small-list-digest Tuesday, August 11 1998 Volume 02 : Number 225



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer, Bronco 2 and Aerostar
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe small-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

RE: FTE Small - A little lift survey
FTE Small - '91 Explorer Alignment
FTE Small - Lift Survey
Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC
Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC
FTE Small - A little lift survey -Reply
FTE Small - Tires
FTE Small - Re: A little lift survey
FTE Small - 87 Bronco II
FTE Small - Re: How do we re-wire fog lights?
Re: FTE Small - 87 Bronco II
FTE Small - Re: How do we re-wire fog lights?
FTE Small - New to the list
FTE Small - I'll try it again
Re: FTE Small - 87 Bronco II
Re: FTE Small - New to the list
Re: FTE Small - New to the list
Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC
Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC
Re: FTE Small - '91 Explorer Alignment

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 07:20:43 -0700
From: cassis
Subject: RE: FTE Small - A little lift survey

David,

I have a 93' 4x Ranger with 2" to 2 1/2" Superlift Coils on it. It was
just enough to make the front of my truck set level with the back. The lift
consisted of coils and new camber bushings. The front shocks had to be
replaced also. I have no complaints about the lift and like the ride I get
in the truck now. My only problem has been with the gear ratio change it
made when I went to 31" tall tires. I do alot of towing and it realy made a
big difrence when I got into the hill country while towing. My point is if
you do alot of towing and are going to go to larger tires a gear swap may
be in order also. Just something for you to consider. Also I installed a
steering stabalizer at the same time I had the lift installed. Anyway hope
this helps.

John Cassis
93' STX 4x4 3.0/5-speed

- -----Original Message-----
From: David Steelman [SMTP:dsteelman katv.com]
Sent: Monday, August 10, 1998 2:25 PM
To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Subject: Re: FTE Small - A little lift survey

Thanks to all who sent info regarding my last post about the tire
size/speedometer question.

Now, while I am sitting patiently in my truck waiting for more
manufacturers to come out with lift kits for 98 Rangers, I'd like to hear
your opinions on any lift kits that you might have used.

If you have lifted a Ford Ranger, no matter what year, let me know whose
kit you used and what your opinions are. This will be my first experience
with lifting a truck so I'd appreciate any stories, praises or complaints
you can send my way.

Also, the kits I have seen so far from Superlift and Trailmaster are both
4" kits. Has anyone heard anything about smaller lifts for the 98's? I
could live with 4", but I'd really think I'd be happier with 2-3".


Thanks to all.
Dave
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 08:29:36 -0400
From: Noah.Karl oscsystems.com
Subject: FTE Small - '91 Explorer Alignment

Hello Small Truck Enthusiast,

This is my first posting and I would like to say that this digest has been
very informative. Its funny because I read this list everyday and say to
myself "...boy, I'm glad I don't have this problem or that problem.." but
eventually, as your truck ages, you get problems..so here is mine...

Its not really a problem more than I need advice from the collective wisdom
of this list...I have a '91 Explorer XLT with 68K miles that has been great
for the past 7 years. In-fact, never seen a garage and I do my own
maintenance, except when it come to new tires and wheel alignments which by
the way is the topic I would like to discuss.

I finally replaced the original Firestone all terrain tires with news ones
after more than 60K miles on them. They aren't the best tires, but they
lasted for such a long time and the price was right. Anyway, I bought the
tires from NTB (was NTW) and had an alignment done. Well, 8K miles later
(almost exactly to the mile) I have excessive camber or toe wear (i.e., the
outside of both front tires are about 50% worn compared to the middle or
inner side!!!). I noticed it when I was ready to rotate them (its
basically our family car and my wife drives it most of the time to haul the
kids around so I don't look over the Explore as much as I should). The
back tires look brand new. I brought the Explorer back to NTB and they
started rambling about rotation and that it has been almost a year since
the alignment and I said I don't care if it has been 10 years, there are
only 8K miles on these tires and the previous ones had 60K on them with, by
the way, had no uneven wear patterns. I suggested to them that since the
wear on both front tires are identical, that the alignment might have been
done incorrectly from the beginning and we are now seeing the results.
They said to bring it in this Wednesday (8/13) so they can take a look and
will determine corrective action (if any).

So...what do you think? Am I way-off-base or do I have something worth
making a stink about? I'll be the first one to admit I'm wrong and I don't
want to make the poor manager at NTB life miserable unnecessarily.

