Rear axel replacements options - Page 4 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


Drivetrain Tech General discussion of drivetrain for the Ford Ranger.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #76  
Old 11-17-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
Im going to have to politely disagree with you fellas...

jeeps are not made out to what they are. yes you get a solid front axle from the factory, but the only jeeps that are really decent from the factory are rubicons. and look at the price on those!

for that price difference from my ranger to the rubi, I can do a SAS, rear axle swap, doubler, all the axle goodies, a great suspension and what not. not only that, ill be different. (and probably for less I might add...)

to get the average jeep with its POS d30/d35 axles to where it would be a trail machine would take just as much work or more. Then you still have a jeep. everybody and their grandma has one. whats the fun in that?!

and yes there is a bigger aftermarket support for heeps, but most of the heap stuff can be made yourself if you have a decent problem solving capacity.

Jeeps are overated. and the ones that arent are overpriced. you just got to have a little ambition and a hunger to learn.

**** I remember when I first started frequenting the boards, I thought I could get a spindle lift for my 4x4. now im trying to gather parts and the cajones to run the SAS.

so I say this (and especially to you Ben.): keep asking. maybe you get some bullsh!t in the threads, but if you pull any useful information out of it, its worth it.

and colin you can be a real negative nancy...
Thanks Gildo

Jeeps are so overrated my 2 uncles have Jeeps and I can out wheel both of them. The only thing good about jeeps is every company in the world makes something for them.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 11-17-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHBubba
Ben, I was trying to illustrate why the front axle design of our Rangers (including the hybrid D35 diff) is not a 'POS', as you have so elequently refered to it in this and other threads. It simply meets a set of criteria that may not match yours. However for many of the rest of us it is a suitable comprimise. I for one would not want a TTB setup..

I brought the t-bars into the discussion because they are part of this system. My point was that our current IFS system, and the TTB system of earlier models are both comprimises. The solid axle is in my opinion the most robust option, anything else is a comprimise. So if you're looking to build a truely indestructable truck, I think TTB should be off your radar too and you should focus exclusively on a SAS. That was the point I was trying to make.

As to a full-size not being up to your perceived 'needs'.. fine. But I still think the late model Ranger is a poor choice for what you claim to want to do. The Ranger is an entry level or economy light pickup. So many facets of it's design, from the engine, to the transmission, to the axles, to the suspension are clearly designed for light duty use and affordability. Let's face it, the Ranger is the Focus of trucks! I think this is why the list price for a 4x4 Ranger tops out at less than a 4x4 full-size even starts at. Once again: you get what you pay for.

Quite honestly.. from what you claim you want.. (a short wheelbase, compact, street legal ORV that can easily be lifted and built up to fit massive tires and abused in deep mud and massive rocks, and has extensive aftermarket support) .. from all that I think you want a Jeep man. I'm sure I'll get flamed back to the stone age for this, but Jeeps have all of that right out of the box. Why spend so much money, effort and time turning a Ranger into a Jeep when a Jeep is already a Jeep?

There's no such thing as a free lunch. And in this capacity I don't think you can cut corners. You can't turn a light-duty, economy pickup into a heavy duty ORV just by adding bigger tires. The Ranger simply isn't designed for what you want it to do.

In short, I think you've either got a lot of work ahead of you, or you bought the wrong vehicle to begin w/.

Colin you still don't see my point do you ? Agree with it or not you just don't see it. However on the other hand I have seen your point since the first post you made in this tread. I really hate you take bits of what I say so far out into left feild I have no idea what you are talking about. Then type pages of text telling me there is nothing wrong with something I never said there was anything wrong with.Then repeat the same thing over and over again which I have already said I agree. How many more times are you going to tell me the ranger is a comprimise ? I already said it is
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
I think it was a good way to meet everyones needs for the least amount of money
I keep trying to drop this but you wont let it fall.

