|
Tall Rear End Gears
After searching for years I found out that Salt Flat Racers are the ones with Tall Rear End Gears sets.
There are a couple of face book pages that cater to these racers etc. But it is a bit hard to get on there and they may want to keep them for fellow racers…so I am putting this on all the car sites I belong to. I am looking for tall gear sets for my 8.8 Ford in a 03 Crown Vic and for my 10 Bolt 5 lug G20 93 Chevy Custom Van. For the Ford I found that they made these gears sets: 2.26, 2.47, and I think something around 2.56. And I am looking for the closes to those numbers for the Chevy. I am hoping someone here can help me. Rich WHY?? I plan on running 6R80 in the Crown Vic and a 8L90E in the van and with the super low lower gears will have the same power at take off as the stock transmission and rear end. |
Quote:
2.41 is the lowest you can go but you risk stalling the engine you can lower the ratio further by putting taller tires... All possible differential ratios above 2.73 can be swapped without having to change carriers (except for the truck differentials with 30-spline axles).] your acceleration will stink with anything below 3.08... you will probably end up wasting more gas. in the long run So unless you got a diesel engine or electrical motors to back up that ratio lower then 3.08 final (low end torque and electrical or diesel motors have a ton a of torque ) so i suggest the 3.08 with the "taller tires" |
Quote:
The Chevy Van is getting low RPM torque monster 383 with its torque peek at 2000 RPMs...running a 85/90 Camaro TPI with matching PCU with Highway mode able to lean to 16.4 on light throttle and load. It too could be golden at that ratio, same question where to get a set? Thanks. Rich PS I have a 2.73 already. |
Quote:
should look into a second overdrive gear? 0.5 gear? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
And I was very close to putting one behind a TH400, using 2nd gear as a under drive with very tall rear end gears, so that when in a city drive I would have a low geared rear end, giving 4 speeds in low, the stock 3 in the auto and the B&W over drive, and then by shifting into third gear (1:1) switch to high and again have four speeds in high. A 8 gears... BUT it would be a little complicated....I would need a floor shifter between the seats. And complex set up to INSURE I never back up in overdrive, that will rip the overdrive's gears out. And shifting the OD in and out of OD. The new 6 and 8 speeds give all of that, super low first and second gears at 4.03 and 2.36 for the 6 speeds 6R80, and 4.56 & 2.97 for the 8L90s Both lower gears are BELOW the stock Fords first gear ratio of 2.48 and GMs 4l60E's 2.48 as well. The 6 speed second gear is near the 4's first gear, but the 8 speed both first and second are lower that the 4 speed's first gear. So there is no need for an under drive... PLUS these are fully controlled automatics, insuring smooth up shifting and down shifting. And as I am NOT building a high HP over revving hot rod but a stock motor in the Crown Vic and a Chevy 383 built for LOW RPMs for the Van, totally built to operate around the 2000 RPM range both the motor and drive train will be a match. i figure the 383 should be pulling around 250/300FP of toque at that speed which should be great for cruising. I have read everywhere that you want your engine to be running near its torque peek for best power and MPG. So I plan on using a used trans mission, which for the 6R80 can be had now for around $500.00 and the 8L90s running from $700.00 to $1200.00. Which leaves the problem of controlling them. One idea is to run dual PCMs, the factory PCM to operate the motor and a Factory PCM for the 6R80, and the same for the 8L90. OR an aftermarket controller which adds about $1000.00 to the costs. So for the Crown Vic $500.00 for the 6R80 plus say $100.00 for a factory PCM, or $1000.00 for AM Controller so $600.00 to $1500.00 for the Vic. And the Van, $800.00 for 8L90, and $100.00 for GM PCM, or $1000.00 so from $900.00 to $1800.00. I feel and think these will work very well, and not only majorly improve each vehicle's drive-ability with all the extra gears during acceleration plus being to down shift a closer lower gear in traffic a function limited with only four gears. AND with the tall rear end gears using the top overdrive gears be running both engines below 2000RPMs and at 80MPH..with I think will give me great MPG, even before I do some tweaking to improve MPG. Like Highway modes, running 16.4 lean at cruse. Rich |
Quote:
IN each case the first gears of the 6 & 8 speeds are running higher RPMs at 10MPH that the stock transmissions with the stock rear end gears. So the lower first gears are making MORE Power even with a 2.26 or a 2.47 than with the stock 3.27 gears. So the numbers show a slightly higher performance off the line than with the stock transmissions with stock rear ends. And at this time I am very happy with each vehicle's power off line and driving. This will just improve it. I end up with more gears up to cruse and a very high final gearing. From 1600RPMs to 2000 RPMs with both vehicle's. Rich |
I think you'll be fine. The c7 base model cruises 70 at 1260 rpm.
