|
Post by hermitjohn on Jan 5, 2017 16:12:38 GMT
Oh yea, while disassembling the clone yesterday, the dustboot just came apart in my hand. You can tell these folk that made this used the absolute cheapest rubber parts they could find. Remember this thing is less than 9 month old. Seriously a slave should last at least a few years, more considering low miles I drive.
But I have run across the el cheapo crappo dust boots before. I usually have to replace the dust boots on tie rod ends and ball joints within a year. I use the aftermarket silicone ones as they last forever. No idea why new parts dont just come with the silicone boots or at least OEM quality rubber boots. I suppose they sell more new tie rod ends and ball joints due to early dust boot failure.
Not sure if they make a silicone boot for clutch slave or not, never seen one. Could be why the slave failed, cause dust boot failed first.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Jan 5, 2017 16:20:58 GMT
Ok, said silicone for some reason, its polyurethane that is nearly indestructible. Taking quick google and not finding a bellows type polyurethane boot sized for clutch slave. Somebody missing a buisiness opportunity here.
EDIT: Not only cant I find bellows style polyurethane boot for clutch slave, but only polyurethane bellows is for those "skyjacker" shocks. I have successfully used them for other things, like slip joint on driveshaft and steering rack. But these are frankly huge to try and use on clutch slave. Polyurethane is only aftermarket "rubber" that holds up long term. You would think they would make an assortment of bellows sizes. Especially for steering rack. I had tried the parts store replacement boots for my Festiva steering rack since you cant buy a replacement rack for Festiva anymore, so wanted it to last. But they disintegrated within a year. Finally used those poly shock boots, just had to make some wood bushings to get them to fit properly.
Not sure if there is some glue that will stick to polyurethane or not, might be able to cut the shock boots down to reasonable diameter.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Jan 6, 2017 15:52:48 GMT
And further find. Apparently the real bargain deal on clutch slave and master is to shop for ones from 1984 to 1986 Jeep Cherokee with GM engines, or the 1987 with the optional diesel engine. The compact Cherokees with the AMC engines used internal slave. I had read of somebody using the slave I bought from 4cyl CJ along with a master from a Cherokee. I thought they were all internal slaves by time the compact Cherokee came out. Nope. The early compact Cherokees used external. They come in various aftermarket designs but most are metal, cheap as $8.
And also master cylinder replacements come in various configurations, even saw a genuine Girling for $12. The Wilwood itself is a copy of the Girling design. Wilwood looks exaclty like the Girling that one company is selling for the Cherokee.
Ok, live and learn. I ever need another master or slave, I know to buy those for a 1986 Cherokee. Though suppose those will fade in availability. Time passes. I know sometimes I go looking for parts I remember from 50s and 60s and 70s stuff that used to be crazy cheap, and it just isnt available anymore or its now some horribly expensive reproduction part.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Jan 11, 2017 16:45:22 GMT
Ok, seems this slave, being GM derived needs an adapter to connect to 3/16 brake line. It uses 7/16 or something. Common on GM stuff from 70s and 80s before they went metric.
Not that important, any nice days this time year meant for getting firewood for next year. Getting firewood in warm part of year is very unpleasant.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 8, 2017 23:47:53 GMT
I redesigned the clutch pedal so rod to master cylinder doesnt bind on Ranger. That was a nightmare getting clutch pedal out of truck so I could modify it. Getting it back together was nightmare part deux...
Oh I mentioned the clone Wilwood type slave cylinder failing on F250 and no rebuild kit available since it used cup seal rather than two o-rings. Well I put new clone on that I had intended for Ranger. Guess what? Stupid dust boot failed on it now. DONT BUY A CLONE pull type slave. Buy a genuine Wilwood. And a genuine rebuild kit for it to keep in the glovebox!
Anyway I need at least one drivable vehicle so the dust boot on the push type Jeep slave is going to go on the F250's clone slave. Pretty sure thats why first clone failed, the dust boot disintegrated and let crap get in the cylinder. I mean who checks for dustboot failure six months after installing it brand new? Apparently those saved pennies by using rubbish rubber parts on the clones are worth a bad reputation to the manufacturer. At least they could either offered their own rebuild kit or made the clone a complete 100% clone so could use the Wilwood kit.
