Transmission info

Discussion in 'Drivetrain Tech' started by Sam, Jun 13, 2018.

  1. Sam

    Sam New Member

    I have a 1997 Ford Ranger XLT supercab 2.4l engine with a 5-speed w/od manual transmission. Mazda code m, M50D-R1 this transmission was used for several years and for several different engines. Just letting people know, and I am looking to do an engine swap, this is why I know this.
    1988 & up 2.3l 2wd ranger
    1988-92 2.9l 2wd ranger
    1991-2000, 4.0l ranger (3.72/2.05/1.31/1.00/.0.79, 4.0l engines)
    1991-up 3.0l ranger
    (3.72/2.20/1.50/1.00/.079 all other engines)
    And is also noted on the 1988 Bronco II and Aerostar.
    The difference between 4 wheel drive and 2 wheel drive is the tail end of the transmission connecting to the transfer case. Just letting you guys and gals know. Have a great day
     
  2. Ranger Forum Sign Up!

    Join RangerForum.com Today - It's Totally Free!

    Are you a Ford Ranger fan? If so we invite you to join our community and see what it has to offer. Our site is specifically designed for you and it's a great place for Ford Ranger Fans to meet online.
    Once you join you'll be able to post messages, upload pictures of your Ford, and have a great time with other Ranger fans. Whether your an old timer or just bought your Ford you'll find that Ranger Forum is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally free!

    Join RnagerForum.com Today! JOIN FOR FREE

  3. DeanMk

    DeanMk Member

    ...used in the Mazda pickup variants, as well. ( ;) )
    Before the '98, I had an '89 B2200 for almost 21 years. Good ol' truck. A former co-worker named her "Ol' Betsy".
    Used the older version of this tranny, the M5M-D.
    3.622/2.186/1.419/1/.858 coupled to a "P" type drive axle. 3.91 gears (43:11).
    REAL happy @ 50 mph. I averaged 25mpg with mine.
    These days, my '98 XL, which I call "Whitey Ford", prefers much higher speeds. Had to becareful when I first got it. Constantly found myself doing 70 in the thing.
    Now 50-60 is no problem, but I call 50 mph the cutoff for OD gear and I downshift often on hills.
    Still, faster and quicker than my ol' Mazda, but not nearly the low end (seat-of-the-pants) power of my older truck.
    If I can keep my foot out of it, I can average around 26-27 mpg.
    Works for me, but I'd really like to swap to 3.73's in the rear end.


    Dean
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2018
  4. vinn

    vinn New Member

    Dean; which engines will bolt-up to that poor little tranny? thanks, vin
     
  5. DeanMk

    DeanMk Member

    ???....the engines are listed in your quote....why is it a "poor little tranny"?
     
  6. vinn

    vinn New Member

    thanks, by differnt engines i ment like small block chev., toyota 4 or ford 302. not important. "poor" is refured to trany that would hold up to a 302 ford. once again, not important, i like the masda made ranger for economy. vin
     
  7. DeanMk

    DeanMk Member

    I think it would not be advisable to put anything more powerful than a 4 litre in front of that tranny (and make sure you have the correct version, at that!).
    From what I understand, the version of the M50 that is in the 4 cylinder trucks have the lowest ratio gears that can be offered. This means the teeth are cut as thin as possible without degrading the strength of the gear.
    If you put a SBC in front of that one (assuming one even could), the first time you put the coals to it, you'll probably do some internal damage.
    I can't speak for other versions of the M50, but there are SO MANY other tranny's that will fit, or can be made to fit, the SBC, that this exercise is really pretty futile.
    ...anyway, if you swap in a SBC it gives you an excuse to get rid of that stupid hydraulic clutch system that the last Rangers had.
    What a POS! It's the worst thing about my truck.
     
  8. vinn

    vinn New Member

    right you are. " that miserable, problemmadic hydrolic clutch system". the first chev. s - 10 had a cable, mechanical system, BUT the next year, used the "un bleedable - replaceable - expensive " hydrolic clutch. the italian made jeeps later did the same thing. at last report, the toyota, still had the "removable - repairable " system. hence - the idea of installing a toyota 22R when cutch change on the ranger occurs. i like the little truck!! it deserves better. vin
     

Share This Page