|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 2, 2015 0:30:20 GMT
Ok, driveway getting in poor condition where it was literally destroying the Festiva. And it doesnt have clearance for real tire chains. I was running out of time, with tractor not working, so didnt want to pull engine on my old Ranger to repair oil pan. Yea old Ranger is the one I put the 300-6 engine into.
Saw a '94 extended cab 4wd Ranger 5spd for sale five miles away "with transmission trouble". I go look, its a 4.0L V6, starts easy and runs ok, and the clutch is worn out. Seller really didnt understand how manual transmissions and clutches work. Steering nice and tight, brakes work, bit body damage left rear. Offer the guy $600 and hire it towed home. Ok, Ford apparently went plum crazy with this second generation Ranger. You have to remove the Y-pipe to get room to pull the transmission. Some guy online said you can twist transmission just so and get transmission out without removing it, but not on mine and if you could you arent going to reinstall it by yourself laying on your back under the truck, after changing out the clutch. Well for whatever reason Ford didnt do the traditional studs and brass nuts way of attaching pipe to the manifolds, they used a hardened bolt screwed into the manifold. After 190k miles, those suckers not coming out without an oxy torch. Heads on bolts rusted and rounded off so cant hope to break them.
I finally cut the cross over piece of y-pipe out and got transmission out of way. I still couldnt get those bolts out or cut. I finally thought of Harbor Freight long skinny electric die grinder that I got cheap and only used sometime back with wire brush, and ordered a mandrel and cutting disks for it. Got them today and voila, after removing the oil filter got all the bolts cut and the downpipe pieces removed so I can weld them with the cross over piece back together.
But I am still stuck with threaded part of those bolts rusted into manifold. Did I mention they are hardened bolts. Ford really wanted to make this incredibly painful for doityourselfer. I held one of the cutoff pieces of bolt in vise grips and tried drilling into it. Its hardened. About like drilling into an old bed frame only lot thicker metal.
So tomorrow I weld the y-pipe back together and try to make some clamps. They sell such things (clamp a stud or something like that) ready made for like $30 each, but not paying that kind money for four of them.
Also reading that cobalt drill bits will drill hardened steel. Never tried them and dont have time for yet more mail order stuff. I'm on borrowed time weatherwise. If I could find them locally, sure they are sold full retail price and high dollar. Not even sure I can get an electric drill in that cramped space at correct angle.
Before I thought of the die grinder, had been thinking I was going to have to pull the engine to get access. Makes one want to kick a Ford engineer. Though I am sure the other companies also were trying every last trick to save every fraction of a cent on the assembly line. Especially on something like this that usually only a mechanic would deal with. And a mechanic/muffler shop would have access to an oxy acetelene torch, which would make this much more trivial. I wouldnt use one often enough to justify the rental on the tanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenw on Dec 2, 2015 3:04:57 GMT
hermitjohn , Good luck putting it all back together, have you found this ranger sight, www.therangerstation.com/Ranger are tough little trucks, wish I could find one like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 2, 2015 13:35:14 GMT
This second generation Ranger is wider and lot more leg/foot room. But jeeze louise, it says 4000 pound on the title. Since when did compact pickups get to weighing as much as full size pickups used to weigh?
Until I got this Ranger, I really didnt understand Ford's argument of discontinuing Ranger cause it was cutting into full size pickup sales. The first genereration was indeed a compact pickup, bigger than the 70s era Japanese pickups, but still compact. Nothing close to full size. Well this truly is a half ton pickup just narrower and little shorter than the official full size pickup. Nice size actually much like the first generation Dakota. Ford should have replaced the Ranger with its Mazda designed compact pickup it sells today in rest of world. Or at least let Mazda sell it here. A truly compact pickup isnt going to steal F150 sales.
Mixed feelings about the extended cab. Lot nicer to be able to put groceries in the cab without feeling crowded. But I really like the longer bed on old Ranger better. Extended cab maybe, but still dont really understand popularity of four door pickups with the super short bed. Car with a big open trunk, not a real pickup.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenw on Dec 2, 2015 15:53:21 GMT
I didn't know there was that much difference in the second generation Rangers. I knew they had prettied them up, but had never been in one. The old rangers were well balanced and could go almost any where in four wheel drive.
