One Piece Driveshaft

[RedDakooter05]

Have you found an aftermarket center bearing assembly for the Ranger? Please share if you have.

Napa has a few dozen or so options according to their online listings, but I have not verified personally.

Busy with other things and just don't have the cash to throw parts willy nilly.

Sponsored

 

[CO2Ranger]

Interesting....so why has Ford not done this to many with the bearing issue squeaking?
most if not all I believe have said they were given full assembly shafts for replacement?

It's likely because they know the driveshaft itself is the issue and they're hoping the new one has a lower chance of destroying the new center bearing.

 

[NotBudule]

If i choose to proceed , i think its best to hide it from Phil , im pretty sure Tito "paints houses" for him, if you know what im saying...

 

[TJC]

I have looked over the Driveshaft maintenance PDF, and offer the following musings, conjecture, and a couple of rhetorical questions.

Who wants to step up and defend the engineering design of this driveshaft?

Anyone wish to speak up about the design being simple to maintain?

I have a difficult time believing that this design was the least expensive, safest design that Ford could come up with. A solid driveshaft with two U-joints seems far simpler... even if it had to be built with aluminum tubing (or some other exotic material) and was slightly larger in diameter.... and had a safety ring to prevent "pole vaulting".

It seems to me that Ford design criteria objectives are a mix of (not in any specific order):

• Safety
• Minimize Production Expense
• Repairable by only Authorized Ford Service Departments
• Using only Ford Parts

It is clear to me that Ford is designing components and vehicles that insure maximum profit streams after the initial sale of the vehicle. Why else would they build vehicles that do not have Transmission Dipsticks, and are equipped with "black box" driveshafts. They could have included the dipsticks, and designed the driveshaft with off the shelf commodity parts that meet safety, reliability, and allowed maintenance by any local auto shop....

But they didn't.

Engineering is a science. Designers are given objective criteria. They build to those objectives. Nothing happens by chance.

We live in a world of contradictions.

We worry about full landfills and loss of key resources, while we design and build obsolescence into every major product.... filling our landfills and wasting resources.

Why would Ford state that the transmission fluid is good for the life of the transmission (150k miles per Phil)? Any mechanic with half a brain knows that not changing the transmission fluid every 50K miles is a recipe for disaster.

Perhaps Ford has decided they want you to purchase a new vehicle every 3-5 years, and they design their products to induce you to do so.

- T

 

[myothercarizahearse]

214 posts and finally get to nitty gritty

It seems to me that Ford design criteria objectives are a mix of (not in any specific order):

• Safety
• Minimize Production Expense
• Repairable by only Authorized Ford Service Departments
• Using only Ford Parts

there you go

 

[Muddy Fenders]

My guess is Ford went to Spicer, and said we need a shaft that has these dimensions and this is our intended purchasing audience with these criteria, and they listed a few things that marketing said would be the most common trait amongst buyers
Spicer delivered the shaft they thought was best suited that met the testing requirements and market, and left it up to the end purchasers to buy aftermarket if they required something different for their needs? I dunno, but that's commonly how mass produced vehicles come to fruition imho.
I think they carried out their mandate.

 

[TJC]

In the FWIW category, I just (2 months ago) replaced the driveshaft in my 2005 extended cab 4x4 Ford Ranger. (vibration from 65mph to 50mph when off throttle)

The original 2005 Ford driveshaft is a one piece aluminum shaft that measures from 62.5" - 64" from plate to plate. This was measured off the truck fully contracted to fully extended, and includes the U-joints.

My Tom Wood's driveshaft plate to plate measurement was 66.5" (includes u-joints). This measurement was from the transfer case plate to the diff plate with the two piece driveshaft removed.

So we are talking a 2" - 3" difference in driveshaft length.

I have a difficult time believing Ford could not have built a one piece aluminum driveshaft for the 5th Gen Rangers that would meet safety requirements.

- T

 

[SigOris]

I have looked over the Driveshaft maintenance PDF, and offer the following musings, conjecture, and a couple of rhetorical questions.

Who wants to step up and defend the engineering design of this driveshaft?

Anyone wish to speak up about the design being simple to maintain?

I have a difficult time believing that this design was the least expensive, safest design that Ford could come up with. A solid driveshaft with two U-joints seems far simpler... even if it had to be built with aluminum tubing (or some other exotic material) and was slightly larger in diameter.... and had a safety ring to prevent "pole vaulting".

It seems to me that Ford design criteria objectives are a mix of (not in any specific order):

• Safety
• Minimize Production Expense
• Repairable by only Authorized Ford Service Departments
• Using only Ford Parts

It is clear to me that Ford is designing components and vehicles that insure maximum profit streams after the initial sale of the vehicle. Why else would they build vehicles that do not have Transmission Dipsticks, and are equipped with "black box" driveshafts. They could have included the dipsticks, and designed the driveshaft with off the shelf commodity parts that meet safety, reliability, and allowed maintenance by any local auto shop....

