Return-Path:
From: fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 11:44:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: t3.media3.net: lof set sender to fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com using -f
Subject: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #57
X-Loop: fordtrucks80up-digest lofcom.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/volume97/57
X-Distributed-By: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
To: fordtrucks80up-digest lofcom.com
Reply-To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com

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

Content-Type: text/plain

fordtrucks80up-digest Digest Volume 97 : Issue 57

Today's Topics:

Re: (no subject) [Croth2 aol.com ]
Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 [Elroseo aol.com ]
pull in steering [Dale ]
Re: 87 Ranger won't run when cold [Bakend aol.com ]
Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage ["Robert Leifer"
Re: 97 Ranger Mileage [Chris Kelly ]
Re: 97 Ranger Mileage [silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob) ]
Brola exhaust [silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob) ]
Re: 97 Ranger Mileage [silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob) ]
Re: pull in steering [droberts MIT.EDU (D Robertson) ]
F150 Bad starts [ketchj trip.net ]
Re: Onboard air compressor [droberts MIT.EDU (D Robertson) ]
5 speed Ranger auto transmission [Harold Bucks
Burning oil [Jim Cannon ]
RE: 85 ford supercab flareside. [Jim Cannon ]
Re: 5.0 Headers [PhilDyson aol.com ]
Fw: subscription cancellation ["jack kagy" ]
Re: Ford 5.4 [Paul Laughlin
Re: (no subject) [mrkrispy webtv.net (Ian Holter) ]
Re: pull in steering [Dale ]
Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage [mrkrispy webtv.net (Ian Holter) ]
Re: pull in steering [Captain Nemo
Re: F150 Bad starts [mrkrispy webtv.net (Ian Holter) ]
Re: F150 Bad starts [Captain Nemo
Re: (no subject) [Captain Nemo
Re: 97 Ranger Mileage [Max Dooley
Re: 97 Ranger Mileage ["Robert Leifer"
Need Help Finding Side Steps [mobius-1 juno.com ]

Administrivia:

____________________________________________________________________
Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-digest-request lofcom.com
Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
____________________________________________________________________


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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:09:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: Croth2 aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Message-ID:

what kind of moron would buy a dodge ram??? the engines are good but
everything else is a repair waiting to happen. I talked to a guy who worked
at a dodge dealership and he said that when they got a shipment of Rams in he
would go out in the morning and there would be puddles of Tranny oil under
about 6 of them, and they had to rebuild the trannssmision when they were
brand new.
This year I've seen at least 3 of them on the side of the road broken down.
too many people are to excited about the body style to even think about
reliability. Rams are overpriced and ugly, if you want a truck that wont
need a hundreds of dollars in repairs every few thousand miles, buy a
Ford.-->Tim

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:13:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Elroseo aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: fordtrucks80up-digest Digest V97 #56
Message-ID:

please remove my name from list

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 00:38:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dale
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: pull in steering
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello

I have a 84 F150 4X4 with 31" Generals (which need replacing).
I have a very severe pull in the front end.
If I let off of the steering wheel I'll be in the ditch in a second.
Could this be a tire? I had the front end aligned and checked out but they
said everything was fine. It has been getting worse ever since.

Also does anyone know where to find Canadian blue book prices?

Thanks in advance.

Dale Grein 97 MXZ 440 LC
Espanola, Ontario 84 F150 4X4 4speed 300 I-6
skidoguy cyberbeach.net

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 01:30:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bakend aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 87 Ranger won't run when cold
Message-ID:

My 87 did the same thing until it finally quit for good. Turned out to be the
crash/fuel shut off switch for the electric fuel pump, The connectors were
burned black by the time it quit and wouldn't start. Might not be your
problem but it is worth a shot! It is located under the carpet on passenger
side fire wall.
Good luck
Bakend

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 06:33:11 -0400
From: "Robert Leifer"
To:
Subject: Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I reread the sticker, and it says most trucks in this category get an
actual mileage of 14 to 20 in the city, and up to 27 on the highway. I think
I got the lower end of it all. Don't like it, and I will bitch about it.
It's not as if this is a rocket; the 3.0 liter is just adequate to get this
thing going. The 2.3 4cyl ranger I took for a test drive was not. Must be
all this pollution control stuff they tag on. After filling up Saturday, I
put 45 miles on, and the gauge went down to 3/4. We know gauges are not that
accurate, but most cars I had wentover 100 miles before the needle wnt down
that far ( except my '66 Pontiac GTO!!!!)

Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Armbruster
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Date: Sunday, August 03, 1997 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage



>I didn't find that mine (a '97 4x4 SuperCab 4.0) got any better mileage
>after a certain number of miles. I've got plenty now to know that it's
>broken-in (26,000). I usually get between 18 to 20, no matter what the
>driving. I've put a cab high alumium shell and Yakima roof rack (bikes,
>skis, etc) on, it came with the 3.27 gears, 235 tires and the 5 speed auto,
>and I've added Borla exhaust, a K&.nN and run Mobil One 5W-30. BTW, my
>sticker said 16 city and 26 highway. I have NEVER gotten close to 26 mpg,
>with or without the roof rack and camper shell.
>
>Dave
>
>>Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 08:13:45 -0400
>>From: "Robert Leifer"
>>To:
>>Subject: Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
>>Message-Id:
>>Content-Type: text/plain;
>> charset="us-ascii"
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>
>> Well, I filled the tank up again after diriving 192 miles; it took 13.1
>>gallons to fill it! Still comes out to a 14.6 mpg, still pretty low for a
>>Ranger 4X2 V6 3.0 liter. The dealer says it will improve after 1000 miles
>>on it, and I'm bately up to 500 miles on it now. does anybody else here
have
>>a 3.0 Ranger 4X2 to give me their gas mileage figures?
>>EPA sticker says 17 city, 23 on the road, but the last tankful was mostly
>>driving without the normal city stop and go.
>>
>>Bob
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
>For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-request lofcom.com
>Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com

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

Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 07:41:37 -0400
From: Chris Kelly
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Robert Leifer wrote:
>
> I reread the sticker, and it says most trucks in this category get an
> actual mileage of 14 to 20 in the city, and up to 27 on the highway. I think
> I got the lower end of it all. Don't like it, and I will bitch about it.
> It's not as if this is a rocket; the 3.0 liter is just adequate to get this
> thing going. The 2.3 4cyl ranger I took for a test drive was not. Must be
> all this pollution control stuff they tag on. After filling up Saturday, I
> put 45 miles on, and the gauge went down to 3/4. We know gauges are not that
> accurate, but most cars I had wentover 100 miles before the needle wnt down
> that far ( except my '66 Pontiac GTO!!!!)
>
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Armbruster
> To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
> Date: Sunday, August 03, 1997 10:10 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
>
> >I didn't find that mine (a '97 4x4 SuperCab 4.0) got any better mileage
> >after a certain number of miles. I've got plenty now to know that it's
> >broken-in (26,000). I usually get between 18 to 20, no matter what the
> >driving. I've put a cab high alumium shell and Yakima roof rack (bikes,
> >skis, etc) on, it came with the 3.27 gears, 235 tires and the 5 speed auto,
> >and I've added Borla exhaust, a K&.nN and run Mobil One 5W-30. BTW, my
> >sticker said 16 city and 26 highway. I have NEVER gotten close to 26 mpg,
> >with or without the roof rack and camper shell.
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >>Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 08:13:45 -0400
> >>From: "Robert Leifer"
> >>To:
> >>Subject: Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
> >>Message-Id:
> >>Content-Type: text/plain;
> >> charset="us-ascii"
> >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >>
> >> Well, I filled the tank up again after diriving 192 miles; it took 13.1
> >>gallons to fill it! Still comes out to a 14.6 mpg, still pretty low for a
> >>Ranger 4X2 V6 3.0 liter. The dealer says it will improve after 1000 miles
> >>on it, and I'm bately up to 500 miles on it now. does anybody else here
> have
> >>a 3.0 Ranger 4X2 to give me their gas mileage figures?
> >>EPA sticker says 17 city, 23 on the road, but the last tankful was mostly
> >>driving without the normal city stop and go.
> >>
> >>Bob
> >
> >
> >
> >____________________________________________________________________
> >Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> >For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-request lofcom.com
> >Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-request lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com


Hate to tell you this but I have a Ranger 1994 with the 2.3 and it is
just as fast as the 3.0, want pull as much but just as quick! I also get
30 mpg. It was getting about 26 and then added a hard tonneau cover,
dynomax exhaust and a k&n air filter! Might want to try to do the same
with yours! I know guys driving f-150 even 250 getting better gas
mileage or at least what you are getting! I would definitely complain to
Ford. Good Luck!
P.S. with that kinda of mileage you could just put a 5.0 in it and gain
lots more POWER and never notice the gas consumption!

