My hydraulic conversion underway

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:55 am

I think my setup should be close to the 300hp. but thats never enough lol.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:32 pm

Well the line I bought on e-bay may just be to short. Its a stock replacement line but I think its going to be about an inch to short. I will find out Monday when I try and put it in.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:01 am

What is the purpose of that "quick disconect valve" Can I remove that and not use it? The stock line is to short so I need to find a differant way to hook it up. I found a line that is for a 88 F-150 that has the same fittings and is longer and will fit as far a lenth but I will have to remove that "valve"

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:55 am

The quick-disconnect does exactly what it says...be a quick disconnect for the hydraulic line. But the purpose for it is for the center-mount slaves that come stock on the Rangers. In that setup, the slave is mounted on the input shaft of the tranny and thus trying to get that special fitting to fit on the slave would've been impossible. So they made the quick-disconnect so you could mount the slave in the tranny, install the tranny, and then connect the hydraulic line once the tranny was installed.

It doesn't make quite as much sense on the external slaves, but it is equally as convenient. It takes a fair amount of pressure to compress the rubber O-ring in the slave so you can install the retainer pin to hold the hose onto the slave. But with the cylinder on a bench, doing that with the little quick-disconnect piece is pretty easy. Then when you get under the truck, the quick-disconnect just snaps right onto the external slave exactly like it did with the internal slave.

BTW, I bought the F-150 hardline too with the intention of doing the same exact thing you are about to do. I never proceeded with that method because the stock line with the quick-disconnect worked so well for me.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:47 am

So I dont have to use that then right? I dont know if its because my motor sits futher back or the bell is differant, but I am lacking a good 2+ inches.

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:01 am

If you use the F150 line that has that special fitting in it, then you don't need the quick-disconnect. The only thing the quick disconnect is really doing on the external slave is allowing you to reuse your stock Ranger line...if it can be reused. I'm not sure, but I think that black hardline can be heated and formed to whatever shape you want so you can retrace the same path the stock Ranger line follows with that F150 line. But I'm confused as to why there's a 2" discrepancy between everybody elses truck using that slave and yours.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:54 am

I guess not all V8 swaps are created equal lol........... This is the line I bought http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... &viewitem=

Now maybe its not for what is says its for. It is the plastic line but its red. I know my original was black, so why this one is red is beyond me. I e-mailed this guy before I bought it and had him measure it. From his measurement ( which is what it was ) I knew it was going to be close. But once I tried to put it in today it wasn't even close. The one for the F-150 is 34" long which should even give me room to make sure I can route this in safe area so it wont rub on anything and be away from my exhaust

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:33 pm

That's certainly a clutch slave hose of some sort, but that's not shaped like my Ranger's clutch line. Here's how mine looks:

(from Advance for $40)
The long-straight part runs diagonally up to the clutch master. It has the same fitting that the external clutch slave requires. In the center of the line, notice the distintive hump. That's right where the line straddles the top of the driver's side frame. The other end has the quick disconnect piece since this pic is of a 1989 Ford Ranger's clutch hose.

The F150 line I have is also black and very stiff just like the stock Ranger line. I'd think some heating would make it pliable so it can be routed where you need it, but I don't know how easily the stuff crushes or crimps when hot.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:30 am

That " quick diconect " end doesnt have the same nipple on it that the other end has? I dont have an end like that at all nor is the valves on the hose look like that. The nipples are on both end of the line. The valves I have dont have the hose attach to them like your is, I dont know why but what I have is totaly differant than what you have. Again, I have the odd ball. lol

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:01 am

The female quick disconnect adapter on my external slave has the same nipple your hose has on the ends. It fits into the slave exactly the same as your hose will.

I suspect the hose you have is from an 83-84 Ranger that had the external slave stock thus it won't have a quick disconnect, just the nipple fittings on each end to go into the master and slave.

Here's a cad drawing of the nipple fitting if that helps any:

I think somebody posted that Summit Racing sells a piece that converts that nipple to an -an fitting so you can run a standard -an8 or -an10 hose between the master and slave. Again, I never even looked into that because my setup worked so well. But I believe people that went with other slave setups, like the 280ZX slave, had to come up with something like that.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:00 am

I did see the fitting that summit has. They are quit pricy for just a fitting. They are $40 each and you would have to have 2, plus the hose, which is cheap in compairison. I did concider that but figure I will try this other way first, and if that wont work out then that will be the way I will go. I was thinking the same thing about the connector. It must be a newer setup, 88 and newer I think.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:59 am

Success!!!!! I have a hydraulic clutch now. Stock clutch master, Slave cylinder for a 1983 Ranger and a line for an 88 F-150. I didn't even need to change the rod on the slave. No preload needed. Just what ever load is on it from the spring inside the slave. I started it up and it goes into gear with ease.

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:28 pm

Great. I'm glad it worked out for you.

Back when I researched slaves to use for my Ranger, I found the 83-84 Ranger slave and decided that's what I was going to use. I'd never heard of anybody else using it so I thought I'd be breaking new ground going that direction. Before I even got to that point in my project, somebody else that was further along in their project saw the post and went that direction as well and had the concept proven for me. They had the preload problem I did and reported back to the thread that this would be a problem for me. I just ASSUMED it would be the same problem for you but I guess not. Since then, I've noticed a few other people from TheRangerStation form have also gone that route (I posted the same info and pics over there back then too). And now you. I tell you, it makes me glad I didn't get that overpriced Total Performance Ranger slave setup they sell.

Another thing, if you don't have the driveshaft installed, the tranny will go into gear with the engine running just like you got the clutch pushed in because the synchros are strong enough to spin the tranny up to speed. So you may be able to shift from 1st to 5th, but you may have the output shaft spinning and not know it. So if you don't have the driveshaft installed yet, you may still need the preload. But if you got the driveshaft installed and the tranny's going into gear with the engine running, then it's working!

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:52 pm

Drive shaft is in. My V8 has been in my Ranger for a little over 5 years. I just finaly got around to doing the hydrolic set up lol.

v8ranger · Post by **v8ranger** » Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:13 am

Well I got to take it out for a drive yesterday. The clutch was slipping when I punched it. Got home and looked it over. Found that the head of the bolts going through the bell housing for the bracket was keeping the clutch fork from releasing the clutch all the way. So I took them out and put in a carriage bolts, much better, no more slipping, and it even made the clutch peddle travel less. I also had to test my newly remade drive shaft. My high RPM vibration is now gone, now I can do 70 in 3rd gear without it shaking the shifter out of my hand. Also had to test the 1.7 roller rockers. She seems to be a little more peppy on the take off. So far all my fixes this winter are working well. Sure do miss driving it. Winter can end any day now and it wont hurt my feelings. Just when the snow is all gone they say we might get blasted this weekend with a coastal storm. Will have to see which way it tracks to see if we get anything or not.

V8-Ranger.com

My hydraulic conversion underway

Re: My hydraulic conversion underway