first winter - Page 2 - 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
  #26  
Old 01-22-2012
B737's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Brick, NJ
Posts: 297
About 250 here. It rides very planted now. Much more predictable in the snow while in 2wd or 4wd. I might remove one bag but I'm reluctant.

Attached Thumbnails
first winter-a775161c.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-22-2012
Ranger_Guy15's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: MN
Posts: 2,827
I just throw 2 50 pound bags in the back and call it good. Just take it easy when your turning and leave more room for stopping and you will be fine.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-23-2012
ranger94's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: abbotsford
Posts: 93
i put blocks of steel in mine, 6" round about 4"high solid chunks of steel. about 200pounds of those strapped down real good plus my new 31's i had no problem with my 2wd ranger. went right past some 4wd trucks stuck at the side of the road on my way to school the other week
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-24-2012
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Rosedale, WV
Posts: 215
never heard of using steel, but on that note, you could probably make some weights out of steel that go inside the rear bumper(or inside the rearmost crossmember for those running rollpans) if you wanted to go with a stealth approach...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-27-2012
97ranger xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mass.
Posts: 459
no snow here in mass. no need for xtra weight

former years just let the snow/ice pile up in the bed. no problems even with 2wd
running firestone a/t's
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-01-2012
tpatten's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: gorham
Posts: 70
I got 6 stone wall blocks weighing in at around 40 pounds each pushed all the way against my tailgate (move my center of gravity the most) and a board across right behind the wheel wells to hold the weight back and this seems to work fairly well.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 11.JPG (2.15 MB, 2296 views)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-01-2012
sniper_101's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sask, Canada
Posts: 1,902
Putting it at the rear of your bed also makes a slide way harder to control and increases your centrifugal mass once you get sideways . . .

Smartest and most logical placement is directly over your rear axle or up against the front of your bed. I used to use about 300lbs in my Ranger or a snowmobile, and use about 900-1100lbs of wheel weights in my Superduty directly over the rear axle.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-01-2012
97ranger xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mass.
Posts: 459
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper_101 View Post
Putting it at the rear of your bed also makes a slide way harder to control and increases your centrifugal mass once you get sideways . . .

Smartest and most logical placement is directly over your rear axle
agree. you want direct weight downwards onto the wheels.
those stones look dangerous....i could see those going flying in an accident.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-02-2012
tpatten's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: gorham
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper_101 View Post
Putting it at the rear of your bed also makes a slide way harder to control and increases your centrifugal mass once you get sideways . . .

Smartest and most logical placement is directly over your rear axle or up against the front of your bed. I used to use about 300lbs in my Ranger or a snowmobile, and use about 900-1100lbs of wheel weights in my Superduty directly over the rear axle.
I would have to disagree. the simple physics of it would say that putting the weight directly over the wheels is adding just that much weight to the wheels whereas having the weight near the tailgate, behind the wheels is actually adding all that weight plus the extra force of holding the frame down between the engine and the added weight. as for having the weight up against the front of the bed, this would only put 1/2 of the added weight to your back wheels and the other 1/2 is going to the front which is not going to help at all because the idea is to gain traction with your rear tires, the front tires have the weight of the engine to hold them down for steering. As for the centrifugal mass, having the weight just behind the tires is not going to be far enough away to have much effect on this in the event of turning sideways, especially with the weight of the engine holding down the other end.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-02-2012
tpatten's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: gorham
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by 97ranger xlt View Post
agree. you want direct weight downwards onto the wheels.
those stones look dangerous....i could see those going flying in an accident.
Ideally this will not be an issue, also I have added another board so the weights are jammed in between the wheel wells and the tailgate, so it would take quite a collision to send these bricks flying.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-02-2012
20102wdRanger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Port Hope. Ontario
Posts: 66
I would agree no more then 250lbs You dont want to take any weight off the steers and definately right over the rear axle or right ahead of it towards the cab in direction, Last winter I used 250 lbs this winter im in around 220 I believe its still a little light in bad snow but I have that little bit of bite still!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-02-2012
SteelDirigible's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 3,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpatten View Post
I would have to disagree. the simple physics of it would say that putting the weight directly over the wheels is adding just that much weight to the wheels whereas having the weight near the tailgate, behind the wheels is actually adding all that weight plus the extra force of holding the frame down between the engine and the added weight. as for having the weight up against the front of the bed, this would only put 1/2 of the added weight to your back wheels and the other 1/2 is going to the front which is not going to help at all because the idea is to gain traction with your rear tires, the front tires have the weight of the engine to hold them down for steering.
This is interesting. You are definitely correct, putting it towards the front of the bed distributes the load to BOTH axles.