Anyway I can get kit for the Jeep slave for like $1.50 off Rockauto.com that includes new dust boot.... So if the Jeep dust boot works and holds up, thats cheap way to go. Whole new Jeep slave is only $6 at Rockauto... But anyway thats going to be bit time consuming to re-engineer the Jeep push slave to reliably act like a pull slave without flexing or binding linkage. So saw a GENUINE used Wilwood slave, in functional condition for $25 and its on way. I can get an actual kit for it and probably should keep one in glovebox. Should thus have both trucks drivable soon enough. Somebody said you can get rebuild kit for the genuine Wilwood slave at NAPA or O'Reilly so thats good to know. Though my luck it would probably require an overnight order and two trips to town.... Its gotten so you just as well shop for auto parts online, as the parts stores dont keep much in stock, its all special order anymore.
Overall the Ranger was a good design, but my gosh they put zero effort in making it easy to work on. They integrated everything to interlock like some giant chinese puzzle box where everything interlocks and it all has to be assembled/disassembled in exact order. So something that should be stupid simple ends up requiring major disassembly. GRRRR....
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 15, 2017 22:23:47 GMT
Genuine Wilwood slave on and bled. Heim swivel on each end. Could see the slave contracting and clutch arm moving a good bit. But the heim swivels and clevises added lot length to the linkage to point I used up all adjustment just making room for them and linkage still bit loose. When I started Ranger and tried to put it in gear, it gently growled at me and refused. I need to make new rear mount hole so I can shorten linkage some more. Close though to having working clutch. Though before driving it, still have lot bits and pieces to put back where I took things apart to get to pedals.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 16, 2017 20:48:36 GMT
Not a clutch pedal feel I particularly like (in comparison, the F250 clutch pedal feel is currently darn near perfect) but I have it adjusted where with engine running, I can change gears without slightest protest when clutch pedal depressed. Now to put back all that stuff I removed to get clutch pedal off to weld it. Then first a test drive like last time around out in field. Then if thats ok, down and back up the driveway. Then will drive it next time I have to go down to clusterbox by hiway for mail. Then try driving it on hiway... After such a big modification, gotta build up some trust in it slowly and correct any problems. Not so stupid as to think its all absolutely perfect and I can drive to California tomorrow in it....
If I had known before I bought it that this was going to be such a big ongoing project, probably never bought it. But on other hand learned a lot from it. Never would even thought of putting an antique Chevy transmission into a Ranger..... not with original Ranger engine anyways. Maybe if I had put a Chevy straight six into it....
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 18, 2017 20:32:55 GMT
Ok, figured I better tinker with it some more. Thinking maybe the clutch arm was hanging a bit on the edge of its exit hole in the bellhousing. Remember this bellhousing originally wasnt used with clutch arm and external slave. This hole was just an inspection hole that I had enlarged a bit so clutch arm would fit through it.
Ok, the clutch arm wasnt coming out without taking loose the y-pipe. That became my least favorite option immediately on discovering that. Already fought enough with that dang y-pipe.
Also couldnt get the die grinder nor the dremel in good position to extend the hole. But I could drill holes. I drilled series of small holes side by side and then used long heavy duty screw driver to knock out the chunk of metal. This is some kind of aluminum alloy so not too difficult though did leave bit of a rough edge. Beats taking stuff apart for better access though.
Hooked slave back up. And clutch works much better. I had guessed correctly that it was hanging up a bit on the bellhousing. And works ok without over tightening the slave cylinder in relaxed position. I also do like having clutch and brake pedals further apart. On their compact vehicles, Ford always did seem to put the pedals uncomfortably close together. Fine for some delicate little gal with tiny feet, but not pleasant for a full grown male or somebody wearing overshoes or something. Now matter of reassembling dash stuff and emergency brake pedal. I'd say its now ok to drive without constantly worrying about clutch disengaging enough to change gears.
No doubt things will loosen up more as I drive it more.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 20, 2017 1:20:52 GMT
Dash back together. Got me thinking back to earlier part of this thread. Actually found 94 Ranger 4.oL thread on fuel economy I hadnt seen. Some guy had problems with his 94 Ranger bogging down after it warmed up and lousy fuel mileage. He replaced bunch parts, got some meaningless error codes. He finally bought one of those $200 remanufactured ECU. Bingo, solved his problem.
