Another question about tires...

[Lefty]

I've got a 2003 Ranger. Most of us have probably noticed that the front wheels in this generation are offset a little further and therefore track wider than the rear. So then I wonder, wouldn't it be all right to install wider tires on the rear wheels? Would this provide more stability and more traction?

 

[Uncle Gump]

I mean... you could. But tire rotations?

Some folks run a wheel spacers on the rear equivalent to the difference to bring them back in line. I believe @dondoes this.

 

[Eddo Rogue]

I would stick with same size all around, unless you are building a something for drag or mud racing, or mud drag racing.

 

[Blmpkn]

A wider front track reduces understeer.

 

[James Morse]

Previous gen also tracks wider in front ('97)... and probably before that, but I don't know.
I hear what you're saying and I thought about it too but unless it's some really special purpose, I'd stick with what the truck was designed to use.
It was when I was looking at how much clearance I had before tires would extend out past the fenders, and I noticed the front has not much clearance and the rear all kinds of clearance, and the reason is per the shop manual there is a ton of difference.
It helps it turn quicker. On a crowned road (which most are) it may appear to be dog-legging, but that's normal... unless it's out of spec and does it on level ground then it's not normal.
The appearance of dog-legging is because the truck is driving up the crown... you could say it is in fact dog-legging but there's a reason for it; on level ground it should track totally straight. You can test it by sighting the truck to drive straight to a sighted point, stop, then measure difference of center of tires front/rear, the difference should be the same side to side, if it's in spec.
It should basically always be in spec unless the frame is bent, or rear axle was removed/re-installed off-center, or other major-type stuff happened, or front alignment is totally way off, etc.
I realize that answers a question you didn't ask, but it's related. I'm just saying, the truck was designed to work a certain way (in theory, optimized), so if you mess with that you are de-optimizing it.
Like, if put larger diameter tires, sure, you gain a bit of ground clearance, but it causes other issues. And so on. Not to say I'm against mods, at all, just that one has to be aware that gaining good for one thing usually means sacrificing something else.

 

[Lefty]

Previous gen also tracks wider in front ('97)... and probably before that, but I don't know.
I hear what you're saying and I thought about it too but unless it's some really special purpose, I'd stick with what the truck was designed to use.
It was when I was looking at how much clearance I had before tires would extend out past the fenders, and I noticed the front has not much clearance and the rear all kinds of clearance, and the reason is per the shop manual there is a ton of difference.
It helps it turn quicker. On a crowned road (which most are) it may appear to be dog-legging, but that's normal... unless it's out of spec and does it on level ground then it's not normal.
The appearance of dog-legging is because the truck is driving up the crown... you could say it is in fact dog-legging but there's a reason for it; on level ground it should track totally straight. You can test it by sighting the truck to drive straight to a sighted point, stop, then measure difference of center of tires front/rear, the difference should be the same side to side, if it's in spec.
It should basically always be in spec unless the frame is bent, or rear axle was removed/re-installed off-center, or other major-type stuff happened, or front alignment is totally way off, etc.
I realize that answers a question you didn't ask, but it's related. I'm just saying, the truck was designed to work a certain way (in theory, optimized), so if you mess with that you are de-optimizing it.
Like, if put larger diameter tires, sure, you gain a bit of ground clearance, but it causes other issues. And so on. Not to say I'm against mods, at all, just that one has to be aware that gaining good for one thing usually means sacrificing something else.

Actually this explains a lot. Thank you. I've been wondering about this ever since I bought the Ranger. But I should also say, that mine is the Edge package which looks as though it was intended for off road driving. Those looks are a little deceiving, however. Mine does not have 4WD. So I've made a few minor changes to improve handling on the street, lowering the rear end by 1" and the front by 3/4." Sometimes what Ford has given us can be improved or adapted to serve our purposes better.

Improving on Ford is something of a hobby for me. After 20 years on the road, mine is overdue for new shocks. I will be looking around for aftermarket options which might upgrade stock.