Could you please reply to me directly at (since I'm on digest mode and I
need your inputs before tomorrow) which is my
email at home and/or which is my email at work.

Any feedback or insights before tomorrow morning would be much appreciated.
Oh-yeah, sorry for taking too much bandwidth.

Karl M. Noah
'91 Explorer XLT
Gaithersburg, MD


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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 07:13:02 -0700
From: "Alan Heaberlin"
Subject: FTE Small - Lift Survey

Dave, here is my experience with a moderate lift on my 1986 Ranger 4WD short
bed. It came with a standard 3" factory lift.
I bought the truck new in 1986 with the intention of using it as a glass
rack truck in my glass shop in the mountains (thus 4WD). The stock springs
were hopelessly weak with an extra 1000 pounds on the back and tools and
glass made it spooky to drive (yes the dealer knew what I wanted to use it
for). Ford parts couldn't order heavy springs without a code number for a HD
suspension unit so I tracked down an '86 that was reputedly a 1 ton camper
special (I think that's what they called it) and got the spring codes off it
and ordered replacements.
After installing the springs it worked fine for 3 years as a glass truck
though it was still a little mushy in the front end. I quit the glass
business and sold the racks and started using the truck for hauling wood,
camping and general 4WD fun in the mountains and desert. Recently I decided
that I needed to straighten up the truck so I could put 31x10.50x15 Wide
Brutes on it. Rangers sit ass-high even stock, and with those giant rear
springs mine looked like a stink bug! Not wanting to make an extreme lift I
started shopping for larger front coils and Rancho shocks. Not getting much
cooperation from the truck shops in the area I picked up a JC Whitney
catalog and they listed exactly what I wanted. They called it a 1-2" lift.
I had my front end man install the springs and put new adjustable radius arm
bushings in and it sits perfectly level. The springs JCW sent me were from
Superlift and for about 20% less than I could find them anywhere else. Now
the truck is level, 31" tires fit and my wife Queenie can get in and out
without showing her butt to the world! My load carrying capacity exceeds the
volume I can get into a 6 foot bed. I recently carried 16 8 foot railroad
ties (over 100 pounds each)a long distance and barely knew they were there.
Hope this helps your survey.

Alan Heaberlin
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.buffalorun.com
Buffalo Run Enterprises

"Law is a matter of statistical probability and truth is finally
a matter of whichever of the many geometries best suit your needs."
George Elliot

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 08:32:28 -0600
From: Dave Armbruster
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC

I have never owned an Aerostar or Taurus, I apologize for the mistake on
Ford car engines, just what my dealer told me (Broadway Ford Truck Sales in
St. Louis, MO). But, the Aerostar/Ranger relationship is based on my
Helm's Ford Service Manuals, which do say the Aerostar and Ranger are built
on the same ladder frame platform, I think the Windstar is Ford's
unibody/front wheel drive minivan. You are right, the suspensions that
bolt up to them are different and the Ranger 4WD system is completely
different than the Aerostar AWD, as are many other systems in the trucks.

Yes, the Explorer probably shared more common suspension parts with the
Ranger than the Aerostar, but the trucks apparently came from different
"platforms" at Ford. I don't work in the industry, so I don't know what
constitutes a platform verses shared parts. Maybe being based on the same
frame doesn't mean they are built on the same platform, although it's
pretty easy to design multiple front subframes and rear suspensions to bolt
or rivet on the same frame. I suspect that wheelbases, track widths,
various mounting dimensions would be similar on Ranger/Aerostar verses
Ranger/Explorer, which would indicate that there's more in common
structurally than what parts are hung off the frame.

My 1997 has the 5 speed auto, the 5R55 is what the technical writers in the
manuals called it, the 4 speed was called the 4R44. The manual is
manufactured by Mazda.

My original point remains, though, that I understand that there were two
main reasons that the SOHC 4.0 never was put in the Ranger: (mis)allocation
to other Ford vehicles and possible engine bay conflicts. Thing is, even
though the Ranger doesn't have the SOHC or a V8, it remains the best
selling compact truck. Ford can then dedicate things like the better
engines to the more competitive SUV market. If people stopped buying the
Ranger, then I'd guarantee the SOHC, or at least a V8 of some flavor, would
show up in a hurry.

