Same problem 1st to 2nd - Hate to bother u Glacier991 but...

[shane73]

Well my problem sounds like many others on here. I have 98 Ranger that I have to let off the gas in order for it to change into 2nd gear and O/D flashing. I have been driving it around like that for about a year now “going to fix it next weekend”. Next weekend just never gets here. Last week my wife’s 95 Explorer started doing the same thing. She’s not going to let me keep putting hers off till next weekend. A while back I read a lot on here about what might be the problem with my truck. Now I am back again reading. I really don’t want to spend (actually don’t have) the money to get a new/rebuilt one but I am stuck making a hard decision. 1) Get a new/rebuilt one 2) sell or trade it in on something newer and with low miles 3) take my chances with the cheapest, smallest, best, and fastest fix I can first. Before I do option one I might should consider putting that money down on something better and newer for her (option two). It does have a lot of miles on it and I don’t know how much more it can take. On the other hand it might be worth fixing, paint looks new, interior is perfect, new tires, battery, new fuel pump, ball joints and bushings in front, runs perfect, good on gas, drives great, drive belt, hoses, wires all new or great condition, and so on…. The most major repair we have had to do to it was like the fuel pump or ball joints. I guess the point is, we keep it up, its nice, its been a very good means of transportation but…with the miles on it how much longer before it does tear up major and we cant sell or trade it in? Should we drive it into the ground? Right now I am leaning toward option three, reason I am is because of several reasons… I much rather fix something myself than pay someone else unless I just have too. Whatever I try, work or not, I learnt something and everyone reading this learnt something. Most of the things I try or new parts I buy can still be used even if I do have to rebuild right? What I learn on this repair might help me in fixing my Ranger with the same problem too. Even if something don’t have but a 10% chance of working and don’t cost but mostly time, I will make time.

I have read other threads with about the same problem and I think I know where to start but if mine is a little different because of miles, no O/D flashing, etc or something just let me know.

Here are some facts… 95 explorer – 4x4 – 4.0 v6 – 201,000 miles – started one week ago not going into second gear until you let off gas – all other gears work fine – no problems with trans till last week – change filter and fluid about every 50,000 miles – close to 40,000 since last change – “no” O/D flashing now or never –I push button to cut off and O/D off light does work – no check engine light on now or been on in over a year – she says it has got worse in the last week – do have a friend with scanner but he’s more of a motor guy than a trans guy (maybe need to go to Amoco for a test?) – best friends dad has been building transmissions for about 25 years “but” more of a backyard/shade tree rebuilder (I can borrow special transmission tools or something like that if I need too.. his first idea was tighten the bands or loosen the kick down cable… does that sound right??) – bought it with about 40,000 miles on it second owner – never has ran hot – checked fluid 3 days ago and was one quart low – put a quart of Lucas in it – checked 2 days ago and fluid looks fine – last filter and fluid change everything looked normal – always use Fram – Anything I missed just let me know.

I think I know where to start but I have read so much I got my brain going in circles. Tighten the band? Change filter? Get the code (but no lights means no code right)? Change a sensor or solenoid? Drive it till it dies?

Thanks so much for any help with this.

 

[Glacier991]

In the 4R44E, 4R55E, 5R55E the first letter means the number of gears - 4 speed or 5 speed. The second - the R, means rear wheel drive. The next grouping 44 and 55 is the torque handling ability in Nanometers. The E stands for Electronically controlled.

Why do I bother telling you this? because what is important in diagnosing these transmissions is whether it is a 5 speed or 4 speed. How come?

The 5 speed is mainly the exact same trans as the 4 speed, but the computer is instructed to make the 1-2 shift an application of overdrive of first gear, instead of the normal shift we think of a 1-2 shift using the intermediate band.

What this means is that in a 4 speed... trouble on the 1-2 shift is likely a problem with the intermediate band. In the 5 speed, the intermediate band is used on the 2-3 shift (and the 1-2 is the OD application), so a 1-2 shift problem is something else other than the intermediate band.

A 95 Explorer has a 4R. Later Rangers with the smaller engine also used the 4R (Explorers switched to the 5R in 97 I believe). So, it sounds like both of your vehicles are 4R transmissions.

Ok... intermediate band application problems. First off... possible broken band. Easy enough to check - drop the pan, and look for parts. Bad news? If broken it is rebuild time.

Other possibles....Valve body, separator plate gaskets, or weak or sticky solenoids. High mileage 4R's almost ALWAYS need a new EPC... possible issues with intermediate servo seals...... but run things down in that order and if it is easily fixable with trans in vehicle, you will isolate it.

