Register now to get rid of these ads!

IS IT WORTH CHANGIN' THE REAR RATIO ??

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Rainer, Dec 22, 2003.

  1. Rainer
    Joined: Dec 8, 2002
    Posts: 159

    Rainer
    Member

    I like better ET's -- who not [​IMG] [​IMG] - here are some facts:
    2400 pounds roadster
    355hp sbc
    th350
    converter ?? - can hold the car up to 1900 rpm
    2,56:1 rear ratio (locked rear end)
    29" bias ply tires or 28" hurst slicks
    I run 0-60mph in 4.9 sec on bias ply - ET time I don't know exactly - it must be around 13.00 I think

    this is the stuff I have - but I wonder if it's worth changin ring and pinion to 3,50:1 and how much faster it would be - or what would you do?
     
  2. DRD57
    Joined: Mar 5, 2001
    Posts: 4,342

    DRD57
    Member

    I doubt it would run 13.00's with 2.56 gears.

    3.50's would help the car launch much better and would get you closer to that number if not even quicker. 3.50 is an all around good gear for street and strip with the power train combination and weight that you have. The fuel mileage may not be that much different. Sometimes those really tall gears can lug the engine which can hurt the mileage. When I changes from 3.00's to 3.50's in my Model A coupe the mileage remained the same.
     
  3. burger
    Joined: Sep 19, 2002
    Posts: 2,383

    burger
    Member


    Rainer,

    Try plugging your combination into CarTest... it's not the real world so don't treat what it says as fact, but you'll get an idea of what to expect. Download the free v4.5 at the bottom of the page.


    http://www.cartestsoftware.com/cartest4.5/
     
  4. Rainer
    Joined: Dec 8, 2002
    Posts: 159

    Rainer
    Member

    wow working on that 1 hour and doesn't worke the way I like - comp dummy [​IMG]
     
  5. 38Chevy454
    Joined: Oct 19, 2001
    Posts: 6,768

    38Chevy454
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    wow, 2.56 is a tall gear, especially with your 29 inch tall tires. You will definitely have better acceleration with lower gears, at least to the point you have traction problems. I think a 3.5-3.7 range would be good choice. It depends on how much high speed driving you want to do, then keep the gear more like 3.5 range. The determining factor will become traction, as more gear (higher number) will give you increased torque on the tires. Bias ply are not known for exceptional traction. However, I think you will not get into traction problems until you get into the 4.0 and higher number gear ratios. Tire spin means not accelerating. Good for show, bad for acceleration.

    Is your engine a 355 cubic inch? Or 355 horsepower? If you have a 355 cubic inch, then you have more low-end torque than if you have a (for example) 283 making 355 horsepower. The amount of low-end torque you have is really the determining factor of what gear ratio is best for your traction. The stall speed of the torque converter also plays a role, it becomes a balancing act. From your decription it seems you have a slightly higher than stock, but not much converter.
     
  6. draggin'GTO
    Joined: Jul 7, 2003
    Posts: 1,795

    draggin'GTO
    Member

    Swapping from a 2.56 to a 3.50 will likely cause you to start having some traction problems due to the increased torque multiplication of the new lower gearing. If all you're looking for is acceleration then maybe the 3.50s would be the ticket, but again traction will likely become an issue.

    If the engine has a mild stock-type cam the engine might not be able to take full advantage of the lower gearing either. If you do a lot of open-road driving I would say change to a 3.23 gear at the lowest, that is plenty of gear to accelerate a 2400 pound rod with 350 horses and still stay highway 'friendly'.

    My own '64 Tempest daily driver (3800# w/o driver) has a mild 350 HP 8:1 compression 455 under the hood, TH400 trans and a 2.56 one-legger rear. Launching softly (2.350 sec. 60' time) so I don't blow the tire (235/45-17) off the rim it still runs 13.80s at 102 MPH in the 1/4 mile using only 1st and 2nd gear. I swapped to a 2.93 gear and the car didn't go any quicker and actually slowed by about a tenth, the mild stock Tri-Power cam works best with the taller gearing in this application.

    I see no reason why your rod with the close to the same power and 1400# less weight can't be running at least mid-13s with the 2.56 gears. [​IMG]

    ----- Bart -----
     
  7. Morrisman
    Joined: Dec 9, 2003
    Posts: 1,602

    Morrisman
    Member
    from England

    Looks like you are geared for about 180mph flat out. You could drop that very comfortably, have a snappier car, and probably get better mileage by letting your engine spin a bit easier at cruising speeds. I ran 3.70 with 26 inch tyres and always wanted another gear to shift to, so 3.20 (do they make 'em?) or 3.50 with 29" tyres sounds a good guesstimate to me. Paul
     
  8. Dragrace66
    Joined: Sep 13, 2001
    Posts: 258

    Dragrace66
    Member

    Rainer's engine is a GM Goodwrench ZZ4 (350cui with 355HP)with 750cfm Carb
     
  9. burger
    Joined: Sep 19, 2002
    Posts: 2,383

    burger
    Member

    Rainer,

    I spent a couple of minutes playing around with CarTest, and I'd recommend a gear ratio around a 3.40... Here's the accumulated data:

    Gear Ratio: 2.56
    0-60: 4.4
    1/4 Mile: 12.9
    MPG: 18.6
    Launch RPM: 700

    Gear Ratio: 3.40
    0-60: 3.6
    1/4 Mile: 12.4
    MPG: 15.1
    Launch RPM: 700

    Gear Ratio: 3.65
    0-60: 3.6
    1/4 Mile: 12.4
    MPG: 14.4
    Launch RPM: 700

    Gear Ratio: 4.11
    0-60: 3.8
    1/4 Mile: 12.2
    MPG: 13.0
    Launch RPM: 1000



    Ed

    PS- I threw in the MPG coz I know gas is expensive over there.
     
  10. Paul2748
    Joined: Jan 8, 2003
    Posts: 2,442

    Paul2748
    Member

    in my 48 Ford with a warmed over 302 I changed from a 3.00 to a 3.55. Very little difference in mileage, but a great difference off the line. Seems to be a good street gear.
     
  11. Rainer
    Joined: Dec 8, 2002
    Posts: 159

    Rainer
    Member

    edmurder thanks for checking that for me!!
    Gear Ratio: 2.56
    0-60: 4.4
    1/4 Mile: 12.9
    MPG: 18.6
    Launch RPM: 700

    Gear Ratio: 3.40
    0-60: 3.6
    1/4 Mile: 12.4
    MPG: 15.1
    Launch RPM: 700

    the hop between this ratio's is great - 0.8 sec on 0-to 60mph - sound realy good to me - I'm surpriesed that it would be that much on such a light car
     
  12. Hot Rod To Hell
    Joined: Aug 19, 2003
    Posts: 3,036

    Hot Rod To Hell
    Member
    from Flint MI

    Why exactly would the 3.40 accelerate the car faster from 0-60, but slower from 60 to the buck-o-change trap speed in the quarter??? (you picked up .8 from 0-60, but only .5 in the quarter!?!)
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.