Return-Path:
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 04:47:47 -0700 (MST)
From: owner-fordtrucks-small-digest ListService.net (fordtrucks-small-digest)
To: fordtrucks-small-digest ListService.net
Subject: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #70
Reply-To: fordtrucks-small ListService.net
Sender: owner-fordtrucks-small-digest ListService.net


fordtrucks-small-digest Sunday, March 8 1998 Volume 02 : Number 070



=======================================================================
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: ADMIN: Aerostars [Gardner ]
Re: Hello small trucks list and question [Gardner ]
Re: ADMIN: Aerostars [S-10 Killer ]
Re: Smitty Bilt Nerf'Em Bars ["Lare/Eric" ]
Re: Guy with 302 rangers [Jordan ]
Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #69 ["Lou Guerriero" ]
SOHC v DOHC v QUAD CAM [Rob782 ]
Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #68 [Rob782 ]
Re: '97 Ranger tow hook placement [Jmark6969 ]
Re: '97 Ranger tow hook placement [YIASCA ]
Re: gauges [Jmark6969 ]
Re: '97 Ranger tow hook placement [Jmark6969 ]
ranger Q's [Jmark6969 ]
winch [David ]
Warning Chime ["Jose A. Castillo" ]
hotrodding the baby bronco [Rob782 ]
Re: sohc Ranger [WHRanger93 ]
Not a 302 but a 2.3 [WHRanger93 ]
Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #68 [Tom Test ]

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

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

Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 06:58:02 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: ADMIN: Aerostars

Ken Payne wrote:
>
> What is the general opinion of allowing Aerostars on
> this particular list since its built on the Ranger
> chassis? If there's interest I'll add a vote for it
> on the web site.
>
> Ken Payne
> Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
> 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/ ----------+

I think its a great idea since it is based of the ranger, we could
probably help aerostar owners since it is not much different.

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

Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 07:06:55 -0500
From: Gardner
Subject: Re: Hello small trucks list and question

Bill03bt wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
> I've been on the other fordtruck lists for a while but I have a Ranger
> question.
> I have a 96 Ranger, 3.0, 5spd and I am thinking about changing the rear end
> ratio to something that will let this engine/trans combo have a little more
> acceleration. I've got the 3.45 gears in it now, and while it is great for gas
> mileage, it lacks the jump that I would like.
> Suggestions as to which ratio I should pick would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
> +---------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/ ----------+

I had 3.73 in my Splash and was quite happy. I also have the 5 speed, if
you have an automatic I would probably go with 4.10.
Chris

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 08:10:58 -0600 (CST)
From: S-10 Killer
Subject: Re: ADMIN: Aerostars

I would like to see some of the Aerostar guys on here.

- -------------
2.3L, SVO OHC
S-10 Killer
GT-40 Ranger
- -------------

On Fri, 6 Mar 1998, Ken Payne wrote:

> What is the general opinion of allowing Aerostars on
> this particular list since its built on the Ranger
> chassis? If there's interest I'll add a vote for it
> on the web site.
>
> Ken Payne
> Admin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
> http://www.ford-trucks.com

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 10:01:52 -0500
From: "Lare/Eric"
Subject: Re: Smitty Bilt Nerf'Em Bars

Bryce,

I have the Smittybilt's on my '94 Splash SC - love 'em 'cause they hang very
close to the body - don't take away any ground clearance .... I got mine for
about $135 in PA ..... I also think they look better than any others that
I've seen because they are the only ones that go beyond the supercab (wheel
well to wheel well) ... I'm not sure if they'll fit on a '97 ...... also, I
only had to drill two holes on each side (other 4 on each side used existing
holes in the frame/leaf spring bracket) .... they have been very solid -
I've had them on for about three years and they've taken quite a beaten
(save my lower body panels quite a few times).

Eris Smith - '94 Splash SC 4x4,4.0L,5-spd, 4" Trailmaster, 32x11.5 BFG's


- -----Original Message-----
From: Bryce
To: Small Ford Truck List
Date: Wednesday, March 04, 1998 1:33 PM
Subject: Smitty Bilt Nerf'Em Bars


>I was wondering if anyone has had experiance with Smitty Bilt Nerf'Em
>Bars?? I'm looking at the black bars that are about 66inches long for my
>'97 Ranger SuperCab 4x4. Are they any good? What's a good price on
>them?...I was quoted anywhere from $122 to $240 in my area. Also will the
>ones from a '94-96 Ranger fit on my '97. I think the part number that I
>was looking at was FN36NB.
>
>Thanks,
>Bryce
>
>Bryce's 4xFord Ranger Page
>http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/baja/2995

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

Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 22:14:12 -0600
From: Jordan
Subject: Re: Guy with 302 rangers

At 07:58 AM 3/6/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Jordan-
> What other work have you done to your Explorer??? I own a '91
Ummm.. not much, I installed my own Borla system (got it cheap too)
>Explorer XLT, 4 dr, 2wd and I am also wanting to stick a 302 or better
>yet the new 281 4.6L Cobra engine in depending on the cost. Maybe a
heh heh that would be cool.