My point still remains the front diff and front axles on my truck are junk, and the only upgrade choice I have is to go the route of Jey and Gildo and rip the whole front end out and do a SAS. Who's fault is that ? Its nobodies, its fact. I don't blame ford, I totally understand why they built the ranger the way they did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
I think it was a good way to meet everyones needs for the least amount of money
There is a group no matter how small or large maybe we are 1% of the ranger owners maybe not, but there is a group of us that would like a better stronger, beefier front drivetrain and we have one option. Sure Ford could have threw us a bone and had a bigger better front diff and axles in at least one model of truck, but I didn't expect them to.
What this is all about and the bottom line, if the truck in my driveway was a 1997 TTB and not a 2003 SLA I would have plenty of options and plenty of upgrades to pick from. Even then if I choose the route Jey and Gildo are going down and do a SAS I would have an easier time and I think it would cost a little bit less money.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 11-17-2005
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 2,099
Your a quote ***** ben, good lord.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 11-17-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by 034x4
Your a quote ***** ben, good lord.
and youre just a *****...

leave ben alone...

lmao
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 11-18-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
its good to be some kind of *****
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 11-18-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Havre De Grace,Md
Posts: 3,262
I hear ya up there!!!!! lol
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 11-18-2005
buckgnarly's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: West Topsham, VT
Posts: 1,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
Im going to have to politely disagree with you fellas...

jeeps are not made out to what they are. yes you get a solid front axle from the factory, but the only jeeps that are really decent from the factory are rubicons. and look at the price on those!

for that price difference from my ranger to the rubi, I can do a SAS, rear axle swap, doubler, all the axle goodies, a great suspension and what not. not only that, ill be different. (and probably for less I might add...)

..

Sorry about getting off topic, but......

You are as ignorant as those guys in Jeeps that beleive that "It's a Jeep thing" crap.

Please tell me how you would swap both axles, get selectable lockers front and rear, a 4.0 low range transfer case, 31" MTRs, a short wheelbase (you may not like it, but it does come with that Rubicon)...let alone all the stuff you mentioned for the price difference. How much do you think Rubicons are? I know I had to give up my first born for mine !

If I had a nickel for every jerkoff I've met on the trails that criticize wha tyou drive I'd own a friggin HMMWV....but I guess I would not be cool then, because it's not "different" .
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 11-18-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
for one, carl, i said that the only worthy jeeps are the rubicons.


that being said, i can map out prices. axles swaps with built axles: abut 2000. doubler: 600-700 plus driveshafts. 37 inch MT/Rs: 600. short wheelbase: yeah ill let you have that one but short wheelbases and long wheelbases both have their advantages, so that one is knd of a wash. selectable lockers: 1000. okay so thats about 4300-4500? the ranger walked out of the lot for 18. 22,500. how much was your rubi?

Im not dissing on youre ride carl. i think you feel that way. Im saying they arent gods gift to wheeling like everyone makes it seem. thats all. nothing more, nothing less.

also lastly I would like to say that maybe those dudes with the "its a jeep thing" ruined it for me. BUT when on the trail with a cool set of guys, that just love to wheel, brand name doesnt have much of a bearing. Ive met quite a few guys wheeling and hung with them for the day and they were cool as hell.

So carl, with the most respect for you (and I do respect you) I just say that build what you got. I honestly think the large majority of jeeps are overated, but when you get to a certain point, with any vehicle, they are all just tools. specifically built tools.

do you get what im saying though? Im not here to bash you...
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 11-18-2005
buckgnarly's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: West Topsham, VT
Posts: 1,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
for one, carl, i said that the only worthy jeeps are the rubicons.


that being said, i can map out prices. axles swaps with built axles: abut 2000. doubler: 600-700 plus driveshafts. 37 inch MT/Rs: 600. short wheelbase: yeah ill let you have that one but short wheelbases and long wheelbases both have their advantages, so that one is knd of a wash. selectable lockers: 1000. okay so thats about 4300-4500? the ranger walked out of the lot for 18. 22,500. how much was your rubi?

