small-list-digest Thursday, February 4 1999 Volume 03 : Number 030



=======================================================================
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 - anti-seize vs Loc-tite
RE: FTE Small - BII Question
RE: FTE Small - 97 Explorer Tranny cooler
FTE Small - RE: 2.9 to 4.0 l swap WARNING: Loong!
Re: FTE Small - BII Question
FTE Small - Re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question
RE: FTE Small - tailgating question
FTE Small - re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question
RE: FTE Small - Re: BII question
RE: FTE Small - Re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - Power windows & locks
Re: FTE Small - TSB on 96 ranger brakes (Tim?)
FTE Small - Ranger - Mazda differences
Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - Ranger - Mazda differences
Re: FTE Small - Ranger - Mazda differences
Re: FTE Small - Cousin of My Aerostar Stinks
Re: FTE Small - Re: Aerostar hodgepodge
Re: FTE Small - Aerostar Hodge-podge
Re: FTE Small - Cousin of My Aerostar Stinks
Re: FTE Small - Service in Colorado Springs: need advice
Re: FTE Small - True confessions of an automotive addict
Re: FTE Small - 97 Explorer Tranny cooler
FTE Small - Ed the Aussie
Re: FTE Small - anti-sieze vs Loc-tite
Re: FTE Small - Service in Colorado Springs: need advice
Re: FTE Small - BII Question
Re: FTE Small - Ed the Aussie
Re: FTE Small - Temp on Eddie Bauer Explorer
Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question
Re: FTE Small - 97 Explorer Tranny cooler
RE: FTE Small - Re: BII question

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

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 06:17:57 -0600
From: "Michael Russell"
Subject: RE: FTE Small - anti-seize vs Loc-tite

Anti-seize typically would be used on bolts and nuts exposed to high temp
and/or high corrosion applications, to ensure they CAN be removed easily
without galling/stripping threads. Loc-tite is as thread-locking compound to
ensure that threaded fasteners DON'T come loose easily (from vibration).

- -----Original Message-----

Date: Tue, 2 Feb 99 15:54:30 PST
From: don neomagic.com (Donald Paauw)
Subject: FTE Small - anti-sieze vs Loc-tite

I've seen several posts that advise using anti-sieze when bolting into
aluminum,
especially on spark plugs. Recently, I pulled out my transfer case and
removed
bolts from it & the transmission, both of which look like they have aluminum
cases.
The bolts from each had an orange sealer that acted like Loc-tite blue. So,
my
question is: exactly where and when should anti-sieze be used.
Also, does Loc-tite act as anti-sieze (even if it doesn't cover all of the
threads)?
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html


________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.netzero.net/download.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:09:10 -0500
From: Burnett
Subject: RE: FTE Small - BII Question

Joe Mitchell wrote:
> Simple question:
> What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> *why*?

1990 was the last year for the BII, and even then it was really only a half
year. From what I can remember, the '91 Explorer was early enough they
could have called it a '90 1/2. The Explorer put an end to the BII. I think
Ford might have planned the Explorer as the next BII. People were really
starting to go for 4-door compact SUVs in the late eighties, and everybody
but Ford seemed to have one. Ford probably decided to change the name
because of the bad press the Bronco II was getting concerning roll-overs.

Regards,

Burnett 89 BII

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

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:16:05 -0500
From: Burnett
Subject: RE: FTE Small - 97 Explorer Tranny cooler

Bobby D Herring wrote:
>
> Now the question: The dip stick handle says use Mercron V.
> I had several qusrts of Quaker State that says it works for
> Dexron and Mercron fluid. Am I going to mess somthing up by
> not buying Mercron V specifically?
>

I don't know the specific differences, but Mercon has come in different
'flavors' over the years. I think both my vehicles specify Mercon III. In
general, newer grades can be used in place of older ones (i.e.: use Mercon
III instead of Mercon II), but not the reverse. I think I have also heard
that Mercon V is NOT a replacement for Mercon III, and that some new Fords
still come with Mercon III. I'd do some careful research before using
anything other than Mercon V.

Hope this helps.

Burnett 89 BII
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: 3 Feb 99 09:02:37 EST
From: CharlesASkarsaune eaton.com
Subject: FTE Small - RE: 2.9 to 4.0 l swap WARNING: Loong!

Jason Talbot wrote:
>
> I have a 88 Bronco II. The 2.9 that's in it is shot. Would it be better
to
> replace the 2.9, with a remanufactured one, or get a remanufactured 4.0.
I
> have a 5 speed manual,

Here's info I've piled up from previous sources. Note I'm not the author,
he's credited
at the end.

