Ranger ttb into Bumpside?

[bearmtnmartin]

Wondering if anyone has done this. The geometry is very similar and it would make for a nice riding truck. I am starting with a bare frame so now is the time to decide. I am building a 1970 F100 4X4 with a Mercedes diesel. I can adapt to the Ranger 5 speed so it makes sense to use the Ranger front end and steering as well. The back will be the later 8.8 Explorer axle with discs.

[HIO Silver]

Too narrow.

TTB in a 4wd suck in terms of overall performance.

[JoshT]

As said ranger is going to be too narrow. I think you'd be better off with a F150 ttb, if doing that I'd use a F150 back axle also. The extra width would probably be good for stability too.

Nothing wrong with a TTB. Works great and a good compromise between a solid axle and an IFS.

[bearmtnmartin]

Thanks for the replies. I was going to use the Ranger setup because it is lighter. The big trucks use the Dana 44 but I don't need that with 150hp. There is I think a one inch difference in track which I can make up with wheel offset.

I am aiming for a comfortable commuter vehicle which will see limited off road use.

But if someone could point me to any bumpside IFS or TTB thread I would appreciate it.

[JoshT]

There is I think a one inch difference in track which I can make up with wheel offset.

I am aiming for a comfortable commuter vehicle which will see limited off road use.

Actually you are right. I was mentally comparing the Ranger to the CV swap that's so common, that's why I said too narrow. I'm in process of building a car trailer and wanted to have it large enough to haul a F100 LWB parts truck (and maybe a mid '60s Galaxie). I remember measuring Dad's '68 F100 4wd and being surprised how similar the width is to my 98 Ranger 4wd. Both are wearing the same size wheels and tires, with a similar offset I think. Forgot about that but you are right the Ranger suspension probably would be a better fit to the 4wd. On the flip side I almost think that the factory front 4wd axle on an F100 almost looks too narrow. If you do go the Ranger TTB route I'd recommend some wheels with very little back space.

You've only got 150hp but how much torque do you have? I know that diesels are usually lower on HP than Torque. Torque is what breaks things. I hope you have a bunch of it, otherwise that thing is going to be a dog.

You will get mixed emotions on how comfortable or how off road capable a TTB is. It is capable. It is not as tough and might not be quite as capable off road as a solid axle, but it rides better. It doesn't ride the roads as well as an IFS, but it's stronger and usually more capable. That's going stock to stock, once you start upgrading, anything goes. I've driven a solid front axle (68 F-100), a TTB (1990 BII), and a couple of IFS (98+ Rangers).

From my experience on road:
#1: the IFS had the best road manners
#2: the TTB was most comfortable
#3: The solid axle, but it wasn't bad

I may be weird though, because for a comfortable DD I'd take the 2wd '84 Ranger I used to have over anything, >>ANYTHING<<, else I've ever driven. Granted it needed a little work to make it handle worth a damn, but that old TIB was the most fun and most comfortable I've ever been on on 2 wheels.

[bearmtnmartin]

The funny thing is that my 1970 F100 I much closer to today's Ranger in size and weight than a full size truck would be. The motor will be around 150 to 180 hp and maybe 200 torque so I don't expect to break anything. And with low power numbers weight will be the killer so the lighter driveline is my preference.

[two-bit]

I do not like TTB. From a maintenance aspect i think its a nightmare. Lots of bushings to wear out. Caster and Camber a PIA to set up.
It is a nicer ride down the road, vs a straight axle. The cornering aspects, ie: body roll, seem a lot smoother also.
I don't use trucks for commuting or casual play. Trucks in my life are work vehicles. Hard work vehicles. So durability and ease of maintenance are top priorities for me.

Nevertheless, its your build, so i am curious as to what you are going to use for the beam anchor points ? If the F100 chassis are like the rest of the straight axle chassis. There is no large center cross member to use for the anchor points.

My first thought would be a 2wd frame. It already has the cross member under the engine you would need for the beam anchor points. Moving the pivot arm mounts on the frame wouldn't be that difficult. I assume you would have to move them in.
VS
The 4wd frame that has nothing under the engine at all.

I maybe wrong on all this, i deal mostly with F-250 and larger trucks from '67 to '79.
Just curious. Where did the Mercedes diesel come from? 80's J-truck?

Two-bit

[bearmtnmartin]

Sorry but but missed the reply. The Mercedes is an OM617 from a 300D.

Since I posted the question I have picked up a 1992 Ranger and it is sitting in my shop. I am going to trial fit some parts over the next while. I will post some pics of progress as I go.