So got to looking and some guy selling a used one he guaranteed, way high priced, but he showed pic of it opened and stated/showed no swollen or bursted capacitors. I had no idea you could open them without damage. Going to open up mine since it apparently doesnt damage anything. Be a kick if that was the problem. But would be back when other electronics were having problems with poor quality Chinese capacitors.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 21, 2017 22:35:52 GMT
Ok, got the ECM out of the Ranger. It had been accessed before as the plastic retainer at bottom where there is an impossible to get to screw without removing whole fender liner was broken off. Apparently previous person to do this didnt have much patience with stupid engineering either.
I get it out. Circuit board looks clean, no burst or leaky capacitors. But number on this unit is f47f-12a650-kb yam1 which is for a federal spec 1994 Explorer with manual transmission. That explains the fault code for non functional EGR. 1994 Explorer had EGR, the 1994 Ranger didnt. But I can guess why they went with Explorer ECM cause the Ranger 4.0L with manual transmission ones are rare as hens teeth in junk yards, and nobody wants to give $200 for one from a parts store. People that ponied up for 4.0L engine in Ranger usually got the automatic. As I say all early to mid 90s Explorers had the OHV 4.0L.
So dont know if this one is faulty or if it is trying to somehow compensate for that missing EGR valve that it expects to find.
Been pricing ECM for 1994 Ranger with manual transmission and cheapest that doesnt look like it went through WWII and then thrown in cess pool for few years, was $150. Ouch. There is one for a 1994 Explorer with automatic transmission for $17. Seller says clean circuit board. I assume they are much more common. All Explorers in early to mid 90s had the 4.0L engine. Well poop. I went ahead and ordered the $17 one. Thats as cheap as it gets, even in the pick a part type junkyards. And I will find out if only difference is it throws up error for missing EGR and missing automatic transmission. Or if it has a genuine hissy fit and goes into limp home mode. If it doesnt work, then suppose I am stuck spending too much money on correct one. Either that or wait until one shows up on ebay. I know last summer there was one for 1994 Ranger with manual transmission and 4.0L for like $60.
I could try to find one for a 1991 Explorer though they may had different pin configuration, but dont think Explorer had EGR until 1993 anyway unless maybe California version.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 22, 2017 0:41:48 GMT
Ok, best I can figure, the computers from a SEFI (with EGR) and computers from non-SEFI (no EGR)have different pin out. Though they interchange plugs. A 4.0L engine can run with either as long as the harness and EMC are both either SETI or non-SETI or you go through the pain of splicing wires on the harness to make them compatible. The ECM out of my non-SETI Ranger is for a SETI Explorer. I am guessing this Explorer ECM that came with my Ranger isnt properly reading some of sensors. But otherwise probably work just fine if the wiring harness was changed or spliced to match the ECM. So if I am correct, the $17 ECM should start and run my engine but no better than my existing ECM. I will need a non-SETI 94 Ranger ECM. Or a 94 Explorer engine wiring harness. How again is all this nonsense supposed to help truck run better???
And reading more, yes an ECM from an automatic will work in a manual, BUT will throw a code.
Ok, since the $17 one is on way, will try it. Guessing though it will be same as current one except it will now also show code for missing automatic transmission.
There are like four different ECM for a Federal 94 Ranger with 4.0L manual transmission. Two are for 4wd, two are for 2wd. And mixed info whether all Federal 94 Rangers were non-egr. Yea it gets really confusing with no definite answers. I know some at least didnt have EGR cause mine doesnt, the manifold doesnt have a hole for it to screw into and no sign of one ever on this engine. But some people swearing some 94 Rangers did have EGR. So grrrr... no way for me to really know if the ECM I find was for a Ranger with or without EGR.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 23, 2017 17:22:39 GMT
Hmmm, supposedly all 1993 Explorer federal ECM were non-egr and compatible with non-egr 1994 Ranger. But truly annoying no information on these ECM seems set in stone, especially pertaining to dates they were used and whether on EGR or non-EGR engines. You read one thing one place and exact opposite elsewhere. As I said, betting the $17 ECM I bought will function about like current wrong ECM that came with the truck. But big gamble biting on one of the VERY EXPENSIVE federal 1994 Ranger manual transmission ECM or slightly less expensive 1993 Explorer manual transmission ECM. And neither particularly abundant or cheap. The automatic transmission version non-egr ECM is cheaper yet, but not that cheap. Oddly ECM for later OBD2 models much cheaper. Search would bring few of them up, and about to click when I would notice its for like a 98 or 2005... They are even worse tied up with that PATS garbage to enrich dealerships in buisiness of programming very expensive keys.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 23, 2017 18:18:35 GMT
Interesting. I have seen all over the place people swapping a 4.0L into a Ranger that previously had a 3.0L. They of course say you need the 4.0L engine harness and ECM. Though sure none of them actually tried it any other way.
