Pulled the Trigger

We are very happy with our ATC/FWC and Ranger. It has been to a lot of interesting places and has carried us on many adventures. It will take us on many more.



Thanks, it's just probably the geek in me over thinking things.
 
We are very happy with our ATC/FWC and Ranger. It has been to a lot of interesting places and has carried us on many adventures. It will take us on many more.

The Eagle works well on my Ranger, too, even though it hasn't wandered as much as the 3pins' rig - yet. :) It has driven up the mountain to work a lot, with a few vacations thrown in and has been good and reliable. Just remember that your braking distance will increase some, so keep the speed down. That'll help save gas, too.
 
I've got an ATC Bobcat that started as a shell and I built out the interior myself. When I weighed it at several different weigh stations the camper is at 875 lbs empty. It's mounted on my 2000 Ranger 4x4 XLT 4.0L V6 autotrans with payload/towing package (photo of my rig in my small avatar to the left) and I like it a lot.

I do have rear air-ride air bags, at 65 lbs pressure. I made brackets between the eye bolts in the truck bed to the frame rails, because I wanted the camper "Mounted" to the truck (personal preference). I almost decided to buy a set of larger 16" wheels so I could get tires in a higher load range (either "D" or "E"), however, I recently purchased some BFG All-Terrain T/A KO (snowflake), 15", 9.5x30, load range "C" tires for my smaller 15" wheels and that took away any hint of wiggles on rough roads (the previous "P" rated tires are not a good idea, IMO). At the same time I replaced my original shocks (150,000 miles) with Rancho 5000 series, both front and rear, so with the stiffer tires and the new shocks, I hardly know the ATC Bobcat is back there.
 
So I had been a little worried about payload weight on my Ranger since so many posts on other sites say don't use a TC with a Ranger. So from Ford's info my Ranger has a max payload of 1370lbs or 1500lbs (which includes 150lbs for driver) with payload package. Since payload package is just heavy duty shocks which the sport model has standard and higher spring rate which my SuperSprings (rated at 3000lbs) sort of does, I figure my max is somewhere in the middle of the two number's. Lets figure my Eagle shell with options is 750lbs seems like that leaves me between 600lbs to 750lbs for cargo and passenger. So my question is how is this not safe? Maybe I'm just reading to much into random posts from people that don't really know what they are talking about since the numbers seem to say it's safe according to Ford's spec's.


my source:
http://www.ford.com/services/assets/Brochure?make=Ford&model=Ranger&year=2011


For two years of camping we had a 06 Ranger super cab with supersprings carrying a Bobcat and the truck did well.I have now switched to a 02 Tundra AC TRD mainly for the extra power,. My ranger only had a 3.0 V6,plus the Tundra ride has more comfort.Which my wife likes.
Frank
 
Like everyone else says, the truck with the camper will get you get you there. We have been on 2 large trips at around 6000 miles each and quite a few mini trips without any problems. My only complaint about the truck is cab room (Frank's post above alludes to that and I think he solved it perfectly) and mileage/power at altitude. In my experience the power drops drastically at 5000' with the 4.0 V6.

Key points:
  • Alley Kat mentions tires and shock upgrades - the tires for sure make a difference in stability - haven't tried shocks yet
  • SuperSprings level the ride and help with sway - I tried Timbrens without success and air-bags don't fit some Ranger/Mazda model years (mine)
  • I think a spoiler or air foil arrangement to get the air to flow over the camper would help mileage a little - see Kodachrome and others who have done this.
  • See Overland Hadley's posts regarding weight and distribution - try to keep heavy things as forward as possible
Again, congrats and have fun.
 
My only complaint about the truck is cab room (Frank's post above alludes to that and I think he solved it perfectly) and mileage/power at altitude. In my experience the power drops drastically at 5000' with the 4.0 V6.


That's interesting, Busboy. I have the 4.0 V6 as well, and only occasionally have driven at elevations below 5000 feet. I usually drive between 7000 and 9000 feet, and get 18 mpg on average (mostly low speed highway) with adequate power, although I sure won't win any drag races. I'm going to have to pay attention when I go to lower elevations to see if I can tell the difference.
 
Like everyone else says, the truck with the camper will get you get you there. We have been on 2 large trips at around 6000 miles each and quite a few mini trips without any problems. My only complaint about the truck is cab room (Frank's post above alludes to that and I think he solved it perfectly) and mileage/power at altitude. In my experience the power drops drastically at 5000' with the 4.0 V6.

Key points:
  • Alley Kat mentions tires and shock upgrades - the tires for sure make a difference in stability - haven't tried shocks yet
  • SuperSprings level the ride and help with sway - I tried Timbrens without success and air-bags don't fit some Ranger/Mazda model years (mine)
  • I think a spoiler or air foil arrangement to get the air to flow over the camper would help mileage a little - see Kodachrome and others who have done this.
  • See Overland Hadley's posts regarding weight and distribution - try to keep heavy things as forward as possible
Again, congrats and have fun.



