Return-Path:
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 23:10:39 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks-small-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks-small-digest)
To: fordtrucks-small-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #16
Reply-To: fordtrucks-small ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks-small-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks-small-digest Thursday, January 15 1998 Volume 02 : Number 016



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
fordtrucks-small-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: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #14 [Jerad Heffner ]
Re: Rnager Lift [mark fitzgerald ]
Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L? [KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)]
Re: CBs: antennas and mounting [Midwest96 ]
Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Gardner ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [FastRngXLT ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Gardner ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Ernie Hannig ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Gardner ]
Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L? ["Bryce" ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? ["Bryce" ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Gardner ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? ["Bryce" ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Gardner ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [Thom Cheney ]
Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp? [FastRngXLT ]
Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L? [FastRngXLT ]
Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L? ["Bryce" ]
Re: clicking noise on Ranger. . rough idle [Jmark6969 ]
Re: clicking noise on Ranger. . rough idle [Rob and Nel
Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?-bryce [KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)]
one piece driveshaft ["Mike Wiatt" ]
My 4"lift ["Mike *" ]
Ranger 3:73 gear upgrade/fesiablity [FastRngXLT ]

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

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 07:37:31 -0500
From: Jerad Heffner
Subject: Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #14

I'm getting better range than i thought I was. As it turns out, my father was
trying to talk to me in his garage with the antenna down! I didn't know till we
were talking last night. So there's the disrutpion. Next time we're out,
we'll do a more precise distance test. The weather has been real gloomy, rainy,
cold, etc, so weather may be a factor as well!

I did barely pick up interstate traffic at 4 1/2 miles, and I say BARELY. It
wasn't very audible, but you could make out what they were saying amongst the
squelch.

>_________________________________________
> __ _____________________________
> ___/ |______ ___Jerad Heffner_______
> | _ | _ [ __'84 Ranger_4x4_______
> -(_)-----(_)--_mailto:jjay ticz.com___

i hope that tag worked!



Lou Guerriero wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'll say it again: The attena has to be a division of the actual
> wavelength of the signal you are trying to pick up. It is possible that the
> 102" is too long, and the wave is "breaking up" when it hits the signal. If
> the attena is not attenuated properly (trimmed), the signal will "bounce
> around" inside the wire... causing enough disruption that the signal will
> weaken. I am about 98% sure this is your problem... I've seen it many
> times... Get out the books, see what the proper measurement is.. and trim
> accordingly...
>
> Good luck!
>
> >I put a 48" fiberglass on the rear bumper on the driver's side. Looks
> great;
> >performancewise? I can't be sure yet, but I get between 1/2 - 2 miles on
> >receiving. Yesterday, my father on a 102" metal whip and I had trouble
> >sending
>
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 06:08:28 -0800 (PST)
From: mark fitzgerald
Subject: Re: Rnager Lift

cool....glad to hear your front end is holding up....good luck:)

fitzy
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 13:17:57, -0500
From: KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)
Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?

As far as I know, the 205 HP SOHC 4.0L is not available in the 1998
Ranger and probably will not be at all because of the high demand for
explorers and mountaineers.

Josh

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 13:21:01 EST
From: Midwest96
Subject: Re: CBs: antennas and mounting

In a message dated 98-01-14 11:24:45 EST, you write:

>

Fout watts per government. Avg. peak out gives 17

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 13:36:19, -0500
From: KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)
Subject: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

I read that a Toyota 4 banger is rated at 142 hp and 160 lbs-ft.
That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
right!
Josh

ps. Just wait till they test a Dakota RT vs a 4.0 Splash...:-(

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 14:43:41 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

MR JOSH J TENNEY wrote:
>
> I read that a Toyota 4 banger is rated at 142 hp and 160 lbs-ft.
> That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
> totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
> something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
> mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
> Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
> right!
> Josh
>
> ps. Just wait till they test a Dakota RT vs a 4.0 Splash...:-(
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

Thats my only defense when arguing with people about trucks..Is that
Ford sales more for a reason...but its not because it leads in
horsepower!!!!

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 14:39:35 EST
From: FastRngXLT
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

In a message dated 1/15/98 1:42:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
KNBD87D prodigy.com writes:


That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
right!
Josh >>

I dont think you will ever see Ford use the 5.0L engine in the Ranger. Mainly
because the engine was dicontinued due to new emmisions laws, thats why they
started puting the 4.6L Modular V8 in the Mustangs. If you see a V8 in the
Ranger, it will probley be the 4.6L.

