99 Ranger/Explorer

[huddy]

Hello again folks! Thanks to everyone on here i have my clutch problem figured out, now, on to a new question. I am thinking about buying a 99 ranger with a 4.0, auto, 4x4. It has a miss in it that comes and goes, head gaskets were a issue with these but it kind of acts like a broken rocker or spring. I also bought a 99 Explorer years ago, wrecked, 5.0 auto awd. How big is this conversion to do? I have read a few things about it on here but, I was not thinking about doing one at that time. I would like to keep the part time transfer case as opposed to the full time. My dad owns the Ranger, so its not going anywhere anytime real soon. Im just poking around to see if its even something i could do. I gave $350 for the Explorer and I can probably buy the ranger for about the same money, so a relatively cheap initial investment.

[Dave]

With the Ranger being a 4x4 makes it a lot easier as well does it being that yaer of Ranger and Explorer. Going to a part time has been many times also, just can't remember what xfer case was used, the 205 or 208.
Dave

[huddy]

Ok, correction, the Ranger is a 98, not a 99, if this makes any difference. I could just put a 4.0 back in it but i feel like it would be more useful with the 5.0?

[Dave]

No big difference in those years, it's the pre'98 that are a lot different.
Dave

[cgrey8]

It's the 97-older that are generally easier isn't it? All 97-older have steering boxes & coil spring. Newer Ranger's have rack-n-pinion & torsion bar suspensions. Those are probably the biggest structural and fitment differences between the two.

But then there are less obvious details that may bite you on the newer Rangers such as:

• Return-style vs return less fuel system
• VSS vs ABS speed sensing
• Std vs digital dash interface
• PATS vs no PATS
• Gas tank pressure sensing for emissions

[huddy]

Theres what I was looking for, the not so obvious stuff. Getting the motor/trans down in it wont be a big deal. I am just concerned about all the little electronics to make it run when it gets in there.

[cgrey8]

You'll want to figure out what your Ranger has and then go back in with the Explorer EEC that closest matches the things your Ranger needs. The Ranger and Explorer have paralleled well over the years, but I don't know to what extent. I do know a LOT of people revert their newer Explorer EECs back to the 97 to avoid things like PATS & fuel tank monitoring. But In the case of a newer Ranger, you may have those things in place and thus not require the "downgrade". The ABS speed sensing and digital dash are the things that would intimidate me the most until I got details on them, which model Rangers and Explorers had them, and then found a match to bridge the generations.

[huddy]

I have decided that i am just gonna put head gaskets on the 4.0 and give the truck to my son, I was building an 83 with a 289, 5 speed for him but he thought the extended cab was a better idea since he stands 6' 3" at 14 years old!

[plowboy34]

Just my opinion but I don't think you should start a kid off in a Hot Rod like that anyways. It's a good way to get him hurt bad or killed....I have seen it way to many times. Let him learn to drive before driving with power....kids think they can handle it but have no idea how to. Again just my opinion

[cgrey8]

Some adults think they can handle it...

I remember when I 1st got my truck converted to a V8. Every now-n-then, the power would catch me by surprise and my engine's a bone-stock Explorer 302...nothing really performance oriented at all. I can't imagine how it must be to drive a "built" Ranger. Hopefully I'll know soon enough.

[plowboy34]

I agree Chris....if you have never driven anything with power you are still inexperienced, but at least you know how to drive, big difference between knowing how to drive and getting use to power as just learning to drive and throwing power in with it.

[Dave]

It's the 97-older that are generally easier isn't it? All 97-older have steering boxes & coil spring. Newer Ranger's have rack-n-pinion & torsion bar suspensions. Those are probably the biggest structural and fitment differences between the two.

But then there are less obvious details that may bite you on the newer Rangers such as:

• Return-style vs return less fuel system
• VSS vs ABS speed sensing
• Std vs digital dash interface
• PATS vs no PATS
• Gas tank pressure sensing for emissions

Chris, just for your future info. Most of the later 4x2 Rangers have the coil spring suspension while the 4x4 and Trailhead and Edge have the torsen suspenson. Any Explorer motor will just drop and bolt in to a torsen suspension Ranger. The '98-2000 Ranger share the same fuel system, fuel pressure requirements and got their speed signal from the rear end as a 99-2001 Explorer. Their engine to body wiring connectors are real close and little splicing requiresThe '98' and 2005 Ranger did not have the PAT's system. The '99-01' Explorers use basically the same ECU, in the EQE1-5 series. Some small differences in the '98 to 99 Explorer wiring harness due to sensor changes. The digital dashes came in I believe in 2004. I started doing a comparison in the Ranger-Explorer connectors and pin-outs last year for the '98-2000 years. I guess I got bored in the Winter., got to finish this Winter.
Dave
You guys are right about too much power before the experience comes in. With Rangers it's even worse with the lack of rear end weight/traction.

[cgrey8]

Very good information. In fact, remember that thread a few years ago that lists out all the subtle changes to the Explorer V8 over the years? All this would be good info to include there too. Here's a link to that thread:
Subtle differences in the V8 Explorer over the years

Note I changed the thread title from what it used to be which was Explorer motors. As it turns out, the use of the words Explorer and motors has been used too many times on the forum, so the search engine won't actually use those as search input info anymore. So to find the thread, I had to search on words I just remembered I put into that thread. Include as much info as you know there. I frequently refer back to this thread for information I'm fuzzy on, but I remember I recorded there. I'd like to think others do to.

[Dave]

Thanks Chris, I to have had a hard time finding that good post from five years ago. Time to go thru it again and check things.
Dave