You should try looking for a used farm pick up, extended cab, four door with a short bale bed are the most worthless things ever put together in my opinion. If it isn't long enough to load fence post length ways on the bed it isn't a real farm truck.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 2, 2015 23:00:15 GMT
They lost me when they discontinued manual transmissions in full size pickups. Makes high mile vehicles uneconomical to rebuild/repair when major component goes bad out of warranty. A clutch is cheap if you do it yourself, a auto tranny rebuild isnt.
Yea, the second generation rangers use the same rear axle as used in the F150 only narrower. The real reason they made Ranger bigger is that it shares chassis/drivetrain with the Explorer and they wanted the Explorer to be a mid size vehicle, not a compact like the Bronco II. Base 2 door model of the Explorer weighs 1000 pounds more than the Bronco II.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2015 23:52:02 GMT
Mixed feelings about the extended cab. Lot nicer to be able to put groceries in the cab without feeling crowded. But I really like the longer bed on old Ranger better. Extended cab maybe, but still dont really understand popularity of four door pickups with the super short bed. Car with a big open trunk, not a real pickup. I'll probably get my head kicked in for saying this, but here goes: The person that buys a 4 door truck with a short bed probably doesn't even need a truck, save for about 3 times a year, and that is pushing it. A regular car with a trunk would most likely do the trick 99% of the time. I find that most people justify, real or imagined, whatever they want to buy. The car manufacturers are not dumb...they know how to sell us what we think we need. I'm not judging others, BTW. If it works for them, so be it. As a side note to all of this, in our state, you have to have a seat belt for every passenger in the car, kids included. That has changed the way that many people have purchased vehicles, and it would for me too, should I ever have to replace our old beater truck. If I was ever to upgrade and spend a bunch of money on another truck, it will have 3 seat belts so we can all go in the truck, or the deal will be off. |
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 8, 2015 18:22:36 GMT
I might get Ranger drivable before another cold front moves through. Really nice weather this week considering its December. Anyway new clutch installed and transmission is now stabbed and bolted to engine. Now just huge bunch of reconnecting bits and pieces, and filling transmission. Better check rear axle too, nobody does any maintenance on high mile vehicles. Hopefully the hydraulic clutch linkage doesnt put up huge fight. I was going to convert it to external Wilwood slave cylinder, but was running out of nice weather. Re-engineering things takes lot time and lot fiddling. Bad enough making the stud clamps so I can reinstall the y-pipe.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 9, 2015 23:00:38 GMT
Got Ranger together today and drove it down to clusterbox and back. Ok, but clutch needs bled. Its geared little on steep side, but they made these to please the EPA, not the consumer. Like that stupid 2.8L early ranger, suppose 5th gear will be useless. Also will pop out of first gear if I dont hold shifter in place. Synchronizer worn I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 12, 2015 23:10:35 GMT
Well I got it bled to point I can shift ok if I depress pedal to floor. Thats not good, but these are a beast to bleed properly. YOu about need a pressure bleeder like some repair shops have to do it right. And I replaced the ATF that Ford says to use, with mostly Lucas oil additive and some 80W90 gear oil. The ATF in a manual transmission thing wasnt for consumers benefit, it was to please EPA. And this is really just too light duty of a transmission for this 4.0L engine. Ok for a four cylinder maybe. All the manufacturers really cheaped out on transmissions in this era. NO heavy duty transmissions in anything under a 3/4 ton.
The Lucas has greatly quieted the high mile light duty transmission and its worked into bearings as its far easier to shift in all gears. Still pops out of first unless I hold the shifter in place. This is really annoying. When I drained the ATF, there is magnet on the plug and it had grabbed a little roll pin. Guessing that might be the cause of the popping out of gear.
It has an oil pressure gauge which seems to work. This engine has good pressure at hot idle. Means its probably got lot life left in it. However I already decided since I find this Ranger rather comfortable, if the engine goes wonky, I think I will replace it with a 300-6 and a granny 4spd. Then put 3.08 gears in the rear (it has 8.8 rear and thus lot choices in gearing). That will keep rpms down on hiway. Just leave it 2wd. That is heavy duty drivetrain and would last indefinitely. Plus be something I actually enjoy working on rather than this tightly packed modern mares nest under hood. I'd make it 4wd again if I could find a narrow dana 44 front axle like used in first generation Bronco. Existing light duty front axle looks like it needs a complete go through to be functional again for 4wd. At least new seals and joints. Though honest guess light duty fine since I just need it to climb my driveway. Otherwise dont need 4wd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2015 16:16:43 GMT
Enjoying your posts.
