• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Cam synchronizer swap, without pulling upper intake.


shitboxinator

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2025
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
Location
reno
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
ford ranger
Transmission
Manual
Did alot of research on here, and every guide i saw said you needed to pull intake to get the cam synchronizer out.
decided to attempt with out pulling intake just to see if i could save the hassle, and if failed id do it the normal method ive seen on here.
i was successful and only took around an hr.
the way i popped my old one out, was to set a 19mm socket on top of trans right behind the synchronizer, to fill the gap between the 11" mini crow bar i used.
used the 180 degree side under the old style units spout for connector, synchronizer popped right up and out.
i did sand the side of the install tool on the new one, as i also opted to install a 1996 (new style) 123mm synchronizer.
but even with the upper off,interference was to the lower intake. on the tool only, as its a bit fatter than the sensor itself. followed the normal 1995+ instructions, set to tdc on cylinder one, confirmed with compression gauge.
pick n pulled the connector and opted to solder it in.
viola, no more check engine light. thankful it wasnt ecu as the circumstances my checkengine had come on were odd, and the 214 was only pullable code from memory, no codes displayed on koer, but cel on while running.
 
Last edited:

DPDISXR4Ti

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
181
Reaction score
56
Location
New York
Vehicle Year
1989
Make / Model
Ranger
Transmission
Manual
Thanks for posting this. Just to confirm, you're saying that the output of the '95+ (EEC-V) synchronizer is the same as the earlier (EEC-IV) one? Obviously the new pigtail connector needs to be spliced in as you mention.

FWIW, any time I've tried to remove a EEC-IV synchronizer at the junkyard, I've broken off the head, so you should go into the job assuming you'll not be able to re-use the part. Obviously in your case, you were planning to replace it any way.

I've also noticed that the "head" of the EEC-V version is larger. It won't even fit past a 2.9 intake, for those that are plotting a distributor-less 2.9. Note that it's close, and could likely be remedied with a little inconsequential grinding to the lower intake.
 

lil_Blue_Ford

Cut & Weld
TRS Forum Moderator
Supporting Member
V8 Engine Swap
TRS 20th Anniversary
TRS Event Participant
TRS 25th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,679
Reaction score
8,299
Location
Butler, PA, USSA
Vehicle Year
00
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0l
Transmission
Automatic
Total Drop
4”
I seem to be a little confused here…

There were a couple different cam synchros. Early 4.0s didn’t have a sensor on the top. Then came the three wire sensor followed by the two wire. The actual synchro assembly was different between the two and three wire versions plus there was a shorter and longer length. Using the wrong length or sensor will cause problems.
 

shitboxinator

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2025
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
Location
reno
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
ford ranger
Transmission
Manual
Thanks for posting this. Just to confirm, you're saying that the output of the '95+ (EEC-V) synchronizer is the same as the earlier (EEC-IV) one? Obviously the new pigtail connector needs to be spliced in as you mention.

FWIW, any time I've tried to remove a EEC-IV synchronizer at the junkyard, I've broken off the head, so you should go into the job assuming you'll not be able to re-use the part. Obviously in your case, you were planning to replace it any way.

I've also noticed that the "head" of the EEC-V version is larger. It won't even fit past a 2.9 intake, for those that are plotting a distributor-less 2.9. Note that it's close, and could likely be remedied with a little inconsequential grinding to the lower intake.
top is original style, 93-95. bottom is 96-98. both are 3 wire, simple hall effect sensors. different plug but the wires are the same colors for reference when installing new plug.
this isnt my pic, i replaced with a brand new unit that was 55 dollars with alignment tool off rockauto.
im not sure on 2.9. ive had a truck with that engine but never needed to do anything to it like this, was bought and sold in a year and never had to do anything beside maintenance.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

shitboxinator

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2025
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
Location
reno
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
ford ranger
Transmission
Manual
I seem to be a little confused here…

There were a couple different cam synchros. Early 4.0s didn’t have a sensor on the top. Then came the three wire sensor followed by the two wire. The actual synchro assembly was different between the two and three wire versions plus there was a shorter and longer length. Using the wrong length or sensor will cause problems.
ive seen 3 style of sensor/synchro.
early style 93-95(3wire), which is what i removed is top one in photo, bottom of photo is what i replaced with, 96-98, 3 wire, 123mm length( as stated in original post) different plug, same wire colors though.
theres a 132mm option im not sure what its for but doesnt fit the 93-95 so doesnt matter, didnt see where or what they fit.
the 2 wire is 99-00 option and wont work with eec iv or v.
 

