• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

3:73's vs 4:10's.......documented

  • Thread starter Thread starter drakesdad
  • Start date Start date Jan 12, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

drakesdad

Member
Jul 29, 2005
961
0
16
Oregon OHIO
Jan 13, 2007
#21
  • Jan 13, 2007
  • #21
I know what your saying Paul.......I'll find out in the spring......I know what it runs pretty consistent now and the only two changes I will make before running it in April will be the 4:10's and the UD pulleys I got from Don........then we will go into FI........I want to break the 12's with the AODE NA....


I did have 3:27's..............wouldn't even spin off the line .....

Car is not a DD anyway........and with the OD button 3:73's don't phase me.........

I've only driven it 1 1/2 hours away since the HCI.....don't think it will ever be the vacation car.........you guys know what I mean.......lol
 
M

MustangGT95

New Member
Jul 29, 2003
407
1
0
Jan 13, 2007
#22
  • Jan 13, 2007
  • #22
Before I cammed mine it would spin like crazy. Now it doesn't. But it still spins some. Can't believe you guys aren't spinning any. My car runs well above 2500 but down low I have nothing. I need those 4.10's soon.
 

DDSTANG94

New Member
Dec 9, 2006
465
2
0
FRASER, MICHIGAN
Jan 14, 2007
#23
  • Jan 14, 2007
  • #23
The best all around performance gear is the 3.73. Gas mileage isn't really affected, in fact we've had customers report better gas mileage when going to this gear from a 2.73 or 3.08. The 3.73 gives an excellent increase in acceleration and top speed isn't decreased because you are able to wind out overdrive further. With a 3.73 your rpm in 5th gear at 60 mph will only be 2005, not at all what you would call "too high". As we said, your top speed will not decrease when putting lower (numerically higher) gears in a car with overdrive. You will simply wind out 5th gear further than you could with the higher gears (numerically lower).

The 3.55 is also a good choice for a daily driver but does not offer the acceleration potential of a 3.73. With a 3.55 your rpm in 5th gear at 60 mph should be right around 1908. To sum it up, for a 5 speed car we feel the 3.73 is the best all around performance choice but either gear will make your car feel 1000 lbs. lighter and a whole lot quicker.

Now, if your pony car has the 4 speed AOD it's a whole different ball game. The AOD is not the most responsive transmission Ford has ever made and it needs all the help it can get. For the AOD, 3.55's are simply not enough. 3.73's are a good choice for automatic cars and again, they don't hurt gas mileage very much and the car remains as streetable as it was from the factory, only it accelerates much better. 4.10's are also a good choice for automatic cars, and we prefer them. A 4.10 may sound extremely steep, but because the AOD's 1st gear is so high (numerically low) and 4th gear (overdrive) is steeper than the T-5 it's a very good choice for the driver interested in making their car perform better.

As for the 4.10 in a stick car, we really don't recommend them for stock engines, but if you've had other work done like an intake and heads they're an excellent choice. At 60 mph in 5th gear 4.10's will bring cruising rpm up to 2204. 2204 rpm still isn't bad on the expressway but in the city you'll be doing a lot of shifting, but if that's not a problem, 4.10's offer a hellatious launch and rate of acceleration.

http://www.alternativeauto.com/techtips/techtips_50.html#q1
 

Black95GTS

Active Member
Jan 8, 2004
1,644
3
38
Marlborough, MA
Jan 15, 2007
#24
  • Jan 15, 2007
  • #24
95Vert said:
This topic has been beat to death and back, but I will say that I disagree with you. I drive my car every single day, and the 4.10s are perfect. At 70mph, i'm at 24-25k rpms. My dad's sport trac and my wife's taurus, runs the same rpms at that speed.
Click to expand...

I'm so in favor of 4.10s for this reason! I think people are somewhat spoiled with havin 2.73s and looking at 1700 RPMS while highway cruisin. Get in almost any other car and look at the tach when you're driving 75MPH. You're gonna see 2500-3000. The only other normal (read: not 6 speed V8s) cars that run real low RPMs on the highway, in my experience, are pickup trucks.

Adam
 

Grn92LX

Fidanza Man!
Founding Member
Jan 14, 2001
6,819
64
129
New York
Jan 15, 2007
#25
  • Jan 15, 2007
  • #25
My "unstreetable race only" 4.30 gears have me taching at an "ungodly" 2300-2700 on the hwy. Gear your car for the combo and powerband, this ain't rocket science.
 

droptopford 5 0

Member
Mar 31, 2005
427
0
17
Jan 15, 2007
#26
  • Jan 15, 2007
  • #26
trav_19 said:
well its been so long since i put my gears in...but i believe my 93 gt vert with t5 had 3.27's i could be wrong???? maybe someone else knows the specs...but im sure verts had the steepest gear ratios
Click to expand...

my 94 aod-e vert had 2.73's... not steep at all, lol.
 