Well one guy posted, he was curious, he tried the 3.0L ECM on his 4.0L engine with 4.0L wiring harness. Said it ran pretty good. He only did it out of curiosity, as he was having problems with the 4.0L ECM running air conditioner full time and he already had the 3.0L ECM. The 3.0L ECM wouldnt run air conditioner at all though it ran engine pretty well. Seems on some and only some setups, Ford had the air conditioner controlled by the ECM in this era. The work around for this problem was to use a separate relay for air conditioner and take it out of control of ECM.
But knowing a 3.0L ECM will run a 4.0L engine fairly well is useful bit knowledge. Unfortunately all 3.0L Taurus/Tempo had EGR as they are really cheap, like $5 to $10. But the Ranger/Aerostar federal 3.0L ECM in 92 to 94 didnt. And they are lot cheaper than the 4.0L ECM. Even the manual transmission version. Also makes me wonder about the ECM from 3.8L V6 from full size pickup.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 24, 2017 18:25:32 GMT
Ok, first one I ordered for $17 got here today. I have gained more knowledge since ordering it, assume it wont work any better than Explorer one that came with Ranger when I bought it. But its here and will try it. Its for a 94 Explorer with automatic. I ordered it on theory that one in my Ranger had just failed and should otherwise work. Unfortunately doubt that now. The ones with EGR did sequential injection and required a cam position sensor which my engine doesnt have, the ones without did batch injection with no cam sensor. Whats amazing is that one that some previous owner put in truck is one for EGR with sequential injection. Amazing it can run the truck at all without a cam sensor. I assume it is and has been running mostly in some overly rich limp home mode and thus the craptastic gas mileage.
The $23 one coming Monday should have better chance working. Time will tell. Its for an Aerostar with 3.0L and automatic but no EGR. Yea I really wanted to see if that guy was telling truth that a 3.0L ECM would run a 4.0L engine fairly well.... as everybody else swears the truck will crash and burn and I will contract Lupus, without the original part number ECM that came from factory....
But if neither of those work properly, finally found one that was most likely to have come in my truck originally from factory available for $35 plus postage. No real guarantee since return shipping probably make it pointless, not to mention junkyards hate giving refunds and since guy knows its unlikely anybody will drive hundreds of miles to punch him in the nose if he lies... Its for a 94 Ranger with federal emissions and manual transmission and 4.0L engine. Not the easiest to find these for under $100 used or $200 reconditioned at parts store. Cheapest I found with guarantee was $150 on ebay. And notice the cheapest man pays the most rings true, if I buy this third one, I will be close to what it would have cost to have bought the correct one in first place, albeit at a very inflated price. I just truly hate greed and people jacking price on some part just cause its a bit rare but still has some demand.
Honest, I wouldnt flinched at correct one for $50 and promise to replace or refund if it turned out to be faulty.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 25, 2017 21:53:47 GMT
The truck would run on the $17 one, but rougher than it ran with the one that I bought it with. Even had whiff of raw gas fumes out the tailpipe. Find out tomorrow how the $23 one works. Its non-EGR, but for 3.0L. Be truly interesting whatever it does. The ECM for 3.0L Taurus cheap as $5, but all Taurus with 3.0L had EGR though they may not had cam position sensor or sequential injection, which is why ones I've used so far havent worked well. It can be painful trying to find out details for a particular year and application ECM.
Been nice if they just had one that you could plug your laptop into and reflash the firmware for whatever year and displacement engine you had. But suppose EPA wouldnt like that, they'd put an inpenetrable force field around the engine and electronics if they could, dont really want consumer touching their own car if at all possible.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 27, 2017 14:39:51 GMT
Oh, been looking more at 3.0L systems. Seems they still used a distributor until 1995 model year. Didnt know that. So the 1995 would have cam position sensor and would have sequential injection. No info other than that one guy on that one thread about using a 3.0L ECM on a 4.0L engine. Guess I find out.
