Look What I Found....

[P. A. Schilke]

i know this is an old thread, but it reminded me of a question you. I bet you are the man with the answer. In the what i remember (possibly not correct time frame) the early 2000s a lot of buzz was taking places on lower emission cars and trucks and few manufactures would label them LEV, ULEV and so on. I always wondered why ford did not label the 4g rangers more and capitalize on the issue. under the hood on my 4g one of the manufacture stickers says meets ulev2 California standards or something like that. Would have been cool to have a tailgate emblem or something being proud of the low emissions status.

Hi Mark,

It would be a corporate decision on embossing the emission standard on Ford Vehicles, and it may have been on Vehicle destine for States with tighter standards. I really don't have an answer as the labeling would have been a Marketing decision, not a engineering decision.

I launched at the time, the largest volume of alternative fuel vehicle production volume in the history of the USA, as all 3.0L Rangers were compatible with E85. Why did we do this??? Corporate Average Fuel Economy Credits so we could sell more Mustangs etc. We badge the Ranger Tailgate with the Road and Leaf stick on.... The program was warmly received but was a sham in the population as no one knew what it really meant.

Ford was an adversary of EPA and CARB for much of my career. Likely part of the decision to not do more than comply as regs required.

In 1974, Ford got caught with a defeat device... a temperature sensor in the door jamb. If the temperature was 80 degrees, the emissions system worked as this was the test lab temp....otherwise it turned off. Legal at the time...EPA was engaged but lost in court... So defeat device rules were passed.

Anyway, I cannot answer your question as an engineer whey it was a corporate Marketing decision.

Best,
Phil

Sponsored

 

[P. A. Schilke]

Maybe not what you were looking for but there was an EV Ranger in '98-02
Ford Ranger EV - Wikipedia
Picture from the Gilmore Museum

Hi KJ,

Yep....and almost all were given to power companies...Few were in private hands and all of them were to be returned to be crushed.... There were a few that escaped but uncommon, DeDion rear end... weird vehicles...I drove a few... Not impressed. The pickup box was composite and I used them in the SCCA Race Truck Series. Recently a few years ago, Road & Track chronicled this as well a thread or two here on 5g Forums...

Best,
Phil

 

[9zero1790]

Hi Mark,

It would be a corporate decision on embossing the emission standard on Ford Vehicles, and it may have been on Vehicle destine for States with tighter standards. I really don't have an answer as the labeling would have been a Marketing decision, not a engineering decision.

I launched at the time, the largest volume of alternative fuel vehicle production volume in the history of the USA, as all 3.0L Rangers were compatible with E85. Why did we do this??? Corporate Average Fuel Economy Credits so we could sell more Mustangs etc. We badge the Ranger Tailgate with the Road and Leaf stick on.... The program was warmly received but was a sham in the population as no one knew what it really meant.

Ford was an adversary of EPA and CARB for much of my career. Likely part of the decision to not do more than comply as regs required.

In 1974, Ford got caught with a defeat device... a temperature sensor in the door jamb. If the temperature was 80 degrees, the emissions system worked as this was the test lab temp....otherwise it turned off. Legal at the time...EPA was engaged but lost in court... So defeat device rules were passed.

Anyway, I cannot answer your question as an engineer whey it was a corporate Marketing decision.

Best,
Phil

thank you phil, that was a great answer just the same. I did not know about temp sensor so I learned something

 

[Old NaCl]

Hi Mark,

It would be a corporate decision on embossing the emission standard on Ford Vehicles, and it may have been on Vehicle destine for States with tighter standards. I really don't have an answer as the labeling would have been a Marketing decision, not a engineering decision.

I launched at the time, the largest volume of alternative fuel vehicle production volume in the history of the USA, as all 3.0L Rangers were compatible with E85. Why did we do this??? Corporate Average Fuel Economy Credits so we could sell more Mustangs etc. We badge the Ranger Tailgate with the Road and Leaf stick on.... The program was warmly received but was a sham in the population as no one knew what it really meant.

Ford was an adversary of EPA and CARB for much of my career. Likely part of the decision to not do more than comply as regs required.

In 1974, Ford got caught with a defeat device... a temperature sensor in the door jamb. If the temperature was 80 degrees, the emissions system worked as this was the test lab temp....otherwise it turned off. Legal at the time...EPA was engaged but lost in court... So defeat device rules were passed.

Anyway, I cannot answer your question as an engineer whey it was a corporate Marketing decision.

Best,
Phil

So that's why Volkswagen got in trouble.

 

[Grumpaw]

Hi KJ,

Yep....and almost all were given to power companies...Few were in private hands and all of them were to be returned to be crushed.... There were a few that escaped but uncommon, DeDion rear end... weird vehicles...I drove a few... Not impressed. The pickup box was composite and I used them in the SCCA Race Truck Series. Recently a few years ago, Road & Track chronicled this as well a thread or two here on 5g Forums...

Best,
Phil

When I had my 2009 Ranger I was on another Ranger forum, and at least once a month a member found one for sale. Apparently quite a few still out there in private hands. Lot of them had replacement battery packs, Chevy Volt being used a lot. Asking prices were usually around the $7 - $9,000 range.

 

[Trigganometry]

My 97 3.0 Ranger had the E85 heads on it. I had knock from day one and for the life of me could not figure out why. Then I had a head gasket go and pulled the heads. That’s when I saw the valves were sucked into the casting. Hmmm that might have something to do with my issue. Went looking for new heads and found a pair of non E85 ones. Slapped those in and went to 287K before getting the 2020 I’m in now. Pretty sure they only offered these heads for a few years and dropped using them for just the reason mention. Not everyone could get E85 fuel back then.

 

[P. A. Schilke]

So that's why Volkswagen got in trouble.

Hi Greg,

Yep...VW, Audi, Porsche and BMW thought the EPA would never find it in the Ones and Zeros of the source code architecture. They took a gamble and lost...

Best,
Phil

Sponsored