Can I optimize my towing capacity? Hear me out..

[RavenRanger01]

So,

I am currently looking at purchasing a remanufactured transmission for my 2003 Ranger. The synchros are beginning to show crunchy signs of soon-to be "salutations" if you will.. Which has been going on for quite some time... After looking into options for replacing only the synchros, I decided it only makes sense to buy a new transmission all together.

I know that there is only so much I can do in order to optimize the towing capacity of such a small truck. (Notice, I said optimize, not increase.. As it's been discussed in previous forums that legally you cannot tow more than what is specified by the manufacturer.....)

But I started to think about options revolving around this transmission swap I am planning to do - regardless of my towing needs.. I know my current transmission is the M5OD. I am unsure what the Axle ratio is but... My truck is a 4x4, has 135,000 on the engine and the clutch was replaced in early 2020 at about 90,000k miles.

As most of us know, these Rangers have a significant reduction in towing capacity when they are a manual transmission... I have also read that the main reason for this reduction in towing capacity is simply because Ford wanted to reduce the number of claims being made from drivers who managed to burn out their clutch's too soon because of poor driving habits, while towing. So, does getting a "better" transmission really make a difference? Or would the standard M5OD simply do the trick...?

I am wondering if anyone here has had any luck with products or "modifications" that have helped optimize their towing capacity for the 4.0L v6 Manual Rangers ? Any and all recommendations or insights would be much appreciated.. So far, from looking into this online, I have noticed some people recommend the following...:

- Use a weight distributing hitch (but apparently they're not too many that will work for a small truck ?)

- Get a "high performance" clutch to extend its' life and reduce wear and tear (recommendations?)

- Adding a better transmission cooler?

- Add some heavy duty clutch bands?

- Swap out the rear drums for disk brakes (I've seen many guys do this, does it in any way affect my insurance?)

- Use a trailer that has integral brakes


Just looking for some help being pointed in the right direction.. Feel free to ask about any more information regarding the truck, and its' uses.

I am not trying to tow a giant RV by the way -- I just do a lot of home renovations and such and if i can safely transport a tools trailer or a dump trailer...

Thanks!

 

[Mechrick]

The towing disparity isn't just manual vs auto, if you look at F250's with either the auto or ZF5 option the disparity isn't nearly as great. The M5ODR1 is a relatively weak trans. There are always steps to do to improve things.

If I was towing with one, I'd gear the truck to tow in fourth instead of fifth at highway towing speeds (55-65). Fourth is direct drive and much stronger than the overdrive gearset at the back of the transmission.

I would dump half a quart of Lucas in the transmission to raise the viscosity of the oil a bit.

Run the biggest diameter clutch disc you can, and if there is a Centerforce pressure plate available, I would run that as well.

Avoid long periods of wide open throttle in 2nd or 3rd gears.

I had a late ('98) M5ODR2 in my V8 Bronco II and I think it would have no problem towing 5000+ pounds behind it, if the chassis wouldn't have scared me silly...

 

[Shran]

^ exactly what he said.

Check your axle gears too. Numerically higher (ie, 3.73, 4.10, etc) will be better for towing. 3.55 or numerically lower will not be as great. I have towed a couple small trailers with 3.27 gears and it just turns the truck into a complete turd. You can have different gears installed but it's not cheap, figure $500 minimum per axle.

 

[Mechrick]

Check your axle gears too. Numerically higher (ie, 3.73, 4.10, etc) will be better for towing

You'll definitely want to tach the engine up when towing, not only to get the engine in the powerband, but to work the transmission less. The rule is whenever you can increase transmission output shaft speed for a given road speed, the torque on the transmission components goes down. Just don't use 5th gear to accomplish this.

Every engine has a max RPM it's comfortable at, where it doesn't sound overly stressed. I've never owned a 4.0L, but for a 2.3/2,5 that's about 3200 RPM.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

The towing disparity isn't just manual vs auto, if you look at F250's with either the auto or ZF5 option the disparity isn't nearly as great. The M5ODR1 is a relatively weak trans. There are always steps to do to improve things.

If I was towing with one, I'd gear the truck to tow in fourth instead of fifth at highway towing speeds (55-65). Fourth is direct drive and much stronger than the overdrive gearset at the back of the transmission.

I would dump half a quart of Lucas in the transmission to raise the viscosity of the oil a bit.

Run the biggest diameter clutch disc you can, and if there is a Centerforce pressure plate available, I would run that as well.

Avoid long periods of wide open throttle in 2nd or 3rd gears.

