ive been thinking about this for a while

[rurouni20xx]

the art of the controlled skid may not be racing to you, but it sure is fun. awd w/o proper suspension tuning has horrible cornering characteristics on road course, rwd is best for this. you have to slow down so far to turn cuz your front tires are pulling you thru the corner. now off roading/rallying on the other hand, that is def awd territory and i agree thats the best setup for such things.

 

[wrecking-crew]

im not building this for racing. its mostly just to do something weird

 

[rusty ol ranger]

A well balanced RWD car would do just as good as AWD.

later,
Dustin

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

whatever helps ya sleep better at night dusty

 

[rurouni20xx]

big dif between awd and rwd buddy, w/ a variable center dif you can make an awd feel like a rwd when setting it to 10/90 ratio, but i like the 40/60 dif and sometimes 30/70. off roading w/ all wheel drive is a lot easier and better than a rwd. plus you have added traction and control on the front wheels, something a rwd can never have.

 

[Will]

Impala SS's are available fwd with the 5.3.

I would rather have AWD...

Yes, perfect. I wasn't coming up with anything bigger than a V6. But still, a 250hp/250ft# transverse V6 mounted in the bed of a 108" Ranger would make it a 50/50 RWD truck and perfect for some serious road course work. The 5.3, even better. But those won't come cheap. A 3.5 out of an unnamed vehicle could be found though. A 250hp, VVT engine is no slouch in a 3,000# Ranger. It would run 6.0 0-60, mid 14s in the quarter and have lots of torque coming out of turns in a perfectly balanced road course pickup truck.

 

[Will]

big dif between awd and rwd buddy, w/ a variable center dif you can make an awd feel like a rwd when setting it to 10/90 ratio, but i like the 40/60 dif and sometimes 30/70. off roading w/ all wheel drive is a lot easier and better than a rwd. plus you have added traction and control on the front wheels, something a rwd can never have.

Our Pilot has a locked rear--you push a button and it's welded. It hops and skips and jumps when you turn. It has no center diff, the transmission has an output for the rear driveshaft. Each rear axle is connected to a side gear in the rear diff by an electric clutch. The computer decides which side needs traction and gives it to it. There is an override button, which I described, to lock both clutches. It's a darn fine setup.

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

the automatic 4WD explorers did something similar.

 

[Will]

No transfercase with active controls in the drive axle?

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

no, the transfer case front output is engaged electronically when rear wheel slip is detected. the case is a standard chain-driven, part-time case with no way of allowing slip between front and rear outputs other than controlling engagement of the front output.

a little more primative than the honda system...but seems to work alright.

 

[wrecking-crew]

quit giving me ideas. its bad to give me ideas. i think i might just stick with a rwd rear engine ranger. but awd sounds cool but hard to set up. hard to decide.

i think im going to try to do all ford in my build. might be more expensive but i think i can use a 351W w/ a 3spd from a stang if im thinking right. tell me what you think of my plan so far and will it work?

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

i thought you wanted to use a transverse mounted engine...

 

[rurouni20xx]

your right, im talking import here. last things i seen vcds available for were mitsu evos/3000gts subarus and some other vehicles. i dont think ford has advanced that far yet.

 

[sloue]

many moons ago , i saw a early 60s chevy van ,buddy put a small block in the back . mounted it bacwards and used a V drive out of boat. it was crazy looking

 

[rurouni20xx]

a reverse stern drive out of a boat? interesting yet effective, the stern drives for mercury boats actually fit chevy small blocks since the mercruiser 43 is actually a chevy 4.3 v6. since the 305/350/383 chevy bolts up to a 4.3 v6 id try it if i had the stuff laying around.