Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and gjeep9754
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2015
- Messages
- 6
- Vehicle Year
- 1993
- Transmission
- Manual
Just thought I would post incase anyone else wants to do this swap, since info on the net was scarce in this regard.
Background: I live in Southern Utah and my 93' Ranger 4.0 is my 4x4 camping and road trip rig. Since i am often 4 hrs from a town (or cell reception) reliability is my top concern with a 23 year old truck. After springing a leak in my p/s line, I decided that manual steering would solve this, amd any upcoming power steering failures. I can now say i will NEVER have a p/s failure again on this truck. I think the steering effort complaint is highly overrated for a street/ mildly wheeled vehicle.
Engine: The 4.0 ohv motor in my truck has a serpentine belt accesory drive, and removing the p/s pump from the system was not simple like the old v-belt days. My rig has AC which is located on the driver side of the motor just above the ps pump. I did some measuring and figured that I can just "skip" the p/s pump since the AC provides the needed belt spacing for that side of the engine. You will need a shorter belt now, a Dayco/Gates 5060790 is the proper length with no other modifications to the system.
Steering Gear: I used a steering gear from a 97 2wd ranger, however my research shows that the same unit is found on all 86-97 m/s rangers, and similar year f series trucks. This box looks very similar to the stock saginaw 525 box on my cj. This box attaches to the exsisting lower steering shaft in my truck, and bolts up to the stock holes.
Pitman Arm: The m/s and p/s pitman arms are different, you need a m/s arm. I am currently using the 97' 2wd arm that came with my box. Compared side-by-side, the m/s arm had approx .75" less drop than the stock p/s arm. When mounted on my stock height 4x4 truck, the steering geometry is fairly straight, although not perfect. I am plenty happy with the angles, and truck drives well. But because I am curious, I am keeping my eye open for a late 80's 4wd m/s arm. I also have toyed around with the idea of using a jeep saginaw drop arm. I don't have one laying around to check, but provided the splines are the same (measuring best I can the one still on my jeep they are real close) it may just be a simple matter of filing out the clocking splines. The jeep arm is also slightly longer, but I dont foresee this being a problem.
Installation: Everything bolted up great with only a few bloody nuckles trying to remove the p/s pulley. Much more room in the engine bay now.
End result: Steering effort is a little greater than before, and it takes more turns of the wheel to complete a turn. I prefer this feel, like the trucks of yesteryear. I could see this setup getting annoying on rock crawling, but for normal 4x4 use shouldn't be a problem unless your a frail old granny. Engine is much quieter without the wizz of the hydraulic pump. I am hoping for a slight fuel mileage increase as well (having elliminated the parasitic drag of the pump plus a 50lb bucket of hydraulic parts), but havent run it long enough to tell. Best of all no more power steering failures, ever.
Background: I live in Southern Utah and my 93' Ranger 4.0 is my 4x4 camping and road trip rig. Since i am often 4 hrs from a town (or cell reception) reliability is my top concern with a 23 year old truck. After springing a leak in my p/s line, I decided that manual steering would solve this, amd any upcoming power steering failures. I can now say i will NEVER have a p/s failure again on this truck. I think the steering effort complaint is highly overrated for a street/ mildly wheeled vehicle.
Engine: The 4.0 ohv motor in my truck has a serpentine belt accesory drive, and removing the p/s pump from the system was not simple like the old v-belt days. My rig has AC which is located on the driver side of the motor just above the ps pump. I did some measuring and figured that I can just "skip" the p/s pump since the AC provides the needed belt spacing for that side of the engine. You will need a shorter belt now, a Dayco/Gates 5060790 is the proper length with no other modifications to the system.
Steering Gear: I used a steering gear from a 97 2wd ranger, however my research shows that the same unit is found on all 86-97 m/s rangers, and similar year f series trucks. This box looks very similar to the stock saginaw 525 box on my cj. This box attaches to the exsisting lower steering shaft in my truck, and bolts up to the stock holes.
Pitman Arm: The m/s and p/s pitman arms are different, you need a m/s arm. I am currently using the 97' 2wd arm that came with my box. Compared side-by-side, the m/s arm had approx .75" less drop than the stock p/s arm. When mounted on my stock height 4x4 truck, the steering geometry is fairly straight, although not perfect. I am plenty happy with the angles, and truck drives well. But because I am curious, I am keeping my eye open for a late 80's 4wd m/s arm. I also have toyed around with the idea of using a jeep saginaw drop arm. I don't have one laying around to check, but provided the splines are the same (measuring best I can the one still on my jeep they are real close) it may just be a simple matter of filing out the clocking splines. The jeep arm is also slightly longer, but I dont foresee this being a problem.
Installation: Everything bolted up great with only a few bloody nuckles trying to remove the p/s pulley. Much more room in the engine bay now.
End result: Steering effort is a little greater than before, and it takes more turns of the wheel to complete a turn. I prefer this feel, like the trucks of yesteryear. I could see this setup getting annoying on rock crawling, but for normal 4x4 use shouldn't be a problem unless your a frail old granny. Engine is much quieter without the wizz of the hydraulic pump. I am hoping for a slight fuel mileage increase as well (having elliminated the parasitic drag of the pump plus a 50lb bucket of hydraulic parts), but havent run it long enough to tell. Best of all no more power steering failures, ever.
Last edited:
