply my experience to the
never engine and injection systems.

- --
James B. Federline MinnSoft Corporation
Principal Consultant "Actual Solutions To Real Problems"
----------M_____i_____n_____n_____S_____o_____f_____t---(sm)---
Tivoli / Lawson / UNIX Administration / Database Administration

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

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:33:27 -0400
From: "C. E. White"
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest V1 #81

Larry Smeins wrote:

> A comment on your feelings about ABS. First, IMHO a well
> designed ABS system is worth its weight in gold. I drive a 10 year old
> German car with Bosch 4 wheel ABS and it has saved my ass more than
> once.

I have the opposite opinion of ABS. My feeling is that 4 wheel anti-lock
brakes are not particularly valuable unless you are a skilled driver.
Most tests I am aware of show that cars with 4WABS actually have
stopping distance slightly longer than cars without ABS Brakes. 4WABS
brakes do allow you to steer while braking hard, but most people don't
have the skill to use this to their advantage. US insurance studies show
no advantages for cars with 4 wheel anti-lock brakes (i.e., damage and
injury claims are the same as for cars without anti-lock brakes). I
think 4 wheel anti-lock brakes are expemsive, complicated and mostly not
useful. If I had the choice I would not have them on my current
Expedition. I do think the rear anti-lock brakes on pick-ups are a good
compromise. They should keep the rear wheels from locking during a panic
stop. This will keep the rear end from coming around during a panic stop
while the truck is empty. With only the fronts locked, you will stop
straight ahead in the shortest possible distance.

You don't want to get be started on 5mph bumpers and air bags.......

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 12:06:58 -0700
From: "J. Martin"
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger 4.0L V-6 Engine racing

I'm not sure about the Lemon law stuff...buuut...

It sounds like your Idle Bypass Air is the problem...
I haven't had much experience w/fuel injection, but I'm almost done
reading Probst's book on EEC/FI. Let's see how bad I can confuse ya! ;)

In Ford fuel injected vehicles, there is something called (I don't have
the book here w/me) Idle Bypass. This is nothing more than a little
valve that lets air past the throttle body--to the engine. Why?

Think of this...when you are down shifting, or slowing down, and you
completely let off of the throttle, the throttle blades (aka
'butterflies) in the throttle body completely choke off the intake air.
If the engine cannot get air, then it can't run. SO, here comes the Idle
Bypass Air to the rescue. The computer calculates (based upon the
vehicle speed, throttle position, RPM, etc.) how far to open the Idle
Air Valve. If it opens it too much or too little, then your 'coasting'
and 'between-shift-idle' RPM's would be too high, or too low,
respectively.

This problem can have several different sources, since so many
sensor-inputs are used to calculate the proper amount of Idle Bypass
Air--but it's really not all that hard to find, when you've got the
right equipment/info (like the dealership should/DOES?? ;)

Please bear in mind that this info is for '88-'93 year model EEC-IV, not
EEC-V(which you probably have, yours being a '97). The info should be
very similar, however.


Josh --> '88 Ranger


> Hi:
>
> I've got a 97 Ranger, 5 speed, 4.0L V-6 engine. When shifting at
> "low"
> RPMs about 80% of the time, the engine races 200 to 1,000 rpm for
> several
> seconds (usually clutch is reengaged before rpms drop). This problem
> is
> not noticable at higher rpm shifts - 2,800 or higher. The engine also
>
> races about 50% of the time when clutch is depressed a vehicle is
> allowed
> to coast to stop. Typically the rpms "stick" at about 2,000 rpms and
> will
> not drop to normal idle (about 900 rpms) until vehicle comes to a
> complete
> stop or clutch is reengaged.

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 14:50:19 -0400
From: Lou Mallia
Subject: Manual Transmission Choices F150, F250

I plan on buying a 4x4 F150 (preferable) or 4x4 F250 sometime during '98.
I plan on buying a manual transmission, and have no interest in an automatic.
I plan on doing occasional towing of a boat, nothing over 2500lbs.
I plan on getting the 5.4L V8 and the 3.55 limited slip rear in either truck.
(Actually, I'd take the entire towing package in an F150 to get super cooling,
bigger alternator, and towing harness). Not sure if the F250 offers the towing
package or if I have to piece it together with single options. Either way,
I belive I will be set up to tow without problem, given the weight I want to
tow.

I'm trying to compare the F150 manual trans to the F250 HD manual trans.
I believe the F250 HD trans includes a creeper 1st gear, which is attractive
to me when I think of pulling a boat up a steep boat ramp.
Alternatively, the F150 (with a taller 1st gear), in 4WD Lo-range, will
probably work as well coming up a ramp. What I'm trying to figure out is if I
really need the F250's HD transmission, to get the creeper 1st gear, for the
boat ramp startup or not.

