Drag Truck - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


General Ford Ranger Discussion General discussion of the Ford Ranger that does not fit in any other sub-forum.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 11-05-2007
cowboy63645's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fredericktown, Missouri
Posts: 813
Drag Truck

Ok, I have a dilema. I am wanting to build a drag truck, and of course, it will be a ranger. I am looking for a 93-97 2wd. Now, the question is, would an ext cab be the ideal truck, or the reg cab? I have built many cars, but never a truck for drag racing. It will NOT be a street legal truck, so the glass will come out, and get a full cage, 4 link rear with coil overs, tub the rear, gut the interior, etc.

I am starting with a 347 stroker, and a C6 tranny, and a narrowed 9" and going from there. I just dont know if a longer wheel base or a shorter one would be better. Also, when the truck is bought keep your eye on the project log portion of the forum, you will see lots of info and pics coming ya'lls way. Thanks for any and all help guys!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-05-2007
My91Ranger's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Roseville, Michigan
Posts: 2,252
I would think as a drag truck the weight would be a really big issue for it, so I would lean towards the regular cab ranger. As for wheelbase, no clue of ne advantages from that, i'm sure someone here knows.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-05-2007
ScottG's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lewiston, Maine
Posts: 4,926
well, for weight reduction, a regular cab would be better

but it depends on what you are going for. Personally, if I was going for a 10sec (or less) 1/4mile truck, i'd want the extended cab for a better "footing"
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-05-2007
cowboy63645's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fredericktown, Missouri
Posts: 813
I was leaning more towards the ext cab for weight purposes for my launch, but thinking of the reg cab for weight as far as lightness and how quick it will move, either way with that small of a truck I will have problems hooking up....anybody else?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-05-2007
0RangerEdge2's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,593
My vote is reg cab after seeing this truck run at a local track.

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/6...c2017f917d.htm

Check out the Ranger at 3:05ish.

Last edited by 0RangerEdge2; 11-05-2007 at 11:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-05-2007
JoshK's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CC, Indiana
Posts: 3,832
Regular cab!

I would be more worried about twisting the frame before doing wheelies off the line.

You can get a better launch with suspension settings.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-05-2007
cowboy63645's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fredericktown, Missouri
Posts: 813
love the truck in that video....I am seriously considering going to a local salvage yard and seein if they have anything that has a good frame and cab on it....
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-05-2007
graniteguy's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,221
All the mini trucks I see at the track are single cabs for weight reasons. I would guess that the square bodied 80's rangers are the lightest of all of them and the cheapest to acquire.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-06-2007
D.
Unregistered User
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0RangerEdge2
My vote is reg cab after seeing this truck run at a local track.

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/6...c2017f917d.htm

Check out the Ranger at 3:05ish.
What track is that? 11.006, not a bad run at all with a loaded passengers side spring..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-06-2007
D.
Unregistered User
 
Posts: n/a
If I had to build a Ranger for strip use only.. and I had a choice of any out there.. It would be a 93, reg cab. Many v8 swaps have already been done to them and documented. They are pretty light compared to a reg cab. Stay AWAY from a ' splash ' as their beds weigh more then a regular tin/sheetmetal one.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-06-2007
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
damn i'm really diggin that xl in the link. how tall are ya?? imo, that has alot to do with being comfortable and having leg room. In an Xcab, you can mount the seat more toward the rear for more leg room. I'd 4 link it. Personally, i'd want a reg cab.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-06-2007
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
Goes to show how little you homies know about dragracing.

An extended cab will allow you to place the engine/tranny/driver further rearward. And the longer wheel base will make the vehicle more stabil during the run.

But hey.. what do I know?

Rich
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-06-2007
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by wydopnthrtl
Goes to show how little you homies know about dragracing.

An extended cab will allow you to place the engine/tranny/driver further rearward. And the longer wheel base will make the vehicle more stabil during the run.

But hey.. what do I know?

