higher gears
#2
#4
"Low ratio" would give poor acceleration, and POSSIBLY better mpg. I don't think it would be a good idea.
Stock gears are pretty low ratio already. Probably designed for highest fuel mileage possible for average conditions.
By "low ratio" I mean lower numbers. i.e. 3.55:1.
High ratio = high numbers i.e. 4.56:1.
If you search, you'll find a lot of threads on this subject.
Stock gears are pretty low ratio already. Probably designed for highest fuel mileage possible for average conditions.
By "low ratio" I mean lower numbers. i.e. 3.55:1.
High ratio = high numbers i.e. 4.56:1.
If you search, you'll find a lot of threads on this subject.
#7
Trending Topics
#9
My stock ratio of 3.92 was pretty good (IMO) for the 265 75R16s I had on when I bought it. It gave pretty decent economy and the power band was good.
If you look at this chart:
http://www.4lo.com/calc/geartable.htm
You can see where you fall with your ratio and tire combination.
You are actually in the economy band already with your combo. About 2600 RPM @ 70 in 3rd gear whereas I was slightly higher when stock near 2700RPM in the same conditions. You're about where you need to be gear wise already. You could go either way with the gears, but you're either going to sacrifice a little economy to get more power or sacrifice some power to gain a tad more economy.
Either way, its probably not worth the money to swap in gears.
If you look at this chart:
http://www.4lo.com/calc/geartable.htm
You can see where you fall with your ratio and tire combination.
You are actually in the economy band already with your combo. About 2600 RPM @ 70 in 3rd gear whereas I was slightly higher when stock near 2700RPM in the same conditions. You're about where you need to be gear wise already. You could go either way with the gears, but you're either going to sacrifice a little economy to get more power or sacrifice some power to gain a tad more economy.
Either way, its probably not worth the money to swap in gears.
Last edited by dillonjm; 09-28-2008 at 01:41 PM.