2.73:1
Whats your gear ratio?
- Thread starter Chris142
- Start date
- Status
Cruze is 3.87:1
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: NateDN10
Originally Posted By: NateDN10
3.84 for the Cobalt
4.44 for the Outback?
That 4.44 seems pretty high (numerically) to me. Engine revs in OD are about the same as the Cobalt - around 2500 @ 65mph.
I looked back at this and with the differences in wheel diameter (195/60/R15 for the Cobalt vs. 225/55/R17 for the Outback) it works out to be very close.
A discussion about gear ratios cannot include engine revs at speed without also including the transmission ratios. For example, my two Honda products have pretty short final drive gearing, but have pretty tall 5th gears in the transaxles (close to 0.56:1 in both). So engine speeds at higher road speeds are reasonable.
The Honda is 2,100 rpm at 70 mph.
The Acura is 1,900 rpm at 70 mph.
Cruze A/T is ~2650RPM at 70
Originally Posted By: NateDN10
Originally Posted By: NateDN10
3.84 for the Cobalt
4.44 for the Outback?
That 4.44 seems pretty high (numerically) to me. Engine revs in OD are about the same as the Cobalt - around 2500 @ 65mph.
I looked back at this and with the differences in wheel diameter (195/60/R15 for the Cobalt vs. 225/55/R17 for the Outback) it works out to be very close.
A discussion about gear ratios cannot include engine revs at speed without also including the transmission ratios. For example, my two Honda products have pretty short final drive gearing, but have pretty tall 5th gears in the transaxles (close to 0.56:1 in both). So engine speeds at higher road speeds are reasonable.
The Honda is 2,100 rpm at 70 mph.
The Acura is 1,900 rpm at 70 mph.
Cruze A/T is ~2650RPM at 70
3.06 in the SRT8. Virtually every truck I own is 3.73! Got a couple Silverados with 3.42 as well.
Now let's see your first gear overall ratios!
Now let's see your first gear overall ratios!
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
A discussion about gear ratios cannot include engine revs at speed without also including the transmission ratios. For example, my two Honda products have pretty short final drive gearing, but have pretty tall 5th gears in the transaxles (close to 0.56:1 in both). So engine speeds at higher road speeds are reasonable.
The Honda is 2,100 rpm at 70 mph.
The Acura is 1,900 rpm at 70 mph.
They are very close 5th in the Cobalt is 0.69; 4th in the Outback is 0.697.
Overall, then:
Cobalt: 2206 engine revs/mi.
Outback: 2334 engine revs/mi.
A discussion about gear ratios cannot include engine revs at speed without also including the transmission ratios. For example, my two Honda products have pretty short final drive gearing, but have pretty tall 5th gears in the transaxles (close to 0.56:1 in both). So engine speeds at higher road speeds are reasonable.
The Honda is 2,100 rpm at 70 mph.
The Acura is 1,900 rpm at 70 mph.
They are very close 5th in the Cobalt is 0.69; 4th in the Outback is 0.697.
Overall, then:
Cobalt: 2206 engine revs/mi.
Outback: 2334 engine revs/mi.
Last edited:
4.636 on the Pathfinder.
The above seems like a more useful comparison than just final drive ratio.
Here's how I calculated it.
First: Figure your tire circumference.
Second: Convert that circumference to fractions of a mile. One mile is 63360 inches.
Then your engine revs per mile is:
(final drive ratio) * (transmission ratio) * 1 / (tire circumference in miles)
Here's how I calculated it.
First: Figure your tire circumference.
Second: Convert that circumference to fractions of a mile. One mile is 63360 inches.
Then your engine revs per mile is:
(final drive ratio) * (transmission ratio) * 1 / (tire circumference in miles)
let's see if I did this right... 3.06 axle ratio times .83 to 1 top gear ratio with a 275/35/20 tire equals
DING! 1867 revs per mile. Do I get a diploma or something?
DING! 1867 revs per mile. Do I get a diploma or something?
dodge dakota o.e.m. 3.55, mpg 9-10 in town only. i drive hard. changed to 4.10. in town went to 12-13 mpg. mostly cause the trans shifting moved at a lower speed. i might have done the same just by changing the shift cable. have NOT been on high way.
Originally Posted By: morris
dodge dakota o.e.m. 3.55, mpg 9-10 in town only. i drive hard. changed to 4.10. in town went to 12-13 mpg. mostly cause the trans shifting moved at a lower speed. i might have done the same just by changing the shift cable. have NOT been on high way.