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

Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 10:08:59 EDT
From: silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-ID:

On Mon, 04 Aug 1997 07:41:37 -0400 Chris Kelly
writes:
>Robert Leifer wrote:
Could it be a faulty O2 sensor?!?! (shurg)

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

Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 10:08:59 EDT
From: silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Brola exhaust
Message-ID:

On Sun, 3 Aug 1997 22:04:09 -0400 (EDT) ir002129 mindspring.com (Dave
Armbruster) writes:

>and I've added Borla exhaust, a K&N and run Mobil One 5W-30. BTW, my

How do you like the Borla exhaust, and how does it sound? I was thinking
about getting it for my truck as well, but the $342 list price is kinda
high.


.---. .-----------
/ \ __ / ------
/ / \(..)/ -----
////// ' \/ ` --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordManTed.com (Mustang Shop)
//// / // : : --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordRanger.com (Ranger Site)
// / / /` '--
// //..\
=======UU====UU===[silent.bob juno.com]=[95 Ranger XLT 2.3L]=
'//||\`
''``

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

Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 10:08:59 EDT
From: silent.bob juno.com (Silent . Bob)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-ID:

On Mon, 4 Aug 1997 06:33:11 -0400 "Robert Leifer"
writes:
> I reread the sticker, and it says most trucks in this category get an
>actual mileage of 14 to 20 in the city, and up to 27 on the highway. I
>think

Hmm... the only way my 4-banger will get 27mpg is if the tailgate is down
and im doing 50mph without stoping. My normal driving gets me about
20mpg. And about 14-17mpg doing 65 to 75mph on the hwy. and plus i have
the vent-shades, bug deflectors that disrupt the slipstream of the truck.

.---. .-----------
/ \ __ / ------
/ / \(..)/ -----
////// ' \/ ` --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordManTed.com (Mustang Shop)
//// / // : : --- http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.FordRanger.com (Ranger Site)
// / / /` '--
// //..\
=======UU====UU===[silent.bob juno.com]=[95 Ranger XLT 2.3L]=
'//||\`
''``

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:11:10 +0100
From: droberts MIT.EDU (D Robertson)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: pull in steering
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear Dale :
I had an 78 F-150 which had a simialar problem. It turned out to be the
front rigt caliper was not releaseing enough, the mechanic that found it
said that a rear brake sticking can have a similar effect.

Dave
86 F-150

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:31:25 GMT
From: ketchj trip.net
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: F150 Bad starts
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello out there,

I have a 91 F150 5.0 and have been having some crappy starts lately.
The tuck starts out okay, but after 3-5 sec, it starts to die, and will if I
don't feed her a little gas. It almost acts like it has water in the
engine, but this only happens when she has been sitting for 12+ hours. I am
perplexed - I have changed all the filters, plugs, wires, and even that pain
in the but computer under the distributer cap. Does anyone have any ideas
on what it may be? I am living in South Texas, where it gets down to 80
degrees at night with 90% humidity - so I don't think the truck is cold.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

J=E4n
J=E4n Erik Ketchum
ketchj trip.net

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:33:18 +0100
From: droberts MIT.EDU (D Robertson)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Onboard air compressor
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Anyone know of an inboard 12v air compressor (pref under the hood install)
>to pump up truck tires? Have COSTCO $40 wonder and it takes about 10 min
>per tire....

I saw years ago guys using an A/C compressor powered off the engine as an
on board air compressor. Of course if you already have air this will not
help.

Dave

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

Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 11:47:06 -0400
From: Harold Bucks
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: 5 speed Ranger auto transmission
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm considering buying a Ranger. The last Ranger I owned had a manual
5-speed and I was satisfied with it. The truck I'm considering is on
the lot and has all the "extras" that I want but has a 5-speed automatic
transmission. Can anyone shed some light on the reliability of this
transmission and can you drain the torque converter like the E40D?
Thanks for any reply.

harold.bucks 1usa.com

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

Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 09:20:29 -0500
From: Jim Cannon
To: Lamar Zabielski
CC: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Burning oil
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Zeb wrote:
"Hi All,

I have an '88 7.3 F-250 HD w/ 96k that blows blue smoke 10% of the time
for
about 2-5 miles then it clears as quick as it came, also it happens both
when cold or hot. So before I go the rebuild route, I had the
brainstorm,
'hey maybe it could be something sticking that is causing it?'

I've only had the truck for about 3-400 miles. I changed the oil using
10-30, that improved the miles per quart from 40 to 70. I changed it
again
using 30 W but still at 70 mpq.

Any Ideas?

Thanks,
Zeb"

Zeb-

Sounds like a bad valve seal (or two or three). Check PCV valve to
ensure you do not have excessive crankcase pressure (long shot),
otherwise replace valve seals...