 

[James Morse]

It looks good! Since you're not 4x4 with it, lowering for the street makes sense. It lowers the c/g which can only be good, for street, as long as nothing is rubbing you should be good to go.
There are all the different models... to me what they did was strip stuff off (compared to '97 gen) then offered upgraded models to include things, for example, I have skid plates, but later on you had to get FX of some type (some years had Level 2 FX) to get skid plates. Versus Mazda B4000 which at the end of their run was pretty much loading them so they were essentially FX's. But there aren't many '08/'09 B4 out there that are low miles and good shape.
What tire are you running now?

 

[Lefty]

It looks good! Since you're not 4x4 with it, lowering for the street makes sense. It lowers the c/g which can only be good, for street, as long as nothing is rubbing you should be good to go.
There are all the different models... to me what they did was strip stuff off (compared to '97 gen) then offered upgraded models to include things, for example, I have skid plates, but later on you had to get FX of some type (some years had Level 2 FX) to get skid plates. Versus Mazda B4000 which at the end of their run was pretty much loading them so they were essentially FX's. But there aren't many '08/'09 B4 out there that are low miles and good shape.
What tire are you running now?
[/QUOTE

It looks good! Since you're not 4x4 with it, lowering for the street makes sense. It lowers the c/g which can only be good, for street, as long as nothing is rubbing you should be good to go.
There are all the different models... to me what they did was strip stuff off (compared to '97 gen) then offered upgraded models to include things, for example, I have skid plates, but later on you had to get FX of some type (some years had Level 2 FX) to get skid plates. Versus Mazda B4000 which at the end of their run was pretty much loading them so they were essentially FX's. But there aren't many '08/'09 B4 out there that are low miles and good shape.
What tire are you running now?

I am on Cooper Discoverer All Terrain 3 tires: 265/70/R15 with Pro Comp aluminum wheels. I could have gone a little larger, but got a very good deal on these. I put on a set of fender flares and front mudflaps to reduce the sling.

 

[gw33gp]

Most vehicles have a wider track in front than in the rear. I understand it makes the vehicle more stable, but I am not an automobile engineer to verify that.

 

[James Morse]

I guess that explains the oem flares and flaps on mine since 265/75R15 was oem, of course it's a different gen too. Somebody put 235's on it but when I get tires I'm putting it back oem size.

 

[Lefty]

I guess that explains the oem flares and flaps on mine since 265/75R15 was oem, of course it's a different gen too. Somebody put 235's on it but when I get tires I'm putting it back oem size.

exactly. Was 265/75R15 really OEM? Way back when I bought my Ranger used but with narrower tires too.

I might be wrong but these tires seem to be larger than stock. The fronts especially stick out further even than the factory fender flares.

 

[Lefty]

I just checked. For what it's worth, the original tire for that era was P225/70R15

 

[pjtoledo]

225/70-15 was typical for 4 cylinder, or coil spring front suspension. and they were usually on 6" wheels.
torsion bar & 4wd had bigger tires and wider wheels.
what does the door sticker say?

 

[Lefty]

Oh I don't know. I don't have a door sticker. The door jamb had been repainted. I don't really care anyway. The OEM tire size I mentioned above was for torsion bars and XLTs.

I got new wheels and bigger tires when I bought it two years ago.

 

[James Morse]

yes on mine the 265/75R15 steel belted with white outline letters is oem, Ford says so ("Research Team") also Oasis report says so.
I'm missing door sticker too and have all the info to re-create it except the spring codes and front/rear grosses and reserves.
But the spare is 235/75R15 that's normal, the larger tire doesn't fit under the truck, at least Ford says so also people have confirmed this.
What size is your spare that -might- infer what was oem size on your truck since chances are if they were oem 225's they wouldn't have put a 235 under neath, it'd be a 225 (probably) if that was oem size.
It doesn't really matter.... just saying.
Well it matters if the tires are different diameter and you put the spare on the front and are in 4x4 because it will wreck things in pretty short order but you don't have 4x4.
I'm not totally clear what the issue is, but it's something to do with the front/rear binding.
If you aren't in 4x4 then spare on front is fine, or on back, but on back I think eventually it would wear out LSD, but obviously you can drive it some distance otherwise they wouldn't have put different sizes.
However, to mention, if you are in 4x4 chances are the tires can slip/drag (gravel, dirt, mud) so actually you can be in 4x4 with different tire sizes, just, don't drive on dry pavement in 4x4 like that.
Others know more....