I had the cab room in the Ranger,though a bit larger in the Tundra. I removed the seats in both so I could use the area better. I think the main comfort problem with the Ranger was actually the type of seat. It had a60/40 bench and the comfort over a long ride just wasn't there. With the Tundra it has the captain type and they are a lot more comfortable.Yes I really noticed the lack of power on the mountain passes like or Sonora & Ebbetts. The type with a steep climb and switch backs. At times I could walk faster. Also against the wind the power wasn't there.I think the 4.0 V6 would have made a difference but thats what I didn't have. So far I am liking the 02 Tundra. It's only a bit larger than the Ranger 8" longer and the Bobcat fits the truck nicely,only about 6" taller. I did add the air bags just to level the truck.I had supersprings on the Ranger and they worked great. The ride is much,much better. What's really weird is that I picked out a Tundra the same color as the Ranger. Oh well I like it and thats all that matters.

IMO I feel the truck is loaded just right. I make aware that I am carrying extra weight and travel slower,usually 60/65 and realize it will take longer to stop.I haven't weighed the truck and camper but I feel I am around the GVW and driving down the road the truck feels good,no rocking or drifting. Just steady on the road.

Frank
 
So close they look like twins.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0069.jpg
    DSCN0069.jpg
    43.7 KB · Views: 102
  • DSCN0182.jpg
    DSCN0182.jpg
    85.1 KB · Views: 116
That's interesting, Busboy. I have the 4.0 V6 as well, and only occasionally have driven at elevations below 5000 feet. I usually drive between 7000 and 9000 feet, and get 18 mpg on average (mostly low speed highway) with adequate power, although I sure won't win any drag races. I'm going to have to pay attention when I go to lower elevations to see if I can tell the difference.


Highz,

Your signature says you have a '99 Ranger - I'm thinking you have the good ole push rod Cologne engine. My truck has the SOHC version of the same engine block. It makes me wonder if the engine tuning is completely different. The difference for me between high and low country for power is night and day, especially with the camper on.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_%28North_America%29#1998.E2.80.932012

"2001 also saw the pushrod 4.0 L V6 replaced by the SOHC version from the Explorer..."

Oh how I wish Detroit would adopt the nice diesels in North America like they have in other countries. We drove around Italy in a Ford Transit motorhome that slept 6. That little diesel sipped fuel and had p l e n t y of power.
 
I'm with highz on this one, I have not noticed any real difference in power with elevation change and most of our driving is above 4000 feet to as high as 12,000. I have the SOHC 4.0L. We just spent a couple weekends down at sea level and didn't notice any difference from home.

We bought our truck used a couple of years ago for getting a camper. Our previous truck was a 1994 ranger with the OHV 4.0. Put 200,000 miles on it and would have kept it but it was a stepside. We stuck with the ranger because I'm pretty familiar with them.

Interesting about the seats. We had buckets in the previous ranger and they were fine. Our current ranger is a FX4 Level II. It was the best truck of the ones we were considering purchasing, lowest miles, and the best deal. One of the features of this model is special off road seats. They don't look any different that the standard buckets but they are the most comfortable seats I've ever had in a truck. The Lady would get out and walk the rough sections with the old ranger. Now she rides.

The axles step up to the 8.8" from the 7.5" with the 4.0L and the brakes are bigger.

We changed the rear leaf springs to a custom set from Deaver. We had airbags and they worked well but we tend to get into rough remote places and were concerned about possible airbag failure. The springs were $650 plus about $100 shipping. It took us a Saturday morning to change the springs.

I weighed the truck empty with the end gate on, 4100 lbs. Installed the camper and loaded it up for a trip. It weighed in at 5000 lbs. We were not in the truck so add in 175 for me and 120 for the Lady. I figure fully loaded we are just under the door tag's 5400 lbs. max weight. We are minimalists- mountaineers and backpackers - and resist the temptation of adding more stuff.

Ah, but all this is kind of behind us now that the ranger is discontinued. It would be nice to get one with the 3.2 litre five cylinder diesel. Yeah, I'm dreaming.

T6 Ranger Pulling Locomotive
 
You're right about the engine on my Ranger - it's the Cologne, so that is different than for Busboy66. But, since Ski3pin has the SOHC and hasn't noticed power loss, I'm wondering about if there's something affecting Busboy's fuel mixture (wonky oxygen sensor or problem with intake manifold or fuel injector problem or ???)
 
We had the same experience with our seats in the 06 Ranger.They were poorly designed it seemed that after several hundred miles the back and butt were in need of some long resting.One disclaimer,I AM A FORD PERSON,but decided to look elsewhere for a new ride.Couldn't see plunking down $25K for a new ride that we only use to camp with.It's a shame Ford is discontinuing the Ranger.I rely did like the truck.Actually it was my second.I bought the first may be an 90/91 used back in 96 my girls drove it and it was a great truck.We don't have a need for a huge truck like Ski we take the minimum so the over loading isn't a problem.Enough said by me on this subject.I'll leave room for other people.

Frank
 
So just finished the 22 hour drive from Kansas City to Laveen, AZ and the Ranger did great. The bucket seats mine has didn't leave my back hurting and didn't have any power issues on the small section of mountains I passed thru. The Ranger does drop to about 16MPG if I actually do the 75 MPH speed limit. Overall from the comments and my short time with the Ranger I think it will meet my needs just fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads - WTW

A
2011 FWC EAGLE-FOR SALE
Dgw2
D
4wheelColeman
The New Guy
m5040
M
R
2016 FWC Fleet
rabidteeth
R
flinchlock
2008 ATC Cougar for sale $10,000
flinchlock
flinchlock
R
**SOLD** 2020 ATC Puma Shell Amazing Custom Build—Go Anywhere Boondocking Special
Ralph
R

New posts - WTW

Back
Top Bottom