97up-list-digest Friday, May 14 1999 Volume 02 : Number 126



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - 1997 and Newer Trucks and Vans
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe 97up-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE 97up - F-350 Changes for 2000
Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips
Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips
FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8
Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8
FTE 97up - Mileage
Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8
Re: FTE 97up - ADMIN: FTE at the Supernationals
RE: FTE 97up - Mileage
Re: FTE 97up - Mileage
Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8
Re: FTE 97up - Mileage
Re: FTE 97up - Mileage
Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8
Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips
Re: FTE 97up - Mileage
FTE 97up - Control Trac and Limited Slip Differential
Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8
Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips
Re: FTE 97up - Control Trac and Limited Slip Differential
FTE 97up - Shocked
FTE 97up - Lowering a new truck?
Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

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

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 07:36:02 -0500
From: "Union Auto"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-350 Changes for 2000

According to the guide the Lariat LE will be different, but all others will
be the same. It is possible (but not likely) that they could change after a
short production run. Last year the Taurus wheels changed after about 6
weeks of production.

Nathan Bernard
Union Auto, inc

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Abraham
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - F-350 Changes for 2000


> Nathan, has the style of the premium wheels on the 2000 Lariat changed
from
> those that came on the '99?
>
> Charles.
>
> Union Auto wrote:
>
> > The changes are basically the same as for the F-250, except the Lariat
LE
> > package will be available. It is only available on F-350 Crew cab DRW.
Not
> > available with 5.4L, requires Limited slip differential. It includes:
> >
> > 16" aluminum styled wheels
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:48:45 -0500
From: "Charles Abraham"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips

Keith,

Did you pay for them and if so how much, or were they covered under warranty?

Over a month ago when my Super Duty arrived, the dealer ordered them under
warranty, but since then, have been getting nothing but a run around as to their

status. The placed order lays somewhere between their parts department and their

auto-body shop: "they came in but they were the wrong ones", is their answer .

Glad to see you posted the part numbers. Worst come to worst I'll just order
them
myself.

Thanks,

Charles.

Keith Veren wrote:

> As most people on the Ford Trucks Enthusiasts site already know, some F-250
> and F-350 SuperDuty pick-ups were made and sold without the thick rubber
> weatherstripping on the bottom of each door.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 10:38:14 -0400
From: "Keith Veren"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips

No charge. I went in and explained that I belong to an internet group and
that many F-350 SuperDuties have been sent out without the weatherstrips.
The parts guy said he would get them, and he did. [He did say that
technically, to ensure that the dealer gets re-imbursed, they should be
installed by the dealer under a warrentee repair order. But in my case he
just asked me to go to service and tell them that I was going to install
them myself and to write-up a "blank" repair order to cover their warrentee
costs].

Keith

- -----Original Message-----
From: Charles Abraham
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Cc: Expedition Mailing List
Date: Thursday, May 13, 1999 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips


>Keith,
>
>Did you pay for them and if so how much, or were they covered under
warranty?
>
>Over a month ago when my Super Duty arrived, the dealer ordered them under
>warranty, but since then, have been getting nothing but a run around as to
their
>
>status. The placed order lays somewhere between their parts department and
their
>
>auto-body shop: "they came in but they were the wrong ones", is their
answer .
>
>Glad to see you posted the part numbers. Worst come to worst I'll just
order
>them
>myself.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Charles.
>
>Keith Veren wrote:
>
>> As most people on the Ford Trucks Enthusiasts site already know, some
F-250
>> and F-350 SuperDuty pick-ups were made and sold without the thick rubber
>> weatherstripping on the bottom of each door.
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 10:02:23 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joe Edelen
Subject: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

Am preparing to purchase a 99 Explorer and am interested in specific
information on the actual mileage that both of these engines are
actually getting mainly on interstate driving at 75 mph and whether or
not the rear end ration has much to do with that.

It is my understanding that AWD and 4WD choices should not affect
mileage. Is that correct?

Thanks in advance for the information.



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 11:36:47 -0400
From: "Keith Veren"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

We purchased the 5.0L for my wife. She loves it, more power than the 4.0L,
and the All Wheel Drive all the time is great. She is secure in the rain
and snow without having to do anything. We chose the 3.73 ratio with
Limited Slip for the axle. The 3.73 is a great all-around axle with enough
pull to tow a trailer but not so much that milage goes down the dumper.
Milage on Interstate 75MPH = 14.5 - 17.0 approx.