Brian

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 14:57:01 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

FastRngXLT wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/15/98 1:42:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> KNBD87D prodigy.com writes:
>
>
> That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
> totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
> something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
> mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
> Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
> right!
> Josh >>
>
> I dont think you will ever see Ford use the 5.0L engine in the Ranger. Mainly
> because the engine was dicontinued due to new emmisions laws, thats why they
> started puting the 4.6L Modular V8 in the Mustangs. If you see a V8 in the
> Ranger, it will probley be the 4.6L.
>
> Brian
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

Even then a 4.6 liter Ranger is not going to muscle up well against a
5.9 dakota there is about 35 hp difference and overhead cam engines94.6)
have a hard time building up the torque of a pushrod! Motor Trend tested
a 4x4 dakota, 5 speed with a 5.2(318) 230 hp and 300 ft lbs torque and
it ran a 15.6 quarter! Now drop in a more potent 5.9 liter in a two
wheel drive dakota I think you wheel be in the high 14! Faster than a
Mustang GT!

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 14:17:26 -0600
From: Ernie Hannig
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

Unfortunately, a more fair comparison to the Ranger 4.0L is the Toyota DOHC
V6 (190bhp) available as an option on the extended cab Tacomas (I believe
its the standard T100 engine). I too hope Ford will catch on and offer more
porwerful engines in the Ranger (but not too soon...my wife will kill me if
I don't keep my '98 4.0L for a few years!).
ernie



At 01:36 PM 1/15/1998 -0500, you wrote:
>I read that a Toyota 4 banger is rated at 142 hp and 160 lbs-ft.
>That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
>totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
>something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
>mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
>Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
>right!
>Josh
>
>ps. Just wait till they test a Dakota RT vs a 4.0 Splash...:-(
>+---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
>| Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
>| List removal information is on the web site. |
>+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 16:46:12 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

Ernie Hannig wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, a more fair comparison to the Ranger 4.0L is the Toyota DOHC
> V6 (190bhp) available as an option on the extended cab Tacomas (I believe
> its the standard T100 engine). I too hope Ford will catch on and offer more
> porwerful engines in the Ranger (but not too soon...my wife will kill me if
> I don't keep my '98 4.0L for a few years!).
> ernie
>
> At 01:36 PM 1/15/1998 -0500, you wrote:
> >I read that a Toyota 4 banger is rated at 142 hp and 160 lbs-ft.
> >That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
> >totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
> >something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
> >mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
> >Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
> >right!
> >Josh
> >
> >ps. Just wait till they test a Dakota RT vs a 4.0 Splash...:-(
> >+---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> >| Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> >| List removal information is on the web site. |
> >+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
> >
> >
>
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

Still not fair if you consider that the tacoma is a full size but still
weighs less than the compact competitors...so even bigger than the
ranger it is lighter with more horsepower...but I also would not ever
want to have an accident in one!

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 16:53:38 -0500
From: "Bryce"
Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?

I've got the 1998 and 1997 ranger brochures right in front of me and it
doesn't look like there's any 4.0L SOHC available yet...the funny thing is
that the 1997 Brochure says, and I quote, "The optional 4.0L SEFI single
overhead cam v6 (shown below) delivers the ultimate in Ranger performance."
This is on page nine. Typo or bait and switch?? Hmmmm...I want my 4.0L
replaced with the SOHC 4.0L

Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995

- ----------
> From: MR JOSH J TENNEY
> To: fordtrucks-small listservice.net
> Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?
> Date: Thursday, January 15, 1998 1:17 PM
>
> As far as I know, the 205 HP SOHC 4.0L is not available in the 1998
> Ranger and probably will not be at all because of the high demand for
> explorers and mountaineers.
>
> Josh
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 17:09:57 -0500
From: "Bryce"
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

'Scuse me, but why would you consider the Tacoma a full size truck????
It's smaller then the Ranger, is it not??? I'm not sure of the over all
length, but the Tacoma X-tra Cab has 121.9 inch wheelbase and is 66.5
inches wide while the Ranger SuperCab has a 125.9 inch wheelbase and is
70.3 inches wide...anyone know what a Ranger SuperCab 4x4 weights in at,
because the Tacoma is 3820 lbs (Curb weight) and a standard cab Ranger 4x4
is 3800 lbs...My guess is that the SuperCab weighs in well over 20 lbs more
than a standard cab Ranger.

Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995

- ----------
> From: Gardner
> To: fordtrucks-small listservice.net
> Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?
> Date: Thursday, January 15, 1998 4:46 PM
>
> Ernie Hannig wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, a more fair comparison to the Ranger 4.0L is the Toyota
DOHC
> > V6 (190bhp) available as an option on the extended cab Tacomas (I
believe
> > its the standard T100 engine). I too hope Ford will catch on and offer
more
> > porwerful engines in the Ranger (but not too soon...my wife will kill
me if
> > I don't keep my '98 4.0L for a few years!).
> > ernie
> >
> > At 01:36 PM 1/15/1998 -0500, you wrote:
> > >I read that a Toyota 4 banger is rated at 142 hp and 160 lbs-ft.
> > >That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
> > >totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
> > >something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
> > >mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
> > >Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
> > >right!
> > >Josh
> > >
> > >ps. Just wait till they test a Dakota RT vs a 4.0 Splash...:-(
> > >+---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco
2--------+
> > >| Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net,
|
> > >| List removal information is on the web site.
|
> > >+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- ----------+
> > >
> > >
> >
> > +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> > | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> > | List removal information is on the web site. |
> > +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
>
> Still not fair if you consider that the tacoma is a full size but still
> weighs less than the compact competitors...so even bigger than the
> ranger it is lighter with more horsepower...but I also would not ever
> want to have an accident in one!
>
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 17:21:47 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

Bryce wrote:
>
> 'Scuse me, but why would you consider the Tacoma a full size truck????
> It's smaller then the Ranger, is it not??? I'm not sure of the over all
> length, but the Tacoma X-tra Cab has 121.9 inch wheelbase and is 66.5
> inches wide while the Ranger SuperCab has a 125.9 inch wheelbase and is
> 70.3 inches wide...anyone know what a Ranger SuperCab 4x4 weights in at,
> because the Tacoma is 3820 lbs (Curb weight) and a standard cab Ranger 4x4
> is 3800 lbs...My guess is that the SuperCab weighs in well over 20 lbs more
> than a standard cab Ranger.
>
> Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995
>
> ----------
> > From: Gardner
> > To: fordtrucks-small listservice.net
> > Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?
> > Date: Thursday, January 15, 1998 4:46 PM
> >
> > Ernie Hannig wrote:
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, a more fair comparison to the Ranger 4.0L is the Toyota
> DOHC
> > > V6 (190bhp) available as an option on the extended cab Tacomas (I
> believe
> > > its the standard T100 engine). I too hope Ford will catch on and offer
> more
> > > porwerful engines in the Ranger (but not too soon...my wife will kill
> me if
> > > I don't keep my '98 4.0L for a few years!).
> > > ernie
> > >
> > > At 01:36 PM 1/15/1998 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >I read that a Toyota 4 banger is rated at 142 hp and 160 lbs-ft.
> > > >That is no comparison to the 160 hp and 225 ft lbs of the 4.0L. I
> > > >totally agree that Ford should offer the SOHC 4.0L or a 5.0 or
> > > >something in the Ranger. The competition is kicking a*s in quarter
> > > >mile times, but the Ranger is so much better build and lasts longer.
> > > >Just look at the sales numbers....Ford must be doing something
> > > >right!
> > > >Josh
> > > >
> > > >ps. Just wait till they test a Dakota RT vs a 4.0 Splash...:-(
> > > >+---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco
> 2--------+
> > > >| Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net,
> |
> > > >| List removal information is on the web site.
> |
> > > >+---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
> ----------+
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> > > | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> > > | List removal information is on the web site. |
> > > +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
> >
> > Still not fair if you consider that the tacoma is a full size but still
> > weighs less than the compact competitors...so even bigger than the
> > ranger it is lighter with more horsepower...but I also would not ever
> > want to have an accident in one!
> >
> > +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> > | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> > | List removal information is on the web site. |
> > +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

Last time I recall reading info ona Dakota they compared it to the
Tacoma since the Tacoma was closest to its size but considered a full
size according to the EPA! While the dakota is a mid size! This is not
my opinion but what I have seen stated! Who would want to drive a Toyota
anyway? NOT ME!

