CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

I'm not a traitor, really!

It doesnt appear to be a full size. 'Ranger XLT' implies small bronco.... Same as an s10 blazer compared to a K5. Motor size throws me off though, making me think maybe its a full size. Look into it a little more.
 
Well... the old rangers were AKA the F-100 Ranger... about the same size as a 1/2 ton.
 
ftcjimmy said:
'Ranger XLT' implies small bronco....


:confused:

:rolleyes:

We'll give you a chance to retract your statement 'fore we obnoxiously prove you wrong.
 
The 400 is a beast... My friend has a 400M (big block parts on the heads IIRC) is his F-150, bored 30 over with a decent cam. That motor is just like having a built chevy 400.
 
Dude , if you have 2500.00 bucks for a Furd , then you have gas money to drive out west a little farther and drive something home and have change . I saw a buch of nice k5's for that or less this last month here :D
 
WELL WHERE THE EFF ARE THEY? I'm lookin my ass off in those damn truck traders and local stuff but they all want higher. Craigslist aint even reasonable as that. So a ford 400 is only as powerful as chvy with all that stuff? My group of guys :). So take out your digital cameras, take pics of important parts, and SEND them too me! make me a member already! I gotta have a k5 first!

[email protected]
aim:TWilsonTX
msn: [email protected]
 
ftcjimmy said:
It doesnt appear to be a full size. 'Ranger XLT' implies small bronco.... Same as an s10 blazer compared to a K5. Motor size throws me off though, making me think maybe its a full size. Look into it a little more.

Ranger XLT implies no such thing...... Thats a trim level/model package. There was no small bronco in 1978... :rolleyes:
 
MrArmyAnt said:
WELL WHERE THE EFF ARE THEY? I'm lookin my ass off in those damn truck traders and local stuff but they all want higher. Craigslist aint even reasonable as that.

[email protected]
aim:TWilsonTX
msn: [email protected]

First of all, that bronco is ugly as hell. And it's a bronco. Dude, you have found all kinds of smokin' deals on blazers. Why haven't you bought one yet?
 
'78 & '79 were the best years for the full-size Bronco. In '80 they went to TTB, so if you plan on keeping the D44/9" combo then its a '78-9 that you want. This should also come w/ a 31 spline NP205, or possibly a 31 spline NP203. I don't remember what year they switched to the B-W cases, but it was not untill the '80s.

That paint job doesn't do anything for me, but if it's what you want go look at it.
 
I have had a 79 Bronco with a 351m(which is essentially the same motor as the 400m), and a F-250 with the 400m.The trucks themselves are arguably some of the best trucks made(9inch and 44 axles,C6 tranny,205tc).But in my opinion(I did say my opinion)thats where the engineering marvel ends 'cause the motors are nothing more than glorified boat anchors!If you think a built sbc burns gas try one of these mothers!And you get no horsepower in exchange for it.To me they are very reminiscent of the old 360 amc dogs.NO ONE makes a better motor than the Chevy small block.Of course thats only my opinion.
 
Can't say for sure for this model, but Ford parts tend to be a good bit more expensive then Chevy parts. This is just a general statement after having worked at autoparts stores for a few years, somebody back me up (or tell me I'm wrong)? Plus Ford tends to not be as simple and swap friendly as Chevy. They will have a couple different brake systems on a single year of some vehicle they make, all that use different parts, for example. Bizzare.
 
MrArmyAnt said:
Yes, the lower part of the panels would be bedlined with the top camoed. That is one ugly ass paint job. Dana 44 with a 9" is pretty good for being stock. I could always de badge it, and put in a 350 :)
Then just buy the Chevy if that is what you want.
 

Latest Posts

Top Bottom