My only experience with creeper 1st gears is in the older 4-speed
transmissions, which were usually driven as 3-speeds unless under great load.
I'd prefer the driveability of the standard (taller 1st) manual in the F150 for
day-to-day driving, but could live with the F250HD if it would really be the
best way to go.

Does anyone have access to the actual ratio's of both transmissions? What
about the drive ratios of the transfer cases in the F150 and F250? Are they
the same in both trucks? Do I need a higher rear end ratio (4.10)?

My final goal is to enjoy driving the manual on a daily basis, while having
enough drive train for towing the boat.

Answers to the above questions, as well as opinions, are welcome and requested.

Thanks,
Lou

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 11:52:52 -0700
From: Brian Pynn
Subject: FW: 1998 Ranger Tranny

> ----------
> From: Brian Pynn
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 1997 11:38 AM
> To: 'fordnatics lists.best.com'; 'fordtrucks80up listservice.com'
> Subject: 1998 Ranger Tranny
>
> I'm very close to purchasing a new Ranger as soon as they hit the lot.
> Had a 1997 on order but didn't get it in on time; order was cancelled.
> My only concern about the Rangers from all the research I've done
> (I've never owned one) is the seemingly continual complaints about
> trannies giving out after only a few years or 50-60 thousand miles (if
> not sooner). Anybody know if Ford has improved the Ranger
> transmission at all in the past year or two...and, in particular, for
> the 1998 model year?
>

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 17:37:57 -0500
From: fwise juno.com
Subject: 3.0L V6

Greetings,

I have a 94 Ranger Supercab with the 3.0L V6 and 5 speed. I like the
truck, but it could sure use an injection of horsepower. There seems to
be a distinct dearth of aftermarket goodies for this engine. Does anyone
know of any company who makes anything for it, or have any do-it-myself
ideas?

I have added a K&N filter, am planning to fab up a cool/ram air system,
and am contemplating a capacitive discharge ignition. Any suggestions on
Jacobs versus MSD?

I would really like a set of headers, as the stock manifolds appear to be
quite restrictive. I've checked lots of header manufacturers web pages,
but haven't found any yet. I am also planning on adding a Flowmaster or
similar muffler in hopes of increasing air throughput.

Any and all suggestions will be appreciated.

Fred Wise
San Antonio, Texas
fwise juno.com

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:08:33 -0400
From: Charles Cohn
Subject: Re: Wiring

At 06:30 AM 8/28/97 -0800, you wrote:
>I was cleaning out my truck (first time for everything) and when I was
>>pulling stuff from under the seat, I found a large grey box with about
>>15-20 wires in a big bundle hooked into it. The truck is an 83 F-250
>351W.
>> It has Duraspark ignition, and the brainbox for that is on the driver
>side
>>wheelwell. Does anybody know what this box is for? I don't have any
>>special options like A/C or anything, so what could this be for?
>

Maybe it's your computer!


Charles Cohn, chasmagc mindspring.com
6311 Mark Trail, Austell, Georgia 30168
USA

voice: 770-944-7510

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 20:29:42 -0400
From: Max Dooley
Subject: Re: 3.0L V6

fwise juno.com wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I have a 94 Ranger Supercab with the 3.0L V6 and 5 speed. I like the
> truck, but it could sure use an injection of horsepower. There seems to
> be a distinct dearth of aftermarket goodies for this engine. Does anyone
> know of any company who makes anything for it, or have any do-it-myself
> ideas?
>
> I have added a K&N filter, am planning to fab up a cool/ram air system,
> and am contemplating a capacitive discharge ignition. Any suggestions on
> Jacobs versus MSD?
>
> I would really like a set of headers, as the stock manifolds appear to be
> quite restrictive. I've checked lots of header manufacturers web pages,
> but haven't found any yet. I am also planning on adding a Flowmaster or
> similar muffler in hopes of increasing air throughput.
>
> Any and all suggestions will be appreciated.
>
> Fred Wise
> San Antonio, Texas
> fwise juno.com
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> +-- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ --+
Jet does make a performance module for this application. they start at
about $280.00. My father is on the same quest as you. He has about the
same set up and same desires as you. If you find anything interesting
let me know. I do know that performence parts for the 4.0 will fit the
2.9, for example headers and such... I'm not aware if this is
applicable to the 3.0 or not. Still trying to find out.