Rich

I was thinking about weight distribution....but didnt mention it.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-06-2007
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
If your building a track only truck. The weight differences between a reg and std cab are not much. A little I'll concede.. but moving the weight rearward is more important for getting those 60s down.

Now... if I were to build a fun DD type of ranger? It would be a std cab short bed. But only because I like the looks better. That and spinning the tires would be easier.

Rich
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-06-2007
JoshK's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CC, Indiana
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by wydopnthrtl
Goes to show how little you homies know about dragracing.

An extended cab will allow you to place the engine/tranny/driver further rearward. And the longer wheel base will make the vehicle more stabil during the run.

But hey.. what do I know?

Rich
From what I have read he is not planning on moving the engine back or foward. He is wanting for more of a drop in engine. From what you are saying the fire wall would need moved and my guess he dosen't want to do that.


As far as being more stable, I agree with you, but unless he is planning on pumping out 1,000 HP I dont think 10 inches of wheel base is going to make a bit of diffrence if the truck gets sideways. I think he will gain more with saving the weight.

I think a boxed frame would keep the frame from twisting and a good suspension set up would keep the front wheels on the ground if you are looking for that much power.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-06-2007
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Mi
Posts: 2,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by firefighterjosh
I dont think 10 inches of wheel base is going to make a bit of diffrence if the truck gets sideways. I think he will gain more with saving the weight.
You address a "problem" before it happens not after it happens. You never want to get a drag race only vehicle sideways. The longer wheel base is indeed what he wants. IT ADDS STABILITY!

Now lets assume he does'nt want to change the firewall. (even though this is a race only truck with a full cage and you have no knowledge of what you are doing) Added weight towards the rear end will help to transfer weight to the tires.

It's called "CG" or "instant center" As the truck sits staticly the CG is not the same as when it's under full load (launching) Boxing in the frame and doing a 4link I assume is what he's going to do. If so a standard cab is not the way to go from a purely functional standpoint.

Guys it's simple science.

Rich
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-06-2007
JoshK's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CC, Indiana
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by wydopnthrtl
You address a "problem" before it happens not after it happens. You never want to get a drag race only vehicle sideways. The longer wheel base is indeed what he wants. IT ADDS STABILITY!

Now lets assume he does'nt want to change the firewall. (even though this is a race only truck with a full cage and you have no knowledge of what you are doing) Added weight towards the rear end will help to transfer weight to the tires.

It's called "CG" or "instant center" As the truck sits staticly the CG is not the same as when it's under full load (launching) Boxing in the frame and doing a 4link I assume is what he's going to do. If so a standard cab is not the way to go from a purely functional standpoint.

Guys it's simple science.

Rich
Durr I had to read his original post again.. "Not street legal" LMAO.....Its too early in the morning (3rd shift)

Anyways...

I guess I dont see any point of moving the engine. You should be able to get all the weight from the front of the truck to the rear tires by using suspension. Unless you have a Top fuel dragster you shouldn't need that long of a wheel base. Look at drag cars.... for example a mustang. There wheel base is shorter then a truck and they do just fine. Or a lingenfilter (sp?) Vete.

If your going to move the engine back then you are going to run the risk of having a wheelly machine.

But cowboy63645 has build other machines I am sure he knows how to build one.

Last edited by JoshK; 11-06-2007 at 05:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-06-2007
gumby's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: indy
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by firefighterjosh
If your going to move the engine back then you are going to run the risk of having a wheelly machine.
it is much simpler, and more effective, to build a rear suspension that will keep a light nose down than to lift a heavy one.

weight transfer is the key. if the weight is already closer to the rear tires, it is easier to handle.

