From: owner-small-list-digest ford-trucks.com (small-list-digest)
To: small-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Subject: small-list-digest V2 #182
Reply-To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Sender: owner-small-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Errors-To: owner-small-list-digest ford-trucks.com
Precedence: bulk


small-list-digest Thursday, July 2 1998 Volume 02 : Number 182



=======================================================================
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:

FTE Small - Explorer Trailer Wiring
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
FTE Small - 2.3L application?
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
FTE Small - '86 Ranger 2.9L - Running rich
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
Re: FTE Small - New to list, Unhappy Ranger owner
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
Re: FTE Small - New to list, Unhappy Ranger owner
Re: FTE Small - '86 Ranger 2.9L - Running rich
Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W
FTE Small - New 99 F150 information
FTE Small - Amplifiers: The Second Consideration

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

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 10:27:22 EDT
From: JaWise aol.com
Subject: FTE Small - Explorer Trailer Wiring

I've got a 93 Explorer. I understand the trailer towing option included
relays to buffer the trailer outputs. My quesiton is I bought the truck used
so I don't know if it has the option. Can you easily see these relays? Where
is the connector for the jumper? Also I looked in the fuse box under the hood
and there is a fuse in the slot for trailer lighting. Does this mean I have
the option? Thanx Jason.
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 08:53:57 -0700
From: Keith Srb
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

At 09:50 PM 6/30/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Ok, I'm seriously considering swapping the 4.0L V6 in my 1990 Ranger 4x4 for
>a V8.
>
>Now first are the 351W and the 302's the same externally size wise? (its
>been a long time since I fooled with engine swapping) in other words, will
>the 351W fit the same as a 302? If the 351W isn't a problem I'd go that way
>as I don't want to build a "RACE" truck I just want a good reliable engine
>in my truck and a stock fresh 351 would provide me with all I'll ever need.

351 will encounter more clearance problems than a 302 will

>Next does anyone know where to look for the necessary parts (mounts etc)? I
>can't remember the names of the companies that specialize in this stuff for
>the life of me. Any WEB address's would be appreciated.

Try http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.jamesduff.com/broncoII/v8conversions.html They have some
good info on the parts needed for the swap. I am not associate with these
people in any way. I stumbled across their web site one day while I was
looking for info on doing this swap.

>One more question, transmissions, I have the AOD 4speed now, will this bolt
>to the V8's?
>
>
>Bob

Keith Srb herbie netvalue.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.netvalue.net/herbie
Mesa, AZ

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 08:30:37 -0800
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

Yes, the 351 and the 302 share the same block. Other than that, I'm not
sure how the swap would go. Good luck!!

TC


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 09:13:43 -0800
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

Keith Srb wrote:

>
> 351 will encounter more clearance problems than a 302 will
>

Right... I think the intake manifold sits higher than the 302.

TC
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 09:26:26 -0700
From: "Tim J. Clevenger"
Subject: FTE Small - 2.3L application?

Hi all,

The engine in my '86 Ranger just reached 176,000 miles, and I think it's =
getting a little tired. I'm ready to rebuild it, but I don't want to =
put my truck out of commission while I perform the rebuild.

I just bought an '83 Ranger for parts. It also has the 2.3L engine, =
only carbureted. This is what I'm thinking of doing:

1. Taking the block out of the '83, rebuilding it (seals, gaskets, =
rods, pistons, valves, camshaft, whatever it needs.)
2. Bolting the manifolds, fuel injection equipment and smog stuff from =
the '86 onto the '83 block.
3. Putting the finished product back in the '86.

Are there any significant differences between the '83 and '86 blocks? =
Anything I need to know before doing this swap?

TIA,

Tim Clevenger

'90 Nissan 240SX SE
'86 Ford Ranger 1WD
'86 Honda Helix

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 09:39:43 -0700
From: Keith Srb
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

At 09:13 AM 7/1/98 -0800, Thom Cheney wrote
>Keith Srb wrote:
>
>>
>> 351 will encounter more clearance problems than a 302 will
>>
>
>Right... I think the intake manifold sits higher than the 302.
>
>TC

I am not sure what the clearance problems would be, I was paraphrasing what
was said on James Duff's Web Page. I also read, some place on the web
page, that you have to cut out or modify the heater box on the fire wall so
there is room for the valve covers. Something like that anyway.

After finding out how many adapters and things I would have to swap out, I
decided it wasn't worth making the swap. JMHO.

Later


Keith Srb herbie netvalue.net
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://members.netvalue.net/herbie
Mesa, AZ

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:46:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Bob Johnson
Subject: FTE Small - '86 Ranger 2.9L - Running rich

Hi! Been a member of the 80-96 list for a while, just joined the Ranger list
- - just bought myself a Ranger. 1986 SC XLT, 2.9L V6, know the little old
lady (really) who was the original owner. 95K miles - looks new - she used
seat covers from the minute she took delivery.