I had a late ('98) M5ODR2 in my V8 Bronco II and I think it would have no problem towing 5000+ pounds behind it, if the chassis wouldn't have scared me silly...

I think the reason the ZF was rated close was cause it had a creeper 1st, pretty hard to smoke a clutch with that...

The manual rangers always rated alot lower then the auto going all the way back to the A4LD....a M5OD has to be stronger then that

 

[Shran]

You'll definitely want to tach the engine up when towing, not only to get the engine in the powerband, but to work the transmission less. The rule is whenever you can increase transmission output shaft speed for a given road speed, the torque on the transmission components goes down. Just don't use 5th gear to accomplish this.

Every engine has a max RPM it's comfortable at, where it doesn't sound overly stressed. I've never owned a 4.0L, but for a 2.3/2,5 that's about 3200 RPM.

My 1994 4.0 with 3.73's and 31" tires is pretty happy with a ~1000lb trailer at 70mph which is right around 3000RPM in 3rdth gear (automatic.) I towed a similar trailer a bunch with my old 4 cylinder Ranger, same gears, 235/75/15 tires and just let it eat in whatever gear I was in...that poor engine would get the job done every time but I always felt like I was on the verge of floating valves.

 

[don4331]

So,

I am currently looking at purchasing a remanufactured transmission for my 2003 Ranger. The synchros are beginning to show crunchy signs of soon-to be "salutations" if you will.. Which has been going on for quite some time... After looking into options for replacing only the synchros, I decided it only makes sense to buy a new transmission all together.

I know that there is only so much I can do in order to optimize the towing capacity of such a small truck. (Notice, I said optimize, not increase.. As it's been discussed in previous forums that legally you cannot tow more than what is specified by the manufacturer.....)

But I started to think about options revolving around this transmission swap I am planning to do - regardless of my towing needs.. I know my current transmission is the M5OD. I am unsure what the Axle ratio is but... My truck is a 4x4, has 135,000 on the engine and the clutch was replaced in early 2020 at about 90,000k miles.

As most of us know, these Rangers have a significant reduction in towing capacity when they are a manual transmission... I have also read that the main reason for this reduction in towing capacity is simply because Ford wanted to reduce the number of claims being made from drivers who managed to burn out their clutch's too soon because of poor driving habits, while towing. So, does getting a "better" transmission really make a difference? Or would the standard M5OD simply do the trick...?

I am wondering if anyone here has had any luck with products or "modifications" that have helped optimize their towing capacity for the 4.0L v6 Manual Rangers ? Any and all recommendations or insights would be much appreciated.. So far, from looking into this online, I have noticed some people recommend the following...:

- Use a weight distributing hitch (but apparently they're not too many that will work for a small truck ?)

- Get a "high performance" clutch to extend its' life and reduce wear and tear (recommendations?)

- Adding a better transmission cooler?

- Add some heavy duty clutch bands?

- Swap out the rear drums for disk brakes (I've seen many guys do this, does it in any way affect my insurance?)

- Use a trailer that has integral brakes


Just looking for some help being pointed in the right direction.. Feel free to ask about any more information regarding the truck, and its' uses.

I am not trying to tow a giant RV by the way -- I just do a lot of home renovations and such and if i can safely transport a tools trailer or a dump trailer...

Thanks!

A. I like your attitude - not optimize, not increase.

OK, there are 3 issues with a manual:

i. Smoking the clutch by slipping it to get load started, especially up hill.​

ii. Dropping the clutch. Revving the engine to 5 grand, then releasing the clutch puts huge strain on the transmission. (OK, you can bulge a torque convertor revving the engine to 5 grand, then pulling from neutral to drive. But you don't usually do that sort of thing towing a trailer).​

iii. Missing a shift going downhill. With the result being the transmission isn't in gear and you're counting 100% on the brakes to slow the truck down. And Rangers were marginal unloaded for brakes.​

​

Not an issue per say but the M5OD is limited to 3.40 1st with 4.0 versus 3.72 with the lower torque 3.0/4 cylinders. But the gears in M5ODR-1 aren't strong enough for the 3.72 ratio to handle the 4.0 torque. And as pointed out, it is a long ways above the 5.79 of the ZF found in the Super Duty. (2.47 1st in Ranger auto * 1.8:1 torque converter multiplication gives an effective 4.45:1 1st when starting load with automatic). I hate to admit it but the Chev boys with the 4.02:1 1st gear in their NV3500s have an advantage. (Yes, the std S-10 comes with a 3.49:1 1st but you can swap a C/K-10 NV3500 in with the deeper ratios and it bolts right up. There is no bolting a M5ODR-2 to a 4.0. )

Manuals don't use clutch bands - that's an automatic thing. Instead, they do use a clutch disk. And there are Mustang clutches which would be an improvement (4.0 was used in the base Mustangs for a number of years).

