So I have had Rangers since I started driving. well and F-150's as well. I never had any issues with my Rangers, but I always herd a common quip with the trucks that no matter what you did you could not get it to ride nice, like well the F-150's. Even the though of putting Bilstiens in them didn't really work because bilstien doesn't make shocks for Rangers. So anyone have any suggestions for making it ride better. I wouldn't want to really lift the truck up because I like the clearance it has stock. I know the FX4 editions when they had them had Ranchos which I have heard made the ride a little better.

Views: 303

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This article might help: http://www.managemylife.com/mmh/articles/authored/how-to-make-a-car... 

Tires are probably your easiest and least invasive option.  Ask your local tire salesman what he has to offer for smoother riding tires. 

What is you definition of ride nice? I worked at a tire shop for the first 3 years I went to college, and I can tell you that they usually won't make a drastic difference in your ride quality. Though horrible tires can, it isn't too common. Are speaking in terms of the comfort of the suspension?

Yes. like when I go over a bump with the truck is virtually wants to fish tail. I guess you could say I would like a more sedan like ride without like lowering it.

I drive a 2003 Ford Ranger and the back end is very wild on it. It has a lot to do with the size of the truck and the type of suspension in the rear. 

People buy trucks to carry loads and tow. So, as a truck manufacturer, you want to maximize the truck's capacity to do this. The Ranger is one of the smallest trucks you can buy. As the truck gets smaller and you try to keep the load-carrying capacity, the comfort of the ride suffers. 

They build the rear suspension so that it will carry around 1500 pounds of cargo. When the truck is empty, that's 1500 pounds of extra spring in the back. That's why the rear bounces. When you consider the truck it self weighs less than 3000 pounds, that's a pretty large percentage. 

Compare that to a much heavier F-150, and the cargo-to-weight ratio is smaller so you're not going to have as much bounce when you drive it with an empty bed. 

It's just the nature of the beast. You can spend money on suspension parts and tires if you want, but it's probably not going to help significantly. 

Funny how I never had a ride problem with my '94 extended cab Ranger.  As an earlier reply explained, you're driving a pickup...a type of vehicle that's always been light in the tail and bouncy.  You want to get a car-style ride and better handling, you need to keep a hundred to two hundred pounds of stuff in the bed all the time. 

Well what ended up happening is when we first bought it it was a decent ride especially since it was running 16' rims and still is. But when the shocks on the rear were going, they were replaced with a really shoddy load shocks, that raised the rear up but just didn't have the give. It got me thinking if next time just ask ford what the stock shocks were when they manufactured the truck.

RSS

Latest Activity

Sir replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"Starting at the top of the page, here's what I see: I've helped pass and signed 38 Legislative Bills, mostly with no Democratic support, and gotten rid of massive amounts of regulations. Nice! Will be on @foxandfriends. Enjoy! POTUS the…"
1 hour ago
Shane replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"So not even a single quote. Good job."
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"Gentlemen,  read a little U.S. History.   You want "violent rhetoric,"  let's see, Patrick Henry plainly inferred, ON THE RECORD, the head of state be assassinated,  "Ceasar had his Brutus, Charles the First,…"
3 hours ago
Vendetta replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"Ted Nugent is a moron. Plain and Simple."
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Brandon Johns's discussion How hipster is AoM
"At present, I don't know.  It seems, though that the site has definitely evolved from the early days.  Back then, AoM purely wasn't hipster.  A lot of the site felt like it was inspired by a column in The National Review.…"
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Nick Martens's discussion Sleeping On The Ground
"Wasn't me that iced up that year. I imagine that somebody used the memory of long-ago Army days to advise the kid on camping gear.  "
4 hours ago
Native Son replied to Braeden 2.0's discussion The Horror of Day to Day Life
"The OP sounds more like an attempt to elicit serious debate on the obvious.  If one finds the consumption of dead matter too offensive for their sensibilities, one is reminded that all life above the single cell level, depends upon consumption…"
4 hours ago
Tarquin Anstruther replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"How about reading through his tweets, or are you someone who thinks like he does and can't see that his language is harmful and undiplomatic? He acts like the school tough guy, I like you I hate him stuff. Perhaps you see it as normal behaviour."
5 hours ago

© 2017   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service