Attachments

lil_Blue_Ford

Cut & Weld
TRS Forum Moderator
Supporting Member
V8 Engine Swap
TRS 20th Anniversary
TRS Event Participant
TRS 25th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,679
Reaction score
8,299
Location
Butler, PA, USSA
Vehicle Year
00
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0l
Transmission
Automatic
Total Drop
4”
ive seen 3 style of sensor/synchro.
early style 93-95(3wire), which is what i removed is top one in photo, bottom of photo is what i replaced with, 96-98, 3 wire, 123mm length( as stated in original post) different plug, same wire colors though.
theres a 132mm option im not sure what its for but doesnt fit the 93-95 so doesnt matter, didnt see where or what they fit.
the 2 wire is 99-00 option and wont work with eec iv or v.
1990-1992 had an assembly that ended in what looked like a cap over the hole and no sensor. Oil pump is driven off the cam so that was needed to account for the lack of a distributor but the computer didn’t read cam data so there was no sensor.

1993-? (I’m guessing 97-ish, I honestly haven’t verified) have three wire sensors and two different lengths depending on the 4.0 motor. I’ve encountered both lengths, the length difference is on the oil pump drive. If you try to put the shorter in a block designed for the longer it may not drive the oil pump correctly. If you try to use the longer in place of the shorter, it doesn’t seat all the way down without force.

Newer ones used the 2-wire. Not sure if there are different lengths for those.

The 2 wire sensor will physically fit on the top of the 3 wire synchro, but the design of the synchro will not read correctly.

I’m not trying to say you did anything wrong, I’m just trying to get the information out there so others know what they can be dealing with. Just kinda clarify things as best I can.
 

DPDISXR4Ti

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
181
Reaction score
56
Location
New York
Vehicle Year
1989
Make / Model
Ranger
Transmission
Manual
ive seen 3 style of sensor/synchro.
early style 93-95(3wire), which is what i removed is top one in photo, bottom of photo is what i replaced with, 96-98, 3 wire, 123mm length( as stated in original post) different plug, same wire colors though.
theres a 132mm option im not sure what its for but doesnt fit the 93-95 so doesnt matter, didnt see where or what they fit.
the 2 wire is 99-00 option and wont work with eec iv or v.
Is the 132mm version perhaps only for the later SOHC engine? That's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

Regardless, thanks for confirming that the 3-wire, 123mm parts have the same electrical output. This means that the '96 - '98 (EEC-V) part can be used as a replacement for the earlier, as long you get a replacement pigtail to account for the different quick-connector. As you indicated, you just need to be aware of clearances, since the EEC-V part is physically larger. I'm sure that was done as part of the goal to make it less prone to physical failure.
 

Shran

Junk Collector
TRS Forum Moderator
Supporting Member
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
Solid Axle Swap
Truck of Month
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
9,378
Reaction score
5,920
Location
Rapid City SD
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
I always figured there was enough room but being able to see what you're doing is the bigger challenge. Even the 90-92 dummy piece can be a challenge to get in, it has to be lined up just right to fall into place... the last one I did made me so mad and I had the intake off so plenty of room. It took all my mental strength not to rage tap it with a hammer.

1993-? (I’m guessing 97-ish, I honestly haven’t verified)
I was thinking that 93-94 used the early style and 95 up was different. I'll have a 95 apart here in the next couple of weeks so I can verify that.
 

DPDISXR4Ti

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
181
Reaction score
56
Location
New York
Vehicle Year
1989
Make / Model
Ranger
Transmission
Manual
I always figured there was enough room but being able to see what you're doing is the bigger challenge. Even the 90-92 dummy piece can be a challenge to get in, it has to be lined up just right to fall into place... the last one I did made me so mad and I had the intake off so plenty of room. It took all my mental strength not to rage tap it with a hammer.
I had the same issue putting one in a 2.9. At first I was convinced there was some difference between the 2.9 distributor and the 4.0 "dummy" plug. The distributor just dropped in every time without issue. I just gradually turning the engine around and eventually the 4.0 part dropped in like it was nothing.


I was thinking that 93-94 used the early style and 95 up was different. I'll have a 95 apart here in the next couple of weeks so I can verify that.
That is correct, for a Ranger at least. On the Explorer the later part didn't show up until 1996. It all coincides with EEC-IV vs. EEC-V. The Ranger got EEC-V in 1995 and the Explorer got it in 1996.
 

Similar threads


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Staff online

Members online

TRS Events

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Truck of The Year


Kirby N.
2024 Truck of The Year!

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Vagabond Video

TRS Merchandise

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Sponsors


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Sponsored Ad

Top