Im not dissing on youre ride carl. i think you feel that way. Im saying they arent gods gift to wheeling like everyone makes it seem. thats all. nothing more, nothing less.

also lastly I would like to say that maybe those dudes with the "its a jeep thing" ruined it for me. BUT when on the trail with a cool set of guys, that just love to wheel, brand name doesnt have much of a bearing. Ive met quite a few guys wheeling and hung with them for the day and they were cool as hell.

So carl, with the most respect for you (and I do respect you) I just say that build what you got. I honestly think the large majority of jeeps are overated, but when you get to a certain point, with any vehicle, they are all just tools. specifically built tools.

do you get what im saying though? Im not here to bash you...

2 built axles swapped for 2k, and 1k for two sets of selectable lockers installed, 4 (not even 5?) 37" MTRs for 600???!!? Where? Doubler would be better than a 4.0 low....then agian, so would selectable hubs, floating rears...it keeps growing....if you really crunch numbers, the Rubicon is not that bad. Especially if your wife keeps the Ranger, and you need a new (ie reliable) vehicle

Anyway, I do get your point, I have met MANY morons who drive Jeeps. the kind who throw on 35/37s on a D30 front, never regear, rub fenders all day.....you get the point. I have met dudes on the trail that would not pull out my Ranger only b/c it was not a Jeep. Hell, the Rubicon crowd gets flack from the "You gotta build it, not buy it crowd" of "Jeepers".

Now when I get out of the Army, and settle into a nice house in VT, then it's time for the build of a Bronco.......any numbers/sources for those axles/tires/lockers?
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 11-18-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckgnarly
2 built axles swapped for 2k, and 1k for two sets of selectable lockers installed, 4 (not even 5?) 37" MTRs for 600???!!? Where? Doubler would be better than a 4.0 low....then agian, so would selectable hubs, floating rears...it keeps growing....if you really crunch numbers, the Rubicon is not that bad. Especially if your wife keeps the Ranger, and you need a new (ie reliable) vehicle

Anyway, I do get your point, I have met MANY morons who drive Jeeps. the kind who throw on 35/37s on a D30 front, never regear, rub fenders all day.....you get the point. I have met dudes on the trail that would not pull out my Ranger only b/c it was not a Jeep. Hell, the Rubicon crowd gets flack from the "You gotta build it, not buy it crowd" of "Jeepers".

Now when I get out of the Army, and settle into a nice house in VT, then it's time for the build of a Bronco.......any numbers/sources for those axles/tires/lockers?
Well I have the axles, i estimate a 2k build up on them with 5.13 gears and auto lockers. I dont really plan on selectables, I work at discount tire and i get them at cost (might be cheating I know!) the doubler would amount to 6:1 I have selectable hubs, semi floating ford 9 inch rear, HPd44 front. And I DO AGREE! rubi are very capable vehicles. especially right out of the factory, more so than any other stocker.

Ide love to see the bronco build up. an EB is my dream trail rig. we can talk numbers about the build up but...

maybe later
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 11-18-2005
buckgnarly's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: West Topsham, VT
Posts: 1,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
Well I have the axles, i estimate a 2k build up on them with 5.13 gears and auto lockers. I dont really plan on selectables, I work at discount tire and i get them at cost (might be cheating I know!) the doubler would amount to 6:1 I have selectable hubs, semi floating ford 9 inch rear, HPd44 front. And I DO AGREE! rubi are very capable vehicles. especially right out of the factory, more so than any other stocker.