Keith





- -----Original Message-----
From: Joe Edelen
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, May 13, 1999 11:21 AM
Subject: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8


>Am preparing to purchase a 99 Explorer and am interested in specific
>information on the actual mileage that both of these engines are
>actually getting mainly on interstate driving at 75 mph and whether or
>not the rear end ration has much to do with that.
>
>It is my understanding that AWD and 4WD choices should not affect
>mileage. Is that correct?
>
>Thanks in advance for the information.
>
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 10:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: ashok bala
Subject: FTE 97up - Mileage

what kind of mileage can be expected from a F-350 Lariat with the 7.3 L
Diesel Engine?

Thanks!
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 14:34:10 -0500
From: "C. K. Hartline"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

Guess I'd like a lesson in drive-train mileage. I would think a higher
rear-end ratio say, the 4.10 would actually be pushing the vehicle farther,
and with the bigger engine the horsepower to gas-used ratio shouldn't be
affected enough to lose mileage...any thoughts or facts on this idea? I
know my Sister in law and I both bought the same vehicle once, only she had
the bigger of the two engines, and she got better mileage. This was with
identical vehicles except for the engine. I'm not sure what the rear-end
ratio was but they were three speed automatic transmissions.

C.K.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 12:34:25 -0700
From: Keith Srb
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - ADMIN: FTE at the Supernationals

At 07:17 AM 5/13/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi gang! Just wanted anyone who's attending the Supernationals
>to know that we're at the Days Inn, room 208 (you'll see an
>FTE window sticker on the hotel room window). Stop by for your
>free door prize ticket and a window sticker for your truck (if
>you brought it to the show).
>
>Ken Payne
>FTE Admin
>
>PS - Keith and Deacon, wish you were here!!

I wish I was there too. :( Oh well, next year.

Say hello to everybody for me.

Later Keith



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 15:55:48 -0400
From: "Suarez, William"
Subject: RE: FTE 97up - Mileage

I have been getting around 17.5 with my F250 SD PSD SC Lariat 4x4.

- -----Original Message-----
From: ashok bala [mailto:ashok522 yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 1:52 PM
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: FTE 97up - Mileage


what kind of mileage can be expected from a F-350 Lariat with the 7.3 L
Diesel Engine?

Thanks!
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 12:56:56 PDT
From: "Scott Matus"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Mileage

It will depend on transmission, Cab-style/wheelbase, Axle Ratio, SRW or DRW.
I have CrewCab 172"WB, SRW, LB, 3.73 Ratio, 6-speed manual.

I get from 15 to 21 Mpg.

Scott.

>From: ashok bala
>Reply-To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
>To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
>Subject: FTE 97up - Mileage
>Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 10:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
>
>what kind of mileage can be expected from a F-350 Lariat with the 7.3 L
>Diesel Engine?
>
>Thanks!
>_________________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
> >== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.msn.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:05:55 EDT
From: RAMWORKER aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

Low axle ratios are high numbers, high axle ratios are low numbers, i.e.,
4.10 is a low axle ratio, 2.75 is a high axle ratio. High axle ratios
typically provide higher fuel economy and less acceleration, while the
inverse is also true, a 4.10 ratio will give lower mileage with greater
acceleration. I've seen studies from the "old days" before automatic
overdrives became available that indicate a ratio of 2.93 would provide
optimum fuel economy while going higher or lower would reduce mileage.
Overdrives have changed that a bit, most automatics provide an overdrive
ratio of about .7, after the overdrives came out, axle ratios started coming
out as 3.5. When you multiply 3.5 X .7 = 2.45, a pretty high axle ratio, but
in conjunction with the release of the auto overdrives came fuel injection
and electronic engine controls along with some other advancements that
provide greater low end torque from the engine, therefore the engine can use
this ratio for greater fuel economy and reduced emissions, since the EPA
likes to rate these things in tons of pollutants per mile traveled, if you
reduce engine speed, you also reduce the pollutants per mile, so the
manufacturers like to do this as a cheap and easy way of getting through one
of the EPA tests, I've seen GM use ratios as high as 2.29. Of course, all of
these numbers are generalizations that are based on typical "family cars",
every vehicle has it's own optimum configuration. Just remember, the higher
the number, the slower your top speed, the greater your acceleration will be
and the lower your fuel economy will be, which is the inverse of what I
believe you've stated.

The car you had was probably too big for the engine and had to work too hard
to provide good fuel economy, or it simply could have been a substandard
engine.

I hope all of this makes some kind of sense to you and is of some help.

