2nd Gen Ram Tech 1994-2001 Rams: This section is for TECHNICAL discussions only, that involve the 1994 through 2001 Rams. For any non-tech discussions, please direct your attention to the "General discussion/NON-tech" sub sections.

Bigger tires vs. gear?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 22, 2011 | 05:08 PM
  #11  
merc225hp's Avatar
merc225hp
Champion
15 Year Member
Shutterbug
Liked
Loved
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,717
Likes: 10
From: N/A
Default

With 4.88 325/80R16 = 2017rpm @ 65mph In OD (.690), 2923rpm in 3rd (1.00)
 

Last edited by merc225hp; Oct 22, 2011 at 05:13 PM.
Reply
Old Oct 22, 2011 | 06:39 PM
  #12  
dsertdog56's Avatar
dsertdog56
Record Breaker
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,822
Likes: 0
From: Just south of nowhere in Oklahoma
Default

Originally Posted by drewactual
The leverage of taller tires jacks with your overall ratio, effectively reducing it.. making getting it moving harder.. once its moving, it should help you... But...

Folks forget that rotations mass is x4.. five pounds of mass that rotates causes the equivalent of twenty pounds at the center of the rotation.. keeping that mass in motion takes energy.. for every pound extra you add to wheels and tires, you've effectively added four.. it adds up quick.

You can figure you're saving gas/energy by using larger tires on the highway, and the math concerning ratios will agree, but the math that everyone forgets, the weight, does not agree.. it will work you over..

4.56 @ 70mph for me is about 2200 rpm in fourth o/d with tc locked and 35".. iirc it was around 1800 w/ 3.92's with 33".. . its likely around 1600 w/33" and 3.55..
Y'know, a lot...or pretty much everybody, doesn't understand what happens when you increase the unsprung weight of tire/rims and how much more REAL effort it takes to get that mass of rubber and metal moving from a dead stop, or BACK to a dead stop!

Or they're in denial...

This is by far one of the best explainations of why big tires don't work with low numerical gears. Along with why your gas mileage doesn't improve much (if at all) when you "gear down". Well that and aerodynamics and hp/weight ratio .

Nicely done Drew!

My truck, at an uncorrected 65mph, tachs about 1700-1800 rpm. Thats with well worn 33 inch tires.
 
Reply
Old Oct 22, 2011 | 06:55 PM
  #13  
Ugly1's Avatar
Ugly1
Record Breaker
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 18
Default

Randy's has some good calculators on their site too.
 
Reply
Old Oct 22, 2011 | 06:58 PM
  #14  
Ugly1's Avatar
Ugly1
Record Breaker
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 18
Default

Originally Posted by dsertdog56
Y'know, a lot...or pretty much everybody, doesn't understand what happens when you increase the unsprung weight of tire/rims and how much more REAL effort it takes to get that mass of rubber and metal moving from a dead stop, or BACK to a dead stop!

Or they're in denial...

This is by far one of the best explainations of why big tires don't work with low numerical gears. Along with why your gas mileage doesn't improve much (if at all) when you "gear down". Well that and aerodynamics and hp/weight ratio .

Nicely done Drew!

My truck, at an uncorrected 65mph, tachs about 1700-1800 rpm. Thats with well worn 33 inch tires.
Very true. I'd heard all the horror stories about unsprung weight my entire life and until I put the theories to the test on a bicycle it never sunk in quite the same way...I'm a believer now.
 
Reply
Old Oct 22, 2011 | 07:06 PM
  #15  
drewactual's Avatar
drewactual
Champion
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,697
Likes: 3
From: Cape Carteret NC
Default

Originally Posted by Ugly1
Very true. I'd heard all the horror stories about unsprung weight my entire life and until I put the theories to the test on a bicycle it never sunk in quite the same way...I'm a believer now.

HA!!!! I'm a mountain biker, and scoffed at this concept until I had to choose between tires with perfect tread (maxxis mobsters 2.4) and great weight (conti verticals 2.2).. It was a 12 hour race, and I went with the heavier mobsters for grip.. I figured it out by lap three, and swapped them out by lap four.. the time i lost in corners and washes was easily recouped everywhere else..

the principle is the same no matter the application..
 
Reply
Old Oct 23, 2011 | 01:05 AM
  #16  
99dodge318's Avatar
99dodge318
Record Breaker
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,169
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Default

Ok with 35's and 3.55, my truck is at 1600 rpms at 70mph, but thats acording to my gps. My speedo is 10 mph off with 35's" tires.

So 60 mph on the factory gauge is 70mph on my garmin. You have to take all this into consideration when you change tires/gears.

As for mpg I get about 14-16 mpg average from a full tank.
 
Reply
Old Oct 23, 2011 | 01:39 AM
  #17  
DogeRamGuy1993's Avatar
DogeRamGuy1993
Thread Starter
|
Professional
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
From: Livonia,MI
Default

Originally Posted by 99dodge318
Ok with 35's and 3.55, my truck is at 1600 rpms at 70mph, but thats acording to my gps. My speedo is 10 mph off with 35's" tires.

So 60 mph on the factory gauge is 70mph on my garmin. You have to take all this into consideration when you change tires/gears.

As for mpg I get about 14-16 mpg average from a full tank.
Okay thank you.
 
Reply
Old Oct 23, 2011 | 09:52 AM
  #18  
SilverSS's Avatar
SilverSS
Captain
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
From: Central Florida
Default

I'd keep the stock wheels and tires just in case you want to tow something heavy. I put 33's on mine with 3.55's and acceleration is quite a bit slower.
 
Reply




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:17 AM.