Ide love to see the bronco build up. an EB is my dream trail rig. we can talk numbers about the build up but...

maybe later

Nah....I'm talking way earlier than any fancy EB editions......like late 60's to 70's. I had an offer on a mint 78 (same year I was born) that was at a townhouse in Philly (wife wanted it gone) for 300 bucks!! I passed, as I was apoor college student.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 11-18-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
whaaa??? i would have given my first born for that deal!!!

lol

EDIT: EBs are 60s to late 70s non fullsize broncos...
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 11-18-2005
buckgnarly's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: West Topsham, VT
Posts: 1,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERGILDO
whaaa??? i would have given my first born for that deal!!!

lol

EDIT: EBs are 60s to late 70s non fullsize broncos...

Ahhh...I thought you meant the Eddie Bauer editions.....i.e. the :"soccer mom editions"!
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 11-18-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
lol ya, i dont think tan bumpers and tree green accents are my dream in an offroad rig. LMAO
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 11-19-2005
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 2,099
EB's are 66-77. So that 78 is a fullsize.

Yes, gil is cheating. Fawkin discounts!
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 11-28-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
just curious what does a F-150 have for front and rear diffs ?
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 11-28-2005
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 2,099
They have full width 8.8's. They suck.

front who cares it's IFS.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 11-28-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PUEBLO, CO
Posts: 3,753
what year F150s? thats kind of an important factor...
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 11-29-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
1985-2005
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 11-29-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 034x4
They have full width 8.8's. They suck.

front who cares it's IFS.
So is width the only difference between a ranger and F150 8.8 ?
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 11-29-2005
optikal illushun's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Coal Region, MTC to be exact...heart of the coal region.
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger1
1985-2005
80-96 = 8.8
97-03 w/ 4.2 & 4.6 = 8.8
97-03 w/ 5.4 = 9.75

80-96 = Dana 44 TTB
97-03 = 8.8 IFS

not exactly sure on the 04/5s but im gunna say 9.75 for the rear.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 11-29-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
I wonder how easy a SAS would be on an F150, I would guess the TTB would be not too bad, I guess really the F150 IFS to SAS would be easy also, right ?

F150's do not have rack n pinion steering like our trucks right ?
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 11-29-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by optikal illushun
80-96 = 8.8
97-03 w/ 4.2 & 4.6 = 8.8
97-03 w/ 5.4 = 9.75

80-96 = Dana 44 TTB
97-03 = 8.8 IFS

not exactly sure on the 04/5s but im gunna say 9.75 for the rear.
So an F150 would take some big tires gear wouldn't they ?
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 11-29-2005
optikal illushun's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Coal Region, MTC to be exact...heart of the coal region.
Posts: 2,232
a SAS on a TTB F150 (like mine) is fairly simple. biggest problem is the track bar and steering linkage.

if u have all the parts, a few friends and a welder u can do a SAS in a weekend on a truck like mine. i was so close to doing one in the summer but didnt have any room to do it.

i know the 04+ have rack n pinion but im unsure on the 97-03s...but im gunna venture and say they did.



im kinda unsure what u mean by bigger tire gears? or do u mean bigger tires?
anyway, 35s are the normal to run but people have been running up to 38s w/o much trouble. just keep the front diff open or a loose limited slip to avoid breakage. afterall, its still a dana 44, just a TTB version.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 11-30-2005
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,115
yeah that what I mean, you already have a D44 up front I would think 38's would be cake.

I was really thinking about the front 8.8, I think thats cool true its an IFS but either way its an 8.8 I would think you could get 40" tires on that.

I don't really know much about all this yet but that seems so much bigger, I would think you could put some bigger tires on there.

I assume the full size broncos are the same as the F150's?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
need a new rear axel manofak Drivetrain Tech 16 09-13-2008 10:43 PM
Rear Axel Question...1997 ranger thef9est1 Drivetrain Tech 5 01-14-2008 07:15 PM
Front Axel Options? SteveOh Suspension Tech 38 01-07-2007 11:24 AM
Alcoa replacements options Lefty04LevelII Wheels & Tires Semi-Tech 10 10-23-2006 09:50 AM
explorer rear axel conversion hypnoticustoms General Ford Ranger Discussion 16 10-10-2006 07:25 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:20 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.