Interesting about the 3.0L. Nobody loved them other than people wanting cheap long lived engine. They werent powerful and they didnt get great fuel mileage. Their claim to fame is that they can last a very long time with regular oil changes, etc. That cam position sensor is a weak point. You should just replace it every 50k miles whether it needs it or not. Let it fail and your engine will be without oil pressure at an inopportune point in time. Head gaskets also can be problem, but my guess that would be for those trying to really push this engine really hard. Course usually only people that see much beyond 200k miles are those with manual transmission. The automatics are expensive to rebuild and Ford automatics of that era have very mixed results from rebuild. Ford like most manufacturers of that era cheaped out on transmissions.
The 4.0L engines, at least the OHV version from 90s can last very long time too. they do have weakness in oiling system so you get some lifter wear eventually and ticking noise, though they can last long time like that. Still run across mention of them lasting 300k to 400k without rebuild, (with manual transmission). That would require very good maintenance. As good as you will get from any gasoline engine out there I think. Oh probably some exception somewhere.
I can see the 3.0L with five speed being great in a 2000 to 2500 pound mini pickup from 60s/70s/80s. You probably see 30mpg in a 2000 pound pickup/car. Pretty lackluster in a 4000 pound truck.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 27, 2017 17:57:52 GMT
Ok, I went down to clusterbox and got the ECM for the 93 Aerostar with the 3.0L and installed it.
Ranger started, ran little odd until I plugged in the idle air control, idle immediately increased to 1000rpm and engine smoothed out, which is about right when cold. I had it off before to keep truck from stalling at hot idle. As truck warmed up, engine ran smoother and smoother. Idle dropped to 500. It did do the hot idle stall at one point, but started right up and didnt stall again.
Anyway, I am going to move the F250 out of way and do some testing with it. Want to see how it acts under load. But frankly its running far smoother than it has anytime I've owned it so I suspect good things during testing. And hopefully thats it, dont have to buy any more ECMs.
CEL on, but would guess thats because this ECM is for an automatic transmission vehicle. There is a way to trick an automatic ECM into thinking automatic still there with couple resistors. Though since I dont have emissions inspection, dont really care.
So that guy posting that one thread was indeed telling truth. A 3.0L ECM can start and run a 4.0L. Now how it drives out on hiway..... still to be determined. But just way it sounded, pretty sure it will do ok. Sounded and reacted to throttle changes, like an engine would with a properly jetted and tuned carb.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Feb 27, 2017 20:32:44 GMT
I took it down the the drive and then the county road and turned around just before chicken house hill. It made noises and smells like anytime you do major changes. Shifted like you would expect an antique transmission that hadnt been used in couple decades. Brought back memories of the old Chevy Apache pickup with this same transmission....
Ranger runs fine. This ECM should do fine. Engine running very smooth. I didnt even think about the engine during test run, just about the transmission. If I actually had working accurate odometer, betting this ECM would get mileage of 16mpg, maybe more.
Still freaks me out a bit how fast granny first gear is with this economy rear axle ratio. First in this transmission is the lowest first gear of all granny four speed transmissions. But with this axle, its just little slower than a normal first gear, doesnt feel like a creeper gear. In the old Chevy, it barely moved when you had it in granny first. Will say its near perfect for getting up the driveway. Slower than first in the original Ranger transmission and crawled right on up with no hesitation and no hint of stalling out. Felt lot like the old 72 Courier I had, it was geared so first was slower than normal first would be, so had lot low end umph. Yet I am not going overly fast and bouncing two foot in air on every bump. Nor super slow creeper crawling.
Next test will be when I go get mail again, will take it out on hiway down to the roadside park. That will give me clue how it does on hiway without getting in any traffic. Also how it handles the big chicken house hill. Of course it would crawl up in first, but curious if it can make it up at least in second. I cant remember now what gear I came up CHH hill with in old transmission. Seems like second. Third in this transmission is between second and third in the original transmission. Fourth is same 1:1 ratio in both transmissions. No overdrive needed with this axle ratio.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Mar 2, 2017 21:01:56 GMT
I had to go into PO for package. Took Ranger. Transmission whined off and on, until I got out onto hiway, then quieted down. But by time I got back to the house, transmission was HOT to the touch. That is not a good sign. I dont remember ever seeing a granny four speed of any make get hot like this. I am thinking possibly there was some hidden corrosion from that rain water and perhaps a bearing locked up (and spun) or something. I debated about completely disassembling it and installing new bearings when I discovered that, but thought i would get away with just cleaning it as well as possible and putting in new lube. It turned fine by hand out of truck, so didnt think there was any bearing problem.
