Odd Resto-mod Build 1984 diesel Ford Ranger

[InfraRedline]

Due to gearing, they are actually reasonably quick up to like 30 mph.
So in normal around town driving they are fine.
But holy hell don't try and merge into 70 mph traffic from a slow start.
There is this one idiotic entrance ramp near one of my office's that literally has a 90 degree bend turn right before the merge. In the wet I sometimes unintentionally drift my truck just trying to keep from having to drop down to 2nd gear.

I hate ramps like that, and the 300 is definitely not fast, but still ...

[emmettlodge]

I hate ramps like that, and the 300 is definitely not fast, but still ...

I honestly don't know if I could daily drive something that slow

[ZackaryMac]

That Ranger is a bit faster than my 1994 S10 diesel, which is heavier and has less HP than the Ford.
Nice job on the truck. You should get awesome fuel mileage from it, and a lot of miles out of that engine.

It certainly does take a different skill to drive something under-powered in traffic. You actually have to do some quick mental calculations before passing, or pulling out. Like, flooring it for 5-10 seconds before pulling out to pass, and hoping the person you're passing doesn't decide to be smart, and give it some gas, cause then you're screwed. Of course at that point, if they don't want dents and paint scraped down their car/truck, they usually slow down when you start pulling in anyway.

[BRealistic]

I hate ramps like that, and the 300 is definitely not fast, but still ...

Automatic?
4 speed manual?

I am in 2nd gear before getting through the intersection (5 speed manual).

[InfraRedline]

Automatic?
4 speed manual?

I am in 2nd gear before getting through the intersection (5 speed manual).

I've only ever driven 5-speed manuals. Can't remember the axle ratio, but yes I generally start in 2nd.

The video isn't mine, but here's from the info from the youtube link:

1992 Ford F150, 4.9L inline 6, M5OD transmission, 2.73 rear end (why?) No major modifications. Surprised it took less then 20 seconds, standard cab, short bed weighted down to 4800 lbs with sandbags for winter.

Fairly new to driving manual transmission, probably should have shifted a hell of a lot sooner.

Truck is a eventual candidate for a Cummins 4BT swap if the 4.9L ever craps out

Good luck waiting for that to happen.

[BRealistic]

I've only ever driven 5-speed manuals. Can't remember the axle ratio, but yes I generally start in 2nd.

Start in 2nd gear? You have driven the four speed with the super low granny gear 1st.. or a 5 speed with a very low rear end.

[InfraRedline]

Start in 2nd gear? You have driven the four speed with the super low granny gear 1st.. or a 5 speed with a very low rear end.

I'm sure I've driven that 4-speed on the older ones long ago, but my mom's current truck is a 5-speed ~2000. The axle is low, but not some super-low aftermarket thing or anything. First does feel like a granny gear, but I dunno ... I don't drive a lot of trucks and this thing doesn't have a tach so I'm not sure where first tops out or anything. I do drive manuals and have a good sense of mechanical sympathy (especially for my mom's vehicles), so it's not like I'm slipping the clutch a bunch on 2nd gear launches. It's easy to do, and moves off just fine in traffic. Very nice truck - love that motor in a lightish regular cab manual.

[bustedbucket]

Am i the only one who likes the way that ranger looks in the before pic more than the after? Has a certain charm. Better looking wheels at least IMO.

There's definately a certain knack needed to pilot super slow vehicles in today's hustle-bustle traffic. The slowest i've driven and owned was my old '83 rabbit 4dr n/a diesel AUTO. Made for some interesting times and a few pissed off fellow motorists!

The ford 300? I like those. Nifty induction sound. Such a "trucky" engine for lack of a better term.

[03GTI4Me]

Great website.

I had an '86 Ranger XL as my first vehicle. It had the 2.3 4cyl, not the diesel, but overall almost identical. Brought back some memories.

[devianb]

Am i the only one who likes the way that ranger looks in the before pic more than the after? Has a certain charm. Better looking wheels at least IMO.

I liked the way it was before too. That 0-60 is shockingly slow!!!

[Broduski]

All you fancy-pants people with EFI and 5 speeds attached to their 300s.

3 speeds and a carb. OG, yo.

[two.twoliter]

Due to gearing, they are actually reasonably quick up to like 30 mph.
So in normal around town driving they are fine.
But holy hell don't try and merge into 70 mph traffic from a slow start.
There is this one idiotic entrance ramp near one of my office's that literally has a 90 degree bend turn right before the merge. In the wet I sometimes unintentionally drift my truck just trying to keep from having to drop down to 2nd gear.

Why be afraid to use 2nd gear? I used to daily drive an s10 with the 120 hp 2.8 v6 and a tall geared 5 speed, so I imagine the power to weight is similar to an f-150 with the 300. The key to getting anywhere in a hurry was not being afraid to keep the revs up a bit. I would regularly use 1st gear up to 30 mph and 2nd to 50 in regular driving, which was nowhere near redline.

[MCTB]

LOL! That is a mobile chicane. The truck makes more noise than it does speed.

obin

Thats the way the Cruiser is. N/A 3B (90 hp/ 160 ft lb) and H55 5 speed makes for a slow beast. I think it accelerated about the same pace, maybe half a second faster. Still loved it. I made a sticker up on Cafepress for the rear glass for the cars behind me to see: "Slow Diesel- Tailgating wont get me to go any faster."