|
Quote:
And what are we talking about, make model and year, and if possible transmission and rear end gearing, please. Rich |
Quote:
EDIT: I believe I recall seeing the C7 as being able to break 40mpg from the factory (at the right speed) with a 6.2L pushrod V8. |
Quote:
I saw that about the C7 Corvette and it was more validation of my nearly 20 year old ideas. Now to find a gear set in the ranges I am looking for. Rich |
Quote:
Corvette 7th gen 14-17? Triple over drive. Version 1 7th: 0.50 Version 2 7th: 0.42 Interestingly they have pretty much used the same chassis and drivetrain since 1997. vvt and some changes, but besides the 0.42 ratio change a lot of it is extremely similar. In my mind the C7 is the C5 version 3. |
I did some pretty extensive research on high-geared GM rear ends when I was working on my wagon. At one point, my wagon had a 2.14 rear, .73 overdrive (NV3500 transmission) and the factory 350 motor. It would do 55 MPH at just under 1000 RPM. At the time, I was using a heavy, 4.3 V6 flywheel, which helped with low RPM torque, but yes--the engine pulled that speed/RPM just fine. In fact, I would often cruise at 45 MPH and ~800 RPM.
The highest ratio that is available for the 8.5" 10-bolt in your G20 is 2.41. The 7.5" 10-bolt (which is what I put into my wagon) was available with 2.29 and 2.14 ratios, but that might not be heavy duty enough for your van, depending on how much you haul. (Astro vans had that rear, though, so they're tougher than you think. I don't know if an Astro van would swap into your G20 or not. They have the same wheel bolt pattern, but the differential is off-center and it may be a bit narrower.) The only other option is a fairly rare 8.75" GM rear, with 12 bolts on the ring gear and 10 bolts on the cover, that came in some cars in the late 70's and early 80's. There was a 2.28 gearset for it, but that gearset only came in Cadillacs from 1977-1979. You could weld spring mounts onto one of those Cadillac rears and bolt it into your van, as it has the same wheel bolt pattern (5x5"), but it would be narrower than your factory rear and the axle shafts and outer bearings would be smaller/lighter duty. If you wanted a rear that was roughly the same width and the same strength (same shafts and outer bearings) as the factory rear in your van, you would need to find one of these 8.75" rears from a late 70's/early 80's B-body station wagon and swap in the 2.28" gearset from a 77-79 Cadillac. I seriously considered doing just that with my wagon, before I fully embraced P&G with EOC and gave up on extremely high gearing. I hope this helps! Let me know if you have other questions about high-geared GM rears. Unfortunately I know very little about Ford rear ends. :D -Funkhoss |
Quote:
Case in point: The problems with going to the super tall gears. There just is too much cost and problems with them. I was told by IWE read ends only, that for the Ford, my rear end is a 8.8 carrier with 28 Splines axles. To get to a 2.41 gear set I have to convert the rear end to an 8.5. Of which they never made a posi carrier for. So I have to do some major mods to perhaps get it to fit and then worry if I got it right. AND this set will cost around $500.00+ just for the parts and I still have to make it work. That some machining or slims might be needed etc. For the Chevy, nearly same deal, I cannot just bolt the tall gears in, again I have to replace the carrier, and as it seems GM is no longer supplying clutches for their posi I am stuck with used or hope to find some NOS parts. And again the cost just to buy the parts to do all of this is also around $500.to $600.00 And I should do a complete rebuild so add another $300.00+. I was working from the idea of around $200.00 for just the gears, all this extra costs make it less a good deal. Your information may be an answer. The Chevy rear ends are prone to howling, so far every van I have had howled so it seems to be a design flaw, so I am considering swapping it a different rear end, but need one better made and able or even comes with those gears… and another concern will be finding one that is wide enough to fit the van. Perhaps finding one that the axle tubes can be swapped?? Or Dodge or Ford...like the Ford 9inch...? So I am going back to my old plan. I am fairly happy with both cars as they are, the Ford is a real jackrabbit jumper off the line and the normal shift points work great under light to moderate power. The only lack is in a power down shift, which can be a little off, either too low or too tall, lugging a little or over revving, but the main thing I need is a second over drive 5th gear. Adding the old B&W Overdrive looks so very good now. And the same can be said for the Van. The best thing of all worlds would be a rear end stronger with less prone to howling with the super gears and perhaps convertible from drum to disk brakes. Otherwise the Borg Warner OD gives me the deep drop in RPMs at cruse I think I need and if it does not work out I am only out a few hundred of dollars not thousands. But considering the wright and large front end I truly think a 6 or 8 speed auto would work best in it. I would very much like to talk with you more. Thanks for your input and help. Rich |
I have read your efforts with a large GM car.