I do have couple spare SM420. At one point I opened one of them and it looked fine inside, no water. I got them for $5 at auction long, long ago. They are older version from 1 1/2 ton trucks I think. I dont much want to remove and replace current one. I will give it another chance but if it gets hot again, then really no choice. A transmission that gets HOT, no matter how heavy duty, isnt going to last long.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Mar 3, 2017 15:40:30 GMT
Ok, if wishes were horses...
I do wish I had disassembled this transmission and put kit in it before installation (yea you can still get kit with bearings/synchros/gaskets), but I gambled and didnt. So I pay price of taking it out of truck and doing it now. Pretty sure its got a bad bearing in it. The other two transmissions have set for so long no guarantee they dont have problems too. All of these are very old and have gone decades unused. So probably best to just fix the devil I know. It obviously still functions otherwise. But getting hot means it becomes non-rebuildable if I ignore the problem and try to limp along as is. Will ruin some gear or shaft and at this point only way to get parts like those would be to scavenge them from another SM420. No reason to ruin one of these out of laziness. They were truly a great design that will never be manufactured again.
And my trip to PO yesterday proves this transmission transplant will work in Ranger behind the 4.0L. Transmission seems well matched to this application. Not for everybody. I know some young bucks putting these in Jeeps complain about how they shift. They expect some sports car shifting. Nope, these were a dump truck transmission.... just very heavy duty and long lasting if taken care of. I obviously didnt take good care of this one leaving it set outside in weeds long time. I doubted I would ever own another old Chevy pickup and kinda forgot about it.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Mar 13, 2017 22:59:58 GMT
Havent done anything to Ranger since. But today took F250 down to clusterbox by hiway and home. Crawled underneath immediately when I got home and touched transmission. Luke warm like I suspected, meaning not stone cold.... Even under hard use these old granny transmissions just arent supposed to get truly warm, let alone HOT.
Got so much to get done before ticks come out to play and weather heats up. But like to have Ranger usable for summer. I will drain one of the spares and check it over closely for corrosion internally. If clean, will gamble and try installing it with fresh lube.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Sept 10, 2017 20:13:10 GMT
Well another summer without a Ranger. Last time to town with F250, dang clutch release bearing seized up, so anytime I touched the clutch pedal, it wailed like a banshee. But ok long as I didnt try to change gears. Need to pull engine forward on it and replace release bearing. So was also looking again at Ranger from underneath thinking about parts for it. Seems release bearing on it went beyond the end of tube it slides on and jammed at an angle. So can drop transmission on it, and at least get it back like I had it, to move Ranger under its own power. Either need to extend the tube or find longer release bearing assembly.
GM used at least three different length release bearing assemblies. (of course they did... thanks GM engineers) Shortest around 1.25inch and longest close to two inch. I am guessing I didnt use the two inch.... as it was only used on older six cylinder models with flat diaphram pressure plate so is most uncommon. But my adapting SM420 to Ford 4.0L was a mix and match conglomeration of modified parts. I cant remember how long the release bearing was that I used, just that it was GM. This Mitsubishi bellhousing is wee bit deeper than a GM bellhousing. So guessing at some point to change gears I pushed clutch in just wee bit too far... and it wedged. Hoping it didnt bend/ruin fingers on the pressure plate. But not end of the world. Its only money... and time. still lot cheaper than another vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Sept 11, 2017 19:35:33 GMT
Enough apart I got closer look at release bearing on Ranger. Thought it was weird I wouldnt have measured and made sure fully extended by clutch arm it still wouldnt go off the deep end. It actually didnt. The reason it looked at an angle was that the release bearing had completely disintegrated and that was outer shell of bearing setting at angle.
