My Ford Ranger - Project Log

[radioranger]

a similar engine combo in a 92 Mustang can easy do 38 mpg on the highway so a lot more drag HP and thus more airflow through the muffler, my 2.3 88 had its peak mpg of 30 when the muffler blew out , on your year Ranger they upped the tailpipe size a bit and no doubt helped .

[nathan01xl]

Originally Posted by radioranger

a similar engine combo in a 92 Mustang can easy do 38 mpg on the highway so a lot more drag HP and thus more airflow through the muffler, my 2.3 88 had its peak mpg of 30 when the muffler blew out , on your year Ranger they upped the tailpipe size a bit and no doubt helped .

the 2.3l Lima OHC 4 Cyl in the old mustang's and ranger's is actually a completely different engine design than the 2.3 Duratec DOHC my truck has

[nathan01xl]

with my tonneau and tire spats installed i have seen an approximate increase of 2-3 mpgs at highway speeds

[nathan01xl]

Changed the differential fluid today with Mobil 1 synthetic 75w-90, a slightly lower weight than the 80w-90 that was in it originally. Also picked up some Mobil 1 0w-30 synthetic for when i change my oil at the end of the month. Hoping to see a little bit of improvement, particularly during cold start warm up times.

Got a bunch 4x6 sheets of cardboard to mock up an underbelly pan this afternoon

[nathan01xl]

got distracted, ended up make side skirts instead of a belly pan lol. looks pretty ghetto at the moment but should blend alright once i get some paint on it next weekend. Hoping to hit 40+ on my commute this week, I am currently averaging about 38. will get some pics up soon

[MetroMPG]

Careful with the front tire spats. They should not extend past the tire, and in fact you'll notice on cars with OEM spats, they rarely extend even that far.

That's because the airflow isn't typically approaching the tires from head on - viewed at the face of the tire, flow may be going somwhat outward & downward due to upstream influences (the nose of the truck).

[nathan01xl]

recently stumbled across this photo of a Ranger track tuck http://3.7mustang.com/vb/attachments...-racing-01.jpg its front end reminds me of my own minus the big splitter. i just need to go lower!

@Metro: I hear what you are saying about the tire spats, i have been thinking of contouring them some more and trimming some off. they dont quite cover the entire front wheel but are close and the transition into them isnt as smooth as i would like it.

[oil pan 4]

Now that your truck slices through the air like a knife have you thought about installing numerically lower rear end gears?

[nathan01xl]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Now that your truck slices through the air like a knife have you thought about installing numerically lower rear end gears?

i have but the cost is pretty steep $300ish to regear unless i got something out of a JY. i have 3.73s and would love 3.45s. which came in some Rangers in the 90s. the other option would be a 8.8" rear out of an explorer which also had the 3.55 option, though not particularly common, but that would add considerable weight.

I was running 235 70r16s for a year which was close to the 5% gear change i would see out of going 3.55. I didnt have any issues with bigger tire size so i cant imagine having an issue with a lower gear ratio either.

[oil pan 4]

Don't worry about adding some weight.
My calculations for adding 100lb is it will cost me 0.1MPG at speed on the highway. Real world fuel logs show me losing about 1 full MPG for the first 500lb I add.

If you could get a 3.55 explorer rear cheaply enough it would be worth it.
I would try for the 3.45 even if its hard to find.