96 ford ranger 5 L oil quantity

[sgtsandman]

I work on 60+ year old military aircraft. You should see the typos and other incorrect info and procedures in the technical manuals for them. One would think after 60+ years of updates and corrections that there would be none but nope...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bobbywalter]

unless someone altered the oil pan, it takes 5 quarts from flat empty.


your stick is wrong if it was completely empty.

 

[98v70dad]

unless someone altered the oil pan, it takes 5 quarts from flat empty.


your stick is wrong if it was completely empty.

I could probably get 10 quarts in also. At some point it gets to be too much and gets whipped into a useless air entrained froth. How much is too much depends on the engine.

The question was is 4.5 quarts too much. I have two different 1996 owners manuals. One says 4.5 quarts and the other says 5.0 quarts for a 1996 ford ranger with a 3.0 liter v6. They both cant be correct. My family is the original owner of the truck. The dipstick has not been replaced. Putting in 4.5 quarts reads right on the full line. Info for anyone who wants it.

 

[98v70dad]

I work on 60+ year old military aircraft. You should see the typos and other incorrect info and procedures in the technical manuals for them. One would think after 60+ years of updates and corrections that there would be none but nope...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I work on aircraft also. Commercial aircraft rocket scientist for 13 years. Incorrect info in technical manuals is one of my pet peeves.

 

[Ranger850]

4.5 quarts is not too much.

 

[Uncle Gump]

I would look at the publication dates of the two owners manuals that you have. The rule is the one with newest date is the one with updated information.

Printed automotive publications are a tricky at best and very expensive. I've seen hundreds of times where changes are made to vehicles even after start of production. But the owners manuals have to already be printed and delivered so that they can be put in the glove box at the plant. Also the printed service manuals have to be at the dealers when the new vehicles arrive. It's impossible to have the new information in the printed pub's because they were printed months prior to the changes. That's why they have SMU's and TSB's. Owners manuals were typically reprinted and sent out to the owners.

That wouldn't be the case in 4.5 qts vs. 5 qts of oil in your owners manuals... rather that tid bit of information was just missed in the owners manual engineering review... or the tech writer just failed to enter the correct data from the engineering review.

Now days... I believe all auto companies ( I know for fact that GM does) use a form of electronic service information... if a change to the publication is needed... the tech writer checks the document out data base... makes the changes... checks it back in... corrected service information the next morning. Way cheaper then printing new manuals or sending out printed corrections.

 

[98v70dad]

I would look at the publication dates of the two owners manuals that you have. The rule is the one with newest date is the one with updated information.

Printed automotive publications are a tricky at best and very expensive. I've seen hundreds of times where changes are made to vehicles even after start of production. But the owners manuals have to already be printed and delivered so that they can be put in the glove box at the plant. Also the printed service manuals have to be at the dealers when the new vehicles arrive. It's impossible to have the new information in the printed pub's because they were printed months prior to the changes. That's why they have SMU's and TSB's. Owners manuals were typically reprinted and sent out to the owners.

That wouldn't be the case in 4.5 qts vs. 5 qts of oil in your owners manuals... rather that tid bit of information was just missed in the owners manual engineering review... or the tech writer just failed to enter the correct data from the engineering review.

Now days... I believe all auto companies ( I know for fact that GM does) use a form of electronic service information... if a change to the publication is needed... the tech writer checks the document out data base... makes the changes... checks it back in... corrected service information the next morning. Way cheaper then printing new manuals or sending out printed corrections.

I am an engineer (aerospace) and have been around giant racks of controlled documents most of my working life. With airplanes even minor mistakes in the manuals can have serious or at the very least expensive consequences. That is why its a pet peeve of mine.

Something as simple as the oil quantity (especially since its an owner maintenance item) should not be incorrect - especially since the 3.0 L engine was offered for many years. Further they don't define full. On some cars is full at the top mark and on others its full halfway between them.

BTW the first thing I did was look for a publication date or revision level - didn't find anything. Probably because Ford wasn't treating the owners manual like a controlled document.

In my case 4.5 quarts vs 5 is no big deal. Normally I would not have given it a second thought. But the extra 1/2 quart was an INCH above the full mark. That is a lot and it concerned me. I usually go by the dipstick but was in a hurry this time because it started raining on me.

Since the truck leak/burns oil a little I'd rather just dump 5 quarts in but I'm not OK with running it an inch above full on the stick.

 

[bobbywalter]

In my case 4.5 quarts vs 5 is no big deal. Normally I would not have given it a second thought. But the extra 1/2 quart was an INCH above the full mark. That is a lot and it concerned me. I usually go by the dipstick but was in a hurry this time because it started raining on me.

i am just a dumb hillbilly...but.

i have been building and destroying drivetrains my whole life. mostly fords.

and for sure a 1/2 quart overfilled can cause catastrophic failure in the right application. no one denies that.


in your manual..if it says 4.5 with filter and the stick matches....then its 4.5.


the fact that it goes an inch with merely a 1/2 a quart in the bigest part of the pan tells me it has to be way overfull to the point you are concerned, that is all crankshaft soak and likely the bigest part of the crank...

so i looked carefully at my data...its for hd cooling which in not a factory order.

1991-mid 92 is the only years for 5 quarts and the rest are 4.5...and that is with filter.

the oil pan was altered for d35 fitment(hybrid) and the coming frame changes in the 93 body style..

so you are in fact correct..especially for a 93 or later. because your oil pan is different.


and i was 1000 percent wrong about your very accurate dipstick.




























hopefully it wont be the last time i am wrong....i hope to live much longer.

 

[98v70dad]

4.5 quarts is the answer for my truck. Maybe that helps someone - don't know. The manual is just wrong.

 

[Ranger850]

Moral of the story - Trust your dipstick

 

[bobbywalter]

Moral of the story - Trust your dipstick

hmmmm....even in Tijuana?

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Moral of the story - Trust your dipstick

 

[Ranger850]

hmmmm....even in Tijuana?

Why would my dipstick be in Tiajauna? I don't even know her...