blksn8k2

I checked the thickness of the new export brace versus the original shock tower braces and the difference is .057" (.125" - .068"). Again, I have a hard time believing that QA1 would design something with such a small margin of error. Factory tolerances for body assembly in 1970 were probably greater than that.

I'm also curious about rear seat legroom. The fact that they moved the front axle centerline forward by about 2" might have allowed them to also move the front half of the cab forward by the same amount. That would theoretically move the front seats forward as well thus providing extra leg room for rear seat passengers. The obvious downside of that would be less length in the engine bay since they have also said that the overall length of the truck has not changed. However, they did drop the 3.2L inline five cyl diesel, right? So maybe that allowed them to shorten the engine bay a bit?

I had a phone conversation with tech support at QA1 on Friday. I called them to get their recommendation on spring rates for their coil-over front shocks. I told the guy that I estimated the car's curb weight at about 3600 lbs with about 55% of that over the front tires. I also told him I was considering the 450 lb/in springs. He agreed that would be a good compromise and that if I wanted a firmer ride for improved handling the single adjustable shocks would have enough adjustment to handle that. He also said that they do sell the springs separately in case I decide later that I need a different spring rate. The one thing that he brought up which surprised me was that if I was using an export brace I could have hood clearance issues. Well, guess what? I am using one. If you look at the photo in my last post the export brace is that stamped V-shaped plate behind the air cleaner. It provides a stiffer triangulation between the tops of the shock towers and the firewall than the two individual plates that came on the car originally. He said he would call me back with the overall height dimension of the upper shock mounting bracket that replaces the factory upper mount. That's the black bracket on the top of the shock in this photo. That bracket mounts on top of the shock tower and since the export brace will be between it and the shock tower, the thickness of the export brace can be just enough more than that of the standard two-piece braces to cause interference with the underside of the hood. I'm a little surprised that they would cut it that close. You can also buy export braces made from billet aluminum and my guess is that is what has caused others problems with hood clearance, not the stamped steel brace like I have. Once I get the hood back on I can try the crushed aluminum foil trick that one of my buddies told me he saw on an episode of Bitchin Rides. That will tell me how much clearance I have between the factory upper shock mount and the underside of the hood. Then I can compare the crushed thickness of the foil to the difference in height between the factory upper mount/shock eyelet and QA1's upper mount.

Not saying I don't buy that jpd but I do find it a bit odd that if Ford has actually increased interior volume you would think they would have at least mentioned it somewhere in their press releases. It's kind of a big deal...actually it's probably at least as important as the fact that they increased the space between the rear wheel wells and they have mentioned that. As a matter of fact, they seem to be attributing the increased inside width of the bed floor more to the fact that they moved the rear shocks outboard of the frame rails than anything else. The only thing I have seen so far that gives me much hope is this sentence from their Nov 24th press release: “Widening the truck by 50 mm may not seem like a lot, but it makes a huge difference, especially in the cargo box. It means that customers will be able to load flat some pretty fundamental items, such as a sheet of building plywood or a full-size pallet,” Hall said. Are we supposed to assume from that that the interior is also wider? About the only things they have put much emphasis on regarding the interior are electronic and storage upgrades which are no doubt important but I would surely hope they would also be mentioning something that the Ranger hasn't exactly "measured up to" when compared to its direct competition. Or is the real problem that the rest of the world cares more about the width of the bed than us fat-assed Americans??

Has Ford released those numbers yet? All I have seen is mention of the bed width increase but nothing on the cab interior.

Correction, Joey actually starts 20th on Sunday. Not sure how that works but I guess it has something to do with different qualifying rules for Daytona. Maybe they are allowed to use their qualifying speed from Wed night instead of their Duel finishing position? Apparently going to a backup car doesn't affect that? "shrug?"

Keselowski and Buescher won the qualifying races at Daytona. Great debut for Roush/Fenway/Keselowski Racing. I think the Ford teams simply out-foxed the competition, especially on their pit strategies. However, Stewart/Haas pretty much sucked with the exception of Briscoe. Lagano caused a mini Big One on the last lap of the second race. As he said afterwards, he would have finished no worse than 4th had he not tried to block Buescher. Now he will have to start the 500 from the rear in a backup car.