Keep us posted.

 

[dogfriend]

The next grouping 44 and 55 is the torque handling ability in Nanometers.

Nanometers? That's kinda small.

Newton Meters? :


Oh yeah, 97 was the first year for the 5R55E in the Explorer, used for both 4.0L engines.

The 97 Service Manual says the 2.3 and 3.0L Rangers used 4R44E, the 4.0L used the 5R55E. So a 98 Ranger with 4.0L probably has a 5R55E. I didn't see which engine he has in the original post.

 

[Glacier991]

I am having a good chuckle at my own gaffe here. But hey, you KNEW these were "light duty" transmissions, didn't ya?

Laughing here... yes it is newton meters.... as my respected friend Dogfriend has pointed out. Now for those of you not so metricly attuned... what may be more important than the absolute measurement might be the relative measurement.... the A4LD was probably the same as the first 4R - 44 Nm. Then we saw a nearly 20% increase to the 5R55 - 55 Nm. Compare that to the 4R70W.... which was probably the same torque wise a the AOD... 70 Nm. Then came along the 4R100/5R100 and I am still trying to ferret out whether the 6R is 100, or something else.... you guessed it though, 100Nm. More than twice the torque handling capacity of the A4 and 4R44, nearly twice the 5R55.

Ok ok my 15 nanominutes of fame.

(Though I am tempted to edit out my dumb statement, I think it is best left as a testament to my own fallability, idiocy and lunacy... and gets ME laughing too. Thanks Dogfriend for your gentle reminder of those things in me ... and for making me laugh at myself - that is something I wish more people could do... no no not at ME, at themselves. We humans are, after all, pretty funny creatures.)

 

[dogfriend]

I am having a good chuckle at my own gaffe here. But hey, you KNEW these were "light duty" transmissions, didn't ya?

Yes, it would explain the failure rate. If the 5R55E is rated in Nanometers then the A4LD must be in Pico(newton)meters.

 

[shane73]

First off thank yall for helping me on this! I have the letter "T" on door jam so not sure if its a 44 or 55 Nanometers Torqued Tranny I stopped by my local auto parts store today to pick up a pan gasket so I could drop the pan like you suggest first, but they were closed for Thanksgiving. Looks like it will be a day or 2 before I can drop the pan now.

I do have a question.. If the band is broke would I still have 2nd gear?

 

[dogfriend]

I think that if the intermediate band is broken, you would lose either 2nd or 3rd depending upon if you have a 4R or 5R.

Does the 98 Ranger have the 4.0L engine?

 

[Wrench]

Interesting note I found in my 99 factory shop manual concerning the 4R and 5R trans.
4R - torque rating 600 Nm
5R - 750 Nm

 

[shane73]

I think that if the intermediate band is broken, you would lose either 2nd or 3rd depending upon if you have a 4R or 5R.

Does the 98 Ranger have the 4.0L engine?

I still have 2nd gear reason I asked. Pretty sure I have the 4R in the Explorer. No the Ranger has a 3.0L. Ranger is a utility/service truck.

Does the band just help it go into 2nd or is the band what makes 2nd gear engauge?

 

[dogfriend]

Yes your Explorer should have a 4R55E, and your 3.0L Ranger most likely has a 4R44E. I think the two transmissions are very similar and operate in the same manner.

From Glacier's explanation above, the 1 to 2 shift happens when the intermediate band is applied (or released?). The band is applied to stop the outer drum from turning. So if you still have second gear the band is probably not broken. But it may be out of adjustment or the EPC solenoid may be bad or some other issue. I'm not an expert on auto trans, but have read that it is common for the EPC solenoids to eventually wear out and fail. When the EPC is bad, it may cause the line pressure to be too low - this would cause the band to slip.

 

[Glacier991]

Wrench is correct... now that I think about it, starting in 95 the back end of the case is stamped inside with the Nm rating ... so the 44 and 55 are not NM ratings... I'll need to figure out the correct rating for those numbers...

And a 4 speed that has 2nd gear has an intact intermediate band - though some think they have 2nd when in fact they have 3rd applied where there is a large flare and the gear only applies when you take your foot off the gas. But a true 2nd gear in a 4 speed cannot exist with a broken intermediate band.

 

[shane73]

I picked up a pan gasket today and plan on dropping the pan tomorrow or sunday. Im almost positive I still have a second gear. If I dont push the gas pedal but about a quarter to half inch down and im on flat to slightly down hill ground, I can count all 4 gears. Even letting off the pedal to let it go into second, I can watch the RPMs and count it go into a 3rd and 4th gear.

