Manual locking hubs

[Shawn Gorbet]

2006 FX4 Ranger. I would like to convert the auto hubs to manual locking hubs. I’m having no luck finding a conversion kit or if there is one. I also may not be asking the right questions. Any help would be much appreciated.
Thank You

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

You don't have auto hubs, yours are locked full time.

 

[Shawn Gorbet]

You don't have auto hubs, yours are locked full time.

 

[Shawn Gorbet]

Ok. So is putting manual locking hubs on this year of Ranger even a thing?
Thanks for taking the time

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Ok. So is putting manual locking hubs on this year of Ranger even a thing?
Thanks for taking the time

98-00ish had vacuum hubs.

And if I had one of those I would swap to your style, much simpler/stronger.

 

[pjtoledo]

replace wheel bearing and hub assembly with a 1998-2000 vacuum assembly. (if it fits)
then replace outer CV joint to 1998-2000 as the outer ends are different.
get manual lockout hubs from 3rd party vender.
you may have to machine the inner hole in the knuckle.

this is the general idea, I'm sure there are a few "minor details" that will need worked out.

you cannot swap the steering knuckles. your 2006 is cast/machined for 12" rotors, the 1998-2000 is cast/machined for only 11.25" front rotors.

 

[sgtsandman]

The strongest design offered on the Rangers is the one you currently have as far as the hubs go. Swapping to manual lock outs would provide no benefit and will actually be weaker.

 

[Manscout]

My '98 has the manual and it is a pain to hop out and turn them in every time I need 4x4. Plus, if your CVs wear out at all, the hubs tend to fly off.
I'd stick to the stock setup you have.

 

[James Morse]

If his are locked full time, doesn't that cause wear on something? I had autos in my '97, changed to manuals, and Ford says in their literature you can just leave them on all the time but when I said that here I was told it causes wear to leave them on all the time.

 

[sgtsandman]

If his are locked full time, doesn't that cause wear on something? I had autos in my '97, changed to manuals, and Ford says in their literature you can just leave them on all the time but when I said that here I was told it causes wear to leave them on all the time.

The front axle free wheels until 4X4 High or Low is selected.

The difference in fuel consumption is so low, it was deemed better to have the hubs permanently “locked” than deal with the problems associated with PV and manual locking hubs.

 

[pjtoledo]

when the front hubs are locked, or permanently live, and the transfer case is in 2wd the result is the wheels are driving the
axles and differential gears.
this puts the load, which is quite small, on the coast side of the ring & pinion gears.
bearings are active, but without a load not much is gonna happen.

to Shawn, you could test for possible changes by removing the front driveshaft.
if you try that pull the plug on the transfer case motor. accidentally engaging 4wd with the front drive shaft removed is a guaranteed expensive crunching sound.


EDIT: talking about '98+

 

[James Morse]

So you're saying there is wear on stuff with permanently locked hubs (and 4wd not engaged).
I don't run the hubs engaged except when I'm in a situation where I anticipate I'll want 4wd then turn them off after.
I don't get why Ford went to fully locked front hubs because it seems worse than manuals which to my scant knowledge don't have a high failure rate but maybe I'm wrong in that assumption.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

So you're saying there is wear on stuff with permanently locked hubs (and 4wd not engaged).
I don't run the hubs engaged except when I'm in a situation where I anticipate I'll want 4wd then turn them off after.
I don't get why Ford went to fully locked front hubs because it seems worse than manuals which to my scant knowledge don't have a high failure rate but maybe I'm wrong in that assumption.

Your truck has ujoints

98+ have CV joints

The difference between those is huge for running full time.

The difference quoted for Ford to switch between the vacuum hubs and fully locked hubs was something like .5mpg.

 

[sgtsandman]

So you're saying there is wear on stuff with permanently locked hubs (and 4wd not engaged).
I don't run the hubs engaged except when I'm in a situation where I anticipate I'll want 4wd then turn them off after.
I don't get why Ford went to fully locked front hubs because it seems worse than manuals which to my scant knowledge don't have a high failure rate but maybe I'm wrong in that assumption.

Things are moving. So there will be wear as a consequence.

Manual hubs aren’t a high breakage item, unless you’re Ericphoto. But manual hubs means the driver has to put down their double moca latte and get out in the nasty weather to engage their hubs. We don’t want that now do we?

PV hubs on the other hand did and do have problems. From what I remember, they were strong enough for most people, when they worked. The working part was the issue.

 

[pjtoledo]

So you're saying there is wear on stuff with permanently locked hubs (and 4wd not engaged).
I don't run the hubs engaged except when I'm in a situation where I anticipate I'll want 4wd then turn them off after.
I don't get why Ford went to fully locked front hubs because it seems worse than manuals which to my scant knowledge don't have a high failure rate but maybe I'm wrong in that assumption.

I'll start by saying I'm talking about the OPs Ranger, a 2006

yes.
the amount of wear is negligible because there is very little load, and it is on the side of the parts used during reversing.
the only set of manual hubs I ever had was on a '78 F150, so I can't comment on the Ranger manual/auto hubs.

well, actually that totaled '99 I bought for parts had PV hubs, but I only drove it up the driveway.


with the feds subjecting all manufactures to CAFE (corporate average fuel consumption) standards you can bet Ford could not find any significant
advantage to go with manual hubs.