I added a few of the under-hood decals. There are a few more that I have and could add but I guess I'm not really interested in going that far. One of my wise guy buddies asked if the chalk marks were next. I have a decal for the trunk mounted scissors jack and I'll probably add that and the tire pressure decal for the door post or door or wherever that's supposed to go. I'm not even sure which door at this point. There's also a data decal that I think goes on the back edge of the driver's door and that one includes the VIN. The VIN is also on a metal tag at the base of the windshield and is stamped at the top of each shock tower but those are partially hidden under the fenders. Then there's also a metal build or "buck" tag that goes under the hood on top of the passenger side fender apron, I think. I'm obviously still researching some of the locations. This car was built in Dec 1969 at the Metuchen, NJ plant which was one of three Mustang plants at the time. What I'm finding out is that each plant may have located some of this stuff differently from the other plants. As a matter of fact, I just read that the "CAUTION FAN" decal was not even installed by the factory but was probably installed by the dealer or customer since Ford supposedly mailed them to customers long after the cars were built. So, technically, I probably shouldn't have installed that one. ?

More recent Daytona 500 practice. Lots of garage activity showing new and not so new paint schemes. One big take away for me is how HUGE the turning radius is on these new cars. Seems like that could be an issue if a driver gets blocked into his pit stall. Might be a long wait...

Has there been any official release of interior volume numbers yet?

The side marker light mounting brackets and front air dam came today. About the only remaining task body-wise is to bolt the hood back on.

Exactly.

I ordered the front air dam yesterday. I'm not happy with the car's stance. When I was ordering parts years ago I decided to go with lowering springs front and rear. I'm OK with the rear ride height but the front is way too high for my taste. The front is actually higher than the rear by about 3/4". Not what I wanted at all but I couldn't know that until after the engine, transmission, etc. were all installed. I also have gas charged KYB shocks front and rear. Gas shocks typically have a lot of resistance in compression and these are no exception. Just to verify that I removed both front upper shock mounts and the car dropped by about 1/4" in front. However, the real problem is with those front "lowering" springs. The coils are just too stiff which is causing the car to sit too high. Probably won't ride worth a shit either. They were advertised as providing a 1" drop but the car actually sits higher in front than it would with stock springs. I could probably remove a coil or two from the springs but that would just make it ride even rougher. Not good. So, now I'm considering trying a set of coil-over shocks on the front. QA1 now makes bolt-on coil-overs for classic Mustangs which were not available back when I was ordering most of the suspension stuff. They have both single and double adjustable shocks with spring rates ranging from 250 to 500 lbs with ride heights adjustable from stock to 2" lower. QA1's single adjustable shocks actually adjust both compression and rebound settings by turning a single knob which has 18 different settings. Their double adjustables use separate knobs to adjust compression and rebound and offer literally hundreds of combinations. Overkill for a street car IMO. By combining the proper spring rate and knob adjustments the single adjustable shocks should be capable of providing a decent street ride, which I doubt I would have with the current setup, and still have enough adjustment remaining for better handling, all while allowing me to set the ride height where I want it. Just like most of the other mods I have made these would not alter the car to the point where stock parts could not be installed in their place if so desired. Regardless, I won't make a decision until I've had a chance to drive the car with the current setup so I know what the real ride height and ride quality are. If I decide a change is in order, as I expect it will be, I'll contact QA1 for their recommendations which would basically be which spring rate to use.

When you combine companies like Fiat, Peugeot and Chrysler quality products and sensible management decisions really should not be at the top of your list of expectations.

Front bumper trial fit. There are six separate support brackets for the bumper. Four attach to the frame rails and two to the front valance. I'm thinking I might add a factory air dam.

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/feu/en/news/2022/01/20/_why-don_t-all-pick-ups-have-that--all-new-ford-ranger-is-loaded.html Should be interesting to see how much of this translates to the NA version.

