Stoutness of the 7.5?

85_Ranger4x4 said:

The 302 got bumped up in the mid 70's to lower the compression.

Click to expand...

I pulled the specs from a 2013 Ford Racing Performance Parts catalog.
they list the 68-96 302 as 8.206 with the Boss being slightly different.
most likely there are some versions not in the catalog. I'm had not realized there was that much difference between the 302 and 351.
other specs are 302 is 18.75 width", 351 21".

don4331 said:

I'm going to question the fox body 'stang being lighter than Ranger/narrower tires.

The '95 Cobra I got my rims off crossed the scales @ 3,458lbs; 1,522 of that on rear axle. My Ranger tips scales @ 3,549lbs; 1,477 of that on rear axle. (Both weights are with me in driver's seat). So, Mustang is 50lb heavier on rear axle and my Ranger has a hard tonneau. Without tonneau, Ranger is lighter overall than Mustang and only has ~80% of weight on rear wheels that the car does.

Mustang had 245/45R17s, Ranger 235/60R15s. Just saying.

You don't have to do any welding. Order a set of DJM Suspension lowering blocks for an F-150, and use them to put the spring perches on top (opposite of how they were intended to be used).

Click to expand...

Not too many foxbodies had 31" tires like the OP has on his truck. Not many had 17" wheels from the factory like your SN95 for that matter. Most of the pre '86 cars were doing good to have 150hp too (they went to the 8.8 the same year they got to 200hp)

From my understanding as the fox morphed into the SN95 it also gained weight. (94-95 GT is among my favorite Mustang though)

My std cab longbox 4x4 5.0 Ranger as it sits right now (but with me in it and a full tank of gas) is just over 4k lbs. With a better front axle, od trans and a fullsize tcase it will only be gaining weight in the future too. A scab would be heavier and a later truck would be heavier yet. I don't know how the OP's 2wd '03 std cab would compare with mine but he would have a lot more safety equipment and more interior stuff.

pjtoledo said:

I pulled the specs from a 2013 Ford Racing Performance Parts catalog.
they list the 68-96 302 as 8.206 with the Boss being slightly different.
most likely there are some versions not in the catalog. I'm had not realized there was that much difference between the 302 and 351.
other specs are 302 is 18.75 width", 351 21".

Click to expand...

I think it was like 74/5-77 they did that dirty trick. Somehow Ford in their infinite wisdom decided it would be easier to redesign the engine block than the cylinder heads... and then a few years later reversed their theory and did the heads and went back to their old deck height.

The base curb weight on my particular Ranger is 3002 lbs. It's a 2003 XL 2wd, standard cab, short bed, 112" wheel base truck with a 3.73 rear open diff. It has a manual trans, manual door locks, manual seats and manual windows. But it does have A/C. It's as basic as basic can get.

Heck the payload on this is only 1260 lbs with a GVWR of 4360 lbs and a towing capacity of 1640 lbs. It's a little thing.

Of course by adding a V8, auto trans, bigger axle?? and possibly some heavier duty springs (both the front coils and rear leafs are shot), the truck weight will go up. Just not sure how much.

You don't have to do any welding. Order a set of DJM Suspension lowering blocks for an F-150, and use them to put the spring perches on top (opposite of how they were intended to be used).

Click to expand...

don4331: That's interesting. I didn't even know that was an option. I am going to have to look into this. Thanks!

EDIT: Eh, still have to move the shock mounts so unless there's a no weld option for those then in for a penny in for a pound.

Soledad said:

Of course by adding a V8, auto trans, bigger axle?? and possibly some heavier duty springs (both the front coils and rear leafs are shot), the truck weight will go up. Just not sure how much.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know mine has gained weight. I didn't weigh it before I started adding crap to it though.

Soledad:

One could use 2 driver's side Explorer spring/shock pads, and use 8 - grade 8 bolts (versus the u-bolts) to attach the springs / mount the shocks. You just be very careful to tighten the bolts evenly. (class 8 trucks mount the axle to the springs so, done with care, there shouldn't be a safety issue, u-bolts just make the installation fast (no mind) for factory...)

Soledad said:

The base curb weight on my particular Ranger is 3002 lbs. It's a 2003 XL 2wd, standard cab, short bed, 112" wheel base truck with a 3.73 rear open diff. It has a manual trans, manual door locks, manual seats and manual windows. But it does have A/C. It's as basic as basic can get.

Heck the payload on this is only 1260 lbs with a GVWR of 4360 lbs and a towing capacity of 1640 lbs. It's a little thing.

Of course by adding a V8, auto trans, bigger axle?? and possibly some heavier duty springs (both the front coils and rear leafs are shot), the truck weight will go up. Just not sure how much.


don4331: That's interesting. I didn't even know that was an option. I am going to have to look into this. Thanks!

EDIT: Eh, still have to move the shock mounts so unless there's a no weld option for those then in for a penny in for a pound.

Click to expand...

something to consider is that your duratec engine has an aluminum block, it is a very light engine and easily revs past 6000 rpms. changing to a set of 4:10 gears should get you going just fine. by the way, they are a bit unstable at 90 so top end should not be too big a concern. throwing a V8 up front will add a couple hundred pounds, all things considered. that will change the F-R weight bias some and drag the handling down with it.
they easily tow 1500-2000 lbs, upgrading the rear brakes to 10" would help.
I've got 300,000 on mine now, that 'lil 2.3 may not win many drag races but it will definitely get you where you want to go.
the front coils are almost the exact dimension as some Crown Vics, so there are some options there.

