The Ford Focus has the SVT suspension as a cheap and easy suspension upgrade. Is there similar for the Ranger? I have a 2001 2.3 duratec 5 speed that seems like it should be able to handle a bit better. I'm really not looking to lower it much, but an inch or two drop wouldn't bother me a bit. Any ideas? I don't tow anything of huge consequence, or haul much weight very often, just mulch and such occasionally.
On a high mileage vehicle, a new set of shocks, even stock ones can make a dramatic difference.
Of course other worn suspension, steering parts are a factor.
Start there before any mods.
iceracer wrote: On a high mileage vehicle, a new set of shocks, even stock ones can make a dramatic difference. Of course other worn suspension, steering parts are a factor. Start there before any mods.
Yup, already did that. New balljoints all around, and new shocks on all four. Has 78,000 or so on it, seems tight and pretty quiet. Doesn't handle that badly, just not... inspiring lol.
Belltech makes front and rear sway bars...
Thinking of one of these with a v8 swap and suspension as my solution to truck needs. Anyone know if these with tow 2500lbs? That would cover my truck and winter beast needs.
Dropping the CG always helps (provided you account for bumpsteer and such). You can get drop spindles and shackles pretty cheap from places like Summit.
I had an older Ranger with the 2.9L V6. I think that you could tow 2500 lbs with your 4 cyl. But not much more. What is your rear end ratio? You would need at least a 3.73 or higher. Since most Rangers came with a front sway bar adding a rear as I did will help. I had the STX version and found that it handled well for what it was. I believe that Mustang wheels will fit depending on the offset so wider wheels is easy.
Just adding a rear without increasing the front roll stiffness will likely increase understeer.
ebonyandivory wrote: Belltech makes front and rear sway bars...
Belltech also has lowering kits for a 2001 Ranger. I used one of their kits on my 97 F-150 and liked it very much.
bentwrench wrote: Just adding a rear without increasing the front roll stiffness will likely increase understeer.
Nope. Just the opposite.
Increasing rear roll stiffness will DECREASE understeer.
Just like all the FWD guys do.
Sorry for the following lengthy post, but this is kind of my wheelhouse.
Lowering it will help quite a bit. The cheapest way to get a bit of drop is by doing a shackle flip in the rear (2 inch drop) and you can trim some off of the front coil springs up to 2 inches of drop (going lower than 2 inches in the front with just coils isn't advisable as it makes it really difficult to properly align). That would get the truck about 2 inches lower all around for the cost of cutting wheels, some nuts/bolts, plus an alignment (camber eccentric bolts will probably be necessary for the alignment). Of course, an off the shelf drop kit from Belltech or DJM are options as well if you're looking for a bit more drop, and parts with poly bushings, and will give you better results than a cheap 2/2 drop.
A rear sway bar makes a substantial difference too. You can mix and match some Ford parts bin stuff from junkyards, but the Roush front/rear kit Is pretty cheap, and beats searching you-pull yards for months trying to find the right combination of Explorer/Ranger/Bronco II stuff to pull parts from.
After that, cram as much tire under it as you can.
Oh, and the steering rack for Extended cab Rangers from 98+ and 4 door Explorers from 98-02 have a faster ratio than the one in your regular cab. That's on my "to do" list.
Personally, I had mine lowered 2/3 with some Mustang wheels and ok tires for awhile, but it wasn't enough. Stock S10s sat lower than my Ranger lowered 2/3. I ended up going lower to a 4/5 drop, got the Roush kit, Cobra brakes on all 4 corners, a Trac-Loc, and wider, stickier tires. It's a riot, and an absolute night and day difference vs stock.
Inquiring minds want to know...
That Roush kit in your link says it's for Rangers up to 2005. Any reason why it wouldn't be applicable all the way up to 2012? (My wiki-fu, such as it is, suggests any changes in those years were basically cosmetic only.)
In reply to Stealthtercel:
The front sway bar should have no issues for any 2wd Ranger from 98-12 as long as it's got coil springs and not torsion bars.
The rear sway bar mounts to the axle tubes. Some time around 2011 Rangers got different rear axles with factory disc brakes that were used for stability control. They were still 8.8s so I can't imagine the axle tubes being any different than previous Rangers, but I'm not sure if there' s any hardware that would conflict with the mounting brackets. I haven't seen them in person to know for sure. I'd guess that it would be fine, but can't say that it's a certainty.
