GEM replacement

[mgscott]

Hi folks,
Just joined the forum and have a question.
Need to replace the GEM on my '97 XLT 2x4.
Anyone know the best place to purchase one?
Where exactly is it located in the vehicle and how do you replace it?

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Michael

 

[BrooklynBay]

Welcome to this forum! Check the links in # 58 in my list of useful threads for more information.

 

[gijoecam]

Can't help with where to get it, but as for replacement, it takes about 20 minutes. Remove the stereo surround, stereo, and vent duct, and you're looking at it. Pull the two connectors on teh front, then remove the screw holding it in place, slide it down, and unplug the last connector on the top. Piece of cake.

Why do you think that the GEM needs to be replaced? It has no moving parts and, in my experience, failure is exceptionally rare.

-Joe

 

[SHAWNANDMOSES]

I actully got the one you need, I was looking for one for my 4x4, and found the 4x2 Take a look at yours and I can send you a picture of the one I got from the salvage yard..Shawn

 

[gijoecam]

I'd be surprised if it worked... If my memory serves, the pinouts and connectors are different.

 

[SHAWNANDMOSES]

I belive it came out of a 1996, but I am not sure, the part # is F67B-14B205-BA. It has the letter (B) on it in the lower right corner.

 

[glfredrick]

The 97 GEM is a specific part, if I recall correctly from when I still had the 97. It is also a piece of crap that rarely if ever works correctly -- especially when shifting in and out of auto 4x4 mode. Ours locked up constantly when backing up or going around sharp corners, even after having it re-flashed and replaced twice by Ford.

I finally just let it do what it did and lived with it until I traded the truck off on a Chevy Trailblazer -- couldn't be happier with that decision. Twice the truck...

Mind you, I'm not a Ford hater -- just that 97. Total POS.

 

[gijoecam]

If replacing the GEM didn't fix it, the GEM wasn't the problem. The GEM is just a dumb box. It does what it's told to. If it detects wheel slippage while backing (which is likely what yours was doing), it engages the 4wd. It doesn't know whether or not the wheels are, in fact, slipping. If a sensor is bad or giving errant readings, it's feeding bad info to the GEM, and like all electronics, garbage in = garbage out. A sharp technician would have been able to monitor the GEM PIDs and see which component of the system was sending an incorrect signal.

 

[glfredrick]

If replacing the GEM didn't fix it, the GEM wasn't the problem. The GEM is just a dumb box. It does what it's told to. If it detects wheel slippage while backing (which is likely what yours was doing), it engages the 4wd. It doesn't know whether or not the wheels are, in fact, slipping. If a sensor is bad or giving errant readings, it's feeding bad info to the GEM, and like all electronics, garbage in = garbage out. A sharp technician would have been able to monitor the GEM PIDs and see which component of the system was sending an incorrect signal.

I'd agree with you, except for all the service bulletins that explain away the real issues with the 97 model year Explorer GEM.

Actually, Ford screwed up. When they purchased the t-case from Borg Warner, they were also supposed to purchase the computer that BW set up for that case. It took into consideration wheel speed while steering, backing, etc., which the Ford computer didn't. Unless you've actually had to live with a 97 day in and day out, you'd never understand just what a problem the GEM could be. Just check all the guys doing the brown wire mod... That's not all because they want to squeal the rear tires...

In any case, the rest of the truck was sort of OK. Teh interior was fine, the stereo good. The motor ran great, except the cam tensioners, which were about due to be replaced, the ball joints, which needed entirely new upper arms to repair, the transmission, which was its third, and the fact that it couldn't tow anything much larger than a snomobile or small boat, and it was a perfectly great truck... :thumbdwn:

 

[gijoecam]

In any case, the rest of the truck was sort of OK. Teh interior was fine, the stereo good. The motor ran great, except the cam tensioners, which were about due to be replaced, the ball joints, which needed entirely new upper arms to repair, the transmission, which was its third, and the fact that it couldn't tow anything much larger than a snomobile or small boat, and it was a perfectly great truck... :thumbdwn:

Reeeeally... hmmmm......

And yes, it's within the vehicle's capacity...

I'd agree with you, except for all the service bulletins that explain away the real issues with the 97 model year Explorer GEM

The 97 and 98 GEMs were almost identical. If my memory serves, the Borg-Warner control system for their cases was a stand-alone unit, and Ford had higher aspirations for the system. As far as I know,Borg Warner never successfully used their control system on ANY of the OEM systems their cases were included in (Ford or GM). I'm sure B/W was just as happy to sell the t-cases by themselves to Ford and GM for all those years... I mean, Ford sold nearly 750,000 Explorers per year in 97, 98, and 99 alone... Add that to GM's vehicles, and that's a lot of 4x4s.

IMHO, it should make no difference whether you're backing or not... wheel slippage is slippage, and the system works to prevent it in either direction. The BWM is for us control freaks... While it is a way to circumvent a malfunctioning system, it's not a solution to the underlying problem causing that malfunction. The control system itself is still quite good. I'll take the Control Trac system over the AdvanceTrac any day!

-Joe

 

[glfredrick]

I don't doubt that that boat was pulled --- once...

After that, they were rebuilding the transmission. I did notice that the picture was a 2 door sport model -- likely a 5 speed. The A4LD/4R5R series won't handle that sort of load -- not often at least.