What is it with the Lucas oils and additives that make people swear by them?
|
|
|
|
Post by beowoulf90 on Dec 16, 2015 17:24:14 GMT
Enjoying your posts. What is it with the Lucas oils and additives that make people swear by them? They're good products that the company stands behind? I don't know, but I like the tv station they have called MAV-TV which focuses on motor sports and family.. They are an American company. They sponsor other motor sports, such as NASCAR etc. (of course it would make sense) Oh did I mention their products work..  I guess some have more "brand loyalty" than others.. I know I use what works. LOL I'm only razzing you.. |
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 16, 2015 19:47:55 GMT
I think rather wasting money putting Lucas in an engine or fuel tank. But their oil additive really quiets down old gear boxes and rear axles. REally tacky stuff, much like chain saw bar oil.
Every parts store used to have one of the little Lucas displays on counter, where you turn the crank and see the Lucas stick to the gears as they turn. Seeing is believing, so figured it would work in a real gear box. I did try it in a worn out engine once to no effect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2015 1:30:50 GMT
Enjoying your posts. What is it with the Lucas oils and additives that make people swear by them? They're good products that the company stands behind? I don't know, but I like the tv station they have called MAV-TV which focuses on motor sports and family.. They are an American company. They sponsor other motor sports, such as NASCAR etc. (of course it would make sense) Oh did I mention their products work.. I guess some have more "brand loyalty" than others.. I know I use what works. LOL I'm only razzing you.. Yeah, Lucas has their name on a little building in Indianapolis. That building holds 70,000 people that gather to watch grown men throw a leather ball around. I'm not sure that I've ever bought a Lucas oil product, but people swear by the stuff. I know a guy that had an engine knocking, and he would pour in some Lucas whit every oil change, and it made that motor quiet. BTW, Lucas is an Indiana company, I think. |
|
|
|
Post by beowoulf90 on Dec 17, 2015 12:40:57 GMT
They're good products that the company stands behind? I don't know, but I like the tv station they have called MAV-TV which focuses on motor sports and family.. They are an American company. They sponsor other motor sports, such as NASCAR etc. (of course it would make sense) Oh did I mention their products work.. I guess some have more "brand loyalty" than others.. I know I use what works. LOL I'm only razzing you.. Yeah, Lucas has their name on a little building in Indianapolis. That building holds 70,000 people that gather to watch grown men throw a leather ball around. I'm not sure that I've ever bought a Lucas oil product, but people swear by the stuff. I know a guy that had an engine knocking, and he would pour in some Lucas whit every oil change, and it made that motor quiet. BTW, Lucas is an Indiana company, I think. I know I use the additive for high mileage vehicles in my oil and it helps. My 1999 Dodge Dakota 4x4 has over 270,000 on it and thus far it seems to help not to burn as much oil between changes. In fact the mechanical side of the truck is working fine, but the sheet metal side is in need of repair. Unfortunately I can't afford a newer truck for at least another year, so I have to find a way to fix it.. It won't look pretty, but it will be functional and usable. |
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 18, 2015 23:29:05 GMT
Whats the deal with these new kind lug nuts with the decorative tin caps bonded to them? I couldnt get grip with socket on them, had to use small chisel and remove the tin. I would been really annoyed if I ran into that out on side of hiway in the rain and dark no less.... It was funny, some previous owner of the new Ranger had apparently run into same thing, one lug nut came with a rusty socket firmly attached. I guess he drove smaller socket over the tinned nut in order to get good grip and it wasnt coming off for love nor money. Its now on the old Ranger...
