3rd Gen Ram Tech 2002-2008 Rams: This section is for TECHNICAL discussions only, that involve the 2002 through 2008 Rams Rams. For any non-tech discussions, please direct your attention to the "General discussion/NON-tech" sub sections.

RPMS and Diff...

Old Dec 22, 2005 | 04:29 AM
  #1  
justint420's Avatar
justint420
Thread Starter
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
From:
Default RPMS and Diff...

Basic Question: What should be turning lower RPM's at the same given speed, say 70mph, a 3.55 rear end or a 3.92 rear end?

My dad's 3.55 turns about 100 lower RPM's at 70 than my 3.92. He has a 03 quad cab 2wd and I have a 03 reg. cab 4wd. Both with the 4.7.
 
Reply
Old Dec 22, 2005 | 04:36 AM
  #2  
tramotorsports's Avatar
tramotorsports
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

The 3.55's will turn a lower RPM.

Mitch
 
Reply
Old Dec 22, 2005 | 04:44 AM
  #3  
justint420's Avatar
justint420
Thread Starter
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

Thanks. I had thought this was how it was, and that I understood Gear ratios correctly.

*New Question*

Assuming the driving was exactly the same, what "should" get better gas mileage? My REG. Cab 3.92 4x4 or his QUAD cab 3.55 2wd?
and by how much?

 
Reply
Old Dec 22, 2005 | 10:21 AM
  #4  
stump_breaker's Avatar
stump_breaker
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

Assuming all things even, the reg cag with 3.92's will have less weight and more "power" transferred to the road thus having to take less gas to accelerate. The Quad cab is heavier and has to work a little harder to get to the same speed. By contrast though, once speed is reached the Quad cab should get better mileage since the rpm's of the engine will be a little lower than the reg cab. So mileage is relative but it shouldn't be much difference.
 
Reply
Old Dec 22, 2005 | 12:39 PM
  #5  
osteodoc08's Avatar
osteodoc08
Record Breaker
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,192
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

It depends on the overall weight as stated, but I'd imagine it would be pretty close if you have 4wd and he has 2wd. It really doesn't matter though, because if you include the weight of a full tank vs the weight of an almost empty tank, driver weight, tire size/inflation,road coefficient of friction, blah blah blah, they'd probably amount to about the same or near enough to not have a statistical significance. Ideally as StumpBreaker said, once up to speed the one with the lower rpm will likely get better mileage. In the real world it depends on the driver...drive like a blue hair and you get better gas mileage than the 16yo that just got his license
 
Reply
Old Dec 22, 2005 | 03:02 PM
  #6  
DCXgageman's Avatar
DCXgageman
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

You will get worse gas mileage, reguardless. If you're like me you'll have your foot in it way more often than your old man.
 
Reply
Old Dec 22, 2005 | 11:22 PM
  #7  
Avanti's Avatar
Avanti
Captain
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

Hey, hey... all old men DON'T drive like ninnies!
 
Reply
Old Dec 23, 2005 | 12:15 AM
  #8  
bobgraphics's Avatar
bobgraphics
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Default RE: RPMS and Diff...

This is a "basic" chart that shows the relationship between axle ratio and tire size and RPMs.

http://www.summitracing.com/landing/...converter2.htm

I have a new 06 1500, 4.7L, 5 speed auto, 3.55, 30" diameter tires, regular cab 2WD and at 75 MPH I am running about 2000 RPM.
 
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:09 AM.