Definitive Ranger/Explorer Frame Swap Vehicle List

Wider than a 1995 - 2001 Explorer (98 and up ranger with torsion bars) not wider than an S10. I knowvery little about S10's...

 

Also the regular cab short box Rangers are 108, not 102. 2-door Explorers were the only ones at 102, that's why they ride like azz ...


cheers
Ed N.

 

I wonder how one of those 2-door Explorer chassis would do under a Henry J! Plenty of Blazer swaps done...

~Jason

 

Another one...You guys just don't quit. I love it!! I will just let this one be. Have fun spreading the gospel of "traditional" hot rodding... I guess I just don't get it, and your probably rite. If every post was how to put a model a on 32 rails then I guess this all would get pretty lame.

 

I figured if no one else was talking about it, but lots of us do it, why keep it a "black art", you know? May as well talk about it in the open so folks can either decide whether to do it or not, and if they do, to know how to do it right.

I started looking into this as a way to get a shop truck going in a hurry... but the project I ended up with came with a finished stock chassis, so I'm using it! Funny, how life throws you a curve...



~Jason

 

Anyway folks, there's LOTS of talk about bolting a V8 into an S-10, but what about into a Ranger?



Here you go - the ultimate "how-to" guide - V8 INTO A RANGER THREAD:
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/V8Conversions.html

This dude sells all the stuff (and has pretty pictures and more info):
http://www.jamesduff.com/broncoII/v8conversion.html

And Matt Harwood of out sister site the Garage Journal has even built one:
http://www.harwoodperformance.bizland.com/
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/diagrams/motormount.gif

Enjoy!

~Jason

 

V8 into ranger is incredibly easy if you use a 1998 and up (torsion bar) chassis - since it's the same as the 95 and up explorer which came with a 5.0 the work wass done for you by Ford. The worst part about that conversion is getting headers to fit around the shock towers which are restrictive. Of course if you're throwing this under a rod you don't need to stay with those and they can easier be cut off and moved to allow use of different headers.

To get some off the shelf I used torque monsters, expensive but very nicely made and fit perfectly.

 

Wicked!

Any more pics?

~Jason

 

Here's a link to a CRAPLOAD of recent info on here about the Ranger rear end:
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=287432



~Jason

 

What about a Comet? I have a 62 Comet wagon. I have to repace the floors, so I could easily channel it a little while I am at and drop it on a full frame. I want a modern suspension and I am building a 347 stroker for it. What frame should I look at?

 

Alright guys I have a question I have been wondering about these...I have a 65 f100...would LOVE to get a modern drive train under it...I have been tossing the idea of putting a ranger chassis under it for about a year...but never really knew if it would work or not...What do you think will it work? The guy that sold the truck to me said its pretty much a bolt on deal. that true?

 

That's a damned good question... Strategy might not know right off, but I'll bet he has an inkling.

~Jason

 

One thing to remember when picking an axle is that the Ranger have spring over axle, Explorers have axle over spring, so it's easier to get them low.

Also Explorer axle (as mentioned in the linked thread) have larger tubes al the way out 9factory rated at 3000lbs instead of 2750 for the Ranger) and have 31 spline axles instead of 28. It's also easier to find them with limited slips.

I have two explorer and two Ranger ones at the moment... ack.

 

Bronco II's are close to bolt on, but the F150 would be too big I think.

 

I can measure the chassis I have if you'd like, see if it'd be suitable. I think though that it might sit too high, they (explorer chassis) are great for truck conversion because of the overhang on older trucks.

 

One of the reasons that early hot rodders put the model A on deuce rails was to get the flathead v8 into the car. Traditionally, rodders made their cars the best that they could with the parts available to them within their financial means. At that time upgrading the chassis to obtain the v8 engine was an economical upgrade. Today, the Exploder (not a typo) chassis is affordable. As for traditional, air bags, super low cars, tattoos and much more isn't traditional either.

 

If people can do an F1, you can do yours. The frames for the 1948 - 1972 trucks are all about the same width - in fact, the rear ends are bolt-in swaps!

~Jason

 

Not a Ranger. I looked and it just won't come out right. Comets, Falcons, Mustangs, etc are unibodys with a floor pan that drops below the outer sills. If you set a Comet body on a Ranger (or S10) chassis, you could channel the body over the frame to look right on the outside, but on the inside of the car the floor would be 8" too high because the floor sits on top of the rails and not in between them.

On those cars I think what you need is a perimeter chassis that bulges out in the middle so that the floor pan can settle between the rails.

 

Which is what I am doing... but please lets not let this degenerate into yet another 'what is traditional ?' thread. Some of us find the info useful, and if you don't, just let it go.

 

Like I said on the S-10 thread, maybe some can run out and buy a Pete & Jake's chassis, but that free S-10 is looking WAY nicer to my budget! Gets me on the road faster, and maybe I can spend the money I saved on the motor!

~Jason

 

That is exactly what I was trying to politely tell dirty petcock. Are you sure you really meant to reply to my post?

 

Yes, but I wasn't trying to be down on you, I just want people who're interested like yourself to stay and contribute, but at the same time not get involved in the the shit talking...

So I guess my comment was aimed more at Petcock and the like.

 

interesting, I wonder how difficult it would be? any of you guys got any measurements? or know what the differnces are in the wheelbase?

 

Since I've got a 2000 Explorer Chassis in the garage and a 99 4x4 Ranger in the driveway, I can measure whatever you need.

The best one to use, in my opinion would be a 96 or 97 Explorer. Disc brakes on the back, stronger axle 5.0 as an option, but without the sometimes troublesome GT40P heads (just regular GT40's) and no PATS (Ford anti theft stuff).
That way you could use the lot - wiring included.

Just say what measurements you want and I'll size it up, I am working on it tomorrow.

 

Just FYI, the P heads were a mid-year change on the 1997 Explorer. 11/04/96 should be the production date split. You would be looking for the engine ID tag number of TK-352** or TK-354** for the non-P heads. Tag is usually on the valve cover.


cheers
Ed N.

 

great thread! the cabover in my avitar won't be using the stock frame either so i guess its the waterboard for me, bummer!

 

You know, the Mazda B-Series actually IS a Ranger... maybe those trucks could be had cheaper because folks think they're an import? LOL!

And don't forget the Madza-badged Explorer, the Navajo (1991 - 1994, the earlier, less-desirable frame).

~Jason

 

I haven't figured out why a photo of my 32 Ford frame has anything to do with this thread,,,if it's the rear axle,,your wrong,,it's a late sixtys bronco 9". HRP

 

Whoops!

I totally pasted the wrong picture!

I'll edit it and swap it out in the morning - sorry, folks.

~Jason

 

my daily drive is a 98 ranger and its an overall comfortable ride , am in the starting stage of doing a 57 ford custom business coupe with late model drivetrain (2002 mustang GT 4.6 5 speed) which really creates some issues such as steering and exhaust. The Ranger swap has been on my mind for some time as some came with 4.6. It does appear to me that one can lower an S-10 a lot cheaper than a Ranger but some explorers (years ?) came with IRS which would be one heck of a sweet ride. So has anyone tried a similar passenger car swap?