The truck seems to run well around town, but I notice a hesitation or
stumble at highway speeds - feels like a gusty headwind. The problem is
intermittant (oh great) - the truck runs fine for a few miles, "stumbles"
for a few miles, runs fine ... The "stumble" is accompanied by black smoke
from the exhaust. No "check engine" or "EMISS" lights on. Just after I
bought the truck, I cleaned the engine. She was hard to start right after
(all wet), and I let her idle for a while when I did get her started - she
didn't like that much, and stumbled, stalled as soon as I blipped the
throttle, and was real hard to start immediately thereafter (may have been a
weak battery). After an overnight charge, the truck has run well since with
the exception of the highway smoke/stumble. The problem predates the
cleaning, so I'm sure nothing went wrong with the degreaser/water, etc. Have
run 3 tanks of gas since I bought her, added injector cleaner to all three -
mileage has been consistent - about 16 mpg in mixed highway/around-town
driving - another symptom of an overly rich mixture?

I've called around, but no one can get me on any diagnostic machines until
next week, and I'd really like to try to solve this sooner. O2 sensor? MAP?
Any help will be appreciated. I'm a digest subscriber but in a rush - if you
would please CC me directly with any ideas I'd be grateful.

Thanks - Bob Johnson
'80 F-250 I6
'86 Ranger SC
'73 BMW R75/5
Other stuff too

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 12:51:09 -0400
From: "AutoTech"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

THE 351 IS NOT THE SAME BLOCK AS THE 302, THE 351 IS TALLER AND WIDER THEN
THE 302
- -----Original Message-----
From: Linda d' Fan
To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Tuesday, June 30, 1998 10:56 PM
Subject: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W


>Ok, I'm seriously considering swapping the 4.0L V6 in my 1990 Ranger 4x4
for
>a V8.
>
>Now first are the 351W and the 302's the same externally size wise? (its
>been a long time since I fooled with engine swapping) in other words, will
>the 351W fit the same as a 302? If the 351W isn't a problem I'd go that way
>as I don't want to build a "RACE" truck I just want a good reliable engine
>in my truck and a stock fresh 351 would provide me with all I'll ever need.
>
>Next does anyone know where to look for the necessary parts (mounts etc)? I
>can't remember the names of the companies that specialize in this stuff for
>the life of me. Any WEB address's would be appreciated.
>
>One more question, transmissions, I have the AOD 4speed now, will this bolt
>to the V8's?
>
>
>Bob
>
>== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 15:03:45 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Small - New to list, Unhappy Ranger owner

I have a 2.9 and have 180,000 with no problems. wish I had the 4.0
though.

Actually the 2.9 is were the 4.0 derived from! So I guess technically
you have a 4.0.
Chris
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 15:14:04 +0000
From: Garr&Pam
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

Linda d' Fan wrote:
>
> Ok, I'm seriously considering swapping the 4.0L V6 in my 1990 Ranger 4x4 for
> a V8.
>
> Now first are the 351W and the 302's the same externally size wise? (its
> been a long time since I fooled with engine swapping) in other words, will
> the 351W fit the same as a 302? If the 351W isn't a problem I'd go that way
> as I don't want to build a "RACE" truck I just want a good reliable engine
> in my truck and a stock fresh 351 would provide me with all I'll ever need.
>
> Next does anyone know where to look for the necessary parts (mounts etc)? I
> can't remember the names of the companies that specialize in this stuff for
> the life of me. Any WEB address's would be appreciated.

One more question, transmissions, I have the AOD 4speed now, will this
bolt to the V8's?

I have seen both applications 5.0 and 5.8! I guess it depends how much
money you want to spend and what you want the truck to do! I would love
to have my Lightning motor in my old Splash!!!(hehe) But the 4.0 has
alot of potential cause of the aftermarket support. For the money this
would be your best bet. Plus you will get better gas mileage with the
4.0...not to much difference in mpgs between 302 and 351 though!
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 17:56:45 -0400
From: Nathan Heid
Subject: Re: FTE Small - New to list, Unhappy Ranger owner

At 03:03 PM 7/1/98 +0000, you wrote:
>I have a 2.9 and have 180,000 with no problems. wish I had the 4.0
>though.
>
>Actually the 2.9 is were the 4.0 derived from! So I guess technically
>you have a 4.0.


WHAT?
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 21:08:40 EDT
From: testforecho1 juno.com (manny loinaz)
Subject: Re: FTE Small - '86 Ranger 2.9L - Running rich

Hi Bob. I too have an '86 Ranger with a 2.9L with 225,000 miles and
counting. A couple of months ago, I had the same problem that you are
describing. After checking the codes on the computer, I found that the
O2 sensor was sending a constant lean signal to the computer. After
replacing the O2 sensor, the problem disappeared. Good luck.


On Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:46:27 -0500 (CDT) Bob Johnson
writes:
>Hi! Been a member of the 80-96 list for a while, just joined the
>Ranger list
>- just bought myself a Ranger. 1986 SC XLT, 2.9L V6, know the little
>old
>lady (really) who was the original owner. 95K miles - looks new - she
>used
>seat covers from the minute she took delivery.
>
>The truck seems to run well around town, but I notice a hesitation or
>stumble at highway speeds - feels like a gusty headwind. The problem
>is
>intermittant (oh great) - the truck runs fine for a few miles,
>"stumbles"
>for a few miles, runs fine ... The "stumble" is accompanied by black
>smoke
>from the exhaust. No "check engine" or "EMISS" lights on. Just after I
>bought the truck, I cleaned the engine. She was hard to start right
>after
>(all wet), and I let her idle for a while when I did get her started -
>she
>didn't like that much, and stumbled, stalled as soon as I blipped the
>throttle, and was real hard to start immediately thereafter (may have
>been a
>weak battery). After an overnight charge, the truck has run well since
>with
>the exception of the highway smoke/stumble. The problem predates the
>cleaning, so I'm sure nothing went wrong with the degreaser/water,
>etc. Have
>run 3 tanks of gas since I bought her, added injector cleaner to all
>three -
>mileage has been consistent - about 16 mpg in mixed
>highway/around-town
>driving - another symptom of an overly rich mixture?
>
>I've called around, but no one can get me on any diagnostic machines
>until
>next week, and I'd really like to try to solve this sooner. O2 sensor?
>MAP?
>Any help will be appreciated. I'm a digest subscriber but in a rush -
>if you
>would please CC me directly with any ideas I'd be grateful.
>
>Thanks - Bob Johnson
>'80 F-250 I6
>'86 Ranger SC
>'73 BMW R75/5
>Other stuff too
>
>== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
>

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 22:59:51 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 5.0 or 351W

Forwarded for: "Linda d' Fan"

>I have seen both applications 5.0 and 5.8! I guess it depends how much
>money you want to spend and what you want the truck to do! I would love
>to have my Lightning motor in my old Splash!!!(hehe) But the 4.0 has
>alot of potential cause of the aftermarket support. For the money this
>would be your best bet. Plus you will get better gas mileage with the
>4.0...not to much difference in mpgs between 302 and 351 though!
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


The only reason I'm considering the swap in the first place is I suspect the
block of the 4.0 is not true, It has it's 3rd cracked head in 60,000 miles,
and I positive it isn't an overheating problem as the truck has had the
cooling system gone through (the first or second head not sure which) and
has NEVER OVERHEATED. I've owned it since it was new, changed the oil 3
times a year (it only has 60,000 miles in 8 yrs) etc.. so as far as I'm
concerned the block was probably not true from the factory, regardless I
would insist on having the deck machined before putting another set of heads
on it and I personally have had enough of this motor.

This is why I'm considering the swap or driving it to Fords World
Headquarters down the road (I live in Dearborn) and setting fire to the
truck on their lawn!

Needless to say I'm not one of Fords happier customers, you wouldn't believe
the list of things replaced on this truck in the 8 years I've owned it (the
total $ amount would be near $10,000 already, thank God for warranties)

Thanks to everyone for their help, although I'm still not sure if the 4.0L
AOD trans works with a 5.0 yet, anyone know?

Thanks again,

Bob


== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 23:44:03 -0400
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE Small - New 99 F150 information

I got this a couple of days ago and thought some of the list members
would find it useful:

>
>WWW.FordWorldNews.Com will release information on the 99 F-150 on 01
>July
>
>

Ken Payne
CoAdmin, Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com
== FTE: Unsubscribe and posting info www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 22:43:15 -0700
From: Richard
Subject: FTE Small - Amplifiers: The Second Consideration

MindEfx wrote:

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:14:05 EDT
From: MindEfx aol.com
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Amplifiers: a caution

Hmm..i have 600 true watts of power in my truck, as long as i dont drive
around blasting it all day my ears feel fine. In fact, the only time i
turn
it up real loud is when i am not in it. Thats all it comes down too,
look at
the pros, their systems are capable of 170+ dBs and they seem to be
ok..its
all about volume control...
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard's Reply:

My second -- and directly personal concern about strong automotive sound
systems -- is the effects that they often have upon the rest of us.
170dB, if I remember correctly, is louder than an entire orchestra.

I need assurance that I will not be forced to endure the blasting of
other peoples' audio systems. Here in California, we have a state law
that a vehicle's sound system must not be audible at a distance of 50
feet. The reason for this law is that most of the rest of us prefer....


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.