>ENGINE SWAP FOR BRONCO II

>You can get a used 4.0 from Explorers or Rangers since 1990. You will
>need the whole engine including brackets for alternator, air
>conditioning, and power steering. kensingtonmotors.com had used 4.0
>engines between $450 and $1250. A salvage yard near you may also have
>one. You're engine mounts will work, check to see if they are okay when
>you pull the engine. I recommend you get the transmission also. You've
>got to remove the complete engine "system" and install in your vehicle.

>You also need to take the following from the donor truck:

>1. Computer from passenger compartment
>2. Wiring Harness from main harness to Computer harnesses.
>3. Exhaust manifolds or headers plus oxygen sensor
>4. Sensors: coolant temperature, manifold pressure, air charge
>temperature,
>5. Any associated power train sensors, such as reverse light switch,
>neutral switch, 4X4 switch.
>6. If possible take transmission with mounts, crossmember and downshift
>linkage.
>6. Possible radiator change - take from donor if possible.
>7. The original radiator will work fine if it's in good shape. It's
>actually bigger than the 4.0's. Shroud is OK, too, but get the 4.0 with
>it's fan.
>8. Motor Mounts [from donor if look okay; new ones preferred].
>9. Fuel tank, lines, and pump. Get an 89 or 90 if you can, otherwise use
>the dual pump setup of an 86-88 Bronco II.
>10. Fuel injection assemblies.
>11. Radiator overflow tank
>12. The ignition module that sits next to the radiator is required.
>13. Ignition coil if not mounted on block
>14. Throttle linkage
>15. Accessory brackets, such as alternator, A/C compressor, air
>injection pump and power steering
>16. Speed sensor in the transfer case. Better yet, get the transmission
>and transfer case. Switches from the tranny back (reverse lights,
>neutral switch, etc) are not necessary unless you get the tranny, too.
>17. Get the power distribution box for connection of the computer
>relays.
>18. You will need the air intake system system consisting of at least
>the mass air flow sensor, air duct, and throttle body. Use either a K&N
>filter or the Explorer's filter box.
>19.If you have air conditioning, get the hoses, condenser, and a NEW
>receiver dryer.
>20. Use the original temperature and oil pressure gauge senders. Just
>install them in the same places on the new engine.

>You'll need from other sources:
>a. Hoses: water, vacuum, fuel
>b. Belts
>c. Wiring harness if not from donor

>The changeover will take about 30 hours to do.

>Take lots of COLOR PICTURES as your stripping the donor vehicle to help
>when you re-assemble in your own engine compartment

>If you want to see lots of pictures and get lots more details about how
>to actually DO this swap, see my article in the October '97 issue of
>Four Wheeler.

>Also get a Chilton's or Haynes Manual. Or even better a factory service
>manual.

>Check out the V-8 Conversion info at:
>James Duff Enterprises - the best on-line Bronco II V-8 swap info found
>as of June 9, 1998.
>www.jamesduff.com/broncoII/v8conversions.html

>Advance Adapters
>www.advanceadapters.com/Ford/Ford.html

>COST: Costs will vary widely depending on what you intend to do with
>the competed package, the condition of the items installed, who does the
>installation, and what items are installed. For my planning purposes, I
>am planning to swap in a 4.0, its A4LD auto tranny and stock transfer
>case. I'll do the work. I run street only - daily driver. I'll do
>little to upgrade the engine. I will install some heavy duty clutches
>and a shift kit in the trans. I'll rework the driveshafts. I'm
>budgeting $3000.

>Here's a question to consider: What could you buy if you traded your
>current truck plus $3000?

>Other Sources:
>Triplett ASAP Auto Salvage, in Colorado www.triplettasap.com
>Bronco II Forum http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://4x44u.vmag.com/forum/b2-1097/
>Oct 97 issue of Four Wheeler magazine



>Updated October 15, 1998

>The following input from Tom Grancey on May 04, 1998:

>OK, I'll try and pass on some more info. I'd like to do it in a public
>forum rather than answer everyone's individual questions. The best thing
>to do is read my article in the Oct 97 issue of Four Wheeler on this
>swap. There's about 4 pages of information and 17-18 pictures. Here's
>what I can remember about this, bear in mind that I might miss a few
>small parts here and there since I'm recalling this from memory, not my
>documentation.

>One of the best approaches is to sit your rig by an Explorer or Ranger.
>Open the hoods, and just compare the two. Take good notes about the
>layout of the wiring, the mounting of different components, and the
>similarities of the two. Next, go to a junkyard and set things out for
>your swap. As you gather the parts, you'll eventually reach a point
>where it ties into the recipient vehicle, either mechanically or
>electrically. That's when you know you have everything.