Thank you! (From me and everybody else who's following along here and making notes.)
Just sitting over here thinking about how to apply any of this to my Ranger. 1994 4x4 which means it has the horrible twin beam front suspension. And oversized tires (265/70-15).
I did add spacers to make the stance a bit better than factory (1" front and 1.5" rear). But I'm not sure if that actually helped the dynamics.
Alright! Great info. Would coils or drop spindles be more preferable? I assume drop spindles as only ride height changes, but not spring rate or anything?
Joey
In reply to joey48442:
I wish we had the option of drop spindles, but nobody makes them for Rangers for some silly reason. I've looked into having custom ones made, but they get pretty pricey. Your off the shelf choices are drop springs (from a few different companies, and/or drop control arms from DJM. For example, you can drop the front 2 inches using either 2 inch drop springs or 2 inch control arms, or you can use the springs and control arms together for 4 inches of drop.
Hmm this thread gives me bad thoughts. Must sort V before bringing home another vehicle.
any chance you know the actual ratios of the two steering racks for comparison?
Has anyone explored using exploder or f150 spindles as a quasi drop spindle?
I don't know exact ratios on the racks, but the Regular cab racks are 4 turns "lock to lock", and the extended cab rack is 3.5 turns "lock to lock". Just for more info if you're junkyard shopping, the 2 door Explorer sports got the same rack as regular cab Rangers, while the 4 door Explorers got the same, faster rack that extended cab Rangers got.
I'm not sure what would be required to use spindles from one of the other vehicles. There were 2 versions of 2WD Rangers available from 98+, and I don't think any of the suspension components are interchangeable. The most common version, is what we've been discussing throughout this thread with an SLA suspension using coil springs. These are the trucks the drop kits are made for. Trying to use Explorer or F-150 suspension parts would be pretty difficult.
The other version is basically the same as 4WD Rangers, but without the 4WD part. They have torsion bars (instead of coil springs), different control arms (vs the SLA), and different front frame sections, that were identical to the Explorer/4WD Ranger components. These often had special trim level names like "Edge", "Trailhead", and "Sport". If you wanted interchangeability with Explorer stuff, these trucks would be the best bet, but the torsion bars and larger front frame probably negate most of the benefits. Some Ranger owners will upgrade to the larger Explorer disc brakes though, which is a simple bolt on for these trucks since they're nearly identical in the front suspension.
SVT once did a concept truck called the "lightning bolt" that incorporated F-150 front suspension, but I've never seen any pictures or heard any details about what exactly they did. It also changed the wheel bolt pattern. Converting to Mustang brakes is a bit more common, and retains the Ranger's original bolt circle.
With a two inch drop, will aftermarket shocks be required?
Definitely suggested, but probably not required.
On the steering rack, I'd want to confirm actual ratio before swapping, not just lock to lock. There's a big fuss over the z3 rack for e30 swapping in bmw-land, but I think it was confirmed that it's just less travel and the same actual ratio as the regular e36 racks.
As you can probably imagine, the BMW guys have access to far more performance oriented info than Ranger owners. There are only a handful of people interested in making Rangers handle, so the number of people willing to gather and share data like that is pretty small.
This is what I do know. There are 2 different steering racks listed on most auto parts websites, and they all base fitment on wheelbase. Based on part specs listed on the websites, the only difference between the 2 parts is the number of turns lock to lock. To me, it makes sense that the shorter wheelbase vehicles would get a slightly slower rack in order to increase stability and reduce the likelihood of a rollover (remember these racks were shared with the Explorers of the era, which were known to go wrong side up from time to time). There have been forum posts from a few people that claimed an improvement when switching racks, but many of them were on forums that don't exist any longer. So, call it an educated guess.
If you'd rather not spend money based on an educated guess and some old forum posts I understand. You can always install a steering quickener of your choosing too. It might accomplish the same thing for less money.
Yeah, sorry, I wasn't saying that expecting you to necessarily have an answer on the actual ratios. You did also just remind me that I have a quickener sitting on the shelf already.
You'll need to log in to post.
