• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2005 - 2009 Specific Tech

Difference in ET times with 4.10 gears?

  • Thread starter Thread starter billy_tripper
  • Start date Start date Oct 2, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

kooldawg6

mine works really well and can take a fair amount
Aug 31, 2006
1,679
2
38
Central VA
Oct 4, 2007
#21
  • Oct 4, 2007
  • #21
maxima said:
what do guys think will spin more stock 17 oem tires or rims or the 18s oem s ??????????with 4.10s
Click to expand...

Given that the 17 and 18 are the same tire, it should be very close traction wise. In stock sizes, the 18 is about .1" taller than the 17. The 17 will have about 1" more sidewall to flex possibly helping straightline acceleration. The 17 wheel/tire combo also weighs less(I weighed mine when I did the swap, but I don't recall what either was )
 

HIGH HEAT

New Member
Oct 3, 2007
1
0
0
OREGON
Oct 4, 2007
#22
  • Oct 4, 2007
  • #22
does anybody have 4:10s with a s/c? can you hook up at all?
what will 4:10 do to the rps' at hwy speeds with a manual
 

stangdude2000

Founding Member
Jun 23, 2001
1,727
0
0
Northern VA
Oct 5, 2007
#23
  • Oct 5, 2007
  • #23
maxima said:
what do guys think will spin more stock 17 oem tires or rims or the 18s oem s ??????????with 4.10s
Click to expand...

The 17s most likely. Check my previous post in this thread for an explanation.
 

DarkFireGT

Playing with my wife's really makes me want one.
10 Year Member
May 23, 2004
692
10
89
East Moline, IL
Oct 5, 2007
#24
  • Oct 5, 2007
  • #24
Why would the 17's spin more? You have more sidewall which means more surface area touching the pavement.
 
S

ski

Member
Dec 14, 2004
380
2
18
Oct 5, 2007
#25
  • Oct 5, 2007
  • #25
anticubicle said:
In horrible weather @ one of the worst tracks in Florida...

Stock - 13.9+ @ 100
Pre 4.10s - CAI & Tune 13.8+ @ 102
Posst 4.10's - 13.1 @ 105
Click to expand...
You also use drag radials, correct? If so, then it appears that gears, DR's, H-pipe, and pulleys reduced your ET by a total of 0.7 sec.
Did you install all of those mode simultaneously, or one at a time? If it was the latter, then how much of an ET improvement did you get from only the gears?
It also appears that your CAI and tune fell short of your ET reduction expectations.
 

stangdude2000

Founding Member
Jun 23, 2001
1,727
0
0
Northern VA
Oct 7, 2007
#26
  • Oct 7, 2007
  • #26
DarkFireGT said:
Why would the 17's spin more? You have more sidewall which means more surface area touching the pavement.
Click to expand...

Well its more an educated guess, but could easliy be wrong. As long as the tire pressure is the same, you'll end up having the same contact patch area regardless of the sidewall or tire width. Pressure is force (weight) divided by area, so area is weight divided by tire pressure. 3500 lb car at 30psi would result in 4 contact patches about 29 square inches each if the weight was distributed evenly. Between tire widths, all that would change at the same psi is the length and width of contact patch. So theoretically, same friction.

With 17's, it would go back to the moment of inertia. Since it has a lower inertia, it needs less torque to get spinning. This is all theoretical, of course, and who knows how the real world would take its effect.

Can you tell I'm an engineer? Or enginerd as we lovingly say...
 

DarkFireGT

Playing with my wife's really makes me want one.
10 Year Member
May 23, 2004
692
10
89
East Moline, IL
Oct 7, 2007
#27
  • Oct 7, 2007
  • #27
Well you should never run street tires at the track with 30 psi, for one. For two, at the same psi, a 18" tire with a side wall of 45 is going to have less contact with the road than a 17" tire with a sidewall of 55. Even if they're at 30psi, the 17" tire is going spread more because of the extra rubber. When you drop the psi down to 15-20, that multiplies the amount the 17" tire is able to spread out. While it does take less for for the engine to spin the wheel, you'll get more of a difference in contact surface area, than rolling inertia.