Manuals also don't use a pump, so there isn't an easy way to introduce a cooler (And because the manual isn't using oil pressure to hold the clutch bands, it doesn't make near as much heat).

Improving your brakes is a great idea: You don't say 2wd or 4wd, but for both, there are options to significantly increase performance.

Front brakes: The '03 Ranger had 11.28" front brakes, for 4wd, the 04-11's have 12" rotors (you need the corresponding knuckles); for 2wd, there are kits to install 13" Mustang rotors.​

Rear brakes: The #1 for rear discs - they work. A lot of people have issues getting/keeping their drum brakes working. (And non-working brakes aren't very useful). The best option is the '10-11 disc brake axle. Largest rotors, ventilated along with largest calipers. (Mustang discs actually provide less braking than properly set up 10" drums, but you can tell at a glance if they are working <shiny rotors>, drums not so much). As Rangers came with rear rotors, I would be very surprised if insurance made an issue over it.​

​

Weight distribution hitch - keeps front tires on pavement; Rangers do majority of their stopping using front brakes. There are a couple models for trucks as light as Rangers.

Trailer brakes - can't recommend them enough. With today's technology, implementing electric brakes over surge is no brainer.

Lower gears: If you read Ford's towing charts, the automatics get increased tow limits, as instead of being limited to 3.55:1 gears 2wd for the manual, they get 3.73:1 (or 4.10:1 vs 3.73 for 4wd). Fuel economy might suffer but it will tow better.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

The M5OD will do just fine for anything a Ranger can legally move and then some. My understanding is that there are not a lot of manuals that fit in the Ranger without modifications. My first Ranger, my blue 00, is a 3.0 with a stock M5OD, 30” tires and 3.73 gears. I towed a number of vehicles behind it on either a tow bar or tow dolly. I also used the thing like an F-250 somewhat frequently. A little more go would have been nice along with a stickier clutch but the real issue was not enough brakes. It came with the biggest brakes Ford used on the Ranger at that time in history, front rotors were bigger than normal for a 2wd 3.0 and the drums were the 10” ones. I even switched to stainless hard lines and DOT4 brake fluid to try and help some. Probably should have gone hydro boost too. Probably will along with the Sport Trac front brakes at some point.

There are two parts to a weight distributing hitch setup. The actual hitch that bolts to your frame and the weight distributing hitch assembly that is what connects to the trailer. I personally prefer a class 3 or 4 weight distributing hitch for what bolts to the truck because they extend farther along the frame than a normal hitch. I’ve never used the hitch/trailer bit of a weight distributing hitch assembly, I prefer to make sure the hitch and trailer are adjusted correctly and my tongue weight is proper.

Electric trailer brakes and a proportional electric brake controller are a huuuuge help for towing. Time delay controllers suck, I’d almost rather have no trailer brakes than one of those.

The most ideal hitch setup is a 5th wheel or gooseneck. It puts the trailer connection right above the rear axle where it belongs for the best control. Those are next to impossible to get for the 83-11 vintage Rangers anymore and they were rare to begin with. A handy person could fabricate what’s needed though.

An upgraded clutch can help. I forget what I went with on my F-150, stage 2 or 3, but it made the clutch very near an on/off switch, so I’m going to say it may well be a 3. Probably a little excessive for a stock rig. Oh well.

Manual transmissions do not have a cooler option in the Ranger. You would have to plumb it and add a pump at the minimum. I’m not sure that level is really necessary.

Heavy duty clutch bands is another thing that’s more for an automatic like the trans cooler idea.

Rear disk helps with stopping faster. The Explorer rear disks and pads are tiny. The Mustang rear disk swap would probably be better and what I probably should have done to my green 00 Ranger. Drum brakes take heat better than disks though.

I used my blue 00 Ranger for the same kind of work you’re doing. When it got smashed, I bought my F-150 and promptly built it into an F-350 essentially. The F-150 is way better at the heavy lifting vs a Ranger. The Ranger made an awesome little run-around rig that could still work. My F-150 is the 300 straight six, I swapped in a ZF5 (they are rated by the manufacturer, not Ford, for a 26k weight rating), 3.55 gears, 31” tires. Legally, it’s rated according to the book minus my gear change (stock was 3.08), something like 3,500#. With the gear change I think it’s more like 5k according to the book. My green Ranger is rated for 5k or higher according to the book. I’ve pulled 5k or more behind both and I’d rather have the heavier F-150 for the heavier trailer.