I love that someone took the time to restore something no one else would think of doing. Its something that I think about all the time. I would love to build up an Isuzu Trooper into another camping truck. Theyre cheap to buy, tough and are the right size all around but if something mechanical goes wrong, youre instantly in for a replacement that is more than the truck itself. Makes me wonder, how much does vehicle worth/ resale value actually matter to an "enthusiast?"

[TrackMagicWS6]

Hope to drop a 4bt cummins in my ranger someday.

[emmettlodge]

Hope to drop a 4bt cummins in my ranger someday.

Okay so I hear this all the time, and I'm stumped.

Why is the 4BTAA such a popular swap? It's a horrible choice. It's loud, really clattery, and it vibrates the hell out of small chassis like the Ranger, S10, and Tacoma. It also doesn't get great MPG and it has a really narrow powerband.

What's the appeal? Am I missing something?

[MCTB]

Okay so I hear this all the time, and I'm stumped.

Why is the 4BTAA such a popular swap? It's a horrible choice. It's loud, really clattery, and it vibrates the hell out of small chassis like the Ranger, S10, and Tacoma. It also doesn't get great MPG and it has a really narrow powerband.

What's the appeal? Am I missing something?

People look past all of that because they want a diesel and there arent many US market choices. The 4BTAA isnt even the motor that they are using. Theyre using the regular 4BT because its cheaper. The 4BTAA is marginally better than the 4BT but its still an NVH nightmare. I dont get it either. A lot of people put them into Cruisers because its a cheaper than Toyota diesel option. Those trucks inevitably end up on the classifieds section on Mud for sale. People spend a lot of money doing the swap and then cannot take the NVH that happens afterwards. The Isuzu 4BD1T is a better option and is gaining in popularity but isnt as popular as the 4BT.

[8V Fury]

LOL! That is a mobile chicane. The truck makes more noise than it does speed.

obin

For a second, I thought you were talking about the fart can hondas.

[The Igneous Faction]

People look past all of that because they want a diesel and there arent many US market choices.

OM617 in a Jeep Comanche.

I was actually thinking about diesel swaps for the Ranger the other day before this thread popped up and thought the OM617 would be a great candidate. I found a few build threads for Rangers with OM617 turbo swaps.

[adrew]

I was actually thinking about diesel swaps for the Ranger the other day before this thread popped up and thought the OM617 would be a great candidate. I found a few build threads for Rangers with OM617 turbo swaps.

Has anyone put a 2.8 PowerStroke in one yet? That's what they come with south of the border.

There's also the 4.5 V6 PowerStroke that came in the Ford LCF, but I don't know if it's too big/heavy.

[MCTB]

OM617 in a Jeep Comanche.

I was actually thinking about diesel swaps for the Ranger the other day before this thread popped up and thought the OM617 would be a great candidate. I found a few build threads for Rangers with OM617 turbo swaps.

Right, the OM617 is gutless, especially in a heavy SUV or truck. If you just wanted MPG, great choice, especially now that there are adapters for GM and Jeep transmission options. Short wheelbase is probably okay but you would have to gear the hell out of it in order to make it livable in a big truck or SUV.

Has anyone put a 2.8 PowerStroke in one yet? That's what they come with south of the border.

The 2.8 powerstroke is a heavily updated Rover 300tdi. Its really great on power but costs a huge chunk of change and parts arent that available in the States.

[two.twoliter]

Right, the OM617 is gutless, especially in a heavy SUV or truck. If you just wanted MPG, great choice, especially now that there are adapters for GM and Jeep transmission options. Short wheelbase is probably okay but you would have to gear the hell out of it in order to make it livable in a big truck or SUV.

In a 4wd or full size truck it would be gutless, but in a 2wd ranger or s-10 it would be almost quick. Keep in mind my '93 s-10 longbed weighed under 2800 lbs with the v6. That's 700-800 lbs less than a 300d sedan.

[BRealistic]

Why be afraid to use 2nd gear? I used to daily drive an s10 with the 120 hp 2.8 v6 and a tall geared 5 speed, so I imagine the power to weight is similar to an f-150 with the 300. The key to getting anywhere in a hurry was not being afraid to keep the revs up a bit. I would regularly use 1st gear up to 30 mph and 2nd to 50 in regular driving, which was nowhere near redline.

Note the 4.9 liter inline 6 is wound out at just 3500 rpm.
The power band is from 1500 to 3500 rpm.
Like I said before- it drives like a diesel.
And in my situation- dropped to 2nd gear means I was going maybe 25mph (2nd is wound out at 40mph), which means the rpm dropped too low for it to pull out in 3rd.
And the 4.9 6 really pulls well from mid range rpm (like a diesel).

[The Igneous Faction]

Right, the OM617 is gutless, especially in a heavy SUV or truck. If you just wanted MPG, great choice, especially now that there are adapters for GM and Jeep transmission options. Short wheelbase is probably okay but you would have to gear the hell out of it in order to make it livable in a big truck or SUV.

Perhaps it's irrelevant, but the OM617 is a power/torque upgrade when compared to the 2.5l AMC, 2.3l Ford, GM's 2.5l, and even the small-displacement V6 options from all three, which is what came in the majority of the trucks being discussed.

Now, compared to modern engines? Sure, it's a dog. But compared to what came stock it's really not so bad.