Desertstorm, if off roading and need to lock the wheels going down hill, use the emergency brake. Thats what I do and it will lock the wheels. However, instead of the wheels barely rolling with the abs, it locks the wheels and keeps skidding down the hill, you keep moving either way. You have more control over it if the wheels aren't locked in my experience.

 

locking the rear up is the last thing that you want to do. the fornt needs to lock and rear needs not. i have 3 trucks, 1 with 4wabs,1 with rear abs, and one with none. the trucks all have mud tires, i take them to the same places. the truck with no abs stops alot quicker going down some of the steep hills, due to piling up mud in front of the tires while sliding. the rear abs equipped truck also does ok. the f 150 with 4wabs does not stop going down hill, it will not stop, the abs kicks in and she slides, and slides and slides but never stops, the pedal is grinding away under my foot. it finally stops at the bottom where the ground is flat. i can really stand on the pedal sometimes, hard enough that the seat is about to break and it will lock the fronts one time out of twenty. so in my experience in South Carolina clay mud, and rock no abs works better offroad. In deep north carolina snow no abs works better, deep snow meaning 8-10". on ice ABS is best. no doubt.

 

I have the same problem driving 18-wheeler-Abs on a large trailer(48-53')pulses so hard it actually jerks you in the cab..and you never feel like your'e going to stop at all in slick conditions...had a couple of close calls this past month with all the lousy weather the Chicago area has had..It DOES keep the trailer in line, Ill give it that, but if you play your brakes right, I could do the same, I just need ALL my stopping power, especially when I have 25-30,000 #'s in the box. I DO NOT SPEED, and I DRIVE TO ROAD CONDITIONS-as I am a profesional, who throws the clock out the window when bad weather sets in, unlike a lot of "professional" drivers out there....a lot of my close calls are other drivers, especially 4-wheelers that can't make up there mind what lane they need to be in, and I get cut-off a lot, and then they shorten my stopping distance, etc,etc...

 

You don't want to lock the front if you want to keep the bed behind you. Just use the abs and let it pulsate down the hill, don't be a candy hee hee. I have jeeps with no abs and a ranger that does and I hang either way on the trail, you just have to out think your rig ha ha.

 

BTW, low range works best downhill, esp with a couple of blips of the throttle to clear the tires.

i like to use 2wd as much as possible, so my braking conditions may vary from yours wendell.

 

Yes, everone has there own driving style that works best for them and it's learned through trial and error. It's flat in S.Carolina anyway, as it is here in northen Ohio, we do have hill country in south eastern Ohio. However, I perfer to wheel in the mountains of eastern W,Va where I'm from. That will make your butt pucker, be decending a step hill on slick flat rock in 1st gear, low range and have it start sliding. This is when you don't want it locked as it allready is from the low gearing, so I have to shift up to 3rd or 4th gear to let the wheels begin to turn again to maintain control, that can make your knucles white ha ha. Those moss covered mountain rocks can be slick, then add some morning dew to the mix and you can have your hands full. I'ld rather go up than down, but once your up, you gotta come down hee hee. It's all a part of the fun. You can end up sliding faster than just letting the wheels roll. It's just a matter of quickly finding the right gear while in low range that will let the wheels roll instaed of slide. If we ever meet, I bet we could swap some great 4-wheeling stories hee hee.

 

I'm soured right now since my low mileage 2004 4x4 low only works when it wants to.

Most likely I will never buy another Ford, Ranger included.

Looking at this forum, there are so many problems and complaints about all kinds of things. Look at a forum of Dodge owners and you won't see all the whining and asking for help, because they just don't break down like your Rangers. And I've never had someone chastise me for not maintaining my vehicle on any other list and no one come forward to address the real problem which is Ford poor design.

I'm old enough to remember when Ford execs made the decision to let people blow up in their Pintos to save $2 per car on gas tank protection. That's "Ford tough."

That's my two cents.

 

Dodge being more reliable? Huh? What alternate universe did you just come from? Read some reviews on Dakotas buster! They suck in about every way they can. If you get a dodge, get a Ram or forget it it. Same with Chevy, get a full-size.