>You'll need the 4.0L engine will all belt driven accessories, sensors,
>etc, the computer and wiring harness, the power distribution box, EEC
>relays and bracket, air intake system, mass air flow sensor, and air
>intake duct. I chose to use 4.0 L motor mounts, you may not need them if
>your's are in good shape. All of these parts will simply bolt into
>place. The computer fits in the same bracket, it's wiring harness
>follows the same path, etc.

>Transmissions are something to consider carefully. The early 5 speeds
>won't hold up to the 4.0 power, and they have a different input shaft
>length. The newer ones are beefier and hold up well. I'm running a 91 5
>speed that sat behind a 2.9L and it's just fine after 1.5 years. All
>bellhousing bolt patterns are identical and there are no fitup problems.

>For 84-85 vehicles, you'll need to change over the fuel system for fuel
>injection. I chose to swap the tank, lines and pump in my swap. Anything
>from 86 forward will work, but the 89-90 is preferred since it's a
>single pump setup, rather than two. If you've already got FI, take 4
>hours off the swap time, 'cause you got what you need already.

>Electrical is not too bad. I used Haynes' manuals for the two rigs and
>merely matched up color schemes for most of it. There's about 10-15
>wires to connect, depending on year, and they color codes match up
>through the years. Earlier vehicles may be missing a few things like a
>brake light switch and a check engine light that you'll have to add. The
>alternator on a 4.0 has an integral
>voltage regulator that has a sense line from the dash. Follow that
>through the schematics to find the resistor and it's hookup. All other
>wires connect at two or three connectors on the left fender apron. For
>the temperature and oil pressure gauges, move the original sensors to
>the new engine and use the existing wiring for them.

>If your cooling system is in good shape, the existing radiator will work
>fine. Mine held for over a year before old age finally got to it.

>If you have A/C, make sure you get the compressor on the engine. You'll
>also need to change the condenser since the connections are different,
>and you'll need the newer hoses for the system. Replace the receiver
>dryer with a new one.

>Now that I've written this, here's some other things to get:
>Fuel pump cutoff switch, found near the computer.
>Speed sensor that mounts in the transfer case.
>Starter motor and cable.
>Ignition module that mounts near the radiator.
>Wiring harness for fuel system and speed sensor.
>New upper radiator hose.

>This courtesy of Jerry Adams and Tom Grancey

Think I'll stick to rebuilding my 2.9 when it hits 200K miles. Unless
a donor 4.0l ranger or explorer shows up at my shop...

Chuck

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

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:51:38 -0800
From: Thom Cheney
Subject: Re: FTE Small - BII Question

Joe Mitchell wrote:
>
> Simple question:
> What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> *why*?


one word... Explorer (I think the last model year for the BII was '89)
- --
Thom Cheney
tcgrafx... among other things
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:32:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Pat Brown
Subject: FTE Small - Re: BII question

> From: "Joe Mitchell"
>
> Simple question:
> What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> *why*?

1990, Explorers replaced them in '91. But Hey, an Explorer Sport IS a
Bronco II, almost. Why was the BII discontinued? Politics, I assume.
BII's were lumped into the swb, high center of gravity SUV's that
all the safety fanatics went after in the late '80s. Too easy to
roll them during evasive hiway manuevers
- --
Pat Brown
Sebastopol, California '87 BII, '96 Bronco. My stable is full :-)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 10:59:17 -0800
From: "Alan Wilson"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question

Was the truck that OJ was riding in a BII?

Pat Brown wrote:

> > From: "Joe Mitchell"
> >
> > Simple question:
> > What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> > *why*?
>
> 1990, Explorers replaced them in '91. But Hey, an Explorer Sport IS a
> Bronco II, almost. Why was the BII discontinued? Politics, I assume.
> BII's were lumped into the swb, high center of gravity SUV's that
> all the safety fanatics went after in the late '80s. Too easy to
> roll them during evasive hiway manuevers
> --
> Pat Brown
> Sebastopol, California '87 BII, '96 Bronco. My stable is full :-)
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

- --
Alan Wilson - Wilshire Associates, (310) 451-3051 x3750
(310) 260-7350 Direct
(310) 458-2842 FAX


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

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 14:32:12 -0500
From: Jim Storch
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question

>Alan Wilson wrote:

>Was the truck that OJ was riding in a BII?