for a dedicated machine, i would take a ex.cab as well.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-06-2007
cowboy63645's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fredericktown, Missouri
Posts: 813
well, there will be a 4 link/coilover setup for the rear suspension, as well as a fullage, and the firewall is getting moved about about 6" to move the motor and the tranny back, in my reg cab, which is an 01, I have plenty of leg room, so I was thinking in either truck I would be fine with doing so. I am only 6' tall. Sounds like the majority is leaning towards a reg cab for looks and the ext cab for function....
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-06-2007
dngerzone's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Tacoma, Washington
Posts: 342
with the weight of the motor towards the rear and the right suspension... you can get the better take off ... and with the longer wheel base... granted it might only be 10 inches or so makes a noticable difference... like rich said ... it is science.. the same thing aplies to the tires you run.. .a friend of mine has a 600 hp.. single cam honda civic and just with the change between tires cut off fractions of a second to his track time.... YA I SAID IT PRACTICALLY 600 HP... IT IS THE FASTEST not so street legal car in washington... sorry it is so long.. IT IS SCIENCE..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-06-2007
D.
Unregistered User
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by wydopnthrtl
It's called "CG" or "instant center" As the truck sits staticly the CG is not the same as when it's under full load (launching) Boxing in the frame and doing a 4link I assume is what he's going to do. If so a standard cab is not the way to go from a purely functional standpoint.

Guys it's simple science.

Rich
Correct, it adds stability. It also adds weight.

I've had an 84 regular cab with several different v8's in it and my present 03 Supercab. With the same axle, and LESS weight, a shorter wheelbase.. it STILL hooked better then my present ride.

Stability isn't a factor with our trucks.. .ther is no stability! They are bricks untill fully scrutinized.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-06-2007
graniteguy's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,221
It would be cool to see a step by step thread with decisions being be made along the way.

I built an s-10 that is sooo close to being in the 12's with the stock short block 4.3 L v6. I made a lot of mistakes along the way. Some had to do with doing what you can with little money or doing what you can with what you have to barter with. A lot of it was simply not knowing.

I'd love to do it all over again with a Ranger and some good planning for the outcome. One being to keep it street legal. I blew that with my s-10 project. I'd use the square body cause they can be had for $200. Think about it, what all would you be using? Frame, body, some front suspension, steering?

There are a lot of v8 rangers and s-10's out there that run in the 14's and 15's cause they can't "hook up".
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-06-2007
JoshK's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CC, Indiana
Posts: 3,832
Maybe I am wrong, but from what i have learned quad and motorcycle wise, most of your transfer of weight will be threw the suspension.

If you have enough power to get the front wheels light then most of your power is being transfered to the rear tires.

You have a good set-up when your front tires are just barely touching the pavement.

My thinking is that if you move the engine back you are going to run the risk of pulling wheelies and then you need to extend the front end, which I would think would be harder then just messing with some suspension mods.

My friend has a 57 bel air drag/street. He has a 700HP 454. He has cheater slicks and has no problems with traction.

I could be way off but its just my thinking.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-06-2007
cowboy63645's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fredericktown, Missouri
Posts: 813
Graniteguy, as soon as the truck is purchased and brought home, there will be a build up thread as soon as park it in the drive way. Every decision I make, every part that is bought, every dollar spent will be documented right here, as well as when it is complete, the time slips will be posted as well.

As far as the body style, I have decide on the 83-92 square body style, in a single cab short bed. The truck will be purchased sometime in the next 3 weeks, so ya'll be prepared for an experiance LOL. Also, along the way with the build, as I post things, if any of you have a better idea on parts, a build technique, anything, please let me know. I am always looking for input on my projects and this one will be no different.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-07-2007
graniteguy's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,221
The one regret I had was not keeping mine street legal. That is probably one benefit of the older Rangers. No matter what engine or fuel setup you use, keeping it inspectable should be fairly easy. It's basically just an issue of keeping the lights working.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gator Drag 2014 Custom Car & Truck Show gatordrag Meets, Greets, & Events 0 03-13-2014 07:32 AM
High school drag truck build. ford rules Project Logs 11 06-06-2010 11:33 AM
Anyone drag race there ranger? JoshK General Ford Ranger Discussion 12 06-12-2007 06:58 PM
Ran the Trailer Queen at the drag strip Wowak General Ford Ranger Discussion 20 12-22-2004 02:39 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 12:37 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.