98+ Ranger 4x4 build suspension

[scotts90ranger]

Ok, you've got me confused there. Fully compressed and has 1" extension left?

Just not seeing how it can be fully compressed and only have 1" of extension available. Did you use the correct terms there? Of course, I'm also not looking at a 4.6 driveshaft either, so maybe it would make sense then.

The front driveline with the 4406 is conventional with U joints on either end so has a slip joint in the middle, there was just enough room in the slip joint to compress the shaft to get it out of the yoke on the front diff after the straps were off. Most drivelines aren't rated for a whole lot of extension on that slip joint so I imagine there's 1" of room for further extension which should account for the differential moving down say 4" like a lift kit would do.

 

[JoshT]

The front driveline with the 4406 is conventional with U joints on either end so has a slip joint in the middle

I got you now. If the slip joint on front is anything like the one on rear shaft, there should be a couple of inches available for it to extend. Maybe not a lot, but some. Please don't pull it apart to check, that could be a pita if it damages a boot (assuming that it has one), or doesn't get splined back together right.

Being u-joint on both ends, it should also solve the issues that the Rough Country and Superlift front shafts are designed to fix.

 

[bobbywalter]

i find the ride a driving character of that vintage ranger as pretty good in OEM configuration.

once lifted and with 35s on standard wheels not so good....coilovers or not.

but liveable ....

as long as you have bracket geometry that is solid they are really strong though.


the longer control arms and coil over setup on pavement was an actual improvement overall. especially on the hiway.



on center feel is always better than a ttb or straight axle though.


while ACCEPTABLE performance is subjective, actual performance is testable.

cost and results otoh can be bitter or sweet. i just keep my expectations lower with that platform.

 

[scotts90ranger]

I found out yesterday just how much the SLA system relies on the sway bar for street manners, holy cow... my low mile sway bar bushings all died and it drives really weird... that explorer on 31's drives worse than my '90 on 35's... but I trust the explorer to 80 unlike the Ranger , not saying I won't but it probably shouldn't so I dont...

 

[JoshT]

i find the ride a driving character of that vintage ranger as pretty good in OEM configuration.

once lifted and with 35s on standard wheels not so good....coilovers or not.

but liveable ....

as long as you have bracket geometry that is solid they are really strong though.


the longer control arms and coil over setup on pavement was an actual improvement overall. especially on the hiway.



on center feel is always better than a ttb or straight axle though.


while ACCEPTABLE performance is subjective, actual performance is testable.

cost and results otoh can be bitter or sweet. i just keep my expectations lower with that platform.

OEM configuration probably wasn;t terrible. OEM configuration being stock 30ish inch tires and stock ride height (AKA stock t-bar preload). Honestly haven't had the truck like that since probably around 2010. That's around the time I cranked the bars and installed 32" tires. Ride got rougher with the added preload, but I was young enough to not care. Some years later I dropped back to a stockish tire size, but never uncranked the bars. Then I installed drop keys and backed off preload to less than stock during the engine swap and live axle conversion. Ride is ok, but tires rub on bumps. I could install shorter tires and get lower, but it's already outside alignment limits of stock upper arms and camber adjusters. There was no point in getting smaller tires for this ride height when these still have plenty of tread left and clear most of the time, plus I'd have been replacing them again when/if I got the parts I wanted to go lower.

IMO a lift kit is not OEM configuration and I wouldn't even consider running 35" on OEM configuration. In fact I'm pretty sure I'm not going to run 35s at all. I think I'm going to put this on 33s and the F-100 on 35s. Both will get lift kits to accomidate.

I can see how longer arms could be an overall improvement. That's physics, leverage makes for a better ride. Also the wider wheelbase is going to improve stability. A problem with that is I don't want to make the truck wider. Another problem with that is cost, a long travel kit is twice the cost of a lift kit for the basic kit, then you still have to do the fenders and paint work to cover wheels and tires with said long travel kit. Looking at an easy 4-6k extra to put long travel on an application that doesn't need it. That's money better put into other things.

I found out yesterday just how much the SLA system relies on the sway bar for street manners, holy cow... my low mile sway bar bushings all died and it drives really weird... that explorer on 31's drives worse than my '90 on 35's... but I trust the explorer to 80 unlike the Ranger , not saying I won't but it probably shouldn't so I dont...

I know what people say about anti-sway bars, but honestly I wouldn't drive on the streets without them. If I needed them out of the way for articulation, I'd be making a quick disconnect to unhook them easily when desired. Haven't seen them marketed for the Ranger (also haven't looked hard), but I know that they are made for and used by the Jeepers. Shouldn't be too difficult to mimic what they have.