Best Regards,
Robert

In a message dated 5/13/99 2:06:19 PM Central Daylight Time,
ca-kid swbell.net writes:

> Guess I'd like a lesson in drive-train mileage. I would think a higher
> rear-end ratio say, the 4.10 would actually be pushing the vehicle farther,
> and with the bigger engine the horsepower to gas-used ratio shouldn't be
> affected enough to lose mileage...any thoughts or facts on this idea? I
> know my Sister in law and I both bought the same vehicle once, only she had
> the bigger of the two engines, and she got better mileage. This was with
> identical vehicles except for the engine. I'm not sure what the rear-end
> ratio was but they were three speed automatic transmissions.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:09:37 -0500
From: "C. K. Hartline"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Mileage

This leads me to another question, why can't you use the six speed manual
with the V-10? It only stands to reason that the six speed would help
increase the V-10's mileage as well as the PSD ...but
I've notice that you can't get it on the V-10...only the 5 speed is
available with that. Which also makes me wonder why only the PSD can have
the 6 speed option, is this some sort of marketing ploy to boost the sale of
PSD's by getting better mileage than the V-10 which is only allowed the 5
speed? After all there is a 3-4000 dollar price difference in the engines.
It also stands to reason that if the 4spdAuto fits across the board in the
superduty, as does the 5spdManual, why wouldn't the 6spdManual work with the
V-10 or even the V-8
cylinders>?
Unless they are going to release it this year to be used with the 2000
SuperDuty Trucks.

Just a thought I had earlier this year when I wanted a V-10 with the six
speed and couldn't get it...decided to hold off and wait for the 2000 model
to see what they do with them.

Also can someone answer this question, although it will sound dumb, can you
get a regular cab superduty with the short box? Is there such a beast out
there? I've noticed the other two truck manufacturers have a short
bed version in the half ton class but when it gets to the 3/4 ton class the
regular cab/shortbed option is not available. Fortunately this was the case
when I wanted a D**** truck with a V-10 but was unable to get the shortbox
in a regular cab, then my eyes were opened to the wonderful Ford SuperDuty
line...

C.K.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:59:54 -0700
From: johny
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Mileage

You could probably use it, but I'm not sure it's worth it.
The PSD has a much more limited RPM range, where the
closer Gear ratio really helps. I'm not sure that's such a big win for the V10

5sp manual is:
1st - 5.72
2nd - 2.94
3rd - 1.64
4th - 1.00
5th - .76

6 sp manual is:
1st - 5.79
2nd - 3.31
3rd - 2.1
4th - 1.31
5th - 1.00
6th - .72

As for a short bed option on the regular cab, it only looks like they come in
long 8' beds only. According to the 99 brochure.

C. K. Hartline wrote:

> This leads me to another question, why can't you use the six speed manual
> with the V-10? It only stands to reason that the six speed would help
> increase the V-10's mileage as well as the PSD ...but
> I've notice that you can't get it on the V-10...only the 5 speed is
> available with that. Which also makes me wonder why only the PSD can have
> the 6 speed option, is this some sort of marketing ploy to boost the sale of
> PSD's by getting better mileage than the V-10 which is only allowed the 5
> speed? After all there is a 3-4000 dollar price difference in the engines.
> It also stands to reason that if the 4spdAuto fits across the board in the
> superduty, as does the 5spdManual, why wouldn't the 6spdManual work with the
> V-10 or even the V-8
> cylinders>?
> Unless they are going to release it this year to be used with the 2000
> SuperDuty Trucks.
>
> Just a thought I had earlier this year when I wanted a V-10 with the six
> speed and couldn't get it...decided to hold off and wait for the 2000 model
> to see what they do with them.
>
> Also can someone answer this question, although it will sound dumb, can you
> get a regular cab superduty with the short box? Is there such a beast out
> there? I've noticed the other two truck manufacturers have a short
> bed version in the half ton class but when it gets to the 3/4 ton class the
> regular cab/shortbed option is not available. Fortunately this was the case
> when I wanted a D**** truck with a V-10 but was unable to get the shortbox
> in a regular cab, then my eyes were opened to the wonderful Ford SuperDuty
> line...
>
> C.K.
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html



== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:33:10 -0500
From: "C. K. Hartline"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

Excellent lesson, thank you very much.

Is the ratio based on wheels turning vs revolution? IE: 2.93
means for every complete turn of the driveline wheels the drive shaft turns
2.93 times?

I just called Dad and while he said rear-ends were way out of his league he
thought that was what the ratio stood for, which when placed against your
previous post about the high being low and vice versa, made much much more
sense to me.

Thanks again for the lesson, it'll help me make a more informed decision
when I order my new truck .