I gather a lot from what you have done. I found it very interesting about how you ended up keeping the 4.10 rear end gears... Reading between the lines I figure your apox. 50MPG was done by a lot of engine off coasting....as you made a bunch of changes to allow that. My clams of 35MPG in a 2000 Mercury Grand Marques was made with the engine fully engaged at all times. Driving on cruse control at 65MPH. I plan on doing that with my Van. It just is too much bother and even technically illegal within most states as have lost of control of your car. Other than that I find the lack of engine changes interesting, this is where I am putting major design changes first: I have searched a dozen times for what I plan on building. I cannot find any one is doing what I am going for: A low rpm 383. My plan is for this motor to spend most of its life running at 1700 to 2200 RPMs ranges and operate from 500 to 4000. Everyone builds a Hot Rod version. i find it interesting that the Chevy 400 and the Olds 403 both had such torque curves, peeking at 2000RPMs. I am trying to build as much torque as possible using a mild the 90 Caddy Cam, and plan on advancing it 4 degrees. I am much more interested in LOW RPM Torque than house power, Torque is better at low RPMs than HP which is made at higher gas using RPMs. I have read in a number of books that for best highway performance and mileage you want everything geared to be running at as near the torque peek and your cruising speed, + or – 10 to 20%. So if my engine’s peek is 2000 RPMS I want my cruse speed to be within 200 to 400 of that RPM which on the low end would be from 1600 to 1800 and on the high end be 2200 to 2400. Every V8 I have tested gets it best MPG running under 2000 RPMs. The combo I want is: a 400 crank machined for a 350. Stock 400 rods so I can keep my KB “D” shaped pistons. I am aware of the side loading on the bore, but as I do not plan on running over 5000 max, this is not a major problem. (This WAS custom 350, doing the 383 was too costly at the time.) Cam will be a 1990 Caaddy Chevy stock cam which stock torque peek is 2000 to 2200. Lifters are stock 350 roller lifter set up. Heads are 1970 early swirl port 192s, and other that major cleanup and 3 angled seats, springs tested and Perfect Circle Street Running (Oiling) valve seals, all rest left stock. I only plan of light grinding to ports to gasket match. I will also run stock ratio roller tip rocker arms to lower the scuffing of the valves in the guilds. I plan on feeding this with a 85 to 90s Camaro/Corvette TPI running MAF controls. I plan on having the stock Highway Mode turned on until I can get a special add on board to the PCM which allow greater tuning of both stock type tuning and fine tuning of the lean burn cruse settings, I will be able to super tune all operating systems. Everything is built counter wise to common Hot Rodding standards. Stock heads, no opening the ports, no polishing them, (Everything I have read says the textured surfaces of stock ports HELP low RPM power, polished and opened (larger) ports are for HIGH RPM air flow and HARM lower RPM power) same for the heads. Low RPM cam that will not shift to higher RPM power curves, (the way most cams make more power, move the power curve up the RPM range) Lastly as the Van has 3:43 rear end gears which helps move it off the line, but also runs in higher RPMs as highway speeds, I am thinking that a second overdrive added to a stock 4 speed auto with a OD gear can work and in fact greatly increase a stock car/van’s MPG, just by lowing the cruse RPMS from around 2600 RPMs to 1700 RPMs. This seems to be the best of all worlds, stock gearing until the added Over Drive is engaged and the advantage of super highway gearing. Plus under some conditions like upgrades I might find the act of being able to “Gear Spiting” as in using say the vans third gear and switching in the second over drive to get a good RPM about ˝ of third and fourth. As I have a couple of 50s B7W overdrives these will most likely only cost from a couple of hundreds to $500.00 low enough that there is a chance I will be able to pay off the cost in a couple of years thanks to the savings in fuel costs. I did a lot of research and testing into MPG. I tried HHO, special tuners called interrupt between the PCM and its sensors trying to fool the car to use less fuel. And a few other odd MPG devices. The only thing I found that worked on my 2000 Mercury GM was leaning the A/F ratio to 16:1, on that car on the highway I was able to get 35MPG @ 65MPH, this was fully engaged motor running on cruse control full time. But as I could not make the switch to a lean burn and back to normal it had a major loss of power. It was not a thing I