I am not familiar enough with this engine to be positive 'bout this (and
I don't have my books with me right now -- I'm on an airplane) but I
think you can swap seals out without major work, if you put air pressure
in the spark plug hole to hold the valve in place when you pull the
spring off, then replace the seals, put the spring back on, then move on
to the next cyl... Just need to pull the valve covers.

Jim Cannon
Houston, Texas

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

Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 10:29:22 -0500
From: Jim Cannon
To: bhill mail.Field-works.com
CC: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: RE: 85 ford supercab flareside.
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Brandon-

If you are having these power and performance problems, I suggest you
look into the source of them before starting to add too many other
things on. They will only confuse things. Doing the exhaust change you
suggest willnot change anyhting, so go ahead and do that, but sort out
the poor 30-40 mph performance problem before messing around with chips
and filters. (Splitfires, IMHO, are a waste of money.) This engine
should perform way better than you describe.

Jim Cannon
Houston, Texas

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:54:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: PhilDyson aol.com
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 5.0 Headers
Message-ID:

In a message dated 97-08-02 13:38:19 EDT, you write:




>I found a shorty style header on an older 2.3 turbo at a local junk
>yard. It
>fit perfect and hooked to the stock exhaust pipe flange w/o leaks.
>Only cost
>me $10.
>Phil

Silent Bob Wrote:

> Whoa! Did that also come with the turbo?! :)


Thinking back I'm not sure that it was a turbo, and the more I think about
it the more I'm inclined to believe that it could not have been. Someone had
already took the head and most of the engine parts before I got there. The
headers were cast aside and since I'd never seen factory headers on a 2.3
before I "ASSUMED" (big mistake) it was a turbo model. They fit my stock
exhaust perfectly, so where would the turbo fit? DUH....I dunno. Well, they
do look alot like the 5.0 shorty's but the bolt pattern is angled. Also, it
does have provisions for air injection and the O2 sensor.
Good catch Bob!
Phil

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:52:07 -0000
From: "jack kagy"
To:
Subject: Fw: subscription cancellation
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

----------
> From: jack kagy
> To: fordtruck80sup lofcom.com
> Subject: subscription cancellation
> Date: Sunday, August 03, 1997 3:46 PM
>
> please cancel my subscription...thanks for the info
>
> jack a. kagy

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

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 02:40:11 -0700
From: Paul Laughlin
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Ford 5.4
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

yhtlines surfari.net wrote:
>
> So any experience towing with the 5.4?

Get hold of a copy of Trailer Life Magazine for June '97. It has a
report on the Ford 5.4, the GM 5.7, and the Dodge 5.9 all puling the
same trailers. Should tell you what you want to know. Paul

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 17:43:43 -0400
From: mrkrispy webtv.net (Ian Holter)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

Tim' you don't have to buy a new ram. if it's the style you don't like.
you can buy a 93, the style is different. but as far as the engine is
concerned,you can't beat the cummins,for fuel economy,and long range
duriabilty. ford doesn't offer a dependable diesel. their powerstroke,
is a international engine and you'll be lucky if you get a 100,000 miles
before you have to overhaul it. I work for a small package carrier, and
they have nothing but problems with the same engines that are in the
fords. just my professional observation. I was just trying to help you
make a educated purchase. good luck!!
Ian

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 17:54:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dale
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: pull in steering
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I don't think it is the brakes because the rotors aren't getting hot.

Dale Grein 97 MXZ 440 LC
Espanola, Ontario 84 F150 4X4 4speed 300 I-6
skidoguy cyberbeach.net

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 17:53:06 -0400
From: mrkrispy webtv.net (Ian Holter)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

Fuel mileage estimates on the window sticker, are just that estimates,
your fuel mileage may vary. this is just one more of the things in life
that have no guarantee.
good luck Ian

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

Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 17:33:10 -0700
From: Captain Nemo
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: pull in steering
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hey, Dale...

I guess you got the alignment done because of this problem, yes? If it
still pulls, the mechanic should have noticed. Has it happened after
then? One thing you can do...is get them (the shop) to 'figure' out what
the problem is, they should at least be able to narrow it down. Get them
to give you an estimate on how much it costs, and what's wrong--these
estimates are usually free. Although it's not very nice, you can let
them find out what's wrong, and fix it yourself. Just be sure to
patronize their shop for future repairs... ;)

Do you have any play in your steering?
Have you tried jacking the front end up and wiggling the wheels back and
forth to see if you have any play? A good thorough inspection of the
front end (i.e., ball joints, tie rod ends, etc.), tire wear, etc. could
point you in the right direction.