Anyway I swapped front tires from old ranger over to front of new ranger. Like I remembered, the tires on old ranger have lot tread. BUT they also have lot small age cracks. If they had any less tread, I wouldnt even bother with them. My experience with old aged cracked tires has not been a good one. I am trying to remember last time I drove the old Ranger. Time flies when one is too ill to work on stuff and its needed oil pan repaired for some time now. I just havent been up to pulling the engine to do it. I am thinking maybe at least four or five years.... and so tires must be around 6 or 7 years old... See if they go flat sooner than later. I will make sure to have spares in back of truck just in case. If I have to buy new set tires, so be it. Grrr... I dont even recognize lot of the economy tire brands now. I was impressed that you can still buy 6 ply 15 inch tires. There for a while you couldnt, at least not for reasonable price.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 0:14:37 GMT
Just bought nexan roadian 2357515 mud terrains for my 86 f150 4x4...love those tires...dirt roads anything...sound good with a stiffer ride. Good reviews online...540 a set.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 7:32:50 GMT
Whats the deal with these new kind lug nuts with the decorative tin caps bonded to them? I couldnt get grip with socket on them, had to use small chisel and remove the tin. I would been really annoyed if I ran into that out on side of hiway in the rain and dark no less.... It was funny, some previous owner of the new Ranger had apparently run into same thing, one lug nut came with a rusty socket firmly attached. I guess he drove smaller socket over the tinned nut in order to get good grip and it wasnt coming off for love nor money. Its now on the old Ranger... Anyway I swapped front tires from old ranger over to front of new ranger. Like I remembered, the tires on old ranger have lot tread. BUT they also have lot small age cracks. If they had any less tread, I wouldnt even bother with them. My experience with old aged cracked tires has not been a good one. I am trying to remember last time I drove the old Ranger. Time flies when one is too ill to work on stuff and its needed oil pan repaired for some time now. I just havent been up to pulling the engine to do it. I am thinking maybe at least four or five years.... and so tires must be around 6 or 7 years old... See if they go flat sooner than later. I will make sure to have spares in back of truck just in case. If I have to buy new set tires, so be it. Grrr... I dont even recognize lot of the economy tire brands now. I was impressed that you can still buy 6 ply 15 inch tires. There for a while you couldnt, at least not for reasonable price. I am in the same boat with tires on my old truck. I've got an old set of Michelins on my truck, the same set that was on her when I bought the truck. They have okay tread, but lots of small cracks, especially on the front. I simply cannot believe the cost of tires these days. They've never been cheap, but the price hikes in the past several years have been sharp. I've been on borrowed time on the tires. I keep thinking that I will find a used set of good take-offs, or buy a set of cheaper tires. I've been putting it off for a long time. On one hand, I'm proud of my frugality and for making this set last for a long time. On the other hand, I don't think the cracks are getting worse, but I know that I am on borrowed time. I hate to spend good, hard earned money on tires for a 20 year old truck with 176,000 miles on it. I only drive it once a week, if that, and sometimes I have to worry about keeping the battery up on it. I hate spending $300 or more on a set of tires...I really do. Mark my words, though. As soon as I have to break down and buy new tires, I will stumble across a full matched set of nice quality tires for a song, at a garage sale price. |
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 19, 2015 14:33:49 GMT
Yea about $70 a tire for 235/75R15 tires about cheap as it gets. And honest usually better spending more for better quality.
Thing is I drive darn little. Only got the new Ranger cause the driveway is so nasty at this point it was literally destroying the Festiva. This Ranger came from factory as a 4wd so has high ground clearance despite somebody having converted it to a 2wd transmission. It also has a nice tight suspension and 235/75R15 tires which take ruts/rocks lot better than the tiny tires on Festiva.
Anyway I drive so little anymore that even this Ranger with 190k miles could last me couple decades... So you get what my quandry is on tires. I dont need them to go zillion miles, I need them to have tread that just lasts maybe 10k miles before dryrotting into oblivion. IF there is enough price savings. Not buying crap to save $10 a tire. I would buy new 10k mile tires, but they better be less than half the price of a 50k tire. So far not seeing that. I've seen 50k tires for $90 each.
I did buy new Yokohamas for the F250 three or four years ago. 10 ply tires last darn near forever, but finally one summer day four years ago, with truck parked in shade, I hear this big BOOM sound. I thought some idiot with a gun, but nope, one of the rear 10 ply tires had just burst for no apparent reason. I mean really tore itself apart with big patch of deep tread rubber torn completely away. Big incentive to just buy set of new tires cause I wouldnt have wanted to been driving it when that tire blew, thus the Yokohamas, even though its an old rough firewood truck. Oddly 10ply 235/85R16 arent that much more expensive than 4 ply 235/75R15. No idea why as the heavy duty tires will greatly outlast the light duty ones.
