New wheels and tires on the ranger?

[pocket-rocket]

Spare us all the e-peen match with the Dodge vs Ford vs GM argument that has been going on for years... Need we be reminded:

 

[valleyvinyl84]

Spare us all the e-peen match with the Dodge vs Ford vs GM argument that has been going on for years... Need we be reminded:

Hey I own a Chevy but I didn't bring it in yet and I don't plan on it.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Spare us all the e-peen match with the Dodge vs Ford vs GM argument that has been going on for years...

Well, that's soon to be GM vs. Ford once GM buys chrysler and kills off most of their product lines.

But yes, arguing about which is better is one of the most pointless endeavors man could undertake.

I just find it odd that someone who is big into dodge diesels would find the need to come to a ranger site and start a ford-dodge argument. I still want to know why he's here. Maybe he actually wants to know something about RBV's and we can help...

 

[exbass94]

 

[stoney311]

Extreme9156,

If you hate ford so much why are you wasting your time arguing with a bunch of people who are obviously ford enthusiasts. Hence the entire website dedicated to RVB's. You must have a very boring life if this is what you do for kicks. My question is how did you even come across this forum? Were you so bored with your exsistance one day that you decided hey, I'm gonna google for a ford ranger forum and then join it just to F**K with people. Seriously man find a hobby.

 

[pocket-rocket]

I just find it odd that someone who is big into dodge diesels would find the need to come to a ranger site and start a ford-dodge argument.

I agree. I like my car and my truck very much, but I don't go signing up with groups that have nothing to do with them, or groups I think have inferior cars/trucks to stir the pot. To me that spells ignorance and immaturity.

 

[XTrEmE9156]

It is to my belief that some people just deserve to be made fun of..... Because we all know 700 rwhp is SOOOO easy from a 2.3l 4-cyl engine........

 

[XTrEmE9156]

honestly i want some input, tell me my points are wrong.....

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Look at these:

This one has since broken the 8 second barrier:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyncDceRkmo

One going 9's with a dodge holset:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH8rBJXz6d0

Another one in the 9's:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TffFXiJ1xkg

Spanking a 5.0:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MImr7y64qgk

585 horsepower on pump gas with a stock short block and holset off of a ram:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fv1-omYCb9c

Here's a ranger for you. Not mine but pretty similar, his is a little faster:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4aqcTmZznY

Sorry, I just put mine together over the summer. No videos of it yet.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

I'm not saying any old 4 banger can compete with V8s or large diesels. The 2.3 is not just any old 4-banger. It turns out that the 2.3 is an incredibly stout piece of iron. The stock block and crank are capable of far more horsepower than the stock 5.0 block and crank. This is well proven by many people, but don't take it from me, go do your own research.

Yes this is the very same 2.3 that has been used in rangers for so many years (also came in 2.0L and 2.5L versions over the years). It's just too bad that most people see it for nothing more than the anemic 4-banger that it is in ranger form.

A closed mind is a terrible thing.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Here's another video I just remembered:

An old 2.3 turbo ranger going 11.26 @ 120 mph on junkyard parts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2D1Q-tReb8

Engine shot:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y3/brooksgnm/Reinstated Ranger/91207267.jpg

 

[XTrEmE9156]

You just aren't getting my point.......

#1. My truck weighs 7,300 pounds and runs a 12.85@105 in 4WD....

#2. All the vehicles in the videos weigh less than 4,000 pounds....

#3. There is no freaking way that those guys have pocket money invested in these vehicles to get them that fast...

#4. All this power may very well be attainable with a 2.0, 2.3, or a 2.5, however to justify the power made and Money spent is just impossible.......

#5 My first post was not directed to any fords or rangers, I was simply stating that tires TOO BIG for a TOO SMALL engine backed by TOO LOW of a ratio is stupid....

#6. I still don't understand why the "And XTrEmE9156, whenever you finish off the tranny in that POS dodge, I want to buy the turbo off it. A Ford 2.3 will make more ponies with a holset than a cummins ever did." Comment was needed...

#7. "Some people can't read, other people can't see past their racism".

 

[XTrEmE9156]

Oh and to add I never said anything about V-8's either.. I love how words are put in my mouth..... Last time I checked My truck was an I-6, but you never know some random trolls might have made a Cummins V-8 and put it in my truck last night........

 

[lil red]

xtreme, really? trying to compare a fullsized deisel anything to a ranger
honestly i think someone has a bad case of small mans syndrome, so please, go back to your obdviously boreing life with the exeption of your truck that has however many horse power, honestly none of us care what your DODGE can do being FORD enthisiasts

so please for everyone involved, please leave us alone
and did i mention that a ranger could rape your truck when it comes to a tight trail

all that thing is really good for is sucking up moneyand gas, and mentally making your penis bigger than 4 inches

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

You just aren't getting my point.......

#1. My truck weighs 7,300 pounds and runs a 12.85@105 in 4WD....

#2. All the vehicles in the videos weigh less than 4,000 pounds....

#3. There is no freaking way that those guys have pocket money invested in these vehicles to get them that fast...

#4. All this power may very well be attainable with a 2.0, 2.3, or a 2.5, however to justify the power made and Money spent is just impossible.......

#5 My first post was not directed to any fords or rangers, I was simply stating that tires TOO BIG for a TOO SMALL engine backed by TOO LOW of a ratio is stupid....

#6. I still don't understand why the "And XTrEmE9156, whenever you finish off the tranny in that POS dodge, I want to buy the turbo off it. A Ford 2.3 will make more ponies with a holset than a cummins ever did." Comment was needed...

#7. "Some people can't read, other people can't see past their racism".

1. I never said I wasn't impressed with your truck. Going less than 13 in an 8000 lb 4x4 chunk of iron is danged impressive!

But to me, seeing how fast you can hurle an 8000 lb 4x4 down the strip is about as pointless as putting 35's on a 2wd ranger. But to each their own.

2. And your point is? I was never advocating putting a 2.3 in a 3/4 ton truck.

3 and 4. So you agree I wasn't talking out my *** after all. You'd be surprised how cheap a 2.3 is to build. As far as ford's go, it's one of the cheapest horsepower/dollar engines until you get to about 500 horsepower. Then things start to get pricey. But I still think you could make a 700 horsepower 2.3 whatever (mustang, ranger, turbo coupe, etc) for what you've got tied up in your ram.

The 2 rangers in the videos were built with pocket money and junkyard parts. Probably less than 5000 in each of those trucks, including the purchase price of the truck itself.

5. I agreed with you.

6. Your BS anti-ford comments pissed me off so I figured I'd make a BS anti-dodge comment. Sorry.

The dodge holsets really are a very popular upgrade turbo for the 2.3s.

7. ????

I think we're more in agreement than we realize. Just don't expect much love from people here if you're just going to go around bashing fords.