What's new
By:
Filters

1st Gen or 3rd Gen Ranger SAS

posford said:
It's like every time the thread gets bumped everyone forgets that he has to deal with Cali emissions :flipoff2:
Click to expand...
:rainbow::rainbow::rainbow:

Precisely. I am very loosely dreaming of a diesel swap, which is why I’m trying to stick to 97 or 98 because as I understand it I should have an easier time getting something like a TDI passed through Cali ref or if I’m $ballin$ a R2.8

But, that would be way down the road so I definitely would need to plan on being mostly satisfied with the stock drivetrain. 4cyl auto is off the table for that reason.
 
posford said:
It's like every time the thread gets bumped everyone forgets that he has to deal with Cali emissions :flipoff2:
Click to expand...
Cali emissions aren't an issue if you start with a 5.0 explorer. If he's planning on swapping in tons then the IFS and wider rear frame don't matter. Space for kids seats, and could chop the wagon into a truck bed if needed.

Here's a full width sas a guy did: 5.0 Full width SAS build
 
Ranchtruck said:
Cali emissions aren't an issue if you start with a 5.0 explorer. If he's planning on swapping in tons then the IFS and wider rear frame don't matter. Space for kids seats, and could chop the wagon into a truck bed if needed.

Here's a full width sas a guy did: 5.0 Full width SAS build
Click to expand...
This. MtnYota did this with an Eddie Bauer 5.0 Explorer. He has leather and A/C on the trail.
 
Helped my buddy do the fab on his 97 explorer 5.0 awd. We used full width 78 bronco axles/steering box, duff arms, and an early bronco Dana 20 transfer case using an advanced adapters ZF adapter. It’s on 37s, forget what springs, shackle flip. Spool in the rear and Detroit up front. It is awesome having windows to roll up, AC, heat, room for four, and a V8 with overdrive. I’ve taken it out a couple times and borrowed it as a driver briefly.
 
The 5.0 AWD ones are easy to bolt a bw4406 manual transfer case to from a late 90s f150. Hardest part is cutting the hole for the shifter. So you don't need adapters if you're content with a chain drive transfer case.
 
I’m 3/4s of the way of “finishing” my 98 SAS.

My only real big complaint of using that era of chassis wasn’t to do with the frame at all, more so the front diff I chose.

I’ve got the 4L OHV, 5 speed with half ton Dana 44/chrysler 9.25 regeared to 4.56. It’s currently on 35s and it’s a blast to drive. It’s just as nimble and peppy on its feet than it was stock form. I wanted tons and 40s but I am happy I went with half tons. It’s a daily driver in the summer (I live in Northern Canada where salt eats rangers).

I used a Toyota IFS steering box for more V8 room in the future. Going with a 93-97 would have been a hell of a lot less work, but we don’t build these stupid things because we’re afraid of some busted knuckles and crying into your pillow at night haha.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9050.jpeg
    IMG_9050.jpeg
    2.5 MB · Views: 23
I’m still in the mental masturbation stage right now, I picked up a D50 and a 10.25 the other weekend. So now I have options, I’ve got an 05+ housing that I would keep radius arms with and the 10.25 rear, or the D50 already cleaned up that I would shorten and go 3 link with an 8.8 rear, or I’m kinda considering a 609 build if I can pull off a cheap hodge podge of parts

I don’t have a Ranger yet and still haven’t decided if I’m going auto or manual. I’ll keep my ecobox / 4:1 300 and add a NWF 5 to 6 bolt adapter regardless of which trans I go with.
FA759F0D-AB80-492A-B183-8603132E01AA.jpeg
 
Found my truck :lmao: no one’s discussed the factory Ford EV power train yet


EFB72270-E09D-47A7-B2E2-021E62809DBF.png


62107243-AEFC-4A4E-9EE5-0A4A7C4B09A4.png
 
How’s speed determined on 97+ Rangers? VSS in the tail housing or at the wheels?

Just wondering if I went the 2wd route is there going to be struggles with getting computers happy
 
fl0w3n said:
How’s speed determined on 97+ Rangers? VSS in the tail housing or at the wheels?

Just wondering if I went the 2wd route is there going to be struggles with getting computers happy
Click to expand...
VSS in the tail of the transfercase, IIRC. Coworker put an Atlas in his 95 without the VSS and its drove fucked up
 
fl0w3n said:
Gotcha, so presumably it’s in the tail shaft on a 2wd then
Click to expand...
I would assume. Car-part shows it as the same trans 91-97 from what I just checked? Could go in what was the speedo hole in the earlier models?
 
lsp432 said:
'97-down is a gear-driven sensor in the tcase or 2wd tailshaft
'98-'00 is the ABS tone ring in the rear diff
'01+ is trans again, but it's a magnetic pickup
Click to expand...
98-00 sounds like the easiest to work with from that aspect if I’m doing a sterling rear that has a tone ring… assuming the tooth counts match up
 
fl0w3n said:
98-00 sounds like the easiest to work with from that aspect if I’m doing a sterling rear that has a tone ring… assuming the tooth counts match up
Click to expand...
the only thing you can't easily get with a tone ring is an old school 14b. Sterling, Dana60+, AAM shit all have applications with tone rings though I think some of the latest GM and Ford applications are going to tone ring at the hub.
 