I've even toyed with idea of putting 16's on Ranger, you can buy rims to do it. And apparently its got enough clearance. But Ranger has 3.27 rear axle so guessing it wouldnt be pleasant without changing rear axle gears. Right now, 5th gear is kinda pointless with that axle ratio. It needs something like 4.11 or 4.56 axle to be able to use 5th effectively in 4000 pound truck with this engine and transmission.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 14:37:43 GMT
Whats the deal with these new kind lug nuts with the decorative tin caps bonded to them? I couldnt get grip with socket on them, had to use small chisel and remove the tin. I would been really annoyed if I ran into that out on side of hiway in the rain and dark no less.... It was funny, some previous owner of the new Ranger had apparently run into same thing, one lug nut came with a rusty socket firmly attached. I guess he drove smaller socket over the tinned nut in order to get good grip and it wasnt coming off for love nor money. Its now on the old Ranger... Anyway I swapped front tires from old ranger over to front of new ranger. Like I remembered, the tires on old ranger have lot tread. BUT they also have lot small age cracks. If they had any less tread, I wouldnt even bother with them. My experience with old aged cracked tires has not been a good one. I am trying to remember last time I drove the old Ranger. Time flies when one is too ill to work on stuff and its needed oil pan repaired for some time now. I just havent been up to pulling the engine to do it. I am thinking maybe at least four or five years.... and so tires must be around 6 or 7 years old... See if they go flat sooner than later. I will make sure to have spares in back of truck just in case. If I have to buy new set tires, so be it. Grrr... I dont even recognize lot of the economy tire brands now. I was impressed that you can still buy 6 ply 15 inch tires. There for a while you couldnt, at least not for reasonable price. I think that my lugs are a 22mm..caps on top of lugs...some I replaced because when I had tires put on years ago they somehow knocked the stud inside the hub..which sheared all but two bolts holding the spindle on... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 14:48:03 GMT
Yea about $70 a tire for 235/75R15 tires about cheap as it gets. And honest usually better spending more for better quality. Thing is I drive darn little. Only got the new Ranger cause the driveway is so nasty at this point it was literally destroying the Festiva. This Ranger came from factory as a 4wd so has high ground clearance despite somebody having converted it to a 2wd transmission. It also has a nice tight suspension and 235/75R15 tires which take ruts/rocks lot better than the tiny tires on Festiva. Anyway I drive so little anymore that even this Ranger with 190k miles could last me couple decades... So you get what my quandry is on tires. I dont need them to go zillion miles, I need them to have tread that just lasts maybe 10k miles before dryrotting into oblivion. IF there is enough price savings. Not buying crap to save $10 a tire. I would buy new 10k mile tires, but they better be less than half the price of a 50k tire. So far not seeing that. I've seen 50k tires for $90 each. I did buy new Yokohamas for the F250 three or four years ago. 10 ply tires last darn near forever, but finally one summer day four years ago, with truck parked in shade, I hear this big BOOM sound. I thought some idiot with a gun, but nope, one of the rear 10 ply tires had just burst for no apparent reason. I mean really tore itself apart with big patch of deep tread rubber torn completely away. Big incentive to just buy set of new tires cause I wouldnt have wanted to been driving it when that tire blew, thus the Yokohamas, even though its an old rough firewood truck. Oddly 10ply 235/85R16 arent that much more expensive than 4 ply 235/75R15. No idea why as the heavy duty tires will greatly outlast the light duty ones. I've even toyed with idea of putting 16's on Ranger, you can buy rims to do it. And apparently its got enough clearance. But Ranger has 3.27 rear axle so guessing it wouldnt be pleasant without changing rear axle gears. Right now, 5th gear is kinda pointless with that axle ratio. It needs something like 4.11 or 4.56 axle to be able to use 5th effectively in 4000 pound truck with this engine and transmission. My last set was Goodyear wrangled a/t..about 75 new at wm...a good overall tire for the price if most of your driving is on pavement...mine is dirt roads..national forest..seems sidewall is weak after awhile...last set were half worn treadwise if that but truck was shaking bad... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 23:45:32 GMT