And, yes, with the blocks to the tailgate, it will put slightly more force on the rear axle. it will, however, take some force OFF of the front (like you said, moving the center of gravity) so if you move the center of gravity past the halfway point, then I would say no, it needs to be over the axle.

Does anyone know what the weight distribution is like in a ranger empty? front axle vs rear? I think that is needed to know for sure. We need to know the weight of the truck and which of that is on the front axle and which is towards the back.

What does the engine weigh?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-02-2012
tpatten's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: gorham
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelDirigible View Post
This is interesting. You are definitely correct, putting it towards the front of the bed distributes the load to BOTH axles.

And, yes, with the blocks to the tailgate, it will put slightly more force on the rear axle. it will, however, take some force OFF of the front (like you said, moving the center of gravity) so if you move the center of gravity past the halfway point, then I would say no, it needs to be over the axle.

Does anyone know what the weight distribution is like in a ranger empty? front axle vs rear? I think that is needed to know for sure. We need to know the weight of the truck and which of that is on the front axle and which is towards the back.

What does the engine weigh?
here is the info on my 2000 2wd ext. cab

Attached Images
File Type: jpg photo.JPG (1.88 MB, 457 views)
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-02-2012
sniper_101's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sask, Canada
Posts: 1,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpatten View Post
I would have to disagree. the simple physics of it would say that putting the weight directly over the wheels is adding just that much weight to the wheels whereas having the weight near the tailgate, behind the wheels is actually adding all that weight plus the extra force of holding the frame down between the engine and the added weight. as for having the weight up against the front of the bed, this would only put 1/2 of the added weight to your back wheels and the other 1/2 is going to the front which is not going to help at all because the idea is to gain traction with your rear tires, the front tires have the weight of the engine to hold them down for steering. As for the centrifugal mass, having the weight just behind the tires is not going to be far enough away to have much effect on this in the event of turning sideways, especially with the weight of the engine holding down the other end.
Lol, I'm sorry, but simple physics would not dictate putting weight directly over the rear axle a equal 50/50 distribution between the front and rear axle, lol. When you see a pickup with a gooseneck or 5th wheel directly over the axle, you don't see the front squatting for a reason . . . there is also a reason why you can slide 5th wheel hitches on semi's and pickups, to distribute weight. The distribution of weight by placement over the axle is not going to equal 50/50 front rear, but it will however change depending on a vehicle's wheelbase, ever so slightly.

Also, placing weight over or behind the axle does make a large difference in control-ability of a truck in a slide. It's placing a ballast weight an extra 2-4ft back makes a very noticeable difference, considering the fulcrum is the front axle . . .

I move heavy stuff for a living (20,000lb tractors to 300,000lbs+ of mining equipment), not trying to be a smart-***, but this is real world fact from someone with experience on the subject at hand.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-02-2012
SteelDirigible's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 3,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper_101 View Post
Lol, I'm sorry, but simple physics would not dictate putting weight directly over the rear axle a equal 50/50 distribution between the front and rear axle, lol. When you see a pickup with a gooseneck or 5th wheel directly over the axle, you don't see the front squatting for a reason . . . there is also a reason why you can slide 5th wheel hitches on semi's and pickups, to distribute weight. The distribution of weight by placement over the axle is not going to equal 50/50 front rear, but it will however change depending on a vehicle's wheelbase, ever so slightly.

