Re: Re: Re: 4.56 the max for 9.25"?

From: Tony Cellana (acellan1@tampabay.rr.com)
Date: Sun Dec 22 2002 - 23:38:31 EST


Actually on a Gen III, not sur what the year cutoff is, supposedly you can
enter a custom number thru a DRB for revolutions per mile for speedo
correction.

Heard this here or on the RTML. Not sure of its validity. Anyone know for
sure?

I'm guessing someone doesn't want to lose effective gearing with taller
tires.

TonyC

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Miller WB5OXQ <wb5oxq@grandecom.net>
To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Date: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:03 PM
Subject: DML: Re: Re: 4.56 the max for 9.25"?

>
>I am curious what he is trying to do. If he has a 4X4 it must have a low
>range and with a 4.56 it must top out at about 2 mph. You will never get
>the spedo to work right anyway.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tony Cellana" <acellan1@tampabay.rr.com>
>To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
>Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 1:23 AM
>Subject: DML: Re: 4.56 the max for 9.25"?
>
>
>>
>> You could use a shorter tire to get a higher (numerical) ratio. But that
>> may be counter to what you're trying to do. Larger tires right?
>>
>> Tried looking through Summit, or any of the larger gear manufacturers
>sites?
>> I want to say I heard of 4.8?s along the way.
>>
>> TonyC
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jon@dakota-truck.net <jon@dakota-truck.net>
>> To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
>> <dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net>
>> Date: Sunday, December 22, 2002 6:47 PM
>> Subject: DML: 4.56 the max for 9.25"?
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > I was ummm, doing some long range planning in my head last night
>> >regarding the Ram... :-) As far as I know, 4.56s are the shortest
>> >gears currently available for the 9.25" Chrysler rear end. Is that
>> >correct? I could get some insane gears for the Dana 44 in the front
>> >axle, but it looks like I will be limited by the selection available
>> >for the 9.25". Randy's doesn't seem to carry anything shorter than
>> >4.56, so I'm guessing nothing beyond 4.56 exists?
>> >
>> >Thanks!
>> >
>> >--
>> >
>> > -Jon-.com ----'
>>
>>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:48:15 EST