'95-'98 Ranger connecting rods

Application is a mini-stock,
rules: 2.3 Ford, no porting/polishing, mild solid cam .45 max, oem bottom end, stock type pistons (no forged) 10:1, 350cfm carb.

Has anyone ventured into using '95-98' Ranger rods F57E-AA as opposed to the '74-'94 D42E-AA rods?

I see a couple of possible advantages. First the rod itself is .25 longer so due to that the compression height of the piston is .25 shorter and should from past experiences wind up with a total weight (rod & piston) less than the older setup.
Second the ring thickness's are 1.5,1.5,3mm which is less than most of the earlier ring packages which should help the drag.

My concern is the actual strength of the rod. The D4 rods are pretty bullet proof, I'm just wondering if anyone has looked at the F5's for a racing application. The motor will see 7100-7200rpms tops.

i have raced the F5 5.4 rods for a couple years now...turn 8000 with stock rod bolts and the stock cast pistons...no issues at all...in fact just won the championship with that combo.

You will find that the F5xx rods are just lengthened f42xx rods. They were replace in 77 by an f8xx rod which has a much smaller beam. I've got a bunch of them ( f57xx ) new and all done up.

all i know is the 5.4 rod used in the 1995 2300 are way beefier than the rods used in the newer 2500..i think they are both 5.4 length...the F5xx rods from the 1995 2300 look the same as the D4 rods,but longer.

@ Old Rob, wanna sell some?

So I got in one of these rods and a piston so I could do some caparisons. As stated the rod appears to be just a lengthened D4 rod. The cap still has the D4 number and the beam has roughly the same mass to it just longer. Coupled to a .030 over piston the whole assembly is 117 grams lighter and has a thinner oil ring package so it looks promising.

The guy I got the rod from says they don't make an aftermarket rod bolt but dimensionally it's the same so I have to believe the ARP 151-6002's will fit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engineczar

So I got in one of these rods and a piston so I could do some caparisons. As stated the rod appears to be just a lengthened D4 rod. The cap still has the D4 number and the beam has roughly the same mass to it just longer. Coupled to a .030 over piston the whole assembly is 117 grams lighter and has a thinner oil ring package so it looks promising.

The guy I got the rod from says they don't make an aftermarket rod bolt but dimensionally it's the same so I have to believe the ARP 151-6002's will fit.

---

engineczar what was the weight on the rod and piston separately? I'm thinking about this package also. TIA

The piston and pin weigh 524g, the piston alone is 395g so it's a pretty heavy pin. The piston is a Sealed Power H676P30 the rod weighs 652g

Thank you very much.

sorry to resurrect an old thread...

Will the newer 99 and up rods also work with the combo? And how much lighter are these? My class is stock rod piston and crank, stock unported 4.20 lift max 10:1 max asphalt 3/8 track with an unlocked rear. I'm wondering if we can get away with the newer lighter duty rod it would give us a lighter weight rotating assembly.

Tough to say. It is a different forging. The 95-97 rod is a F57E-AA and the 98-01 is a F87E. They both take the same rod bearing, the wrist pin diameter is the same, and I think the center to center is close as well. The piston is shorter to compensate for the longer stroke of it being a 2.5. Without one in hand I'm not sure if there's an obvious difference. I'm not quite sure why the factory would make the change but they did, so now you just need to figure out why.

As a follow up the 95-97 piston/rod combo worked out very well.

If in doubt, whichever rod is chosen, the rod can be mildly stone-ground/smoothed & then shot-peened. Shot-peening adds considerable 'compressive' strength to the rod...... any rod. A new set of ARP bolts, and you should be good to go. -Dave-

The only rods we've ever run in our 2.5 race motors,keepm 'em under 7600 never a problem.