> Alan,

Funny you should bring that up. If you go to the online auction
at http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.ebay.com and search for "Ford Bronco", or go
directly to item #617030057, you will find that exact vehicle for
sale. It is a full size Bronco. The auction, which runs thru 2/5,
is a "private auction" for serious bidders only. They've asked
for an opening bid of $200,000.00 (Wow!). Supposedly, any
money in excess of the minimum bid will go to charity.

JimS

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

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 14:23:54 -0600 (CST)
From: Sandman
Subject: RE: FTE Small - tailgating question

On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, M. Monninger wrote:

> Seems to me I remember 350 lb being the limit on the Ranger. I don't have
> the manual handy, tho.
>

I've had over 500 lbs. of people sitting on the gate of my 89 Ranger
before with no problems. Never actually looked at the rating though.

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

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 99 16:59:44 EST
From: CONAN RALVM8.VNET.IBM.COM
Subject: FTE Small - re: BII question

>>What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
>>*why*?

I suspect -part- of the "why?" was that someone had started another
rollover scare. Good excuse for Ford to be corporately "responsible"
and offer something bigger, "better" and more expensive. ;-)
Ed in NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 14:53:01 -0800
From: John Adkins
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question

I remember reading somewhere that the name "Bronco II" was too
"male-oriented" and Ford wanted name that would appeal to female
buyers (who buy more new vehicles), so the Bronco II name went away and
the Explorer name was used. That's also why there's an Expedition
instead of a full sized Bronco today.

Pat Brown wrote:
>
> > From: "Joe Mitchell"
> >
> > Simple question:
> > What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> > *why*?
>
> 1990, Explorers replaced them in '91. But Hey, an Explorer Sport IS a
> Bronco II, almost. Why was the BII discontinued? Politics, I assume.
> BII's were lumped into the swb, high center of gravity SUV's that
> all the safety fanatics went after in the late '80s. Too easy to
> roll them during evasive hiway manuevers
> --
> Pat Brown
> Sebastopol, California '87 BII, '96 Bronco. My stable is full :-)
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 19:06:37 -0500
From: J Cope
Subject: RE: FTE Small - Re: BII question

Almost...? Yeah, that's funny...

JC


> From: "Joe Mitchell"
>
> Simple question:
> What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> *why*?

1990, Explorers replaced them in '91. But Hey, an Explorer Sport IS a
Bronco II, almost. Why was the BII discontinued? Politics, I assume.
BII's were lumped into the swb, high center of gravity SUV's that
all the safety fanatics went after in the late '80s. Too easy to
roll them during evasive hiway manuevers
- --
Pat Brown
Sebastopol, California '87 BII, '96 Bronco. My stable is full :-)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 19:07:26 -0500
From: J Cope
Subject: RE: FTE Small - Re: BII question

This one gets a resounding "Hells no!!" OJ was in a full-size.

JC

Was the truck that OJ was riding in a BII?

Pat Brown wrote:

> > From: "Joe Mitchell"
> >
> > Simple question:
> > What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> > *why*?
>
> 1990, Explorers replaced them in '91. But Hey, an Explorer Sport IS a
> Bronco II, almost. Why was the BII discontinued? Politics, I assume.
> BII's were lumped into the swb, high center of gravity SUV's that
> all the safety fanatics went after in the late '80s. Too easy to
> roll them during evasive hiway manuevers
> --
> Pat Brown
> Sebastopol, California '87 BII, '96 Bronco. My stable is full :-)
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

- --
Alan Wilson - Wilshire Associates, (310) 451-3051 x3750
(310) 260-7350 Direct
(310) 458-2842 FAX


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

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

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 19:26:10 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Power windows & locks

Jason Talbot wrote:
>
> I have a 88 Bronco II, with manual windows, and locks. I would like to
> convert them to power. I know there are kits that will do it, but how hard
> are they to install?

Shouldnt be too hard; the door panel comes off easily and the fuse box
is right there by the door. :-)

>What kind of modifications would I have to make? A

possibly some drilling here and there, maybe a little filing for
fine-tuning the adjustments.

> stereo installer in my area will do it, but he said the only way is to add
> an alarm system with relays for the windows, and locks. Is this true? If

NO! To put it bluntly.. Did the B-II come equipped with an alarm if it
had OEM power accessories? (no) Try some other installers and see what
they'll say.

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 19:32:24 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - TSB on 96 ranger brakes (Tim?)

Sorry it took so long to reply; Kim bought me a 'Play Station' Thursday
and my on-line time dropped dramatically for a few days ;-)

BJ Tiemessen wrote:
>
> I have a 96 ranger and my brakes grab when it rains or I drive through
> slush. I was told that there was a TSB put out about the pads swelling
> or something.

I forwarded the original to the owner's e-mail so I can look it up
tomorrow and get back to you with the info.