Dave


>Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 22:49:35 EDT
>From: Jckarkka aol.com
>Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC
>
>In a message dated 98-08-10 11:46:02 EDT, darmbruster milehigh.net writes:
>
>
> '97, it and the Aerostar shared a common platform >>
>I don't know where the story about the Ranger and Aerostar sharing a common
>platform came from . They have very little in common.
>
> They more or less shared engine availability, in that they both at one
time
>in their history had 2.9, 3.0, and 4.0 l engines
>
> They both have A4LD automatic transmissions, and some early aerostars
>shared the (Mitsubishi?) 5 speed manual.
>
> They both were rear wheel drive and used 7.5 and 8.8 inch Ford rear
>axles. This is where the similarity ends.
>
> The Aerostar is unibody construction (has no separate frame), while the
>Ranger has a separate body on frame construction.
>
> The Aerostar has coil springs in the rear, while the Ranger has leaf
>springs.
>
> The Aerostar had a SLA front suspension mounted to a bolt on
>crossmember / subframe, nothing like the twin I beams with radius arms of the
>Ranger from the same era.
>
>In the automotive industry, a platform is generally thought of as the
frame or
>underbody and suspension members. While the Aerostar and Ranger may share
>similar powertrains, the "platforms" are totally different.
>
>The Ranger (and BroncoII) have more in common wtih the Explorer than the
>Aerostar, as the basic frame and suspension layout of the Ranger, Explorer,
>and Bronco II are similar (but different from the Aerostar).
>
>Also, the SOHC 4.0 L engine is not now, nor ever was optional or available in
>the Taurus. All of the SOHC 4.0 L engines go into Explorers. The Taurus
uses
>the old Vulcan 3.0 l (standard), and a DOHC version 0f the more modern 2.5 (/
>3.0) l engine found in the Contour.
>
> My guess is that Ford has a production capacity constraint on the SOHC
4.0,
>and prefers to dole them out to the more profitable Explorer than the thinner
>margin Ranger. (That's how I would run my business!)
>
>Alan K.

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 10:55:43 -0400
From: luxjo thecore.com
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC

> My original point remains, though, that I understand that there were two
> main reasons that the SOHC 4.0 never was put in the Ranger: (mis)allocation
> to other Ford vehicles and possible engine bay conflicts. Thing is, even
> though the Ranger doesn't have the SOHC or a V8, it remains the best
> selling compact truck. Ford can then dedicate things like the better
> engines to the more competitive SUV market. If people stopped buying the
> Ranger, then I'd guarantee the SOHC, or at least a V8 of some flavor, would
> show up in a hurry.

Thats too bad. I really wanted the new 4 door ranger supposedly
coming out in 99. I'm not willing to sacrifice 45 HP as I tow almost
5000 lbs. The front end of explorer and ranger are prety much the same
package. There is really no good reason the SOHC would not fit in the
ranger. They should make the 4.0 SOHC standard on the upscale rangers
and make the 4.6 optional. That would be one sweet ride. :-)
OX
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 11:33:37 -0800
From: Brad Allerheiligen
Subject: FTE Small - A little lift survey -Reply

I have a 94 XLT Supercab 2x4 that I installed a 5" Pro Comp stage II lift
with extended radius arms. I am pretty happy with it so far, especially
since I upgraded it from the cheesy stage I lift. The only thing I really
noticed (besides the stiffer ride) was the increased bump-steer caused
by the extended radius arms. But if I had to do it all over again I would try
to go with something from either Kreg Donohoe or Fabtech.
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.donahoeracing.com/
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://fabtechmotorsports.com/

Good luck , and let us know how it turns out.

- -Brad-
94 Ranger XLT Supercab PreRunner (NSTYXLT)

>>> David Steelman 08/11/98 02:11am >>>

Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 16:25:02 -0500
From: "David Steelman"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - A little lift survey

Now, while I am sitting patiently in my truck waiting for more
manufacturers to come out with lift kits for 98 Rangers, I'd like to hear
your opinions on any lift kits that you might have used.

If you have lifted a Ford Ranger, no matter what year, let me know
whose kit you used and what your opinions are. This will be my first
experience with lifting a truck so I'd appreciate any stories, praises or
complaints you can send my way.