And that's just my take on it. I could be wrong as well. But if 18's were the best, drag racers would use those instead of 15's and 17's.
 
A

anticubicle

New Member
Jul 30, 2007
268
0
0
Oct 7, 2007
#28
  • Oct 7, 2007
  • #28
If you take drag racing seriously at all or just do it as an every other weekend hobby the best thing you can do for yourself (and the other racers even!) is buy some Mickey's and a set of cheap wheels.
 

Five Oh Brian

Member
Jun 13, 2007
552
1
16
Pacific Northwest
Oct 7, 2007
#29
  • Oct 7, 2007
  • #29
kooldawg6 said:
Given that the 17 and 18 are the same tire, it should be very close traction wise.
Click to expand...

Actually, they are not the same tire - not even the same brand. Ford installs Pirelli PZero Nero All Season tires for the 17" wheels on new Mustangs, but uses BFG G-Force TA KDWS's for the 18" wheels. The Pirelli's are more of a long-life tire that offers less traction than the slightly softer BFG's.

Best 60' time I've ever run with the factory 18" BFG's was 1.865 with 26 psi. With 23 psi, best was 1.889. However, I really had to do big burnouts to warm them up enough to hook like that, and results were very, very inconsistent on the factory tires. Some runs were in the high 1.80's, many in the 1.90's, some over 2.00, so it was hard to dial in for bracket racing with any real accuracy.

Now, I only used drag radials at the track for consistency's sake. Short burnout to clean them off, then stage and go with perfect traction every time. Best 60' time with drag radials has been 1.833 and the worst 60' time with drag radials has been 1.899, so they're super consistent. Now I can dial in much easier with just the air quality (DA) to account for.
 

kooldawg6

mine works really well and can take a fair amount
Aug 31, 2006
1,679
2
38
Central VA
Oct 8, 2007
#30
  • Oct 8, 2007
  • #30
Originally Posted by kooldawg6
Given that the 17 and 18 are the same tire, it should be very close traction wise.


Five Oh Brian said:
Actually, they are not the same tire - not even the same brand. Ford installs Pirelli PZero Nero All Season tires for the 17" wheels on new Mustangs, but uses BFG G-Force TA KDWS's for the 18" wheels. The Pirelli's are more of a long-life tire that offers less traction than the slightly softer BFG's.
Click to expand...

Obviously, I wasn't clear on that statement at all
I do know the factory tires are different brands for the 17 and 18 wheel. I was meaning if you had a 17 and 18 tire of the same brand. Very easy to see the confusion in my original statement
 

stangdude2000

Founding Member
Jun 23, 2001
1,727
0
0
Northern VA
Oct 8, 2007
#31
  • Oct 8, 2007
  • #31
DarkFireGT said:
Well you should never run street tires at the track with 30 psi, for one. For two, at the same psi, a 18" tire with a side wall of 45 is going to have less contact with the road than a 17" tire with a sidewall of 55. Even if they're at 30psi, the 17" tire is going spread more because of the extra rubber. When you drop the psi down to 15-20, that multiplies the amount the 17" tire is able to spread out. While it does take less for for the engine to spin the wheel, you'll get more of a difference in contact surface area, than rolling inertia.

And that's just my take on it. I could be wrong as well. But if 18's were the best, drag racers would use those instead of 15's and 17's.
Click to expand...


Thats actually not true. Against the law of physics. As long as the tire pressure is constant - doesn't matter if its 15 psi or 30 psi - the total contact patch between ANY two tires supporting the same amount of weight will be the same. Switching tire profiles will merely change the shape of the contact patches. At 15 psi, evenly distributed weight on all 4 tires, our cars would have 4 patches each a ballpark 58 square inches. Increase tire width from 8 to 10 inches, for example, and you would decrease the length of that contact patch from 7.25 to 5.8 inches.