You can easily upgrade the 8.8" for strength by going to aftermarket 1541H steel axles, almost as strong (10% less) as stock 31 spline. Cost under $200 and no welding or fighting adapting an Explorer rear.
Dave

Thanks everyone for all of the suggestions and info! I definitely appreciate it!

pjtoledo: For my speed need I have a Lexus IS350 and for a V6 it's darn quick so having a higher top speed in the truck is pretty much a non-necessity. But, getting to the speed limit as fast as possible, I'm always up for that. And sounding good while doing it is even that much better.

This truck is my tinker mobile, something to keep me busy and out of my wife's hair.

My first thought was to turbo the 2.3 but I want to increase the trucks towing and hauling capabilities above what they are currently and do it as cool and efficiently as possible. Not because I need too but really, because I just want to see if I can do it....safely. And I think that a V8 would do it better than a 2.3 turbo. I'm not afraid to say I'm wrong though and I'm always open to suggestions.

I figure a larger engine, stouter axle, better gears, heavier duty springs and brakes should get me at or near a 3000lb towing capacity if not more. If a 4x2 3.0 auto with 3.73's can tow 4100lb I should be able to get near that. Any more than that and I don't think the standard cab frame would support the extra towing weight.

Mac: That's pretty interesting regarding the aftermarket 1541H steel axles. I'll have to compare the cost of a used Expo 8.8 with a Ranger 8.8 and see if the difference is equal to the cost of the steel axles. It could be that a Ranger 8.8 and steel axles may still be cheaper than a used Expo 8.8.

don4331: I'm going to have do some digging on this because I cannot for the life of me picture the spring/shock pads in my head. Do you have an example of or a link to what you are talking about? Is it where the OEM shock mount is actually bolted/welded to the spring pad on some vehicles? I think I've seen that before.....maybe....vaguely.
EDIT: Ooooh! Ok, I think I just found (via a GIS) what you are talking about. So the Explorer spring pack plate and shock mount are all one unit? Nifty! But wait, wouldn't the spring plate be on top of the springs when used on the Ranger (because the spring perches have to be on top)?
EDIT-2: Actually, thinking about this, I don't technically have to do a spring over configuration. I could just stick with a spring under config and go with some lifted rear springs for an Explorer. Jeeps were spring under for a long time and did just fine.

Right now I'm getting all of the bugs worked out of it. All of the things that the PO should have done over the years but didn't. Then my next step is to get the suspension set up (lift spindles, new coils, new rear leafs, all new bushings) and the rear axle situation resolved. Once the suspension and axle are done then it's on to figuring out the engine and trans. And after that it's the "looks" department.

Question from me Dave:

So, 8.8 and 7.5" 28 spline axles are identical. Does replacing 7.5" OEM axles with 1541H axles make the 7.5" almost as strong as stock 8.8"?!

Soledad needs to pull axles to swap from 9" to 10" brakes anyways; $200 for pair of axles would be easy way out...

Also, I never thought about leaving springs under axle and using springs with greater arch/longer rear shackles. Skinning this cat might be easier than you though.

Just thinking out loud:

4.0 OHC has 207hp/238ftlb; and can tow up to 3,500 lbs with M5OD. (Ford's engineers being concerned with clutch starting up a hill, lawyers with brakes if you put it in neutral coming down a hill).

2.3 Turbo in SVO Mustang made 205hp/248ftlb at basically same revs. (Yes, I know it is Lima, not Duratech). Point is close enough for girl I go with. And it gets you 4 cylinder fuel economy if you keep your foot out of throttle body. Lastly, SVO only had 7.5" (3.73 gears).

Just to keep you thinking...

don4331 said:

Question from me Dave:

So, 8.8 and 7.5" 28 spline axles are identical. Does replacing 7.5" OEM axles with 1541H axles make the 7.5" almost as strong as stock 8.8"?!

Soledad needs to pull axles to swap from 9" to 10" brakes anyways; $200 for pair of axles would be easy way out...

Also, I never thought about leaving springs under axle and using springs with greater arch/longer rear shackles. Skinning this cat might be easier than you though.

Just thinking out loud:

4.0 OHC has 207hp/238ftlb; and can tow up to 3,500 lbs with M5OD. (Ford's engineers being concerned with clutch starting up a hill, lawyers with brakes if you put it in neutral coming down a hill).

2.3 Turbo in SVO Mustang made 205hp/248ftlb at basically same revs. (Yes, I know it is Lima, not Duratech). Point is close enough for girl I go with. And it gets you 4 cylinder fuel economy if you keep your foot out of throttle body. Lastly, SVO only had 7.5" (3.45 gears).

Just to keep you thinking...

Click to expand...

axle shafts, yes. the side gears inside the differential, no.

I guess for the axles it's going to come down to which one puts less hurtin' on my wallet. The Ranger 8.8 or an Explorer 8.8 (both with 4.10's). Although not equal, I just can't see me putting enough engine in there to destroy a 28-spline 8.8 on the first test drive. I've always been easy on my vehicles (been made fun of for it too) and that wouldn't change for this thing either.

I do keep going back and forth on the engine. Been thinking of maybe taking the Duratec as far NA as possible and see how it feels for a while and if I don't like it then swap it out for something with even more HP. Right now though I can't keep the thing running long enough to even go to town. It's down again with another cooling system leak. I replaced the degas bottle and radiator (both which had sprung a leak) and that created more pressure in the system to expose more weak areas which is now the "T" just above the starter. UGH!

Explorer 8.8 with 4.10s is probably easier to find: 4 doors w/ 4.0 and Sport with manual being usual suspects.