could use daily. The 80s Camaros TPI cars had such a set up. It was called at that time a Lean Burn Cruse setting, now it is called Highway Mode, what is did/does, was/is under light load, light throttle it automatically leaned the A/F mix, and with nearly any change in load and/or throttle smoothly switch out of Highway Mode to normal A/F mixes giving back full power. This mode took a 20/25 MPG car to 30/35 MPG, just that little switch hidden inside the PCM. And I did NOT make this up, I first learned about this on a site called Third Gen.org decades ago, here is a fast search showing some data about tuning highway mode as proof: https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-...servation.html And a cure for NOX with this mode is to increase the EGR. This cools the chamber, lowing the NOX, allows for burning left over fuel normally take care by the Cats, displaces some of the incoming charge, and can help cut pumping loses by forcing the throttle to be opened more lowing the drag of engine vacuum. There is also recover of engine oil vapors and gas tank gas vapors. Now we come to the big questions. Will all of this work?? I will find out this spring. Rich Quote:
|
[Preliminary sidebar: I typed my response in a hurry last night, and didn't stop to proofread. I only noticed this morning how many typos there were in what I wrote. :eek: They're fixed now. Quite embarrassing...]
Here are my answers to your questions, and some additional ideas. Quote:
Quote:
-$150--GM 7.5" Caprice rear with only 99,000 miles -$100--2.14 gears and carrier, in good condition -$100--Bearing/installation kit -$150--Labor for setting up the gears One excellent resource, if you haven't heard of it, is car-part.com. It's a search engine for basically every junkyard in the country. If you know what you're looking for, you can find very specific parts, often for pretty low prices. Complete rear ends with relatively low miles can be had for $150-$300, if you're willing to call around to find them. Quote:
Here's some screenshots of a search on car-part.com for one of these rears in late 70's/early 80's B-body wagons (I've included a shot of each step, and what you'll need to select). This rear should be about the same width as the one in your van, with the equivalent axle shafts and bearings, and equivalent brakes. In theory, all you would need to do if you bought one is cut off the wagon brackets, weld on spring mounts, and bolt it in your van. As you can see, there are several available with 2.56 gears, and at least one with 2.41 gears. Some also state that they have a posi. Some others don't specify either way, and for them you would need to call the yard to confirm. (None of these would have the 2.28 gearset, though, as those only came in Cadillacs. For that ratio, you'd need to buy those gears separately have have them installed in one of these rears.) https://i.imgur.com/ZlfnHrH.jpg https://i.imgur.com/oluldBh.jpg https://i.imgur.com/0x4W1Go.jpg https://i.imgur.com/twaLfJc.jpg Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I also disagree that it's a bother. It's become so habitual and instinctive for me that I don't even think about it anymore. I just drive. I'd also point out that the time and money that I put into configuring my cars for safe, effective EOC is only a small fraction of the time and money that your hypothetical engine build will require. But, to each his own... If you would rather focus on lean, low RPM cruise, I can respect that. I'd just ask that the respect go both ways. ;) Quote:
Quote:
Another way to achieve the same effect is to have a high-geared rear end, and add additional lower gears--like a granny-gear manual, or a range box from a transfer case mounted behind the transmission. If you are not planning to tow with your van, though, an automatic transmission with any of the highest ratio rear-end gearsets that GM offered (2.14 through 2.41) will still give you plenty of first gear, even fully loaded. You'd only need a lower first gear if you wanted to start on a hill with a trailer. I've learned this by experience. :D Quote:
I question, though, whether the mechanical engine modifications you propose are necessary, or will offer any significant gains over a stock motor in good condition. GM optimized their stock truck/van/large car engines for low RPM torque from the factory already. You might just end up throwing a lot of time and parts at this engine, only to find that the MPG results you get aren't really much better than stock. If you want more power than stock, that's different...but a stock small-block Chevy in good shape already has plenty of torque for the majority of the vehicles it came in (in my opinion). Just some thoughts... -Funkhoss |
