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

Gears

  • Thread starter Thread starter teal94_stang
  • Start date Start date Apr 6, 2010

teal94_stang

New Member
Sep 23, 2007
18
0
1
Marshall, Michigan
Apr 6, 2010
#1
  • Apr 6, 2010
  • #1
I am thinkin about buying a set of gears and dont know wich to buy (3:73's or 4:10's). I drive my car a few times a week and visit the track 3 or 4 times a year thats about it. What is going to be the difference between the two? Is it pricey to have them installed at a shop?
 

fiveohwblow

Official Member
15 Year Member
Jul 21, 2005
2,169
145
155
Apr 6, 2010
#2
  • Apr 6, 2010
  • #2
Its all opinion. 4.10's if you are more concerned about track and less about shifting and fuel economy.

3.73's seem to be the most universal gear. Universally making stang owners smile over performance, and not frown at fuel mileage too much.
 
D

davis1d0

New Member
Mar 4, 2010
64
0
0
Apr 7, 2010
#3
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #3
I drive mine more often then not when the weather is nice..... knowing this I put 3.55 gears in my car. It made a huge difference from my 2.73 gears that were in it. 3.73 would be my vote simply because you still have some gas mileage as stated above, but in all honesty I like the 3.55's just because I can still get 26ish on the highway.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Apr 7, 2010
#4
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #4
agreed on both counts. for a car you drive often, 4.10s can become a hassle, and i would recommend 3.73s.

for a car you drive little and go to the track with, 4.10s are a better choice.
 

ProKiller

Founding Member
Apr 26, 2002
3,064
15
78
PA
Apr 7, 2010
#5
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #5
3.73s. expect to pay $400 for a shop to install.
 
J

johnny_munyak

Member
Aug 7, 2008
97
0
6
Apr 7, 2010
#6
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #6
davis1d0 said:
I drive mine more often then not when the weather is nice..... knowing this I put 3.55 gears in my car. It made a huge difference from my 2.73 gears that were in it. 3.73 would be my vote simply because you still have some gas mileage as stated above, but in all honesty I like the 3.55's just because I can still get 26ish on the highway.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree completely. I went with 3.55's after much thought and I am not sorry. I thought about 3.73's but I do mostly freeway and highway driving. This gearing has plenty of grunt down low too. Seems to match my camshaft/head combo well too. Revs right around 2000 rpm at 60 mph in 5th....2300-2400 @ 75 mph. 3.73's will turn around 150-200 RPMS more.

If you are running a 5 gear, you can't go too wrong with 3.55 or 3.73. IF you drive more freeway/highway....go 3.55s. By going to 3.55s from 2.73s, my gas mileage around the city went up 2 mpg, and down about 2 mpg on the highway.

Hope it helps.
 

teal94_stang

New Member
Sep 23, 2007
18
0
1
Marshall, Michigan
Apr 7, 2010
#7
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #7
Thanks for all the input. It was very much helpful.
 

Adam95GT

New Member
Aug 14, 2006
2,564
3
0
Burlington, NJ
Apr 7, 2010
#8
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #8
4.10's no questions...
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Apr 7, 2010
#9
  • Apr 7, 2010
  • #9
Play with one of those gear/mph programs you can find on line

You'll find the diff between 355's & 373's is about 125 rpm

Grady
 

Black95GTS

Active Member
Jan 8, 2004
1,644
3
38
Marlborough, MA
Apr 8, 2010
#10
  • Apr 8, 2010
  • #10
Use the search function, type in "gears"... you could read for days.

Adam
 

xracer22

Active Member
Sep 27, 2007
102
18
29
york pa
Apr 14, 2010
#11
  • Apr 14, 2010
  • #11
I would definetly go with the 3.73's. I beat (ahem) Drove a friends car that had 4.10's and it just seemed like i couldnt shift fast enough. I have 3.73's in my car and love em! Slightly higher rpms but not nothing to be concerned about. As for the gas mileage 1. I didnt buy a mustang for that and 2. keeping my foot out of it to record NORMAL gas mileage is impossible!
 

earleys94gt

Active Member
Aug 31, 2003
1,223
16
49
Ashley, Ohio
Apr 14, 2010
#12
  • Apr 14, 2010
  • #12
373's for "all around performance"

355's if you are concerned about MPG; though a Mustang isn't made for MPG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
66 Coupe Progress Thread
  • DTCRAWLEY
  • Apr 19, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
38
Views
643
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Wednesday at 10:27 PM
General karthief
J
Transmission
  • Jraesims
  • Mar 7, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
157
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 8, 2026
JD1964
5
Hello fellow Mustang fanatics.
  • 580HP*428Cj
  • Apr 2, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
2
Views
163
The Welcome Wagon Apr 2, 2026
General karthief
A
Engine 04 GT timing chain issue
  • AwesomeX1103
  • Sep 3, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
347
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Nov 5, 2025
Noobz347
X
VE Table Not Dialed? Send Me Your Datalog.
  • X-cam34
  • Feb 8, 2026
  • Digital Self-tuning Forum
  • 2 3
Replies
49
Views
1K
Digital Self-tuning Forum May 1, 2026
X-cam34
X
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?