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:40:39 -0500
From: Steve
Subject: E4OD

My dad has a '90 F-250 460 W/E4OD. The trans was just rebuilt and now it
won't stay in 2nd when you put it in manually. It free spins like it is
in neutral. Coming down a hill and putting it in second it does give you
the compression braking effect. This was discovered while pulling a 26
foot 5th wheel into Wyoming. It is warrentied, but the trans shop has
limited expereance with this trans. The first time he took it in for
this problem it only acted up once, so they put a new computer in it. It
worked fine for a while but started acting up again and is back at the
shop. Any ideas?

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:07:16 -0400
From: Chris Kelly
Subject: Re: 3.0L V6

fwise juno.com wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I have a 94 Ranger Supercab with the 3.0L V6 and 5 speed. I like the
> truck, but it could sure use an injection of horsepower. There seems to
> be a distinct dearth of aftermarket goodies for this engine. Does anyone
> know of any company who makes anything for it, or have any do-it-myself
> ideas?
>
> I have added a K&N filter, am planning to fab up a cool/ram air system,
> and am contemplating a capacitive discharge ignition. Any suggestions on
> Jacobs versus MSD?
>
> I would really like a set of headers, as the stock manifolds appear to be
> quite restrictive. I've checked lots of header manufacturers web pages,
> but haven't found any yet. I am also planning on adding a Flowmaster or
> similar muffler in hopes of increasing air throughput.
>
> Any and all suggestions will be appreciated.
>
> Fred Wise
> San Antonio, Texas
> fwise juno.com
> +-------------- Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1980 and Newer --------------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks80up listservice.net, |
> | Send Unsubscribe requests to fordtrucks80up-request listservice.net |
> +-- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ --+


Try performance products...I think they carry dynomax exhaust and borla
exhaust for your application! Also Superchip offers a computer chip
that adds about 10 horsepower and 15% more torque all the way across the
tach! Only trade off is that you have to use premium...but you get 2 to
3 mpg more! SUPERCHARGER!!!!! Let us know what you do and how well it
Works

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:11:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: DanHolmes9 aol.com
Subject: Re: Bronco II stuff

You don't have to lift it to run the 235's. They fit on my Ranger, and
it sits lower than your Bronco. You could fit 255's on your truck or more,
because that is the with of the tire, not how tall it is. It is the second
number that tells you how tall it is. That is how tall it is compared to how
wide. You may already know this, but just thought I'd let you know before
you lift it to fit 235's. A 235/70(what I have)is 235mm wide, and it's
sidewall is 70% of it's with(165mm). A 235/70 should fit just fine, but a 75
might rub. True, a 235/70 is taller that a 215/70, but that 215, would be
taller than a 235/60. I miss the old method where a 27 inch tire was a 27
inch tire, no matter how wide it is. I guess the metric system makes it
easier for cars, but for us truck guys that have to worry about clearance, it
is a pain in the neck. If you want a tall tire, make sure you pay carefull
attention to both numbers because you have to do some math(ugh!)to find the
actual diameter.

Daniel

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:16:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: DanHolmes9 aol.com
Subject: Re: 90 Ranger Clutch Problem

Bill,

I replied to you first post a while ago, but never saw it. Guess it got
lost in all the shuffle too. I have the exact same problem with my 88 Ranger
2.3 with the Mazda 5-speed. My truck has 150k on it and dosen't want to
shift to first like you said, and grinds into reverse. I agree with Andy
about the pressure plate. The clutch just dosen't seem to release all the
way. It feels like it is always rubbing. I also have some wierd ratteling
noise when the truck is idleing in neutral with the clutch ingaged. Probably
a bad bearing somewhere. My truck has been driven very hard also. The
previous owners must have ran the hell out of it. They wore out the shifter
so bad the dang thing flops all over the place. I have managed to get that
fixed, but have yet to work on the clutch. I can live with it for a while,
but it is a pain in the rear to back out into a street with cars coming up on
you and not be able to get the thing in first gear!

Good Luck,
Daniel

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:32:38 -0400
From: Chris Kelly
Subject: Re: 90 Ranger Clutch Problem

DanHolmes9 aol.com wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I replied to you first post a while ago, but never saw it. Guess it got
> lost in all the shuffle too. I have the exact same problem with my 88 Ranger
> 2.3 with the Mazda 5-speed. My truck has 150k on it and dosen't want to
> shift to first like you said, and grinds into reverse. I agree with Andy
> about the pressure plate. The clutch just dosen't seem to release all the
> way. It feels like it is always rubbing. I also have some wierd ratteling
> noise when the truck is idleing in neutral with the clutch ingaged. Probably
> a bad bearing somewhere. My truck has been driven very hard also. The
> previous owners must have ran the hell out of it. They wore out the shifter
> so bad the dang thing flops all over the place. I have managed to get that
> fixed, but have yet to work on the clutch. I can live with it for a while,....


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.