see: Quigley 4X4 conversions
you order them right thru most Ford dealers, close enough.

 

Does anyone know about when we're going to see the 3valve engines in the vans? You get thet 3valve V10 in there and the thing will fly, unless they have to detune it because of a lack of airflow, like on the 6.0L diesel.

 

The van got the V-10 a year before the pick-ups did. But after the V-10 proved to be a viable selling point in the trucks, the trucks got preference over the vans. The vans will get the 3 valve, and it's horsepower will be slightly less due to airbox design considerations. The PSD has no room for the big intercooler in the van, hence it's 80 hp decrease. Along with some packaging constraints like exhaust routing, airbox and heat build-up that also demanded a cut in power. But the gasser doesn't have all those constraints, so we will see a minor cut in power, say 340-345, Ken

 

My '90 e-150 with twin I beam handels very poorly, wanders all over the road. Did it from day one. But I don't hear anyone else complaining. Is mine a lemon? Did the pickups improve when they dropped the twin I beam? Do Chevy's handle better? I am waiting for Ford to improve the suspension so I can get a new van.

 

Well, I wouldn't say mine handles like a sports car, but I also have never expected much from it either... Wander... yeah it does that too... lanes changes require... planning... tends to a be micro-second delay between steering input and an actual change in direction... Stiffer sidewall tires will help... as would an aftermarket rear anti-sway bar, beefier front bar and stiffer bushings... But in the end, it needs to be remembered the twin I-beam system was designed to be simple and strong. Handling was of secondary importance.

Also bear in mind the handling standards at the time when it was designed: late 60's, when the average "sports car" didn't have the grip of today's econo-box.

 

Jimrat, make sure you're putting XL rated tires on the van.. If you aren't then it will wander like crazy. The other thing may be the alignment is out.. Take it to an alignment shop and get it aligned. If it still wanders take it back and make the tech the did it drive the thing. If it still does it demand your money back.. It's a very simple thing to do.... The factory specs are about .5" out.... It needs some camber/caster (beyond spec) to make it drive right. My '92 DID handle like a sports car... I could take most turns 15mph over what they were rated... The only bad thing in it was the little bit of body roll.

 

My 04 E350 handles way better than I expected it to. Although I do have some wander on certain highway surfaces it's not enough to be a problem. I really thought it was attributable to the tires. I have a 94 Explorer with Twin Traction Beams and new bushings/shocks that handles fine to me, no wander at all. The biggest difference in handling between the two is the sheer bulk of the van. I am happy with the handling of both vehicles. I also have a 95 SAAB 900 that I bought new so I know what really good handling can be like. I just don't expect the truck chassis vehicles to handle in the same league as a european sports sedan and I don't try to drive them the same way.

 

The twin I-beam is cheap, strong and sufficient to 99% of the people who need vans. Handling is not a priority, the basic design has radical camber and caster change depending on the compression or decompression of the suspension when cornering. The old 911 Porsche's were not a car you'd want to lift off the gas on when cornering hard. The rear-end would raise, decreasing rear track width and tucking the wheels under car for way big camber change and then you're watching the world go by out of the side windows as the rear end tries to pass the front end.

The I-beam is basically the same design except the pivot points are wider. Cars set up to roadrace have a bunch of camber set in, the tops of the tires are canted in, check it out sometime. So in a hard right corner, the tire with the most bite, the right front will lose that camber and have full tire width contact. Twin a-arms which keep the spindle in a perfectly horizontal plane when fully dropped, or fully raised keep the best tire contact for best bite in corners.

There never has been a twin I-beam that felt good when driving, they're all vague, and subject to wander, it's the nature of the design. Keep your adjustment on your steering box tight, and get a good alignment. And remember the ball joints in Ford twin I-beams are notorious for early wear and needing replacement. Stiff sidewall tires are imperative even though you'll lose some cushion that the suspension can't absorb. But good shocks will help to firm up that feel a little. Ken

 

Thanks for the replies. I have noticed that handeling and steering is much better if there is at least a 5lb diferential in tire pressure front to back, more in the back. Also it tracks much better when I let go of the steering wheel. Makes me wonder if theres something going on betweeen the power steering and the suspension. It handels the best when i have a 6000lb trailer behind it. They went about 15 years with the last body style so its about that time again.

 

Yeah, that's cool, but they raise them 4 inches in the front and 3 in the back! Unless someone is planning to use them on terrain that requires that, most people don't want them that high. It makes a unstable vehicle more unstable, and a high vehicle higher, something 98% of people don't really want.

 

I don't know if the suspension is the same in those vans as it was in a 1995 Ford Bronco, but I know they have those bushings on the ends of them. I can not remember what they are called right now. I purchased a 1995 Bronco not long ago just to clean it up and resell for a profit. It had the original shock absorbers on it. This truck had 112,000 miles on it. It wandered all over the place also, so naturally I purchased a new set of shock absorbers for it (six shocks to be exact). It still did the same thing. It wasn't until I changed the shocks that I noticed the bushings on one of the I-beams was totally shot and had been for a long time. It started to elongate the hole the bushing was suppose to sit in. By changing the bushing though made a major difference in how much play was in the steering. You might want to check those bushings on your van if it is the same set up.
Paul

 

Will the 2006 E350 V-10 have the 30 valve head and/or the 5 speed torque shift tranny (5R110) that's available with the V-10 in the '05 Super Duty? If the April introduction date for the '06 E-series is correct we should have seen the options and specs by now, but as yet, I haven't been able to find them.

 

Don't know about the 30 valve head, but I read somewhere that the torqueshift trans is available with gas engines on 2005s

 

I've been thinking of getting a newer E-150 for the simple reason that I thought the 92 to present model had a better suspension, no more I-beam, better motors 4.6 or 5.4 four speed etc.
But after reading this thead I think I'll wait another 5 years or more.
The only reason I want a new van is the old 4.9's carberated gas mileage isn't that great and the interior looks so dated.

BTW I noticed the 04 models have a green LCD? mileage odometer, is that the big 04 improvment.

 

Folks,

I have to agree with jmailand about heat and A/C issue! I love my E350, known as "ETon," but the lack of control over rear environmental systems is irritating. Heat? Two settings; none or toast. A/C? Two settings; none or freeze. You can vary it a little by controlling fan speed, but that's a pain... I *assumed* that the environmental controls were like my Aerostars, because every other control is nearly identical in placement and functionality. Sooooooooo, it came as quite a surprise when the kids (actually young adults) said they were frying in the back seats. It was here that I learned "that's just the way it is." Oh, well... That's the only thing I "hate," so that ain't too bad...

DadVan