Combo change.. Track Heat Intake and 3.90's (I drive on street more than track)

[GRGT1994]

The only clearance issue I had is with the K member x brace (it's a vert specific piece). The header interfered with it on one side. I notched it out, but still get interference. So I'm just running without it.

Don't notice much difference. Eventually I plan to get a MM K member brace, or maybe just a MM tubular K member with brace.

 

[Pokageek]

Ahh. Ok, that's what I had heard, the x-brace. I really don't want to remove it though..I mean, it must be there for a reason.

 

[Black95GTS]

Just some more #'s...

According to the calculator, in SECOND gear, the 4.10's are @6400 at 60MPH vs the 3.90's @6094. For 0-60, the 3.73's and 3.90's only need 2 shifts and stay in the power zone.

Just to clarify this for you: Steeper gearing WILL NOT cause you to accelerate slower. Note all the dedicated strip cars with 4.56 and higher rear ends. I can't believe I'm reading this.

If you really want to take this "logic" one step further, why not just stay with your 2.73s cause then you can cross the line at the top of 3rd, and there will be only 1 shift 0-60.

Do you see how silly that sounds?

Will you have to be a better driver to get the most out of them? Of course, but thats the way it is with any modification. There is no doubt at all that you will be slower, in all aspects excepting 140+ mph, with 3.73s compared to 4.10s.

Adam

 

[GRGT1994]

Just to clarify this for you: Steeper gearing WILL NOT cause you to accelerate slower.

Well, in the case of 0 to 60, actually it will. You're theory is sound. But when the question is purely regarding getting to 60 with a stock T-5 tranny, that shift to 3rd will add between 1/2 to a full second on your time. No question. And 1/2 is a very fast 2-3 shift.

As far as the 2.73 argument, you may want to remember that that setup would leave you below the power band for too long to make up with the one less shift (assuming you could get to 60 in 1st, which I don't know whether that is possible, but I will give you that one). Maybe if you abuse the crap out of your clutch with the 2.73 you could do it. But that whole line of argument just seems kinda silly.

Your larger point about total acceleration is valid, though. But I was only focusing on the 0 to 60, which means more to me.

 

[Pokageek]

Having the 3.90's installed today/tomorrow. Will report back.

 

[95WhiteVenom]

A friend of mine had the 3.90's before some idiot ran a red light and totaled his car. Man what a difference, I have 3.55's and i've driven 2 foxes with 4.10's and a 94 with 3.73's.
The 3.90's are a very nice set-up. I'll be considering them when I beef up my rear end.

 

[chefster]

410s badd for every day

 

[Pokageek]

Well, as usual I am reporting back with results. 3.90's are NIGHT AND DAY to 3.55's. Between that and the change to track heat (with my combo H/C/I - not stock) the car is a totally different car and a lot quicker. I feel like I have gone from a cruiser to a racer. I still have first gear and my hwy has great power in fifth and not revving too high either. Perfect choices of combo for me. Trial and error... Thanks to everyone for the input!