C.K.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:10:38 -0500
From: "Charles Abraham"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips

Keith,

Checked with the dealership and found that my weather-strips had
finally come in. Picked them up at lunch and plan to do the install
tonight. What did you mean by "proper orientation"?

They look like big windshield wipers. I'm assuming the blade edge
should be slope downward, correct? Anything else to know?

Charles.


Keith Veren wrote:

> .I finally figured out the proper
> orientation of the weatherstrips for the SuperDuty and installed them.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 17:25:37 EDT
From: Speir2 aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Mileage

In a message dated 5/13/99 1:54:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ashok522 yahoo.com writes:


Diesel Engine? >>
I have a F250 SD PSD have kept a log since day I purchased it, regular
travel I have averaged 19.3MPG towing a 7300 TT average 12.4 MPG. I
fill up when I hookup fillup when I disconnect.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:33:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joe Edelen
Subject: FTE 97up - Control Trac and Limited Slip Differential

With regard to Ford trucks, specifically the Explorer, are these 2
animals the same thing? I understand the Control Trac comes with 4WD
and the Limited Slip with AWD. Is that correct and do they basically
do the same thing under the 2 different conditions of AWD or 4WD?


Thanks


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 19:32:27 EDT
From: RAMWORKER aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

In a message dated 5/13/99 2:04:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ca-kid swbell.net writes:

> Is the ratio based on wheels turning vs revolution? IE: 2.93
> means for every complete turn of the driveline wheels the drive shaft turns
> 2.93 times?.

Exactly, and it sometimes helps to think of the axle ratio as an
underdrive,as are all of the transmission ratios except for direct (sometimes
referred to as "high") and overdrive. Nobody's' engine that I'm aware has
enough power that it can perform in a satisfactory manner at a true 1:1 ratio
or overdrive. when I first installed an automatic overdrive in my truck, I
still had the original 2.94 ratio which made for a final (overdriven) drive
of 2.03, talk about a complete pig in overdrive with the converter locked up,
Yuk. I later installed a 4.10 ring and pinion which made the truck much more
fun to drive.

> I just called Dad and while he said rear-ends were way out of his league he
> thought that was what the ratio stood for, which when placed against your
> previous post about the high being low and vice versa, made much much more
> sense to me.

> Thanks again for the lesson, it'll help me make a more informed decision
> when I order my new truck .

Good luck with your new truck, BTW, I delivered a '99 F-250 SD yesterday, it
was a supercab incomplete truck with a Stahl utility body, 5.4 engine,
automatic. It had seven miles on it and it was a hot rod. It pulled itself up
onto my trailer like it wasn't there. I think that no matter which engine you
choose, you'll be very happy with it.

Best Regards,
Robert
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:41:29 -0400
From: "Keith Veren"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips

Hold the weatherstrips up to the door bottom so the little blue pins are
right at the corresponding hole, but don't push them in yet. Then, turn the
weatherstrip over (lengthwise, right end is now left end) and line the holes
up again. You will notice that you could actually install them either way,
but only one way is correct. I am sure you will determine which way is the
correct way by holding the weatherstrip to the door bottom and closing the
door as far as possible to see how the doorframe would compress the rubber.
If you still have a question, let me know and I will figure out how to
explain the orientation I found to be correct!


Keith





- -----Original Message-----
From: Charles Abraham
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Cc: Expedition Mailing List
Date: Thursday, May 13, 1999 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - The Case of the Missing Weatherstrips


>Keith,
>
>Checked with the dealership and found that my weather-strips had
>finally come in. Picked them up at lunch and plan to do the install
>tonight. What did you mean by "proper orientation"?
>
>They look like big windshield wipers. I'm assuming the blade edge
>should be slope downward, correct? Anything else to know?
>
>Charles.
>
>
>Keith Veren wrote:
>
>> .I finally figured out the proper
>> orientation of the weatherstrips for the SuperDuty and installed them.
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 22:30:31 -0500
From: "Greg Gilmore"
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - Control Trac and Limited Slip Differential

There goals are the same in limiting wheel slippage, however control trac
initiates lower igintion spark and fuel regulation in addition to monitoring
wheel spin and applying break pressure in cornering and low friction
situations. Limited Slip is designed for situations where a wheel looses
touch with the ground, ie slipping off a boat ramp or falling into a ditch.
Control Trac is more of a handling feature, ie the same as the Mustang's
application. I hope this is close to accurate
- -----Original Message-----
From: Joe Edelen
To: 97up-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Thursday, May 13, 1999 4:46 PM
Subject: FTE 97up - Control Trac and Limited Slip Differential


>With regard to Ford trucks, specifically the Explorer, are these 2
>animals the same thing? I understand the Control Trac comes with 4WD
>and the Limited Slip with AWD. Is that correct and do they basically
>do the same thing under the 2 different conditions of AWD or 4WD?
>
>
>Thanks
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 19:16:26 +700
From: bwat wa.freei.net
Subject: FTE 97up - Shocked

I get a slight shock every time I get put of my 99 SD
ANybody know what's up? It happens as I touch the door to
close it!