Quote:
My van gets 14MPG at any speed and seemly up hill and down hill. It is a TBI POS, a standard carb intake with a pair of injectors. A tune port intake was created to make a 305 feel and drive like a 350, on a 350 it could make it feel like a 400, on a 383/400..well I am hoping for something like a 450/500. Really. I talking torque. But now a days everyone want HP...at the standard cost in gas mileage. I really think I have spotted a real answer that most everyone has missed, a low RPM Engine fed by an intake MADE to make low rpm torque controlled by a highly tuned PCM running though a 6 or 8 speed transmission with super low 1st and 2nd gear and double over drives so in top gear the engine is running low rpms and pulling my van though super tall rear end gears. IF I can get 20/25 I will be very happy, above that I will dance a jig.... And I have a few other tricks to throw at it. More EGR, and reclaiming and feeding gas vapor from the vapor recovery system and oil vapor from the engine. Who know what I might get. Rich I really need a photo host to share pictures, wish the site hosed pictures like most. My van is a special model, it is aerodynamic...it does NOT get pushed around at 75/85 MPG passing or being passed by big rigs...their bow wake does not hit the van like all the other vans...Wish I could post picture here. |
Well it is sometime very frustrating how much we can find on the internet and what we cannot find.
Case in point; Rear axle widths. I am looking into a swap for a 93 Chevy van. I can not find how wide the rear axle is. I am looking into using a 1970 to 1990 Chevy Caprice rear end, and need to know how wide that one is too. Thanks. Rich |
I have to say to funkhoss: 1000 Thanks for your fantastic help.
I have began the hunt for one of the suggested rear ends. A good amount of choices….now to find a needle in a hay stack…I lean towards the 8.75 rear end for it being stronger than the 8.5 and in the hope to find a 2.41 with Possi. There are only about 100 of RPMs between the 2.21 and a 2.41, and the 2.41 is much easier to find. This with a 6L80e will make my van a real great powered set up. More or less a complete updating of the whole drive line. A TPI 383 with a 6 speed automatic to a stronger 8.75 rear end with 2.41 gears. At last this set up is within my grasp... Rich Question: I was told I would have to replace the carrier to get a 2.41 gear set into my 8.5 rear end. Is that correct? Quote:
|
Quote:
https://www.impalassforum.com/thread...widths.237620/ Using that as a starting point, you can then use a parts website like rockauto.com to compare the length of axleshafts to determine the overall width of other assemblies, too. It turns out that van rear ends (like yours) are wider than C10 pickup rear ends of the same generation. This was confirmed on the part interchange guides as well. I had assumed that they would be the same as pickup rear ends, but evidently they aren't. Based on the information above, here are the approximate widths, from wheel mounting surface to wheel mounting surface, of the rear ends in question: 1977-1996 B/D body sedan: 61.7" 1977-1996 B body wagon: 64.7" 1981-1987 C10 truck: 63.7" G10/20 van: 67.8" So, you could run a B-body wagon rear end, but if you wanted to keep the same track width you'd need to use 1.5" spacers. Quote:
-Funkhoss |
WOW you really are the rear end whisper.
I searched a number of times on the internet trying to find the correct words to find that information. Again a 1000 Thanks. I love this van...like my 03 Crown Vic after a number of other cars, I worked out the best of all of them. If you would like to see what all my fuss is about here is a few links: Here is my main personal face book page: Send me a friend request so you can check all of this out. https://www.facebook.com/richardacoyle7 First this insane van: There are an number of improvements that are not shown. Larger anti-sway bars, dual batteries under the floor behind the drivers door, a ceiling mounted A/C, converted to Hydro-boost brake system. https://www.facebook.com/richardacoy...0269632&type=3 https://www.facebook.com/richardacoy...7783599&type=3 https://www.facebook.com/richardacoy...0309951&type=3 On the Fords here is the Mercury before the engine failure. I am moving and improving on all these details to its replacement a 03 Crown Vic P71 ex-cop car. https://www.facebook.com/richardacoy...4656793&type=3 At the same time you can see what my day job has been. Rich Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
-Funkhoss |
OMG this is so very complex...The local junk yards have NO codes, other that popping the rear covers off and counting teeth and doing the math...they are totally lost, interchange only.