That's why I switched to a Trailblazer -- it has an electronic version of the 700R4 that all the Ford guys are swapping into their Explorers so they can actually do something with their trucks.

 

[BrooklynBay]

http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=200351

 

[gijoecam]

I don't doubt that that boat was pulled --- once...

After that, they were rebuilding the transmission. I did notice that the picture was a 2 door sport model -- likely a 5 speed. The A4LD/4R5R series won't handle that sort of load -- not often at least.

That's why I switched to a Trailblazer -- it has an electronic version of the 700R4 that all the Ford guys are swapping into their Explorers so they can actually do something with their trucks.

My Ex pulled my boat repeatedly for three summers in a row. ('98, '99, and '00) I now have 165,000 miles on the original trans (knocking on wood) with nothing more than regular fluid and filter changes. It's definately not a 5-speed, and the 4.0 OHV/5speed combination was not rated to tow more than 1800 lbs IIRC. The 4.0 SOHC/5R55E with the 4.10 rear in my Explorer is rated for 4700 lbs. I'd get into all the details of the towing setup, but it was within the vehicle's maximum weights and axle capacities, and remains a capable tow vehicle. But the fact that the manufacturer is willing to stand behind that tow rating tells me something about the transmission's capabilities.

I've seen a few people that have swapped 700R4s into their trucks on this site. Overall, I don't doubt it's a more solid trans than the 5R55 series, but that doesn't mean it's the cat's meow either. Just because someone may have done it doesn't mean it's best for everyone. If it was, I'm quite confident Ford would not have hesitated to do it years ago. Of course, how many Trailblazers has GM sold? Last I checked, the Explorer had been the best-selling SUV for a decade and a half, and Ford had sold nearly 5 million Explorers since they introduced the world to the SUV in 1990. I think maybe, just maybe, they did something right...

Also, all the threads I've seen with that swap involved swapping the 700R4 for the A4LD in the 1st gens and OHV second-gens. The 5R55 is a whole different beast with its own set of shortcomings. It may have been done, but I can't imagine there's many significant advantages to it.

 

[glfredrick]

All the Ford Explorer transmissions behind the v-6 engines are based on the old C3, which was originally designed to go behind the 4 cylinder motor in the Pinto. Ford just tacked on an overdrive sun gear and modified the valve body for the rest in order to get it shifting 4 or 5 times.

The basic flaw with the transmission is the surface area of the clutches and bands. It is simply too small to be of good use.

My Trailblazer tows 7500 comfortably and has done so a lot... In fact, I used it to tow the 'Sploder to the trails. I've towed with both and I'll take the Trailblazer ANY DAY.

FYI, I've towed that sort of weight with my 92 Explorer and with my 97. The Trailblazer wins hands down -- period. I don't expect a Ford guy to believe that, but I've been there and done that. Like I said above, I'm not a Ford hater -- it is just that Ford REALLY screwed up when they didn't convert the C4 into the transmission in the Explorer/Ranger line instead of that crappy little C3.

Oh, and I've rebuilt all of the various transmissions we're talking about... Big difference in the size of the 700R4 components versus the 5R55E or A4LD. I went through 4 transmissions on my 92 'Sploder and 3 on my 97... I have since discovered that a lot of other guys are having the same issues.

As for the basic frame, body, suspension, and motor of the Explorer for towing -- it is adequate. The transmisson is not. Of course the 300 HP I'm getting out of the Trailblazer works a tad better in the hills than the old Explorer did.

As far as Trailblazer sales... Just look around some day -- they're everywhere...

 

[TequilaSnrs087]

I don't doubt that that boat was pulled --- once...

After that, they were rebuilding the transmission. I did notice that the picture was a 2 door sport model -- likely a 5 speed. The A4LD/4R5R series won't handle that sort of load -- not often at least.

That's why I switched to a Trailblazer -- it has an electronic version of the 700R4 that all the Ford guys are swapping into their Explorers so they can actually do something with their trucks.

The previous owner of my Ex routinely towed a boat with it. Not sure of the exact size, but large enough that he used 4 low on boat launches. The original transmission has never been rebuilt and has 152,000 miles on it and shifts great.

 

[Joe Dirt]

It's just a combination of maintenance, operation, and uh... luck? I have a 20' Four Winns that I pulled with both my '99 Ranger and my '01 2-door sport Auto. I never had a problem- slow to get up to speed, and using 4wd on launches- never, EVER had a problem with any of my trucks.

Heck last summer I routinely had to run my '04 4.6L (with the "weak" tranny) F150 pulling a Case 90XT with a bucket, forks, and tracks on a 6 Ton landscape trailer for work- whole load was over 14,000 lbs! When I looked down the beltline, you could see the truck start to bow down at the bed. Yes, it was overloaded, yes it was bad, yes i had a brake controller and good electric brakes on the trailer- and I never got a sniff out of the transmission temp gauge. Last trip with it was from Grand Rapids, MI to 30 miles northwest of Chicago. No issues- and it was stop and go across the Dan Ryan in Chicago. I guess it was just a weak unit that you got. Sorry for your luck, it happens, I've had some doozy vehicles too! (shrugs) '82 Mercury Lynx comes to mind!

 

[daffy]

How did a GEM replacement thread turn into a GM vs Ford flame thread?