Just some ideers... ;)

Josh --> '88 Ranger



> I don't think it is the brakes because the rotors aren't getting hot.
>
> Dale Grein 97 MXZ 440 LC
> Espanola, Ontario 84 F150 4X4 4speed 300 I-6
> skidoguy cyberbeach.net

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

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 20:58:23 -0400
From: mrkrispy webtv.net (Ian Holter)
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: F150 Bad starts
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

Did you change the distributor cap? Did you check fuel filter in tank?
Switch may be sticking in automatic fuel shut off . Also check and
lubricate throttle body linkage. Just some suggestions- hope they help!
Ian

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

Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 22:51:16 -0700
From: Captain Nemo
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: F150 Bad starts
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi!

Could it be a fuel delivery problem? I know on startup, the fuel pump
is turned on momentarily to prime the FI system, and then turns off, for
saftey reasons, until the car starts. Kind of sounds like you run out
of fuel for a bit, really. Maybe you are losing the 'prime' on your pump
after it sits for awhile? Could the pump be going bad? Has this problem
been getting progressively worse? Or did it just start doing this one
day?

Well, that's my two-bits worth!! ;)

Josh --> '88 Ranger

> Hello out there,
>
> I have a 91 F150 5.0 and have been having some crappy starts
> lately.
> The tuck starts out okay, but after 3-5 sec, it starts to die, and
> will if I
> don't feed her a little gas. It almost acts like it has water in the
> engine, but this only happens when she has been sitting for 12+
> hours. I am
> perplexed - I have changed all the filters, plugs, wires, and even
> that pain
> in the but computer under the distributer cap. Does anyone have any
> ideas
> on what it may be? I am living in South Texas, where it gets down to
> 80
> degrees at night with 90% humidity - so I don't think the truck is
> cold.
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jšn

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

Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 23:04:45 -0700
From: Captain Nemo
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: (no subject)
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Ford does indeed use the Navistar International block, and it does
have it's peculiarities. But, you get out of it what you put into it. A
diesel engine requires more attention and care than a gas engine does.
It requires keeping the oil changed regularly, using the proper coolant
and fuel additives, etc. And--along with necessary maintenance-- it will
last a long time. How you care for it plays a big part in what you get
out of it. The Powerstroke is a very popular engine, and for good
reason. When taken care of, it will run with the best. The Cummins is
also another great diesel. You will find people on both sides who swear
by either of them.

Now, the Dodge chassis is a WHOLE 'nother issue...
Just keeping it lively... ;)

Josh --> '88 Ranger

> Tim' you don't have to buy a new ram. if it's the style you don't
> like.
> you can buy a 93, the style is different. but as far as the engine is
> concerned,you can't beat the cummins,for fuel economy,and long range
> duriabilty. ford doesn't offer a dependable diesel. their powerstroke,
>
> is a international engine and you'll be lucky if you get a 100,000
> miles
> before you have to overhaul it. I work for a small package carrier,
> and
> they have nothing but problems with the same engines that are in the
> fords. just my professional observation. I was just trying to help
> you
> make a educated purchase. good luck!!

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

Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 00:11:20 -0400
From: Max Dooley
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Robert Leifer wrote:
>
> Well, I filled the tank up again after diriving 192 miles; it took 13.1
> gallons to fill it! Still comes out to a 14.6 mpg, still pretty low for a
> Ranger 4X2 V6 3.0 liter. The dealer says it will improve after 1000 miles
> on it, and I'm bately up to 500 miles on it now. does anybody else here have
> a 3.0 Ranger 4X2 to give me their gas mileage figures?
> EPA sticker says 17 city, 23 on the road, but the last tankful was mostly
> driving without the normal city stop and go.
>
> Bob
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Message distributed via http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.lofcom.com/
> For help send subject "HELP" to:fordtrucks80up-request lofcom.com
> Comments and suggestions are welcome, use: kpayne mindspring.com
My father has a '93 splash 4x2 3.0, I will have him check his mileage
next time and get back to you.

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

Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 06:20:39 -0400
From: "Robert Leifer"
To:
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Max, thanks,
I appreciate your response, as well as those from everybody else here

And to Thomas Stoner: I will respond to your very detailed points sometime
today; thanks for all the info in that message

Bob Leifer

-----Original Message-----
From: Max Dooley
To: fordtrucks80up lofcom.com
Date: Tuesday, August 05, 1997 12:20 AM
Subject: Re: 97 Ranger Mileage

>> ____________________________________________________________________....


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.