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 17:46:30 -0500
From: "Bryce"
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

Are you sure it wasn't the T100 maybe?? I could see that comparison much
easier than the Tacoma...

Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995

- ----------
> From: Gardner
> To: fordtrucks-small listservice.net
> Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?
> Date: Thursday, January 15, 1998 5:21 PM
>
>
> Last time I recall reading info ona Dakota they compared it to the
> Tacoma since the Tacoma was closest to its size but considered a full
> size according to the EPA! While the dakota is a mid size! This is not
> my opinion but what I have seen stated! Who would want to drive a Toyota
> anyway? NOT ME!
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 17:59:11 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

Bryce wrote:
>
> Are you sure it wasn't the T100 maybe?? I could see that comparison much
> easier than the Tacoma...
>
> Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995
>
> ----------
> > From: Gardner
> > To: fordtrucks-small listservice.net
> > Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?
> > Date: Thursday, January 15, 1998 5:21 PM
> >
> >
> > Last time I recall reading info ona Dakota they compared it to the
> > Tacoma since the Tacoma was closest to its size but considered a full
> > size according to the EPA! While the dakota is a mid size! This is not
> > my opinion but what I have seen stated! Who would want to drive a Toyota
> > anyway? NOT ME!
> > +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> > | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> > | List removal information is on the web site. |
> > +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

OOPS! You are right! I got my models mixed up! Sorry for the confusion!

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 15:15:51 -0800
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

Gardner wrote:

> Last time I recall reading info ona Dakota they compared it to the
> Tacoma since the Tacoma was closest to its size but considered a full
> size according to the EPA! While the dakota is a mid size! This is not
> my opinion but what I have seen stated! Who would want to drive a Toyota
> anyway? NOT ME!

Are you thinking of the T-100?

Now don't everyone get all sick and nervous over truck identification
and classification.... geez you guys!!! LIGHTEN UP!!!!

TC

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 19:07:34 EST
From: FastRngXLT
Subject: Re: Toyota 4 banger = 160 hp?

In a message dated 1/15/98 4:47:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
garrpam netgsi.com writes:


weighs less than the compact competitors...so even bigger than the
ranger it is lighter with more horsepower...but I also would not ever
want to have an accident in one! >>

I think you have the Tacoma mixed up with the T100. The T100 carries an
OPTIONAL V6 engine that is also optional only to the extended cab Tacoma
compact, which is what Ford is in competion with. I wouldnt worry too much
about Toyotas 190bhp engine, a friend of mine has one and hates it. Toyota
gears their trucks to low and it steels rear wheel power. Just look at the 1/4
miles times compared to a Ranger. Most Car Mags compare the top most optional
truck (4x4, extended cab, the works) and rates 1/4 and 0-60 times based on
that. So you can expect lower 1/4 mile and 0-60 times from a Standard cab
Ranger 2x4 than a 4x4. To make a long story short. Dont worry about what the
Toyotas can do, I dont. We bought our trucks for long lasting, better towing
and tougher purpouses than any other compact on the road.

Brian
Black '96 3.0L V6 SC/SB

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 19:10:30 EST
From: FastRngXLT
Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?

In a message dated 1/15/98 4:53:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, bryceb ibm.net
writes:


doesn't look like there's any 4.0L SOHC available yet...the funny thing is
that the 1997 Brochure says, and I quote, "The optional 4.0L SEFI single
overhead cam v6 (shown below) delivers the ultimate in Ranger performance."
This is on page nine. Typo or bait and switch?? Hmmmm...I want my 4.0L
replaced with the SOHC 4.0L

Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995
>>
Thats what my says to, but then you look at the 4.0L Engine specs and its the
same old 160HP 220 Ft LBS tourqe. I think it might be a typo. Car and Driver
still say its an iron blocked pushrod.

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 19:28:43 -0500
From: "Bryce"
Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?

I agree it's got the 4.0L pushrod engine and not the SOHC...I wonder if
they were really considering putting this engine in the '97 model in late
'96 since I got my brochure in the early stages of this model year...I't
woulda been nice, but I'm happy with the normal 4.0L...

Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995

- ----------
> From: FastRngXLT
> To: fordtrucks-small ListService.net
> Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?
> Date: Thursday, January 15, 1998 7:10 PM
>
> In a message dated 1/15/98 4:53:26 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bryceb ibm.net
> writes:
>
>
> doesn't look like there's any 4.0L SOHC available yet...the funny thing
is
> that the 1997 Brochure says, and I quote, "The optional 4.0L SEFI single
> overhead cam v6 (shown below) delivers the ultimate in Ranger
performance."
> This is on page nine. Typo or bait and switch?? Hmmmm...I want my 4.0L
> replaced with the SOHC 4.0L
>
> Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
> http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995
> >>
> Thats what my says to, but then you look at the 4.0L Engine specs and
its the
> same old 160HP 220 Ft LBS tourqe. I think it might be a typo. Car and
Driver
> still say its an iron blocked pushrod.
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 21:22:36 EST
From: Jmark6969
Subject: Re: clicking noise on Ranger. . rough idle

i have a 96 ranger 2.3 and i also have a clicking noise, however it is the fan
for the vent/heater. there is no solution except to forget it. i know it
sucks but that's the way a ford is.

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 21:46:29 -0500
From: Rob and Nel
Subject: Re: clicking noise on Ranger. . rough idle

Jmark6969 wrote:
>
> i have a 96 ranger 2.3 and i also have a clicking noise, however it is the fan
> for the vent/heater. there is no solution except to forget it. i know it
> sucks but that's the way a ford is.
> +---------Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer & Bronco 2--------+
> | Send posts to fordtrucks-small listservice.net, |
> | List removal information is on the web site. |
> +---------- Visit Our Web Site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/ ----------+
We used to have an ANNOYING clicking noise whenever we ran the defrost
in our 94 Ranger. Turns out it was just a parking lot ticket that
slipped in between the top of the defroster grill and the underside of
the dashboard. P.S. it isn't TOO hard to look inside the fan motor
housing on a 2.3 4cyl.. Just remove the air cleaner, washer bottle and a
couple of other doo-dads to get at it. We had to since a bunch of leaves
piled up around the resistors (speed controls) for the fan and almost
caught fire. Wouldn't be bad PM if you live / park around alot of trees.

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 21:59:03, -0500
From: KNBD87D prodigy.com (MR JOSH J TENNEY)
Subject: Re: Ranger SOHC 4.0L?-bryce

Bryce,

Ford made a mistake. I am looking at my Ford Source Book and it says
nothing about a SOHC. I did hear that ford made a mistake. I was
waiting for the SOHC before I bought mine, but I bought the 4.0L OHV
anyway. Hopefully they will add something soon....maybe a midyear
option or 99 option? I hope so.
Josh

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 21:29:07 PST
From: "Mike Wiatt"
Subject: one piece driveshaft

Most of em are custom fab. Any reputable driveline shop can make one up
for you. I suggest calling a local 4 wheel drive shop and asking them if
they suggest any local shops. 4 wheelers beat the crap out of their
trucks so the shop should know who does good work and who doesnt.

- ---------------------------------------------
pyro152 hotmail.com
'94 Ranger Supercab 4x2 4.0 5 speed
Custom 4" lift (bent beams and arms)
The Ford Ranger Pages
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/7894
- ---------------------------------------------


______________________________________________________

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

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 21:43:25 PST
From: "Mike *"
Subject: My 4"lift

Ok my lift is done and it is unbelieveable. Here is what I did:

4" coils
Re-bend I beams
Re-work Radius arms
Rancho RS9000's
Long add a leafs
Brake lines
Rancho RS5000 steering stabilizer
American Eagle 15x8 589s
BFG 31x10.50x15 All Terrains

The ride is great. The steering is great. Without any drop brackets it
looks super clean. I dont have a need for 5th gear anymore :-( . New
gears and a Detroit Locker are in store for next month. If anyone is
concideing a lift for their Ranger I would highly recommend this setup
over brackets. By the way, it is sitting a little low in the rear and I
have no problems with the driveline vibrating (I found out the 4.0 comes
with an 8.8" rear end with stronger U-Joints than the other engines).

Any ?s...let me know.

- ---------------------------------------------
pyro152 hotmail.com
'94 Ranger Supercab 4x2 4.0 5 speed
The Ford Ranger Pages
Custom 4" lift (bent beams and arms)
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/7894
- ---------------------------------------------


....


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.