But they didn't.

Engineering is a science. Designers are given objective criteria. They build to those objectives. Nothing happens by chance.

We live in a world of contradictions.

We worry about full landfills and loss of key resources, while we design and build obsolescence into every major product.... filling our landfills and wasting resources.

Why would Ford state that the transmission fluid is good for the life of the transmission (150k miles per Phil)? Any mechanic with half a brain knows that not changing the transmission fluid every 50K miles is a recipe for disaster.

Perhaps Ford has decided they want you to purchase a new vehicle every 3-5 years, and they design their products to induce you to do so.

- T

Then, you go to trade it in at a Ford dealership and they low ball on the trade because of “ known issues “

 

[SigOris]

In the FWIW category, I just (2 months ago) replaced the driveshaft in my 2005 extended cab 4x4 Ford Ranger. (vibration from 65mph to 50mph when off throttle)

The original 2005 Ford driveshaft is a one piece aluminum shaft that measures from 62.5" - 64" from plate to plate. This was measured off the truck fully contracted to fully extended, and includes the U-joints.

My Tom Wood's driveshaft plate to plate measurement was 66.5" (includes u-joints). This measurement was from the transfer case plate to the diff plate with the two piece driveshaft removed.

Se we are talking a 2" - 3" difference in driveshaft length.

I have a difficult time believing Ford could not have built a one piece aluminum driveshaft for the 5th Gen Rangers that would meet safety requirements.

- T

why are we always two or three inches short? ?

 

[TJC]

I know that I have said this before, but it is worth saying again. Just got back from a ride into town and back out, and I have to tell you that the smoothness of my Ranger is perfect, from stop to start to stop... under every condition I could throw at it.

It is now the truck I thought I was buying 2 years ago. I am ecstatic! The wife mentioned again how much smoother it drives.

Thanks again Tom Wood's Driveshaft... worth every penny!

- T

 

[Tremors]

If i choose to proceed , i think its best to hide it from Phil , im pretty sure Tito "paints houses" for him, if you know what im saying...

I think it's BS. The man from Tom Woods driveshaft chimes in going in to detail explaining and Phil can"t prove him wrong. It leaves me wondering. Who's right or wrong. They can't both be right. And they can't both be wrong. I'll try to get all the angles on my driveshaft correct first. Which seems impossible from what I've read. A lot of people try many times and never get it to work out. If I can't get it I guess I'll be forced to try the one piece driveshaft

 

[TJC]

I think it's BS. The man from Tom Woods driveshaft chimes in going in to detail explaining and Phil can"t prove him wrong. It leaves me wondering. Who's right or wrong. They can't both be right. And they can't both be wrong. I'll try to get all the angles on my driveshaft correct first. Which seems impossible from what I've read. A lot of people try many times and never get it to work out. If I can't get it I guess I'll be forced to try the one piece driveshaft

If you were local I'd take you for a spin and let you judge for yourself.

- T

 

[MIBuckeye]

• Regarding the quotes about fools and suckers, I prefer this quote: Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
• About the assertion that this isn't a major issue because it doesn't affect every truck. You are missing the point. It is a major issue to those whom it does affect. And there appears to be a large number of people who do have the problem. Maybe not a majority but a large enough group of people to spawn the creation of many many forum threads about the issue.
• About it being a Band-Aid. I'd consider something like lowering the carrier bearing, adjusting the pinion angle, or putting the shaft out of phase to be more analogous to a Band-Aid. Completely removing the shaft and replacing it with a different shaft of a different design, resulting in a dramatic improvement seems more like a cure to me. The perfect cure? Maybe, maybe not.
• Lastly, there's a lot of talk about this won't work or that won't work. Lets talk more about what will work. If anyone has any better ideas and can produce a better solution that is shown to work better and be safer I will pay you $3,000 to take this burden off my shoulders and will discontinue our Ford Ranger drive shaft. I'll mark it as discontinued and add a link on our Ranger shaft product page to whatever better solution you find. I've done that before, put links on our site to other companies products that I believe will work better. You can find an example of that here. The only catch is that it has to be shown to perform better than what we are offering, for at least 10 Ranger owners who previously had drive shaft issues.

Great idea!!

I'll add to the challenge here and say if anyone is willing to meet me with their smooth driving Tremor with locking rear to swap driveshafts and wheels anywhere in the Midwest, I'll give you $500 to eliminate this as the issues that are on my plate.

 

[Muddy Fenders]

If you were local I'd take you for a spin and let you judge for yourself.

- T

But that proves nothing for him.
He could drive mine and feel the same as yours.
I have the original shaft.

 

[Muddy Fenders]

Who's right or wrong. They can't both be right. And they can't both be wrong.

This applies to so many threads on here LOL
Like anything related to oil, and the oh so dreaded damper talk.

I guess if anything it retains a fun factor every day you come here. Never a dull moment.

Sponsored