So once again any chance you might have to codes for to read what the insides of a rear end is? Rich Quote:
|
Nope--those tags are often missing, anyway. They'll have to count teeth, or look for teeth number stampings on the gears.
You'll need to verify too, of course, that it's the rare 8.75" 10/12 bolt hybrid, and not a standard 10-bolt. -Funkhoss |
Thanks again.
Rich PS Some later model rear ends stamped such numbers into the axle, but I do remember those tags on a nut... |
Quote:
And I came to a deeper question, what parts like these do you still have and are you willing to part with any? I have been sitting on as many hay stacks I can but so far found no needles. Rich |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-Funkhoss |
Quote:
Thanks. Rich |
Quote:
|
So after much searching, I found finding such a read end or even the parts impossible.
Plus I also was told that as no one makes gears for such a set up I would be stuck running some 50 year old ring and pinion carrier and perhaps even most of the rest of a rear end. And finding a possi unit even harder to find. SO with all the trouble and time to try to salvage such an old rear end I now will now install an devoiced Borg Warner 1962 Overdrive from the Three Speed W/OD unit and add it to the tail end of my stock 4L60 transmission, and then rebuild my stock van’s rear end with a final set of new of near new gears and a possi carrier, and of course new bearings. This over drive will than give me a major drop in RPMs, my numbers show that with just adding it will drop my RPMs to around 1800 at 85MPH… |
Ok im at a loss here.... except for the expense, there are blank 3rd member kits offered for just about anything ever manufactured and probably ratios as well. I have even seen quick change diffs as a kit. Worse case is buying and welding the correct brackets.
|
My 93 Chevy Van is a special case, it turns out it has the widest rear end in such a van, even the second widest rear end out or a 70 GM Largest station wagons is about 2to 3 inches short. And the newer 96 van rear ends are shorter.
Plus they have not made gears in the 2:0 to 2:5 ratios sense the 70s for GM rear ends, nor the carriers for those gears. To get the rear end in the 2.24 or even 2.43 the only way was to find a 40 to 50year old wagon rear end. AND to get a possi same thing…and then to find a rebuilding kit for that possi even harder. The estimated cost IF I can find such a rear end is in the range of $1000.00 to $2000.00 to rebuild it and then to modified the spring mounts. AS I have held onto two of the old 3speed w/od transmissions, my only costs will be to have a coupler to connect the output shaft of the 4L60 to the input shaft of the OD, a special new drive shaft, and to rig up a VSS sensor system so the truck reads it speed from the back end of the OD unit. I figure the cost to mount the OD is around $400.00 to $700.00. This will give me a full 5 speed. And IF I can find the use of the gear splitting of a second OD I get 8 forward gears. I only consider that a help when claiming long hills by being able to select the best gear for load, power and RPMS. |
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned.
**Disclaimer** I am not very mechanically inclined and maybe this isn't a possibility anyhow. I saw in an earlier post that the G20 was offered with a 2.41 and the Astro may have been offered with both a 2.29 and 2.14 although possibly offset. If the axle shafts are the same diameter between the G20 and the Astro could you have a custom rear made using the shafts from your van and the "pumpkin from an Astro? It would give the taller gearing you want and the dimensions/spacing/etc of the stock set-up. Again I'm not all that mechanical so I have no clue how this may affect the driveshaft arrangement or the load capacity. I don't know much about the GM transmissions (and it may have been mentioned before) but why the automatic? A manual would be lighter and give you control over the gearing and shift points. I have always had better mileage with a manual trans as opposed to an automatic. It would also give you the opportunity to coast at idle rpms in neutral (not good for the automatic) and with a heavy flywheel it would probably coast farther than with a stock weighted one if left in gear. A Tremec TR-6070 could get you all the way down to a 0.45 top gear and save about 100 lbs. |
Please recheck that post for a G20 with a 2:41, I think you read a 3:41 or 43 which is what my Van's rear end is.
I believe the Astro uses a smaller lighter rear end, even the G20 rear end is nearlt too light. As for a automatic I used to drive cross country to conventions and would run into cities at bad times and working clutch though such is too painful for me to do. Also there are a few advantages to a auto. Rich |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com