4.10 gears...not what I expected.

[Schrade]

I'm gonna' go the OTHER way here, after I get the pipes hung - 3.45 -> 3.07, since I've lost some top end with the 4L60e. Tach is just a little high @ 70, and it will add up to less wear on longer trips, and less fuel to boot.

I think that 3.07 is my only option here.

I found it interesting to learn that the original track car had a 3.07 installed...

[KILLSHOTS]

Originally Posted by LGAFF

porting and exhaust are what I would always go after first....

porting 30-40hp
Exhaust 15-20hp
You could even run the stock exhaust if on a budget, put in an X-pipe and some decent mufflers....

$1000-1200 for 45-60hp and more RPM range

Headers would be next

My exhaust is wide open after the cats. Headers coming soon.

[Locobob]

Originally Posted by KILLSHOTS

Marc says, "18% more torque to the wheels. All of the time!" Of course, gears don't change flywheel HP but gears, by definition, multiply torque and more gear is supposed to provide more torque at the end of the equation. Surprisingly, my car is not even any more tail-happy than before. Extremely disappointing for what's talked about as the "best upgrade ever."

Gear to gear at any rpm yes more torque with the 4.10's but.... speed in gears is now different and at certain vehicle speeds the 3.45 car is going to be in a lower gear than the 4.10 car therefore the 3.45 will effectively have more torque in certain speed ranges. Numerically taller gears will not make every car faster in every circumstance, gears should be chosen based on the cars power output, traction, intended purpose and driving style.

[PhillipsLT5]

Would of been nice to see before/after dyno sheets
I still think you made a good move and only will compliment the rest of your future mods
You should now be at aprox 2200RPM @ 75MPH

[Dynomite]

Originally Posted by KILLSHOTS

Oh no, don't get me wrong: I do NOT doubt Marc. I fully understand the physics of his claim and I know it to be true. My issue is with the EFFECT of the "upgrade". So much was made of it by many that I think I just expected too much. However, going by just the numbers, I think you can understand why I expected a pretty drastic difference. I figured my car (Marc's chip, open exhaust) with stock gears was getting roughly 340 lb/ft of torque to the rear wheels at peak. Multiply that 1.18 and I'm over 400 lb/ft at peak. On paper, that is a DRASTIC difference in twist and I expected a big SOTP effect that I did not realize.

I understand the expectation given all the talk. But for those that do not understand the physics/math I thought a good time to confuse them more

Like LGAFF suggests.....if you want real seat of the pants feel of accomplishment.....ADD HORSEPOWER which is pretty easy on the LT5

The 410s do let you get 6th gear into play more often.

[WARP TEN]

I think it is all just a personal thing. I loved getting my 4:10s on my 93 early in its life with me. I felt it really improved my normal around town driving and cruising on the highway. Gears were also one of the first mods I did when I got my 95. To me the car feels quicker. Subjective I realize. I like the usefulness of sixth gear now. It does make the tires spin more but new tires recently helped a lot with that. WARP TEN ran a 12.4/116 at BG this week (admittedly with Marc H driving) and he wasn't power shifting. Overall I am happy with the mod; sorry you don't like them that much. Lots of folks are perfectly happy with stock gears but I am glad I switched. --Bob

[mike100]

If you got 340 rwtq on a dyno in 4th gear you will still get 340rwtq in 4th gear, but at a different speed (lower). There is a trade off- obviously free power isn't created, it is just shifted around by moving the torque curve left or right with respect to rpm, speed, time etc.

[KILLSHOTS]

Originally Posted by mike100

If you got 340 rwtq on a dyno in 4th gear you will still get 340rwtq in 4th gear, but at a different speed (lower). There is a trade off- obviously free power isn't created, it is just shifted around by moving the torque curve left or right with respect to rpm, speed, time etc.

But how does that square with having "18% more torque to the rear wheels at all engine rpm?" That statement tells me that if I was putting down 340 lb/ft at 4800 rpm with stock gears, then I'm now putting down 401.2 lb/ft at 4800 rpm. Am I oversimplifying or misunderstanding the statement?

[Dynomite]

Originally Posted by KILLSHOTS

But how does that square with having "18% more torque to the rear wheels at all engine rpm?" That statement tells me that if I was putting down 340 lb/ft at 4800 rpm with stock gears, then I'm now putting down 401.2 lb/ft at 4800 rpm. Am I oversimplifying or misunderstanding the statement?

You traded wheel spin for wheel torque........same horsepower. Your wheel spin dropped 18%...the guy you were racing just out ran you
18% more torque to the rear wheels at all engine rpm is a true statement. The wheel spin drop at all engine rpm was not mentioned

[Schrade]

Just hung up with Psychic Hotline. They said heated discussion on the way yup...



This statement needs quantification, for starters...

"18% more torque to the rear wheels at all engine rpm?"

And I think a more judicious use of the term "multiply torque" is in order.