 

[pjtoledo]

bigger sway bars, front & rear.
add a leaf to the rear springs.
keep the hitch as short as possible, that decreases the trailers leverage against the Ranger.
stay on the short side for tires. shorter tires provide increased power, and increased braking. shorter sidewalls provide more lateral stability.
limited slip rear differential.

already asked, what is your front suspension?
EDIT: oops, you have a 4x4 so you can get 2004 or later front knuckles that have 12" front rotors. same calipers & pads & hubs, only the knuckle & rotor increase.

 

[superj]

my 3.0 ranger towed my little 84 bmw on a dolly with zero issues and i have that same trans. i do have the 4.10 rear gears though so that helps alot. the car weighs around 2500, if i remember right. maybe 2300 since its a 318

my truck has 225k on it and the trans is original. i changed the fluid to royal purple last summer and made sure none of those little plugs are leaking when i changed to the aftermarket shifter so my trans is ready to go. just keep the rpms up and you will be good

 

[don4331]

Rear disk helps with stopping faster. The Explorer rear disks and pads are tiny. The Mustang rear disk swap would probably be better and what I probably should have done to my green 00 Ranger. Drum brakes take heat better than disks though.

This just sticks in my craw

Explorer rear discs might look small, but they are only 7/16" smaller than the Mustang GT rotor sometimes used and 1-11/16" larger than the V6 Mustang rear rotor set up most commonly used! '10-11 Ranger discs are within 1/16" of the Mustang GT rotors

But the major difference is the caliper - the Mustangs only have 38mm piston, while the Explorer have 48mm ones (60% increase).

Just for reference 235/75R15s have diameter of 28.9" (radius 14.4"); my Ranger puts ~1,900lbs on rear axle (950lbs/tire), traction coefficient for my BF Goodrich ATs is about 0.75 ≈ 10,000 in lbs would required to lock the rear wheels.

500psi is moderate braking, 1,500psi or more is possible when you 'stand on the pedal'.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

This just sticks in my craw

View attachment 131139
Explorer rear discs might look small, but they are only 7/16" smaller than the Mustang GT rotor sometimes used and 1-11/16" larger than the V6 Mustang rear rotor set up most commonly used! '10-11 Ranger discs are within 1/16" of the Mustang GT rotors

But the major difference is the caliper - the Mustangs only have 38mm piston, while the Explorer have 48mm ones (60% increase).

Just for reference 235/75R15s have diameter of 28.9" (radius 14.4"); my Ranger puts ~1,900lbs on rear axle (950lbs/tire), traction coefficient for my BF Goodrich ATs is about 0.75 ≈ 10,000 in lbs would required to lock the rear wheels.

500psi is moderate braking, 1,500psi or more is possible when you 'stand on the pedal'.

Well now… I stand corrected… I was unaware.

My complaint was that I had to replace one of the caliper brackets and you can buy them for a Mustang but not so much for an Explorer. I had been told the Mustang brakes were better, but I never checked into it.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

This just sticks in my craw

View attachment 131139
Explorer rear discs might look small, but they are only 7/16" smaller than the Mustang GT rotor sometimes used and 1-11/16" larger than the V6 Mustang rear rotor set up most commonly used! '10-11 Ranger discs are within 1/16" of the Mustang GT rotors

But the major difference is the caliper - the Mustangs only have 38mm piston, while the Explorer have 48mm ones (60% increase).

Just for reference 235/75R15s have diameter of 28.9" (radius 14.4"); my Ranger puts ~1,900lbs on rear axle (950lbs/tire), traction coefficient for my BF Goodrich ATs is about 0.75 ≈ 10,000 in lbs would required to lock the rear wheels.

500psi is moderate braking, 1,500psi or more is possible when you 'stand on the pedal'.

I have never been around the Mustang setup, any chance they would have more swept area than Explorer since they don't have the drum parking brake? The pads on RA don't look as long but are much thicker compared to the Explorer ones.

I run my '85 heavier than most and my Explorer discs work fine for me.

 

[sgtsandman]

The 2010 & 2011 rear discs are ventilated, I imagine the full size Explorer is as well. The Sport had solid discs with no ventilation. So, if doing a brake or axle swap, pay attention to what you are getting. The details make a difference.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The 2010 & 2011 rear discs are ventilated, I imagine the full size Explorer is as well. The Sport had solid discs with no ventilation. So, if doing a brake or axle swap, pay attention to what you are getting. The details make a difference.

Pretty sure my rear Explorer discs are solid.