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 99 16:26:06 PST
From: don neomagic.com (Donald Paauw)
Subject: FTE Small - Ranger - Mazda differences

Does anyone know what, if any, differences there are between the
Ranger and Mazda pickups? I'm especially interested in the
4x4 '88-'91 models, not so much body but chassis & driveline.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 19:34:18 EST
From: Bakend AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question

In a message dated 2/3/99 11:59:16 AM Mountain Standard Time,
awilson wilshire.com writes:

> Was the truck that OJ was riding in a BII?
Nope Fullsize!
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 19:00:55 -0600
From: Scott Ford
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Ranger - Mazda differences

Donald Paauw wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what, if any, differences there are between the
> Ranger and Mazda pickups? I'm especially interested in the
> 4x4 '88-'91 models, not so much body but chassis & driveline.
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

The '88 to '91 Mazdas and Fords were completely different, that was
before Ford bought out controlling interest in Mazda. Ford did not
start providing trucks to Mazda until the '93 Ranger bodystyle (don't
remember if Mazda started selling them in '93, or if it was later.)

Scott Ford

- --
_________________________________________________________________________
'92 Ranger 4X4 Scott Ford
sford umr.edu
'86 Mustang GT Member
'56 Ford F-100 Alpha Psi chapter
Theta Xi Fraternity

http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.umr.edu/~sford
http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.umr.edu/~thetaxi
"Whether you think you can, or think you can't, you are right" Henry
Ford
_________________________________________________________________________
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 99 17:38:52 PST
From: don neomagic.com (Donald Paauw)
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Ranger - Mazda differences

>
> The '88 to '91 Mazdas and Fords were completely different, that was
> before Ford bought out controlling interest in Mazda. Ford did not
> start providing trucks to Mazda until the '93 Ranger bodystyle (don't
> remember if Mazda started selling them in '93, or if it was later.)
>
> Scott Ford

So, that explains the prices I'm seeing. Thanks for the info.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 21:11:35 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Cousin of My Aerostar Stinks

Richard wrote:
>
> "Mike McNany" wrote, about:
> Son Of My Aerostar Stinks!-----------------------------------------
>
> I like to think I'm in good shape but I have pulled muscles and my back
> out
> trying to apply torque on vehicle parts at the extreme reach of my arms.

Amen brother!

> A
> lot of times you just have to jam your arm down in places it shouldn't
> fit
> and feel (?) with the socket to do the job.

I'm thankful that I was blessed with thin arms and a high tolerance for
pain/heat.

>
> I strongly think that Automotive
> manufacturers, in their attempts to make it to hard for common folk to
> work
> on the vehicles, are also making it equally hard on the professional
> mechanics to do their job. This includes factory mechanics with all
> their
> specialized tools.

Yep. At least a dealer tech only has to worry about one make when
he/she's buying the 'special tools' required. I on the other hand have
to deal with whatever comes in the door; I cant justify buying a tool
(if I can find one!) for a one-time job on a Jaguar or whatever that
exceeds the money I'll be PAID for the work.. I've got a whole drawer
full of 'modified' tools though. It's easier to bend/cut/weld/notch an
existing wrench/socket to do the job (safely of course!) than to hunt
down the tool and pay for it assuming it doesnt have to be ordered. I
certainly have plenty of the 'real' special tools for the more common
makes/tasks, but with ingenuity and a boss that was a machinist for many
years we can usually fabricate something equaling the factory tool or
better.

>
> Me --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Mike, are you a professional mechanic?
> Having to do mechanical repairs like this sounds like the times of
> Charles Dickens. How does a mechanic pull through these days without
> suffering bodily injury?

We dont. It's been slow at the shop this week so I've been doing more
electrical work (adding lights) than my usual work but I can still count
5 scabs, 1 bruise, 2 burns and a sore back in a quick inventory of my
body. A box of band-aids & a tube of Neo-sporin lasts about 2 months
and I only use those for 'bleeders'.

> I mean, putting your back out can be major
> medical stuff. The bending and stooping that I had to do just to change
> that air filter: I mean, how can a person withstand this on a daily
> basis?

Careful positioning of the body; spread your legs and rest your chest on
the fender instead of bending, use LONG extensions etc. I used to work
at a 'quick-tune' type place in the '80s and was seeing a chiropractor
regularly until I replaced my 24" extension with a 36" to keep my 5'-11"
frame straighter while I was working. In a shop environment lifting the
vehicle some 6-16" helps for CARS, but trucks.. well unless you crawl in
under the hood and sit on whatever's available it's rough. Now add in
all the chemicals we're exposed to during the course of a day and it's
easy to see why my profession is pretty low on the 'predicted life
expectancy by profession' tables.