I ended up going with a Wix air filter for a 75-76 Mustang II 5.0L, of all things. It is the same ID and OD as the OEM filter but is about 1/4" lower in height. That got the air cleaner lid down to where it should be with a slight gap between it and the base which is closed by the rubber gasket on the bottom of the lid. Much better fit. I even tried the supposedly correct Motorcraft FA-14 air filter but it was no better that the K&N that I already had. K&N also has a replacement filter for the Mustang II application and I will probably use one of those eventually but the WIX was about 1/4 of the price of the K&N and a better choice for this experiment. I also started installing the front end trim including the grille, sport lamps in the grille, the headlights and the surrounding trim for all of that. Next up will be the front bumper, front turn signal lights and the front side marker lights. I'm still waiting on a set of new mounting brackets for the marker lights. New horns and wipers have also been added. The seal between the hood and core support is kind of an experiment at this point. The reason Ford used those was to keep more air passing through the radiator rather than over it. On the '70 Mach 1 they used a set of twist on hood locks that pass through holes in the hood and lock into brackets on the core support. That seal is actually supposed to cover the entire top of the core support but would obviously interfere with those hood "pins". I haven't found any photos yet to see how that was handled originally so this is probably a temporary experiment as well.

My cousin and I were talking about the upcoming season about a week ago and who we thought might do well in the new Cup cars. I told him I thought Lagano could be one of those guys. His car control is exceptional, he's a quick learner and he seems to be able to tell the crew what he needs to go faster. I even mentioned that no one else does a burnout like Joey. I'm not a big fan of that stuff but Lagano can make it interesting. After his win today he was drifting the car through the turn during his victory burnout. Awesome!

This may have been covered already but there were some interesting tidbits from the Ford Performance coverage of the Bronco Raptor that could also have some bearing on the next gen Ranger Raptor. First of all, and I fully realize this statement is more about the current Raptor models, this statement does nothing to ease my doubts about whether or not North America will ever get a Ranger Raptor: "With the addition of Bronco Raptor, Ford once again expands its Raptor high-performance off road vehicle franchise, which also includes F-150 Raptor for North America and Ranger Raptor for global markets." Then there was this statement that should end the debate about the construction of the 3.0L EcoBoost which will also supposedly be the powerplant for the next gen Ranger Raptor: "To give Bronco Raptor even more desert-running power, the Ford powertrain team developed the proven twin-turbo 3.0-liter EcoBoost® engine with specific Raptor-level tuning to meet Ford Performance standards. With a target of more than 400 horsepower*, Bronco Raptor will be the most powerful street-legal Bronco ever, with intercooling and air-induction systems designed to endure the higher ambient desert temperatures. For higher-speed desert capabilities or crawling over rocks, the compacted graphite iron-block engine, which saves weight while providing strength for added durability, is paired with a 10- speed SelectShift™ automatic transmission tuned to meet Ford Performance standards. A true dual-exhaust system, featuring first-for-Bronco active-valve technology, uses near-equal-length pipes for an improved exhaust note. The system allows drivers to alter the sound of their Bronco Raptor with four selectable exhaust modes, including Normal, Sport, Quiet and Baja." https://performance.ford.com/enthusiasts/media-room/2022/1/bronco-raptor.html?cid=PRODDM408958&bid=1560964594

Sorry, but none of that is breaking news. What about the next gen Ranger and Ranger Raptor?

Engine compartment getting closer to being complete. I added plug wires and vacuum lines. Still having a minor issue with the air filter. Seems the K&N drop in filter I bought in 2010 is a little too tall. It was the correct replacement part number but the chrome air cleaner lid will not seal against the base. Right now I am waiting on the Motorcraft FA-41 that I have ordered to see if it fits any better. The first two photos are without a filter and the last is with the K&N installed.

Looks like the Cindric/Burton #41 was the highest finishing Mustang in 9th place and on the lead lap.

Brad K in-car at speed in the #6.

Here's your fix until the season opens. Jan 11 testing at Daytona. I especially like how the new cars sound with the exhaust coming out both sides of the car as opposed to driver side only on the old car. Sounds just like a 427 AC Cobra with side exhaust idling through the pits.

Had Ford gone through with the Bronco pickup idea I may have done that. If I were crazy enough to trade my less than 30k mile F-150, at this point the next best option might be the upcoming next gen Ranger Raptor, and that's assuming we will actually be allowed to buy such a thing here in the US. With Ford releasing info on the 2022 Bronco Raptor this morning I am hopeful that the Ranger Raptor gets a little of the same equipment. At least the same 3.0L EB/10-speed auto drivetrain.