Mileage going up when going to a higher numerical gear ratio usually means someone forgot to also change the speedometer/odometer calibration. If you just change the axle, the odometer "thinks" you're driving further and faster than you really are, and the calculated mileage goes up because the engine is producing less torque to achieve the indicated (incorrect) speed and distance.
dodge dakota o.e.m. 3.55, mpg 9-10 in town only. i drive hard. changed to 4.10. in town went to 12-13 mpg. mostly cause the trans shifting moved at a lower speed. i might have done the same just by changing the shift cable. have NOT been on high way.
Mileage going up when going to a higher numerical gear ratio usually means someone forgot to also change the speedometer/odometer calibration.
If you just change the axle, the odometer "thinks" you're driving further and faster than you really are, and the calculated mileage goes up because the engine is producing less torque to achieve the indicated (incorrect) speed and distance.The car came with 3.42s. I changed them out for 4.10s at ~5K miles.
At 110K miles I went to 3.73s, which curiously enough gives me the same effective overall ratios as a stock ratio C5 Z06 (which had a closer ratio 'M12' T56 than the f bodies, combined with a 3.42 axle ratio).
At 110K miles I went to 3.73s, which curiously enough gives me the same effective overall ratios as a stock ratio C5 Z06 (which had a closer ratio 'M12' T56 than the f bodies, combined with a 3.42 axle ratio).
2011 Golf: 3.78
2005 Neon SRT4
GEAR RATIO
1st 3.65
2nd 2.05
3rd 1.37
4th 0.97
5th 0.76
Reverse 3.47
Final Drive Ratio 3.53
2003 Yamaha YZF-R6 / redline is 15,500 rpm's / 180/55ZR17 tire.
GEAR RATIO
1st 2.846
2nd 1.947
3rd 1.556
4th 1.333
5th 1.190
6th 1.083
GEAR RATIO
1st 3.65
2nd 2.05
3rd 1.37
4th 0.97
5th 0.76
Reverse 3.47
Final Drive Ratio 3.53
2003 Yamaha YZF-R6 / redline is 15,500 rpm's / 180/55ZR17 tire.
GEAR RATIO
1st 2.846
2nd 1.947
3rd 1.556
4th 1.333
5th 1.190
6th 1.083
Last edited:
Honda S2000 has very short gear ratio, 6th gear is 4300-4400 RPM at 80 MPH.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
let's see if I did this right... 3.06 axle ratio times .83 to 1 top gear ratio with a 275/35/20 tire equals
DING! 1867 revs per mile. Do I get a diploma or something?
3.15 axle ratio times .83 to 1 top gear ratio with 275/35/18 tire equals 2,060 revs per mile for my beast.
1st gear: 4.23
2nd gear: 2.53
3rd gear: 1.67
4th gear: 1.23
5th gear: 1.00
6th gear: 0.83
2,700RPM at 80Mph in 6th.
let's see if I did this right... 3.06 axle ratio times .83 to 1 top gear ratio with a 275/35/20 tire equals
DING! 1867 revs per mile. Do I get a diploma or something?
3.15 axle ratio times .83 to 1 top gear ratio with 275/35/18 tire equals 2,060 revs per mile for my beast.
1st gear: 4.23
2nd gear: 2.53
3rd gear: 1.67
4th gear: 1.23
5th gear: 1.00
6th gear: 0.83
2,700RPM at 80Mph in 6th.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
Trans Am is a 3.42
Silverado is a 4.10
Equniox is a 2.70
The Buick is interesting to me.
First Gear Ratio 2.92
Second Gear Ratio 1.57
Third Gear Ratio 1.00
Fourth Gear Ratio 0.71
Reverse Ratio 2.39
Final 2.93
Silverado is a 4.10
Equniox is a 2.70
The Buick is interesting to me.
First Gear Ratio 2.92
Second Gear Ratio 1.57
Third Gear Ratio 1.00
Fourth Gear Ratio 0.71
Reverse Ratio 2.39
Final 2.93
Last edited:
Final drives for our cars:
Fit: 4.56
Cruze: 3.83
Fit: 4.56
Cruze: 3.83
E-150 3.55 LSD I wish it was a 3.73 LSD
Aerostar 3.73
Liberty 3.73
Aerostar 3.73
Liberty 3.73
My current Ranger and my previous Ranger both came with 3.73 gears. It seems just right for the 3.0 V6, but 4.10 might have been better for the 2.5L I4.
My Explorer had 3.27s unfortunately. It had good highway fuel economy for a 4.0 V6 4x4, but it was a slug.
My Explorer had 3.27s unfortunately. It had good highway fuel economy for a 4.0 V6 4x4, but it was a slug.
- Status