 

[Glacier991]

Ok... this took me some researching but I now have it right (I think). Forget Nanometers, except to embarass me, which is good for the human spirit, a little hubris. The 4R44 and 5R44 were designed to handle 600 newton meters of torque... or about 440 ft lbs. The 5R55 ws designed to handle 750 Newton meters of torque, or about 550 ft lbs.... getting a clue here?

The "X"R44 was 440 ft lbs of torque...dropping a zero is 44. The 5R55 (no X because there was only a 5 speed) was 550 ft lbs of torque.... drop the zero 55.

So, have I exonerated the stain of a 'nanometer"?

Oh and, just for the record... when the A4LD was born, before the days of putting torque ratings into names of rear wheel drive trannies (4R44-4R55-5R55-4R100-5R100) A4LD did not mean what is common urban legend, namely: Automatic 4 speed light duty... but rather automatic, 4 speed, "locking device". The A4LD was FORD's first controlled locking torque convertor.... utilizing a "locking device" - which we now commonly know as a TCC lockup clutch and solenoid.

 

[Glacier991]

Many people confuse the engagement of the torque convertor as a gear change. Possible.

 

[dogfriend]

Ok... this took me some researching but I now have it right (I think). Forget Nanometers, except to embarass me, which is good for the human spirit, a little hubris. The 4R44 and 5R44 were designed to handle 600 newton meters of torque... or about 440 ft lbs. The 5R55 ws designed to handle 750 Newton meters of torque, or about 550 ft lbs.... getting a clue here?

The "X"R44 was 440 ft lbs of torque...dropping a zero is 44. The 5R55 (no X because there was only a 5 speed) was 550 ft lbs of torque.... drop the zero 55.

.

Isn't there a 4R44E and 4R55E but no 5R44E? Or is there a 4R44E, 4R55E, 5R44E, 5R55E, 5R55W, 5R55N........ :

 

[Glacier991]

Boy when it comes to shovelling out the hubris, my "friend" Dogfriend has a plentiful supply...

Yes there IS a 5R44, I forgot, ok ? <sheesh>

And well DUH of course there is a 5R55W, 5R55N and 5R55S, : I can explain the differences between those and where they went, but ... notice something in common? Yep, you got it, 750 NEWTON meters each (for those of you like me who just cannot fathom all that metric foreign stuff, try 550 FOOT LBS of torque handling capacity. 55!!)

Ok.. go ahead, say it. Nonoooooometers. Nanoo nanoo (apologies to Mork)

Neener neener.

 

[dogfriend]

My dad doesn't believe the Metric system is needed. His quote:

"We went to the Moon without that crap, why do we need it now?"

 

[Glacier991]

I expect that the newton meter numbers stamped or cast into the inside back of the case on the 4R 5R series is because of the fact those transmissions were, in whole or in part, built in France.

 

[shane73]

Ok a couple weeks ago I finally got around to dropping the pan on my explorer. I didnt find no parts and there was no metal shavings on the little magnet. Everything looked fine. I adjusted the bands, 10 pounds, 2, 2 1/2 turns back and all that good stuff. I put in a new filter. Filled it up with fluid. I then went for a test drive. It shifted better than it did when I first got it. It seemed that way anyway. I drove it for about 2 weeks. Also from 0 to 65 MPH I kept counting 5 shifts but it might have just been the torque convertor fooling me on one of them 5. Anyway for 2 weeks it was just perfect then yesterday I started up a big hill and it felt like it was slipping going up that hill. When I got to the top of the hill, back to letting off the gas to go into second again. I brought it home and tightened up the bands and after 2 - 2 1/2 turns they tightened down so in guessing I didnt break a band. I even tried to tighten them a 1/4 or so turns tighter than supose to and it made no difference. My question is now what is the next thing I should try replaceing?

Also too,the other one im working on, the ranger... took the pan off it... there were parts of the band lining in the pan. So that one has got to come out and be rebuilt for sure.

Question on ranger.. how do I check for sure I have a 4R44E in it, just incase someone before me didint change it to something else?

If I do have a 4R44E in it... can I go back with a 4R55E or something better? If I can.. is a 4R55E better? should I or no reason to? More trouble than its worth? Sorry so many questions but I have always been a DIY person and I and so lost when it comes to transmissions.

 

[BrooklynBay]

There is no harm in putting a stronger transmission into it. The 3.0L uses the 4R44E. The 4.0L uses the 4R55E.