 

Hey , I noticed when I researched what small truck to buy that no matter the problem , people still loved their Rangers!! Mostly anyway, there are always a couple of exceptions of course.

 

I worked with a guy who kept buying Dodge Dakotas. When asked about reliability, he quipped, "I'm driving a Dodge" in a laughing manner. He was an arrogant fella, but that's beside the point. Anything that CAN fail on a Dakota - WILL in very expensive ways & frequently. S10's front end parts will need upwards of $600 front end work every year for typical mileage - and getting worse with each batch. And they're too featherweight to DO anything besides look cute. Is that a truck for a guy?

 

Dodge reportedly cares more about profit per auto built than pretty much every other large manufacturer in the world. Toyota was actually pleased when Daimler merged with them as they correctly predicted the catastrophe DCX became. Until then, they feared Chrysler's profits per car. So Chrysler cars are bolted together with a lot less care than Rangers on the whole.

 

I had a 1998 Dakota supercab, 4x4 with 318 and auto.

I really liked its ride, power, handling etc.

It was hard on gas though for its size, and the truck was reliable for the most part, except its poor rear diff, which had to be rebuilt 3 times when I owned it.
The first two were warranty, the last one cost me $700 and pissed me off, then I sold it.
It was not stellar at hauling much of a load, or towing much weight though.
My current F150 is almost like a locomotive in comparison too how much it will haul or tow, compared to my dakota.

 

VanHoy, ford's design isn't poor, it has a borg warrener t-case and ford doesn't make the shift motors, it comes from the same place as the rest, dodge included. I sold dodges for a while and I don't know about there forums, but hang a round at the dealer if you want to hear people complain. I had new dakotas's come off the truck with auto trannies not shifting, interior trim pieces missing. They had a real quality control problem, beside's, chrysler will soon be a memory I'm afraid. If your refereing to me for scolding you, I wasn't. I'm sorry if you took it that way. I was just trying to explain to you what it takes to keep a shift motor functioning as long as you can. Your shift motor may just be junk from the get go, "heck", I don't know. Just sharing what my experience has been. If you don't want the shift motor problem, buy a 4x4 truck with a manual t-case, But they are getting hard to find. I've had 7 rangers and never had a serious problem with any of them and I abuse the **** out of them on and off the road. The reason people here ask for help is because thats what the site is for. If you notice, a lot of the rangers are old and with high mileage. You won't find that on the dodge site, because dakota's don't get old or high mileage to need help. I understand you being sour right now and I wish I could have a look at your truck for you, but your across the country. Every member here is valuble, so please stay on the forum even if your mad at me and ford. I didn't mean to sound rude or anything, I still want to be your buddy and help where ever I can. I even E-mailed ford and ask them about putting a manual t-case in the ranger. They said more people would have to request it. When the manual t-case was offered, 90% of there customers wanted the electric shift. That says more about the country than about ford. The manual tranny is all but history becuse everyone wants automatic these days, except me and maybe a few others, it's getting bad for us old school guy's.

 

Yep, look around & see how many old 4x4 Dodges or Chevies you see. About 90% of those will be full-size. I don't think you'll see the Ram with a 4.2 V8 trucks going much past 160K on the clock either. Try climbing underneath for a look-see at the dealers. If that doesn't tick you off, you should spend more time reading reviews & service books. OK, I'll make my main point easy with this one: the 4.2 V8 has oiling issues & a very shallow oil pan. So if your old Ranger gets too old & quirky, find a newer one well-taken care of. Or an F150. There are some gems with small engines & stick shift left.

 

I love the ranger line. I'm fond of the 2nd gen ranger mostly. I've had two of them. Most of you remember the first one, a 4.5 L, AWD racer I built for local romping. It met a semi... It saved me though. I have another one, exactly the same stock build, I'm thinking of trunkng this into a mid engine V8 427 Supercharged Monster. That one is still in the pencil waiting for the drafting table. I like second gens for their simplicity. My wife can even work on my truck with just a Haynes Manual.