Thanks, Brent
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 00:02:52 -0500
From: "C. K. Hartline"
Subject: FTE 97up - Lowering a new truck?

This will sound positively silly I'm sure, but I was reading back about the
lifts that are coming out with the new Superduty series trucks in the 4x4
models no doubt. Is it possible to take the lifts out entirely and let the
truck sit lower without damaging it?
I have a rare muscle disease, that while I'm not in a wheel chair or use a
cane, I can't do steps worth a hoot. I've looked into having an electric or
some kind of step that would lower and allow me easier access but no one
seems to make one that goes low enough. And the company isn't very hip on
the idea of modifying their great patented design to accomodate one guy with
a stair deficiency. So unless I build something myself, I'm stuck with a
step stool or I'd be happy if the truck sat a bit lower. I'm not going to
be taking it offroad at least not in the heavy duty kind of offroading
stuff. I was thinking of a 2000 SuperDuty F-250 4x4 Shortbed V-10, with
either the 5 speed or the Auto
prefer to drive>. I finally found a place here in the Saint Louis area that
has more than just the one Superduty. But they are all powerstroke diesels.
And it's too late to order one this year. I don't want to order a new truck
and not be able to get in it. Getting out is not a problem as I can slip
off the seat and let gravity plant my feet on the ground, it's just the
getting up that is the trick. When I ask the dealer about lowering or
taking out the lift kit from the factory, they all give me that incredulous
look of "you've got to be kidding". I just want to get my truck, and be
able to enjoy driving it. Could I simply order it without the lift? I was
really wanting a Regular cab short box. But those don't exist. Any ideas
or know of any companies that make a step or product that might be able to
resolve this for me? If I can't get this resolved, before long, I'll be
forced to consider a new Ranger
Amc Pacer built into a truck...just my opinion> I've looked at both the
Ranger and the Superduties, and I know I can get in the Ranger without a
problem, but would really prefer the SuperDuty hands down if I can get this
worked out.

C.K.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 05:57:17 -0400
From: Karen Wall / Steve Offiler
Subject: Re: FTE 97up - 4L SOHC and 5L V8

At 02:34 PM 5/13/99 -0500, you wrote:

>Guess I'd like a lesson in drive-train mileage. I would think a higher
>rear-end ratio say, the 4.10 would actually be pushing the vehicle farther,
>and with the bigger engine the horsepower to gas-used ratio shouldn't be
>affected enough to lose mileage...any thoughts or facts on this idea? I
>know my Sister in law and I both bought the same vehicle once, only she had
>the bigger of the two engines, and she got better mileage. This was with
>identical vehicles except for the engine. I'm not sure what the rear-end
>ratio was but they were three speed automatic transmissions.


Sounds like the definition of rear-end ratio was nailed with earlier
replies to your question. Brief recap: the axle spins slower than the
driveshaft, and the ratio of the two speeds is the axle ratio. A 3.55 axle
has a driveshaft spinning 3.55 times faster than the axle and wheels.
Higher numbers mean more engine RPM for a given road speed.

Regarding you and your sister's experience with the same vehicle, her
larger engine got better mileage:

Fuel economy is impacted by a *large* number of variables. I can't
possibly hit them all, but some of the major ones are: vehicle weight,
vehicle aerodynamics, tires, engine, transmission, axle ratio, weather, and
DRIVING HABITS!

Say for example you drove yours like a hotrod and she drove smoothly. Or
you tended to drive in hillier country. Or she did mostly highway driving
while you did more city driving. Or she mostly drove around empty while
you carted around a carpool. Or you lived where is was cold for most of
the year (cold means higher drag in the driveline due to more viscous
fluids plus higher aerodynamic drag due to more dense air) whereas she
lived in moderate temperatures (but not hot enough to be running the A/C
all the time). Or - you used a lot of A/C and she didn't. And so on......

And there are even more obsure reasons why a larger engine might get better
mileage. Say for example the larger engine is paired with a higher
(numerically lower) axle. This engine has more torque at lower rpms, and
uses the axle ratio to keep engine rev's down for a given road speed.
Running a steady speed with an axle that forces lower engine rpm's, higher....


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.