>
> I wonder if this has become commonplace in the design of consumer
> products in general. When I worked on stereo equipment and told my
> customers (even showed them) that the Sony cassette deck that they
> thought was so good was just so much junk, they would find it hard to
> believe.

Yes. About the only electronics I open nowdays are CB radios, and it's
just as asinine there as you describe in your field.

>
> I rag on Sony because somehow they've gotten this reputation for
> quality.

Advertising! "It's a SONY" :-) (But I DO like my 'Play Station' so
far..)

But it really extends to almost all Oriental consumer
> electronics products now: truly throwaway merchandise. Screws set into
> plastic,

Like the air filter nuts.

> flimsy overstressed parts,

Like several 'oil-filled' engine mounts I can think of and many other
parts come to mind.

> wildly overpriced replacement parts,

Like anything related to fuel-injection and it's controls.

> exhorbitantly-priced service manuals that must be purchased individually
> for each product.

And in the case of cars separate manuals for differing aspects. Of
course you can buy manuals covering all vehicles from '82 up on CD, but
it's in the thousands of Dollars and to stay current costs another chunk
of change every month.

> Electronics technicians are complaining lately that
> all current VCRs have flimsy garbage transport mechanisms: just barely
> adequate to do the job. My point is that this is almost exactly how my
> Aerostar was engineered.

And the older Taurii, Tempo and Escort. (Ford isnt the only one, just
using Ford examples to (sorta) stay in-topic)

> It is hard to imagine that the product
> managers have anything other than contempt for their customers: us! The
> guys who pay their salaries! Or perhaps they are under pressure from
> the executives for insane profits.
>

Planned obsolecense.. most front-end parts are designed for 125-150,000
Miles; I dont know about the design target for OTHER parts though.

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
> Richard
>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 21:33:38 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Aerostar hodgepodge

Wayne Haley wrote:
>
> In response to my post Bill Ciocco wrote, "Why would someone have a problem
> changing BII oil. (sic) I do my own every 3K miles and it takes 15 minutes."
>

15 Minutes is high! ;-) I've got it greased, fluids checked/topped,
tires set and the air filter checked and out the door.

> Well Bill, you are much more mechanically adept than I! I have changed the
> oil on virtually every car I have owned, to date, a '68 Buick GS400, '73
> Buick LeSabre, 1981 Datsun pickup, 1982 Chevy Impala, 1984 Bronco II, 1986
> Volkswagen Golf, 1988 Subaru station wagon, 1963 Chevrolet Impala SS, 1992
> Infiniti G20, 1996 Chevrolet Camaro SS, 1998 Acura Integra GS-R. The BII
> was not not only the worst oil change, it was far and away the worst.

How? I guess I'm forgetting my early years of oil changing, but to me
it's no different than most. Try the early 300ZX, Caddy 4100's, 4x4
S-10s with a 2.8, 2.5L GM FWD products or any Nissan 'hardbody' truck
with a 4 cylinder. (Saw a boy get fired over the Nissan; turned out the
filter kicked his butt and he left it ON and threw the new filter in the
trash.. the customer noticed the blue Nissan filter still on the truck
and well... fireworks is probably the friendliest description I can use
for the ensuing 15 minutes.)

> Talk
> about sadistic, the placement of that filter was worthy of the Gestapo!

No, just misfortunate; the ones mentioned above are more worthy!

> If
> you like to change your oil while the engine is warm, it is almost
> impossible not to burn yourself. Well, almost impossible for me not to burn
> myself!

Most imports or FWD vehicles are the same; usually the darn filter is
just to the side of the exhaust. Flex pipe make an interesting 'waffle
pattern' burn on your fore-arm. ;-)

> Anyway, my hat is off to Bill for being a 15 minute BII changer. In fact,
> Bill, if you aren't doing anything this weekend. . .

My shop's got a $12.90 special right now.. Of course by the time you
drive here and back you might need another.

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
85 B-II 2.8
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 21:50:54 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Aerostar Hodge-podge

Richard wrote:
>
> Wayne Haley wrote ---------------------------------------------------
>
> First off, I appreciate the responses to my previous post about tires
> and
> wheels. Think I will stick with the stock wheels for now and go back to
> Michelins.
>
> Me -------------------------------------------------------------------

> I got some BS at Montgomery Ward about a Bridgestone that they were
> pushing. The shop manager swore that their "Turesna" (believe it!) is a
> standard Bridgestone model. But, in checking the spelling, damn if the
> standard Bridgestone tire isn't a "Turenza." And there's some marketing
> deal between the two companies. Bridgestone tires have a rough-riding
> reputation.