'84 Bronco II said:
Or just get a 1st or 2nd gen...
Click to expand...
I want to go with something newer and OBD2 and I like the body style because it reminds me of my first company trucks I used to use and abuse. Nothing against the 1st and 2nd
 
I'm not spending any time working on my current rig that needs attention, so what better time to dive into the abyss of FBM and pickup another project that I can neglect :homer:

91 2.9 with a blown head gasket. If I can convince him to hold off till next weekend when I can get up there, I'd trade him my 05+ front and 10.25 rear and he adds $200 to the deal.

I keep dreaming of a 97+... but this looks clean enough and with a little elbow grease the interior might be comfortable and cleaned up enough I can convince my wife to ride in it.

Since I'd be trading the 05+ and 10.25, I'd probably build it like this:

3 link a Narrowed D50 + dodge knuckles for steering (already have)
Chevy 63's and pull the explorer 8.8 I have under the XJ or build an F150 8.8 and adapt to 8x6.5 (already have)
Probably fix the head gasket on the 2.9 and consider a 4.0 swap in the future
Swap the FM146 for a M50 or keep the FM146?
NWF 5 bolt to 6 bolt / Ecobox-I / 4:1 300 (already have, just need the 5 bolt to 6 bolt)


3B7C25FF-54B1-4B0E-8C95-AE55B72D06E1.jpeg

BF19DD62-70A0-4442-A42F-6B86E05ED95C.jpeg
 
I like it, sounds like a good deal and a good plan of neglect :flipoff2:

What is the age out for emissions in California, if there is one? Would a 4.0 swap work and be within emissions as needed? Thinking the head gasket and the bolt in swap would be similar in work
 
Cameronswmp9 said:
I like it, sounds like a good deal and a good plan of neglect :flipoff2:

What is the age out for emissions in California, if there is one? Would a 4.0 swap work and be within emissions as needed? Thinking the head gasket and the bolt in swap would be similar in work
Click to expand...
1975 :laughing:
 
Provience said:
1975 :laughing:
Click to expand...
So he's got some time before that happens, if it's rolling like NC (20 years here).

I know federal law is same year and newer, same manufacturer, and not bigger than original (not sure if that's displacement or just cylinder count). But I also know California is pretty much a different country anyway so that probably doesn't mean shit....
 
Cameronswmp9 said:
So he's got some time before that happens, if it's rolling like NC (20 years here).

I know federal law is same year and newer, same manufacturer, and not bigger than original (not sure if that's displacement or just cylinder count). But I also know California is pretty much a different country anyway so that probably doesn't mean shit....
Click to expand...
no, 20+ years ago in CA it used to be a rolling 20 years, then they changed it to "only pre-75 vehicles are exempt"

in most of the counties in the state, there's a few that don't have biennial smog checks
 
My understanding with California is swapping in a motor that was available in the same year and make is easily passed.

And from earlier in the thread, 2.9 and 4.0 share motor mounts and fuel system so should be relatively plug and play.

I don’t even have the shit yet so still time to figure it out :flipoff2:
 
Rock the FM146 if you keep the 2.9, you won't hurt it. I did repeated 2nd to reverse high RPM clutch drops (in mud) and the trans never cared.

Fun fact about the 2.9s they're batch fired FI same as early FI full size. An 80s/early90s 302 can go in, add an injector pigtail to each side, everything plugs in and runs off the 2.9 ECM, but I believe the 5.0 ECM plugs in aswell. Not sure if that falls within acceptable engine swaps, but I figured I'd muddy the waters.

Things I'm unsure about. F series was batch fire, Mustangs weren't? F series upper intake won't fit under a Ranger hood, so you need the Mustang upper. Not sure if that changes anything with batch versus sequential fire injection.

I would have done this to mine when I swapped the 351w in, if I wasn't stuck trying to find a GT40 upper intake and Lightning lower intake. 302 makes it way easy.
 
posford said:
Things I'm unsure about. F series was batch fire, Mustangs weren't? F series upper intake won't fit under a Ranger hood, so you need the Mustang upper. Not sure if that changes anything with batch versus sequential fire injection.
Click to expand...
All OBD2 is SEFI. Almost all MAF is SEFI.

This means that basically all F-series other than the last few years are batch fire.
 
Ummduh said:
I swear at one point in time there was a kit to swap in a GM 2.8l 700r4 with the 4.0ohv engine. Had to be the 2.8l version because it had a specific bell housing. It's been a long time since I've heard about it though.

The real answer though, is that the ranger platform is way better with a v8 swap.
Click to expand...
I was reading, I think last week or 2, about a guy who swapped in a 700r4, and was talking about a 3.8 GM swap with it. In an explorer gen 1 (91-94)

Sounds like for a trans swap going to a M5OD R1 is the best option, for auto sounds like C4 and no OD. Unless 4R/5R swaps with controller, but not sure if it's even required
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh