RE: 3.55 or 3.90 in an R/T ?

From: Mooberry, J (j.mooberry@lmco.com)
Date: Thu Sep 09 1999 - 17:15:21 EDT


>>
I think we're miscommunicating a little, I think lower ratios (big numbers)
are great and will make your truck get up and move. I don't think
numerically smaller gears are better, I just think they're easier to smoke.
<<

Wait a minute that came out wrong. I meant:
Nobody cares, but just for the record.

>>
I think we're miscommunicating a little, I don't think numerically smaller
gears are better. I think lower ratios (big numbers) are great and will make
your truck get up and move, but they're easier to smoke.
<<

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mooberry, J [SMTP:j.mooberry@lmco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 3:48 PM
> To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
> Subject: RE: DML: 3.55 or 3.90 in an R/T ?
>
> Please feel free to correct my if I'm missing something here...
>
> >>After I switched to 4.10's...No more problems<<
> Can't contest experience like that, also can't explain it. Maybe somebody
> dumped some Mr. T's medallions in your trunk. I'm just talkin the
> physics
> of the whole thing here. If I swap my 3.55s for 4.10s, the engine can
> spin
> my tires easier(the driveshaft gets 4.1 revolutions to spin the tire once,
> instead of 3.55 revs). Therefore, with the pedal mashed, its easier to
> displace the weight of my bed and lose traction.
>
> >>(Ponder on this: If numerically smaller gears are better, then why do
> most
> of the track vehicles run 3.90 - 4.56.)<<
>
> I think we're miscommunicating a little, I think lower ratios (big
> numbers)
> are great and will make your truck get up and move. I don't think
> numerically smaller gears are better, I just think they're easier to
> smoke.
> I don't want to squabble over chicken feed here. Well, actually it's
> pretty
> fun.
>
> -Jay
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bernd D. Ratsch [SMTP:bernd@texas.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 3:03 PM
> > To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> > Subject: RE: DML: 3.55 or 3.90 in an R/T ?
> >
> > Nope...I'll never give up. (Although the beer would be nice) ;)
> >
> > From my days at the track (Sear Point), I used to run 3.23's on my
> > ProStreet Class Camaro. Always burned them at the lights and always
> > smoked
> > them 1/2 way down the track. After I switched to 4.10's...No more
> > problems
> > and the e.t's were MUCH better. Also, most of the other vehicles we
> built
> >
> > (mainly 5.0's) all had the gears switched to 3.90 for better times.
> >
> > - Bernd
> >
> > (Ponder on this: If numerically smaller gears are better, then why do
> > most
> > of the track vehicles run 3.90 - 4.56.)
> >
> >
> > At 02:47 PM 09/09/1999 -0400, you wrote:
> > >I agree, takes off faster. But slips more. Try squockin em off the
> line
> > in
> > >3rd gear(higher gear, lower ratio). See where that gets you. 2 for, 1
> > >against. We outnumber you, Bernd. Concede victory and I'll FedEx you
> a
> > >beer.
> > >-Jay
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Jack Hilton [SMTP:HEMI@charter.net]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 6:25 PM
> > > > To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> > > > Subject: RE: DML: 3.55 or 3.90 in an R/T ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It should take off faster , but it should lose more traction .
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At 01:18 PM 9/9/1999 -0500, you wrote:
> > > > >Take a vehicle with 3.08, 3.23, or 3.55 gears, put it next to
> another
> > > > >identical one with 3.90 (or 4.10) gears and launch them.
> Guaranteed,
> > the
> > > >
> > > > >3.90 (or 4.10) will take off faster, loose less traction, and
> > > > >overall...have a quicker time.
> > > > >
> > > > >- Bernd
> > > > >
> > > > >(And no...I wasn't leaning on my handle bars..) ;)
> > > > >
> > > > `>
> > > >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:16:40 EDT