'Turanza' actually. We sell a TON of 'em and havent had any complaints
about the ride and VERY few tread-wear warranty issues. Bridgestone and
Firestone are now the same company due to buy-outs etc. Were I in the
market for a 'premium' tire it'd be my 1st choice in a stock car/2wd Tk.
application

Sorry.. just dont *LIKE* Michelins from prior bad experiences and the
overly stiff bead that requires extra effort/care during
mounting/dismounting.

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:01:20 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Cousin of My Aerostar Stinks

Mike McNany wrote:
>
> I tried to word my opinion concisely and I was replying to a pro
> mechanic (the maniac).

It's MANIC! :-) Dont feel bad. everytime someone sees my name-tag they
read maniac too. It's taken from the ZZ-Top song of the same title. I
met my fiancee on-line 5 years ago and she still calls me Manic 95% of
the time rather than 'Tim' .

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:07:53 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Service in Colorado Springs: need advice

Jeff Richardson wrote:
>
> Greetings!
>
> I recently moved to Colorado Springs, and I'm looking for suggestions as to
> where to take my '99 Ranger for service. I'm a little wary of dealers, but
> Ford dealers know Fords better than most anyone I assume. Anyone here in
> Colorado (or anywhere, for that matter) have suggestions for Ford truck
> service in Colorado Springs?
>

Go to the iATN website (iatn.com I think) and see if there are any
members in that area; just like ASE certification it doesnt ASSURE
quality work but it's a good indicator that at least they care. For
those that dont know the iATN is the international Automotive
Technicians Network wherein members can post e-mail questions to the
other thousands of members if they run into a 'problem child' similar to
this list but dedicated to the professional.

Hope this helps!

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:23:45 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - True confessions of an automotive addict

Wayne Haley wrote:
>
> To Bill Ciocco and all other interested FT owners:
> My response to Bill's post (re: Aerostar Hodgepodge) carried an implication
> that I am not mechanically inept. Upon further consideration, I have
> decided this is not the case! As I have thought back on all the bolts I
> have twisted off, screws I have dropped down carb throat and stuff I have
> taken off and couldn't remember how to get back on, I have decided I am most
> certainly a liability under any hood. I probably am the guy that could turn
> a 15 minute oil change into a one hour ordeal!

Thanks for the chuckle! :-) It happens to the pros too; a month or so
ago I dropped a nut into the intake side of a turbo.. finally got it out
by blowing air into the exit side to spin it out! :-) Last week
dropped a 'special' intake manifold bold into an area nobody could find
it and the parts man looking up the new bolt said "Damn, they're PROUD
of that bolt".. (dont know the price.. that was enough incentive to look
REALLY hard for it and an hour later it was found..) Next day a water
pump actually fell off when I got all the bolts out and it whacked the
radiator. (arrgh!) Thankfully it was repairable. (At OUR expense of
course.)


>
> I am going to keep at it though. After all, this is a Ford, not a Ferrari!
> No dis intended :-).

Carry on! I know most DIYers are competent, but I see the work of the
ones that arent after it's messed up or apart and have to laugh
sometimes. ;-)

>
> This is a great mailing list, appreciate all the input on my various insane
> questions. Happy motoring!

Well said!

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:25:55 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - 97 Explorer Tranny cooler

Bobby D Herring wrote:
>
> Now the question: The dip stick handle says use Mercron V.
> I had several qusrts of Quaker State that says it works for
> Dexron and Mercron fluid. Am I going to mess somthing up by
> not buying Mercron V specifically?

Mercon=Dexron with a 'Ford' accent. ;-)

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

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:16:09 -0600
From: "Randy Collins"
Subject: FTE Small - Ed the Aussie

Ed:

Hey! I live in St. Louis! You're correct--the Explorers are built at the
St. Louis assembly plant. I think there may also be a plant in Canada or
something like that that also builds them. My dad works here at the St.
Louis plant. I'll have to aske him.

To Everyone:

My 98 Ranger 4x4 with the off road (and 410 gears) package is making a
"clank" when I put it in gear. Does not do it all the time and mostly when
I put it in reverse. Should I be concerned? Anybody know where this may be
coming from? Tim Turner? This is the sloppiest driveline I've ever driven.