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 15:37:20 -0500
From: "Lou Guerriero"
Subject: Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #69

No ADS no AEROSTARS.

Although Aerostars are similar to ranger/explorers in frame/engine... they
are designed for different use, and mods etc are of a different nature.
Those with trucks do not yet Feel old...... those with minivans have
resigned themselves to age...

ADS would ruin the site.... Perhaps you could make a page with aftermarket
listings.... and put ads there.. but I don't want to see them in my e-mail
every day...

And hey everyone. .quit posting with HTML. It's aggravating!!!!!

Lou Guerriero
________________________________
Web: http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.echelon.ca/loug/
E-Mail: loug bigfoot.com OR loug mailexcite.com OR
lou_guerriero yahoo.com
OR loucifur hotmail.com

ICQ UIN: 1235438
Kali NN: Loucifur
________________________________

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 17:17:42 EST
From: Rob782
Subject: SOHC v DOHC v QUAD CAM

Single Over Head Cam (SOHC) is one cam per cylinder bank.
V-6/8/10/12/whatever have 2 cams . I-4/6/8/whatever have one cam.

Dual Over Head Cam (DOHC) is two cams per cylinder bank. V-6/8/10/12/whatever
have 4 cams per engine

Quad Cam refers to DOHC, having 4 cams per engine


In a message dated 98-03-06 06:47:52 EST, you write:

I'm sure someone already responded to this but..
>S.O.H.C == Single Over-Head Cam (one)

But if you have two heads(V-6, V-8, v-12, etc) with a camsfaft
over each one, you have two camshafts

>D.O.H.C. == Dual Over-Head Cam (two).

But if you have two heads(V-6, V-8, v-12, etc) with dual cams
over them, you have four camshafts

>QUAD-CAM == Four camshafts, usually overhead.

Another name for the above configuration
>>

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 17:22:49 EST
From: Rob782
Subject: Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #68

The 3.0 in the ranger and taurus (OHV) is the Vulcan V-6, i believe. This was
developed out of the 2.9, which was developed out of the 2.8, which was
introduced all the way back in 78.

Sure is Ken! The only thing is that if it out of a Taurus some of the
>mounts may be different since it coming out of a front wheel drive
>car!
>Good Luck
>
>JUST drop in a 5.0

The standard Taurus engine is shared in the Ranger (OHV) The middle
engine is a DOHC version of the 3.0L, which would be the one to have. >>

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 20:47:20 EST
From: Jmark6969
Subject: Re: '97 Ranger tow hook placement

I dont know about the front mounting but i placed the rear tow hooks on either
side of the spare tire directly on the frame. it's been a good location but
it''s kinda hard to get to.

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 20:53:39 EST
From: YIASCA
Subject: Re: '97 Ranger tow hook placement

In a message dated 98-03-07 20:48:15 EST, you write:


either
side of the spare tire directly on the frame. it's been a good location but
it''s kinda hard to get to. >>

Ranger aren't meant to TOW, they are meant to fix up and drive the F_ck over
Chevy's, so if your low and high it's cool, buy a f150 to tow not a Ranger
with it's wimpy 4.0 V6 like mine, and i hope you don't try it with the 3.0 or
even tonka toy 2.3, might blow a engine. I love ford's but their engine picks
SUCK, put in a 5.0 or even 4.0l V8, come on FORD your starting to PI_S me off
like this wimpy KEN PAYNE SITE

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 21:04:48 EST
From: Jmark6969
Subject: Re: gauges

Yes you can install aftermarket gauges but you will have to use a bracket to
mount them. As for how they hook up, they should include instructions on how
to do that when you buy them, if not you can go to an accesory shop and have
them do it for you (ka-ching). Good luck!

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 21:30:28 EST
From: Jmark6969
Subject: Re: '97 Ranger tow hook placement

Personally i know that ford could use a better engine designer but i do know
that whoever picked the powertrain for my ranger 2.3l 4x2 picked a damn good
one. It has hauled 8,000lbs down the highway at 65mph during a move i made.
It did beautifully. NO problems whatsoever. but your right to becareful.
yall have fun driving!

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 21:37:31 EST
From: Jmark6969
Subject: ranger Q's

Hi guys and gals,

I have a couple of questions i would like to get answered.