I agree contact patch would effect more than the inertia, especially with vehicles this size that aren't close to optimized, but it is not something that should be overlooked either. Inertia is one huge reason why people use lightweight flywheels, small rims, and even aluminum (or lighter) driveshafts. You'll never see a serious drag racer merely drop rim size (on drive wheels) without doing something to improve traction.
 
R

ragged86

New Member
May 1, 2006
6
0
0
atkins,ar
Oct 9, 2007
#32
  • Oct 9, 2007
  • #32
i ran 8.67 in the eight mile with the factory 3.31 gears on the pirelli factory 17's, c@l cold air, and a tune. with the 4.10 gears i ran a best of 8.31 in the eighth with drag radials. my best 60' on the pirelli tire was 1.97, and with the drag radials and gears it was a 1.92. i need a converter really bad.
 
B

billy_tripper

Member
Mar 30, 2005
56
0
6
Oct 10, 2007
#33
  • Oct 10, 2007
  • #33
DarkFireGT said:
Why would the 17's spin more? You have more sidewall which means more surface area touching the pavement.
Click to expand...

The 17's do NOT have more surface area touching the pavement. I can see why it would be easy to think that when both of the tires are 235 width, but the width is referring to section width (the farthest outer edge of the sidewall when it's blown up on a standard rim). With the 18, you have less sidewall and so it doesn't curve back inward as far when you get out towards the tread of the tire. Therefore, the tread is wider on a 235/50 compared to a 235/55 by a substantial margin. I just learned this from looking at a lot of new tires and comparing sizes and section widths, etc.

edit: I have a 235/55r17 here and a 245/40r18 to compare. I know that's a different size, but I'm just using it to prove a point. The 245 is only 10mm wider and being a low pro 40 series you would baredly have any sidewall flex. I did some measuring and on the 235/55r17 and I think you should be able to get 8 inches across of contact if the air is REALLY low. About 7 with normal air pressure. On the 245/40r18 you would get about 9.5" of contact with regular air pressure. 10mm is less than half an inch and you're gaining over 1.5" with the 40 series 18".
 
C

chubhunter

New Member
Apr 1, 2007
63
0
0
heartland
Oct 10, 2007
#34
  • Oct 10, 2007
  • #34
billy_tripper said:
I was running 3.31 gears. I've tried launching at different rpms but I've found about 1500-1800 to be the best. After I got the gears it seems like I can't go over about 1800 and the tires try to break loose. It's an auto so I don't have to worry about powershifting, and shift rpm and I didn't get a timeslip either time. Thanks for the help guys and any more input is appreciated. I may try the factory 17's to get my time down a little, but I still am boggled by the small gain from the 4.10's when they feel so much stronger. The only thing I can figure out is the really cold temps from the first run helped me.
Also, without the gears I ran an 8.9 first, then an 8.8, then a 8.74, then an 8.8 something. With the gears I ran 7 runs and even when I got a horrible start I still ran a worst run of 8.76.
Click to expand...

I changed from the factory 3.55's to 4.10's in my 05 and my times didn't improve either. I believe some of the problem was very hot track temps with the 4.10's. And I'm still running the stock tires. Wheels spin was a huge problem. Even when I would get a real good 60 ft time I would blow it by completely losing it when I hit second gear. Wheel spin is a big problem. However on the street it feels so much stronger and I would never go back to the 3.55's.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Progress Thread 2004 Comp Orange GT
  • ctandc
  • Jun 26, 2023
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
56
Views
5K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jun 1, 2026
ctandc
C
Took some pics, i do really own a mustang...
  • 2000xp8
  • Jun 20, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 6 7 8
Replies
148
Views
19K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 1, 2024
Mustang5L5
  • Locked
“Doing stuff the wrong way for the right reasons”: A related stupid story.
  • CarMichael Angelo
  • Apr 26, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 27, 2020
a91what
Holley Sniper review - The good, the bad, and learn from my frustration
  • LX Dave
  • Aug 14, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
37
Views
61K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 19, 2026
AeroCoupe
Progress Thread 87' GT rescue
  • africansnowowl
  • Apr 29, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
16
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 2, 2020
Cheapskate207
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2005 - 2009 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?