Remember this was a NEW release bearing, so to completely fail in first ten miles is crazy. But that is apparently what it did. I have never seen one come apart before. Most when they fail, the bearing just seizes up and rubs against fingers of pressure plate everytime you push clutch. If you are totally clueless and oblivious to the squeal, eventually this just wears away the fingers so nothing happens when you push clutch pedal.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Sept 18, 2017 17:11:53 GMT
Ok, got transmission parted from engine. And remains of the release bearing out in the sunlight. Its in pieces, but obvious it had ZERO grease in it from factory. Never occurred to me one of these would leave factory dry. No way knowing now but guessing this is Chinese made. New one from Rockauto.com is NOS, tattered box but new looking made in USA release bearing. Must been on shelf for decades. It has grease visible, though got me wondering how much. I sincerely dont want to pull the transmission again until the clutch disk is worn out. Also has me wondering if there is indeed a bad bearing in the transmission, might just been the release bearing in its various death screams. though sure sounded like internal to the transmission. But again, its such a short transmission.... I may regret it, but lot work to modify another transmission so going to gamble, that most of problem and noise from the self destruction of the release bearing.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Sept 30, 2017 22:57:08 GMT
Well got the EMT conduit and the mandrel bent connectors to redo the y-pipe on Ranger. Moving crossover back of transmission so all room in world for the clutch arm. Just lot cutting and welding involved. Not sure why I didnt do it this way before. Been under truck a bit this afternoon to make sure it will all fit like I want. Seems to. Biggest hassle is welding in oxygen sensor bungs (actually making the holes for them) and custom welding tee joint for the crossover pipe. They dont seem to sell such premade for some reason. They used to. But I had trouble just finding the mandrel bend elbows for a reasonable price. Lot places wanted crazy price or else crazy amount shipping. Same difference in the end. Advanced Auto Parts dot com not only gave reasonable price plus free shipping, they also had coupon for 25% off total. Worked for me. Nobody else was close. the mandrel bend elbows are nicer than me just cutting angles in pipe with chop saw and welding it, which is what I was going to do if I hadnt found Advanced.
I think thats why old men are so grumpy. They had figured out a system that worked, and thought they could afford stuff, then the world changed while they are still alive. I have very low tolerance for obvious pure greed. And its abundant in this new gilded age.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Oct 6, 2017 22:38:45 GMT
Moment of truth approaches. Just gotta make new bracket for clutch slave. Got new y-pipe of my own design welded up and bolted on. This one gives lots of room for clutch arm and slave cylinder. And this release bearing has grease. So although Murphy is very creative in finding things to go wrong, this should work much better than before. What, only taken couple years now....
Trying to remember other things that might be problematic. Ah yes, radiator weeps along seams where plastic joins aluminum. Wouldnt doubt it will have to be replaced. Hope thats it. Its been interesting, but not THAT interesting.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Oct 8, 2017 22:13:54 GMT
Okie dokie. Finished hooking everything up. Ranger started right up, no strange noises from transmission/clutch. With engine running and clutch pedal pressed, able to shift gears easily. Didnt drive it yet.
My neighbor that has been AWOL for last two or three years, showed up last evening to tell me he has guy to fix driveway and ready to get on with it. I figured he would show or somebody would show when I seen new yard light on that property lit up and went and looked and new meter loop and new meter in place. No reason to battle the driveway as it is now, with Ranger and 2wd, wait until its smooth. He talked like bulldozer guy will be here this week. I was wondering whether to wait on neighbor or go hunt up a bulldozer guy myself as its really bad shape. Its just nicer to split the cost for both of us. There are some other properties also sharing access, but owners dont use them so arent going to pay.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Nov 9, 2017 19:26:56 GMT
For pete's sake, been a month, neighbor is AWOL again and the dozer guy never showed. Guess I got to try Ranger with driveway in current state and use chains if necessary. If it works ok, then its the backup vehicle as the F250's 4wd and ten ply tires makes life lot easier with drive as it is.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Nov 20, 2017 16:20:20 GMT
Maybe there are miracles, dozer guy actually showed up today. Not expecting much, this is older smaller dozer and smoking like a son of a gun. Hadnt seen a diesel smoke like that in a while.
I am not expecting a miracle beyond him showing up, dozer this size isnt going to do much beyond smoothing drive some, its not going to do the promised improvements in drainage. Not unless this guy is truly genius expert operator and with equipment like this, doubt that he is.
|
|
|
Post by hermitjohn on Nov 21, 2017 19:35:40 GMT
The miracle continues. I watched him off an on yesterday smoothing up neighbors yard and was impressed. Today he started on driveway. This old boy understands building roads and is one with his dozer. No doubt thats why the long wait. You get a reputation for doing good job at reasonable price, you have more jobs waiting for you than you can shake a stick at. He gets an amazing amount of work done with that little smokey dozer. This going to be best incarnation of the access road since I have lived here.
|
|