1. What is the factory gear ratio for a 96 2.3l 4x2 (not a splash)?
2. What gears would I need in order to make my truck quicker with no eng.
mod's?
3. What are the widest tires i can fit on the factory 14" rims?
4. Is it possible to add spacers to the axle inorder for the wheels to stick
out about an inch or so from the body?
5. Will lowering the rear 2" give me an improvement in speed? How much?


Thanks in advance for your help, I really appreciate it!

Good luck and safe drivin! Jeff in Dallas

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

Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 21:45:50 -0500
From: David
Subject: winch

Does anyone know if there's enough room behind the front grill of a 94
Ranger to mount a winch. If there is, is there anything to bolt it to? Does
anyone have a brushguard on their Ranger? If so what brand is it? Any
suggestions on what brand to buy, where to but it, and how much it should cost?

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

Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 20:49:23 -0600
From: "Jose A. Castillo"
Subject: Warning Chime

I have a 95 Ranger XLT what decides once in a while to play the warning
chime because it thinks the door is ajar, about 5+ minutes after the
door has closed, sometimes much longer. The door ajar light comes on
and the chime wails away. It seems to happen only when the ambient
temperature gets warm, because it never happens when its cold outside.
I am trying to figure out why, and if I can replace or repair the sensor
or
chime module. Any ideas would be appreciated???? The chime also wails

when the key is moved to the accessory position without the door ajar
light coming on????

Anyone know of a good manual on the electrics on
rangers, I have tried Haynes not much on electrics.

I have come up with a quick fix, Play the music loud, but I'm looking
for a more healthy solution (not going deaf). Any help would be
appreciated.

Castillo, Jose A.
Dallas, Tx

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

Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 22:27:27 EST
From: Rob782
Subject: hotrodding the baby bronco

I have a 1990 Bronco II XLT 4x4. It has the 2.9, with 140 factory hp and
105K. It has the automatic (anybody know which one?) which hasent been so
much as looked at since 65k when we bought it. I'm looking to get more power
without swapping, although it is a possibility. Does anyone know if i can get
a Mass Air conversion kit for the 2.9 ? And what about the rearend? is it
the 7.5, 8.8 or 9.0 or something else? I know my truck has the 3.73s, it has
the towing package.

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

Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 02:16:44 EST
From: WHRanger93
Subject: Re: sohc Ranger

Josh I would not have enough money for the R/T that is why. And I will give
Ford Until early July to put it in or i can say hello to dakota. But i will
always be a true and blue Ford Fan. I have always liked MOPAR also i just
Hate And I mean Hate GM! But the first fullsize truck i want would be a ford
F-150 Flareside but dont got the money right now. Plus I fell inlove with the
new Lightning when I saw it at the Chicago Auto show. 325 Horespower and 450
ft/lb torque It is just To Sweet.

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

Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 02:34:23 EST
From: WHRanger93
Subject: Not a 302 but a 2.3

I am sick of all this talk about 302's. I was reading Trucking the othere day
and they had this article on some drag races competitions going on some
where. Anway they had all these truck and the times they ran. Now the one
that stuck out in my mind the most was not the supercharged 351 monster
lightning that ran in the 12's but the tourbo 4-banger ranger that rang in the
mid 13's. Now that is impresive. That is technology. Consider a new T/A
runs 13.8 with a 350 producing 305 horse. This little 4-banger could spank it
with a 13.4. I would to love to have a sweet tourbo 4 that could propel my
ranger into the 14's let alone the 13's. When peole she you fast machine and
ask you what you got under the hood and you say oh just a 4 look at their
faces that would be a site to see. I remeber readingabout 2 months agot on
this list a bout a company the sells tourbo 4's supped up to around 250 horses
does anyone know about this company or one like it ? I would love to swap my
4.0 for a fast 2.3 or 2.5 tourbo that would put me into the 13's Thanks

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

Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 04:01:39 EST
From: Tom Test
Subject: Re: fordtrucks-small-digest V2 #68

In a message dated 98-03-07 17:23:43 EST, Rob writes:

> Vulcan V-6, i believe. This was
> developed out of the 2.9, which was developed out of the 2.8, which was
> introduced all the way back in 78.

The Vulcan does not derive from, or resemble any of the other Ford
V6 engines. The Vulcan was a new design specifically for fhe
Taurus; if it resembled any previous engines in design detail, you
would have to say if borrowed from Ford's Windsor V8
(221-260-289-351-302) of 1962 vintage, which in turn strongly
resembles the 1955 Chevy V8. The engineering resemblances are
stud-mounted stamped rockers, cast crank, cast aluminum pistons,
thin-wall block ending at main journal centers, intake covers rocker
valley, chain drive cam, etc.

The 2.8 V6 was derived from the Ford Europe 2.6 V6 of late 1960's
vintage; we first saw it here in the import Capri (2.0 I4 from Ford....


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.