Thanks to all.
Dave

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 10:42:39 -0700
From: cassis
Subject: FTE Small - Tires

Hey guys I recently dropped down a size in tires - I went from
31"x10.50"x15 to 30"x50"x15's. I have a set of BF Goodrich All Terrain
Radial TA's 31"X10.50"x15's for sale. One tire is almost new (less than
5000 miles) the other 3 are about half worn and have been roatated every
5000 miles. I'm asking for $150 for the set. If anyone is intrested e-mail
me at cassis uei-houston.com

John Cassis
93' STX 4x4 3.0/5-speed

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 09:41:07 -0700
From: "Pete Lawless"
Subject: FTE Small - Re: A little lift survey

"David Steelman" wrote:
>Also, the kits I have seen so far from Superlift and Trailmaster are both
>4" kits. Has anyone heard anything about smaller lifts for the 98's? I
>could live with 4", but I'd really think I'd be happier with 2-3".

I put a TrailMaster 4" Suspension lift (along with a TM 3" body lift, TM
dual steering stabilizers and TM SS shocks) on my '88 about 5 years ago.
I've been happy with the lift, no problems at all.
I don't think you'll be sorry if you go with the 4", in the end it really
isn't that much and I've talked to a lot of guys that went with a 1.5" or
2" lift and wished they'd gone with 4".

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 12:55:48 EDT
From: MadDog15M aol.com
Subject: FTE Small - 87 Bronco II

I recently bought a 87 Bronco II. I was wondering if you guys could help me
out here. Im just starting to get into trucks and stuff, and since this is my
first truck I could use some suggestions. Im looking for websites or places
where I can order catalogs for parts. The thing is in great condition,
although it could use a new paint job and some new tires. Anywho, im lookin
to get a lift kit for it and I got a catalog from James Duff, but I wanted to
check out other dealers. My bro has a 87' Samurai, and he knows about this
stuff somewhat, but I couldn't get him to help me. Anyway if someone could
help me out here I would appreciate it. Thanks!

Eric Blackwell
87' Bronco II
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 13:28:16 EDT
From: BFunk33 aol.com
Subject: FTE Small - Re: How do we re-wire fog lights?

In a message dated 8/11/98 3:41:15 AM US Mountain Standard Time, owner-small-
list-digest ford-trucks.com writes:

> Subject: FTE Small - FTE Small-How do we re-wire fog lights?
> >
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I know its been some time, but I was curios on how to rewire fog
> > lights so you can use them with your parking lights. Some of y'all
> > have done it with explorers, but has anyone tried it with a '98
> > Ranger?
> >
> > Josh
> > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
> Did you get a reply on this Josh? I'm still interested in doing it as
well..

Not difficult at all.
Simply run a wire from the + side of any parking light (or from the
appropriate wire in a harness) to a switch in the dash, then to a relay, such
that, when the switch is on, the relay closes. Wire the fog lights to the
relay contacts such that they are on when the relay is closed (properly fusing
the hot wire).
This will require a 12V, normally open relay able to handle the amp load of
the fog lights.
Since the parking lights come on when the headlights are on also, this will
allow fog light use when either parking or headlights are on, but not when all
lights are off.

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 13:18:45 -0400
From: "AutoTech"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 87 Bronco II

MADDOG, I HAVE DOORS AND OTHER BROMCO 2 PARTS IF YOU NEED THEM
- -----Original Message-----
From: MadDog15M aol.com
To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 12:58 PM
Subject: FTE Small - 87 Bronco II


>I recently bought a 87 Bronco II. I was wondering if you guys could help
me
>out here. Im just starting to get into trucks and stuff, and since this is
my
>first truck I could use some suggestions. Im looking for websites or
places
>where I can order catalogs for parts. The thing is in great condition,
>although it could use a new paint job and some new tires. Anywho, im
lookin
>to get a lift kit for it and I got a catalog from James Duff, but I wanted
to
>check out other dealers. My bro has a 87' Samurai, and he knows about this
>stuff somewhat, but I couldn't get him to help me. Anyway if someone could
>help me out here I would appreciate it. Thanks!
>
> Eric Blackwell
> 87' Bronco II
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 13:47:32 -0400
From: Ed Yohe
Subject: FTE Small - Re: How do we re-wire fog lights?

Are you trying to just rewire your existing set up, or are you trying to do
a complete installation from scratch?

