I just traded my '03 Ranger XLT 4x4 for an '07 F150 STX 4x4. I know that with my Ranger, the front hubs were always engaged and the front linkage always in action - the system was just linked together at the transfer case to get "4-wheel drive". How is my F150 different? It has the manual transfer case. I'm already resigned to the fact that I'm not going to get anywhere near the performance off-road that I had with the Ranger (4.10:1, 4.0L V6, 33" MT's, rear lockers) vs. with stock AT's, 4.6L V8, and 3.73:1 gears, but I'd like to know the strengths/weaknesses of my new setup.

 

You'll have to manually lock unlock the hubs. The truck will do better than you think because of the ground clearance, but will feel big on tight trails. When your tires wear out spring for some 285/70-17s in a BFG A/T KO for the stock wheels unless your gonna lift it.

 

How many f-150's have locking hubs?
Don't they come with an axle disconnect?

 

gjohn,
your 4wd system should be very similar to your ranger's set up with the "full time hubs". The Super duty's have a different setup than the F150/Rangers, because of the solid axle and lockouts.

 

so do the rangers come stock with all time 4x4?? or can u unlock them?? I was looking at getting an 03 4x4 ranger. I may wind up going full size with a v6.

 

It's not full-time 4x4. The front linkage is always locked and engaged - the system merely disconnects the driveline via the transfer case and therefore power is only going to the rear unless you activate the transfer case and connect the whole system together. What I like about this system: relative ease in troubleshooting - if the system isn't engaging, it most likely has something to do with the transfer case, and you work out from there. Something that always kinda worried me: all of that linkage in the front was always moving as long as the front wheels were turning. I thought that opened it up to wearing out sooner, but the flip side is that if one doesn't use the 4x4 system often, the system may be "broken" from no use. I'm not an expert by any means, but for whatever points this system may have against it, I thought it better than a system that required vacuum pressure to lock the front hubs, and then you still had the transfer case to think about. Just took one more factor out of the whole "what-went-wrong" scenario. Does that clear anything up, or did I make it worse?

And, if I might add, my '03 Ranger 4x4 got the very same MPG as almost every full-size truck I knew. I attributed this to the 4.0L, the 4.10 rear-end, the extra 4x4 stuff (weight and just more stuff to move) and my lack of finesse on the right pedal. So don't plan on saving a bunch of money on gas if you get a Ranger. Especially one that is built to offer a little more off-road... just IMHO.

 

im looking more of the lines of a 2wd as a DD. I have a 78 f150 on 38.5's if i wanna go offroad. I want 2000-2006 ranger, 150, 250. But if u said that ur ranger got the same mpg as a fullsize i may just go back fullsize. I know my 94 302efi gets 20mpg. do u know what the average mpg of a 4.6?

 

my ranger only got 15 mpg because of it's setup... a few other guys with 2wd rangers get over 20 mpg. my new 4.6 has been getting 15-16 so far.