Whats the deal with these new kind lug nuts with the decorative tin caps bonded to them? I couldnt get grip with socket on them, had to use small chisel and remove the tin. I would been really annoyed if I ran into that out on side of hiway in the rain and dark no less.... It was funny, some previous owner of the new Ranger had apparently run into same thing, one lug nut came with a rusty socket firmly attached. I guess he drove smaller socket over the tinned nut in order to get good grip and it wasnt coming off for love nor money. Its now on the old Ranger... Anyway I swapped front tires from old ranger over to front of new ranger. Like I remembered, the tires on old ranger have lot tread. BUT they also have lot small age cracks. If they had any less tread, I wouldnt even bother with them. My experience with old aged cracked tires has not been a good one. I am trying to remember last time I drove the old Ranger. Time flies when one is too ill to work on stuff and its needed oil pan repaired for some time now. I just havent been up to pulling the engine to do it. I am thinking maybe at least four or five years.... and so tires must be around 6 or 7 years old... See if they go flat sooner than later. I will make sure to have spares in back of truck just in case. If I have to buy new set tires, so be it. Grrr... I dont even recognize lot of the economy tire brands now. I was impressed that you can still buy 6 ply 15 inch tires. There for a while you couldnt, at least not for reasonable price. Actually 21 mm...put brakes on front this morning. |
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 20, 2015 14:55:20 GMT
Got the second two wheels/tires swapped. Surprised, all this messing and only one lug nut that threads stripped getting it off. Cause nobody it seems can be bothered to use anti-seize on lugs. Course of all used cars I've owned, only couple where previous owner even used anti seize on spark plugs... People only think immediate gratification, not being able to deal with same problem easier next time. The last wheel, somebody had swapped four of the five stock lug nuts with some better ones. They still had the stupid tin shell on them, but better made so I could get them off with socket as is, didnt have to go hammer and chisel to remove the tin first. Now I have mix and match lug nuts needing three different size sockets to remove. Oh joy.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 21, 2015 23:31:00 GMT
First drive down paved road today. Luckily yesterday I noticed the steering alignment was out of whack. Somebody had probably replaced a tie rod and didnt mark things before removing it. Then tried to adjust other side in order make up difference. I did a tape measure re-alignment with steering box centered. Must got pretty close. Nice quiet ride with no tire scrubbing nor pulling one way or another.
Transmission, marginal. I did try 5th gear. Whee at highway speeds its NOISY. Dont need to use 5th so this transmission will get me through the winter. Engine however could pull truck in 5th which impressed me. I think this is pretty good engine.
Then got to decide for next summer, whether to rebuild this transmission... there is a kit. Or search junkyards for bargain replacement. Or replace both engine and transmission with heavier duty. On ebay one of these transmissions ships for $550 and up. Not a particular bargain I think. One just as well buy a rebuilt one for few hundred more if spending that much.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Dec 21, 2015 23:55:34 GMT
Oh, Ranger uses 1/2-20 thread lugnuts. Can buy the open ones without tin cover, package of 20 for about $13 on the bay. Might be worth it so I dont need three sockets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2015 1:07:52 GMT
I bought another f150 4x4 a few weeks ago...same year color everything...except it had a borg warner transfer case and mine is a new process....but it had solid lugs nuts I am getting...plus many more parts as I am at the end of my restoration...I have six plys now..six ply spare..and carry torque wrench with socket in case...but these new tires are stout.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Jan 9, 2016 23:48:20 GMT
Mixed feelings about the extended cab. Lot nicer tobe able to put groceries in the cab without feeling crowded. But I really like the longer bed on old Ranger better. Extended cab maybe, but still dont really understand popularity of four door pickups with the super short bed. Car with a big open trunk, not a real pickup. Ok, extended cab not great for groceries. The seats dont move forward enough to make it easy to put bags groceries in and out from area behind the seats. I found it easiest to sit in the drivers seat and get the groceries from behind up between the two front seats and put them over into the passenger area. Not great. Maybe just remove the passenger seat altogether, that would give good access.... Gotta say just the extended cab alone has almost as much room as the Festiva. But then it doesnt get 45mpg like the Festiva.... I put that old Toyota topper on and looks like easiest to put groceries in back, even if they are more prone to toppling over. So have to say a longer bed and a single cab the better way to go. I suppose if one had a four door cab, that would make back seat friendlier for groceries..... But just as well buy a SUV at that point. Still comfortable vehicle to drive, if transmission wasnt so noisy. I'd really like to keep existing engine, but looking more and more like smartest strategy is to replace with a non-computer carb engine and an old granny four speed. I found a Navajo with bad 4.0L engine, but good 5spd and transfer case for $400. But really too far away to be economical to hire it brought home. Otherwise thats a bargain for the parts. Making Ranger 4wd again would eliminate need for granny gear since the transfer case would have low range. |
|