TheDamned

"I am Canadian and Damned for it!"
Jul 22, 2003
457
0
48
Montréal, Québec, Canada
Jan 16, 2007
#27
  • Jan 16, 2007
  • #27
Wow since I have my 3.73s my car is even more of a gas guzzler, I can't imagine with 4.10... 100$ per week of gas FTL
 
M

MustangGT95

New Member
Jul 29, 2003
407
1
0
Jan 16, 2007
#28
  • Jan 16, 2007
  • #28
I only get 180ish miles per tank SWEET. At this point I don't even care anymore.
 

1slow95

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
1,797
3
48
ohio
Jan 16, 2007
#29
  • Jan 16, 2007
  • #29
95five-oh said:
Who in here has 3.27's stock in their car? I was under the impression that we either had 2.73's or 3.08's. I've got a t-5 and im revving about 1700-1750 while cruising at 70mph, which is perfect, but it seems like it takes forever to get up to those speeds with stock gears.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure 3.27's were only available with an auto trans in the 94-95 cars.
 
Q

QCStang

Founding Member
Mar 28, 2002
813
1
18
Aylmer, Quebec, Canada
Apr 2, 2007
#30
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #30
Low-5.0 said:
I'm pretty sure 3.27's were only available with an auto trans in the 94-95 cars.
Click to expand...

Nope. I have 2.73.
 
P

phillipstheman1

New Member
Mar 14, 2007
37
0
0
Apr 2, 2007
#31
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #31
my car had 3:27's in it before swithching to 3:73's and soon to be 4:10's mine is a 5 speed 94 5.0 gt... 3:73's my gas milage wasn't hurt at all in fact i get 22 on the highway i checked it when i went on a trip .... 4:10's im expecting a diffrent story
 

chaos254

Founding Member
Jul 27, 2002
467
3
29
NJ
Apr 2, 2007
#32
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #32
i have 2.73's and I really do need new gears but I don't know if I'm going to build a n/a or turbo car so I'm waiting till I figure out the combo first before I waste money on gears/installation and then just have to change them again.
 

1slow95

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
1,797
3
48
ohio
Apr 2, 2007
#33
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #33
QCStang said:
Nope. I have 2.73.
Click to expand...

You missed my point...3.27 was an option for automatic cars. You could not get 3.27 gears with a manual trans in 94-95. I'm not 100% sure of this, but I do know some cars had 3.27's stock, and all of them that I've seen have been automatics.
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Apr 2, 2007
#34
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #34
If your going to post rpm's post the SPEED you were running not the type of road it is (ex: highway). That tells nothing.

If you are looking for gains from 3.73's to 4.10's...make sure (as killercanary alluded too) that there wasn't much time between swaps from track time to track time...

If I want the engine in it's powerband I downshift.
 

gcomfx.com

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
3,690
0
56
Republic, MO
Apr 2, 2007
#35
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #35
Good luck with this... 4.10s would have been too much in the 1/4 on the bottle with the stock engine. I'll be interested to see what you cross the line at.
 

drakesdad

Member
Jul 29, 2005
961
0
16
Oregon OHIO
Apr 2, 2007
#36
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #36
Low-5.0 said:
You missed my point...3.27 was an option for automatic cars. You could not get 3.27 gears with a manual trans in 94-95. I'm not 100% sure of this, but I do know some cars had 3.27's stock, and all of them that I've seen have been automatics.
Click to expand...

Yeah Mike....mine was stock with 3:27's........I couldn't imagine what the car would have been like with higher than that........hated it...lol..
 

JJ95GTID

Active Member
Sep 22, 2003
1,141
4
49
Phoenix, AZ
Apr 2, 2007
#37
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #37
TheDamned said:
Wow since I have my 3.73s my car is even more of a gas guzzler, I can't imagine with 4.10... 100$ per week of gas FTL
Click to expand...

I believe A LOT of this has to do with lead foot disease

With my current setup I can get between 18-23mpg. It all depends on how I drive it for that tank full of gas. I drive 50/50 street/hwy, mostly to work and back.
 

FoxRod87

Active Member
Feb 1, 2006
243
1
27
Carolina
Apr 2, 2007
#38
  • Apr 2, 2007
  • #38
87 coupe I had 3.55s and went 8.36@85 in the 1/8th still in third gear. I put 4.30s in it and went 8.26 at 80 in third bouncing off the rev limiter. My 60' was 1/10th quicker.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 1994 Cobra Supercharger install
  • from6to8
  • Sep 25, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 20 21 22
Replies
420
Views
9K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
H
1966 mustang starter and pulley troubles
  • Hotrods4ray
  • Sep 24, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
359
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jan 10, 2026
Realmongo
K
Engine 2000 Mustang GT - Fuel issue post-blown spark plug repair
  • kenster1092
  • Feb 26, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
4
Views
336
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Mar 10, 2026
kenster1092
K
18” vs. 17” wheels on fox
  • dz01
  • Nov 14, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
26
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 28, 2024
2000xp8
Progress Thread The Mach Returns - Update/build thread
  • squeak93
  • Feb 20, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
5
Views
324
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jun 1, 2026
squeak93
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?