Ford Ranger II 3.0 liter Engines

According to this, in 1999 Ford had recessed the threads in the block for the longer TTY bolts and this is the way it is on my engine _ recessed threads.

However the TTY bolts are too long and too small, the original bolts that were used on my engine are the shorter type and are 10mm, while the TTY bolts are 9mm.

Using the TTY bolts on my block are way too sloppy and too long _ they bottom out about an inch before coming in contact with the head.

I'm assuming Ford goofed and recessed the threads for the non TTY bolts on my block ???

 

The heads are the same but yes the block was machine with deeper holes and recessed threads

Threads and diameter of bolts were the same just an inch longer

Reads like you have the wrong bolts if they are "sloppy"
3.0l Vulcan engine, Ford did have other 3.0l engines in 1999, not in Ranger of course, lol

 

Then Fel-Pro put the wrong bolts in the box.
I can clearly see that the TTY bolts are smaller in diameter then my originals.
They read smaller on the calipers too.

But even then, the longer TTY bolts are simply too long for the block.
As I said, they bottom out with an inch to spare before they even come in contact with the head.

You can even see in the link (your link too) that the TTY bolt is thinner, it's not just an optical illusion.

 

Yes, never noticed, it does look thinner

 

What also find confusing are all the different methods of torqueing the head down if Ford only used two kinds of bolts.

The longer and thinner TTY bolts use one method, but in the manual the other shorter bolts that are not necessarily TTY bolts also have similar torqueing methods as the TTY bolts for some years.
93 through 98 just has torque specs, but no turning of the bolts 90 degrees and yet my 99 has the shorter non TTY bolts, but uses the TTY torque method ???
Are they all TTY bolts, no matter what length and size they are ?

You see what I'm getting at here...

But then again how important is it, so long as what ever method is used, the bolts are torqued evenly ???

 

The 3.0l used regular bolts some years not TTY

If you see a degree, like 80deg or 90deg as final torque it will be TTY, if FINAL is ft/lb then its a regular bolt

This PDF has Ford 3.0l 12-valve specs, page 22: http://fme-cat.com/LiveDocs/99999.pdf

Looks like 1998 and earlier 3.0l used regular bolts and 1999 and up TTY

 

Thanks, that table cleared things up and answered my question.
It likes you can use TTY bolts in non-TTY situations.

My truck is in "green" _ note the part number for the head bolts.
That part number applies to the shorter bolts that were used, and in my case, I have to use them, Ford didn't thread the block far enough for my 99 to use the longer bolts.

Note that from 90 to 86 the torque instruction on not for TTY bolts, but include the same part number in "red" as for my 99.

And of course you can also have the longer TTY bolts for my 99 in "purple" as they also follow the same TTY torque sequence.

 

what month was your ranger made? you might have a "98" engine if it was early months of 99

 

I would have to look on the door post.
It actually doesn't matter anyway _ it's all buttoned up and running.

New EVAP code now, P0453, "Fuel tank pressure sensor, high input".
And the gas gauge needle is stuck on full, so something is probably shorted _ not too sure.
Who knows what the doofus forgot when he put the new fuel pump in.
I can see myself pulling the box to trouble shoot.

I'll start a new thread eventually, but not a priority now.

 

lol jeff wiggle the sender connection, may not have good connection

 

It would be great if it were just a bad connection.

The gas gauge was working, showing a 1/4 tank the first time a started it up, but then after that, it now shows full.
Like right past the full mark as far as it will go.
Maybe the same connector and bad connection is also affecting the sensor.
I did some digging, it's in the tank _ as far as I can tell.