Also, placing weight over or behind the axle does make a large difference in control-ability of a truck in a slide. It's placing a ballast weight an extra 2-4ft back makes a very noticeable difference, considering the fulcrum is the front axle . . .

I move heavy stuff for a living (20,000lb tractors to 300,000lbs+ of mining equipment), not trying to be a smart-***, but this is real world fact from someone with experience on the subject at hand.
well when he said 1/2 and 1/2 he was talking about if the weight were at the front of the bed. if it were an equal distance from both axles, the ballast weight WOULD be split 50/50 (though the overall distribution wouldnt)

but let me ask you this... what is the goal weight distribution here? with rear wheels getting power you need traction there, and you need enough in the front to steer, but is 50/50 even split what is desired?
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 02-04-2012
sniper_101's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sask, Canada
Posts: 1,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelDirigible View Post
well when he said 1/2 and 1/2 he was talking about if the weight were at the front of the bed. if it were an equal distance from both axles, the ballast weight WOULD be split 50/50 (though the overall distribution wouldnt)

but let me ask you this... what is the goal weight distribution here? with rear wheels getting power you need traction there, and you need enough in the front to steer, but is 50/50 even split what is desired?
Yes, so no matter how much you put at the front of the bed, unless it's an equal distance between the front and rear axle, it's not going to be a 50/50 distribution, it'll change on wheelbase of course, but like stated, has to be in the dead center.

As far as weight bias, that opens a whole new can of worms. What are we going for, more traction for winter driving, snow wheeling, sled pulling? As far as winter driving, usually you add enough weight just to aid in traction of the rear wheels (if we're talking pickups). Therefore you add weight with the idea of bringing the weight bias closer to a 50/50 front rear, but depending on the truck's weight and bias, is impractical. This also depends on how much traction you get empty of course. For example I run non-siped M/T tires on my truck all year, horrid in the winter, I have been stuck on flat ground in 2wd with no weight. My buddy has BFG A/T's on his Raptor, it's not only a significantly lighter, but it does far better in the snow and ice than my truck. As obvious as tit is, adding weight isn't always the key, but it shows some vehicles require different amounts of weight for traction. Especially when you consider that a Ranger/F150 is probably close to a 56% front bias, where as a bigger truck with a diesel may be as high as 60%+ . . . so you can see what I'm getting at, obviously a person would most likely not require any weight on the steer axle.

So the point is, 150-300lbs in most Ranger's for the winter with decent All Seasons should be enough.*

* = not including variables
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-04-2012
Jrevans2002's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, Ill
Posts: 560
I have 4- 70 lbs bags, well Menard's calls them "Tubes" resting between the wheel hump. I framed out some 2X4's and placed it in front of the tubes to keep them from sliding forward to the front of the bed. I know we don't consider "US" as added weight but we all are!!!! I'm 290 lbs so I add weight to the front of the of truck that helps with the 50/50 weight distributions.

Last edited by Jrevans2002; 02-04-2012 at 11:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-05-2012
B737's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Brick, NJ
Posts: 297
..... edited out.... disregard
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First Ranger, First Post widriga Member Introductions 5 05-13-2015 01:27 PM
First Post, First Day, First Car. Sierra Invenio Member Introductions 8 05-12-2015 12:34 PM
First idiot to make a thread about winter driving - 2009 edition the.hatter Wheels & Tires Semi-Tech 33 11-04-2009 06:22 PM
Your winter mods.... BCranger General Ford Ranger Discussion 82 12-03-2006 10:11 PM
first winter storm damage offroadjoe General Ford Ranger Discussion 10 12-01-2006 05:43 AM


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 09:08 PM.


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.