At 01:28 PM 8/11/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 8/11/98 3:41:15 AM US Mountain Standard Time, owner-small-
>list-digest ford-trucks.com writes:
>
>> Subject: FTE Small - FTE Small-How do we re-wire fog lights?
>> >
>> > Hey guys,
>> >
>> > I know its been some time, but I was curios on how to rewire fog
>> > lights so you can use them with your parking lights. Some of y'all
>> > have done it with explorers, but has anyone tried it with a '98
>> > Ranger?
>> >
>> > Josh
>> > == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>>
>> Did you get a reply on this Josh? I'm still interested in doing it as
>well..
>
>Not difficult at all.
>Simply run a wire from the + side of any parking light (or from the
>appropriate wire in a harness) to a switch in the dash, then to a relay, such
>that, when the switch is on, the relay closes. Wire the fog lights to the
>relay contacts such that they are on when the relay is closed (properly
fusing
>the hot wire).
>This will require a 12V, normally open relay able to handle the amp load of
>the fog lights.
>Since the parking lights come on when the headlights are on also, this will
>allow fog light use when either parking or headlights are on, but not when
all
>lights are off.
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>
>
> \\|///
> \ - - //
> ( )
> +----------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo--------------------+
> ( * )
> ^

Ed Yohe
Northern Michigan University
Administrative Information Technology
Consulting Services
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.nmu.edu:2000/www-sam/AdIT/staff/EYOHE/HOME.html


Email: Eyohe nmu.edu
Voice: 906.227.1269
Fax: 906.227.1890
This message has been composed on 100% recycled electrons.
(opinions my own, not my employer)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 14:05:55 -0400
From: "Russ Parker"
Subject: FTE Small - New to the list

Hi Everyone,
Names Russ and I just joined this list. I own an 89 Ranger 4x4 that I'm
currently swapping a 2.3 turbo motor into. It's lifted, painted,polished,
the whole nine yards.
I have a pic up on my site at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Canyon/2457 if
anyone wants to take a peek.
- -Russ

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 15:47:00 -0300
From: "Steven Adams"
Subject: FTE Small - I'll try it again

Can anybody please tell me before I go out and switch them to see if
they fit..I have a 1984 Bronco II with manual locking hubs and I want to
know if they will fit my 1991 Ranger with automatic hubs,and if so will I
have to switch anything else?Thank....Steve

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 14:44:44 EDT
From: MadDog15M aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 87 Bronco II

Im not really interested in the doors, but what other parts do you have? Im
lookin for stuff for suspension, and maybe some tires. Anyway E-mail me back
and tell me what you have to offer.

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 14:47:16 EDT
From: MadDog15M aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE Small - New to the list

Hey Russ welcome to the list. I just joined up too. Anyway I checked out
your webpage. That is a kickass ranger, as far as rangers go :) Anyways were
did you get all your stuff as far as suspension? Just wondering cause im
looking for suspension for my Bronco. Anywho welcome to the list.

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 15:23:37 -0400
From: "Russ Parker"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - New to the list

>Hey Russ welcome to the list. I just joined up too. Anyway I checked out
>your webpage. That is a kickass ranger, as far as rangers go :) Anyways
were
>did you get all your stuff as far as suspension? Just wondering cause im
>looking for suspension for my Bronco. Anywho welcome to the list.


It has a 6 inch superlift kit with the super runner steering upgrade. I
bought all of it from Tyres international in Akron Ohio. It replaced a 4
inch trailmaster kit which IMO is a much better riding and handling
suspension. I still have the 4 inch TM suspension that I will be putting up
for sale after october when I swap in the new longer radius arms. I've had
three suspensions now. Racho 2.5 Tralmaster 4 and superlift 6. Trailmaster
was the best. It currently has trailmaster invader SK shocks, I polished the
plated surface till they look like chrome. Stiff riding shock! I'm gonna
switch back to SSV's or Rancho 9000s.

- -Russ

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

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 18:25:34 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC

I have never owned an Aerostar or Taurus, I apologize for the mistake on
Ford car engines, just what my dealer told me (Broadway Ford Truck Sales
in St. Louis, MO). But, the Aerostar/Ranger relationship is based on my
Helm's Ford Service Manuals, which do say the Aerostar and Ranger are
built on the same ladder frame platform, I think the Windstar is Ford's
unibody/front wheel drive minivan. You are right, the suspensions that
bolt up to them are different and the Ranger 4WD system is completely
different than the Aerostar AWD, as are many other systems in the
trucks.
Yes, the Explorer probably shared more common suspension parts with the
Ranger than the Aerostar, but the trucks apparently came from different
"platforms" at Ford. I don't work in the industry, so I don't know
what constitutes a platform verses shared parts. Maybe being based on
the same frame doesn't mean they are built on the same platform,
although it's pretty easy to design multiple front subframes and rear
suspensions to bolt or rivet on the same frame. I suspect that
wheelbases, track widths, various mounting dimensions would be similar
on Ranger/Aerostar verses Ranger/Explorer, which would indicate that
there's more in common structurally than what parts are hung off the
frame. My 1997 has the 5 speed auto, the 5R55 is what the technical
writers in the manuals called it, the 4 speed was called the 4R44. The
manual is manufactured by Mazda.
My original point remains, though, that I understand that there were two
main reasons that the SOHC 4.0 never was put in the Ranger:
(mis)allocation to other Ford vehicles and possible engine bay
conflicts. Thing is, even though the Ranger doesn't have the SOHC or a
V8, it remains the best selling compact truck. Ford can then dedicate
things like the better engines to the more competitive SUV market. If
people stopped buying the Ranger, then I'd guarantee the SOHC, or at
least a V8 of some flavor, would show up in a hurry.

I heard that the only "real" reason why the ranger did not get the SOHC
was lack of supply since the demand for them in Explorers were so great!
There is not difference in engine bay area.

The five speed auto is the same tranny as the 4 speed auto, Ford 'found'
another gear between 2 and 3rd this is the same way the tranny become a
4 speed!!! Same tranny but they just keep improving it! The manual is a
Mazda or a Mitsubishi(not sure about 97 up but there were a couple of
Mitsu'! I hated my Mazda 5 speed in my 94 Splash lost 3rd gear synchro
twice and used more fluid than any tranny I have had.
The Aerostar is fully framed and the windstar is unibody! Funny that the
windstar would get the more powerful engine though.
I almost bought a D*dge cause I wanted a v-8 and nobody else offered one
in their small trucks! Take it easy...I didn't do it...I traded my
ranger in on a used Lightning, but still would like a 5.0 ranger.
Chris
94 Lightning
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 18:33:43 EDT
From: MindEfx aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Ranger with SOHC

I remember reading some article about a year ago..in one of the truck mags, i
cant remember which. This guy bought a brand new splash and dropped a
supercharged 5.0 in it, lowered it a little, put 18" rims on it. I think he
added 4 wheel discs too. The article said it was good to 150mph or something
like that i think. Ford should make a SVT Ranger like that. But I guess the
new 1999 Lightning will be a good subsitute for that.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 18:39:17 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Small - '91 Explorer Alignment

Noah.Karl oscsystems.com wrote:
>
> Hello Small Truck Enthusiast,
>
> This is my first posting and I would like to say that this digest has been
> very informative. Its funny because I read this list everyday and say to
> myself "...boy, I'm glad I don't have this problem or that problem.." but
> eventually, as your truck ages, you get problems..so here is mine...
>
> Its not really a problem more than I need advice from the collective wisdom
> of this list...I have a '91 Explorer XLT with 68K miles that has been great
> for the past 7 years. In-fact, never seen a garage and I do my own
> maintenance, except when it come to new tires and wheel alignments which by
> the way is the topic I would like to discuss.
>
> I finally replaced the original Firestone all terrain tires with news ones
> after more than 60K miles on them. They aren't the best tires, but they
> lasted for such a long time and the price was right. Anyway, I bought the
> tires from NTB (was NTW) and had an alignment done. Well, 8K miles later
> (almost exactly to the mile) I have excessive camber or toe wear (i.e., the
> outside of both front tires are about 50% worn compared to the middle or
> inner side!!!). I noticed it when I was ready to rotate them (its
> basically our family car and my wife drives it most of the time to haul the
> kids around so I don't look over the Explore as much as I should). The
> back tires look brand new. I brought the Explorer back to NTB and they
> started rambling about rotation and that it has been almost a year since
> the alignment and I said I don't care if it has been 10 years, there are
> only 8K miles on these tires and the previous ones had 60K on them with, by
> the way, had no uneven wear patterns. I suggested to them that since the
> wear on both front tires are identical, that the alignment might have been
> done incorrectly from the beginning and we are now seeing the results.
> They said to bring it in this Wednesday (8/13) so they can take a look and
> will determine corrective action (if any).
>
> So...what do you think? Am I way-off-base or do I have something worth
> making a stink about? I'll be the first one to admit I'm wrong and I don't
> want to make the poor manager at NTB life miserable unnecessarily.....


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.