TIA

ran
>,
>> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 17:45:38 +1100
>> From: "Ed Minner"
>> Subject: FTE Small - Ed the Aussie
>>
>> Hi I'm Ed from Australia, and l lived St Louis for some time, is there
>> anyone out there from St. Louis?
>> I have a 97 Explorer which I have been informed is built St. Louis.
>> Go the Cards!!
>> Ed the Aussie
>>
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:35:47 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - anti-sieze vs Loc-tite

Donald Paauw wrote:
>
> I've seen several posts that advise using anti-sieze when bolting into aluminum,
> especially on spark plugs.

Amen! Money well spent. I dont HAVE to, but I use a tub of A-S a year
(at least) on spark plugs and anything exhaust related since I might be
the next one to work on a vehicle I see!

> Recently, I pulled out my transfer case and removed
> bolts from it & the transmission, both of which look like they have aluminum cases.
> The bolts from each had an orange sealer that acted like Loc-tite blue. So, my
> question is: exactly where and when should anti-sieze be used.

At a guess it was an RTV sealer or an anti-leak compound similar to
thread sealant.

> Also, does Loc-tite act as anti-sieze (even if it doesn't cover all of the threads)?

No. I use Anti on anything that gets hot and loc-tite on anything that
rotates and PST or similar on anything going into fluids.

Tim Turner/Manic Mechanic
Custer Auto Repair
Wilmington NC
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 3 Feb 99 19:29:19 PST
From: don neomagic.com (Donald Paauw)
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Service in Colorado Springs: need advice

>
> Go to the iATN website (iatn.com I think) and see if there are any
>

It's http://www.ford-trucks.com//lc/lc.php?action=do&link=http://www.iatn.net
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:47:22 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - BII Question

Joe Mitchell wrote:
>
> Simple question:
> What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> *why*?

I've looked it up before and I think it was '92. Why? The SUV was
becoming popular and the profit margin was so much better for vehicles
loaded with un-needed accesories that rarely see dirt than base models
that play hard. I really think there would be a good market for a
stripped down 4x4 at a 'real' price rather than the over priced
'yuppie-mobiles' that seem all the rage now. I'll keep repairing my '85
B-II as long as necessary until Ford makes another vehicle as capable as
it is. (Unlikely.. I guess I'm stuck with my beloved B-II for the
duration!)

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

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

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 22:52:46 -0500
From: pms2
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Ed the Aussie

Randy,

There was a TSB for a ping sound when the truck was first put in gear
for '97 Rangers. Don't know if it applies to 98's. My '97 did it
intermittently, but I never got it fixed because I traded the lemon on a
'98 Ranger. Thank goodness for 2.9% APR.

Phil



Randy Collins wrote:
>
> Ed:
>
> Hey! I live in St. Louis! You're correct--the Explorers are built at the
> St. Louis assembly plant. I think there may also be a plant in Canada or
> something like that that also builds them. My dad works here at the St.
> Louis plant. I'll have to aske him.
>
> To Everyone:
>
> My 98 Ranger 4x4 with the off road (and 410 gears) package is making a
> "clank" when I put it in gear. Does not do it all the time and mostly when
> I put it in reverse. Should I be concerned? Anybody know where this may be
> coming from? Tim Turner? This is the sloppiest driveline I've ever driven.
>
> TIA
>
> ran
> >,
> >> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 17:45:38 +1100
> >> From: "Ed Minner"
> >> Subject: FTE Small - Ed the Aussie
> >>
> >> Hi I'm Ed from Australia, and l lived St Louis for some time, is there
> >> anyone out there from St. Louis?
> >> I have a 97 Explorer which I have been informed is built St. Louis.
> >> Go the Cards!!
> >> Ed the Aussie
> >>
> == FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 00:09:14 EST
From: Ding060297 AOL.COM
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Temp on Eddie Bauer Explorer

I would say your thermostat is getting stuck in the open position...Or you
have way to much antifreeze in there and not enough water mixed in....ding
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 00:23:46 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: BII question

Pat Brown wrote:
>
> > From: "Joe Mitchell"
> >
> > Simple question:
> > What was the last production year for the BII, and does anyone know
> > *why*?
>
> 1990, Explorers replaced them in '91. But Hey, an Explorer Sport IS a
> Bronco II, almost.

What?! Okay.. follow me for a day of off-roading. Fortunately I have a
tow-strap. I hope you dont mind any body damage either since I can
pivot in a smaller diameter. The Bronco & Bronco II were replaced by
LESS capable vehicles due to the demand for 'SUV's that rarely see
anything but pavement styling. If I wanted a 'fancy' ride I'd get a
still capable 'Range Rover' rather than any of the now offered American
vehicles. I'll stick to my 14 year old B-II and fix whatever it needs
rather than spend more than I did on a single-wide trailer in '93......


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.