Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48

Thread: Your Car(s): Transmission and Axle Ratio?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Panama Republic
    Posts
    308
    2004 Nissan Pathfinder
    4 speed automatic
    4.636:1 axle ratio
    What's this for?

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,465
    1983 Mitsubishi Sigma
    3 speed auto (sigh)
    I'm sure one of the aussie members will know the final drive for it?

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Spastik_Roach View Post
    1983 Mitsubishi Sigma
    3 speed auto (sigh)
    I'm sure one of the aussie members will know the final drive for it?
    probably somebody will come up to suggest that your final drive will be to the junkyard
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,056
    2003 G35 Sedan

    Gear ratios ( :1) 5-speed automatic
    1st 3.540
    2nd 2.264
    3rd 1.471
    4th 1.000
    5th 0.834
    reverse 2.370
    Final drive ratio ( :1) 3.357

    don't feel like lookin up the civic
    Gone:
    09 Ducati Monster 696
    09 Audi Q5 3.2
    03 Infiniti G35 Sedan
    07 Honda Civic Coupe LX 5spd

    Current:
    10 BMW 335d
    12 Audi Q5 2.0t
    10 VW Jetta TDI
    11 Ducati Monster 796

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey, England
    Posts
    4,000
    1993 Mazda 323 1.3i 16v 5spd manual - 4.11
    2005 Audi A6 2.4 6spd manual - 4.38 (though it can't be driven at the moment...)
    V0R5PRU7NG DUR6CH T3CHN1K

    Motion & Emotion

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    brisbane - sub-tropical land of mangoes
    Posts
    16,251
    interesting thread, i wouldn't have a clue as to the ratio's, never bothered to find out
    Andreas Preuninger, Manager of Porsche High Performance Cars: "Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."

  7. #22
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Island, NZ
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleet 500 View Post
    I have a Motor Trend test of 3 MG's and I actually know where it is.

    So here are some quick specs. None of them had super-low gearing, though, like yours.

    Motor Trend, Oct., 1971. (I assume they are 1972 models.)

    ------------------------ MGB-GT---------- MGB--------- MG Midget

    Engine------------------ 109-cu-in/1798 cc 109/1798---- 78/1275
    Horsepower/torque------- 92/110----------- 92/110------ 62/72
    Curb weight------------- 2,360 lbs--------- 2,240 lbs---- 1,635 lbs
    Axle ratio---------------- 3.91:1----------- 3.91:1------- 3.73:1
    Transmission------------- 4-speed manual-- 4-speed man- 4-speed man
    0-60 mph---------------- 12.8 secs-------- 13.1--------- 15.2
    1/4 mile------------------ [email protected] mph-- 19.3@74----- [email protected]
    Braking, 60-0 mph-------- 133 feet--------- 134 feet----- 134 feet
    Fuel mileage-------------- 25-28 mpg------ 25-28 mpg--- 25-30 mpg
    Speed in gears @ rpm--
    1st---------------------- 28.5@5500 rpm- 28.5@5500--- 29@5500
    2nd---------------------- 45@5500------- 45@5500----- 49.5@5500
    3rd---------------------- 70@5500------- 70@5500------ 69@5500
    4th---------------------- 96.2@5500----- 96.2@5500---- 96.2@5500
    it's amazing how much faster on the quarter mile the MGB was just by adding a solid roof! or did the GT have some other tricks?

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Fernando Valley, Calif.
    Posts
    6,794
    Quote Originally Posted by sproggly View Post
    it's amazing how much faster on the quarter mile the MGB was just by adding a solid roof! or did the GT have some other tricks?
    There is really not that much of a difference between the first two cars listed.
    3 tenths of one second and 1.3 mph. A slight difference, but not much.

    No tricks involved; I doubt Motor Trend, which tested dozens upon dozens of cars per year would bother tricking up an MGB.
    '76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    33,488
    It's strange though, isn't it? Why would the heavier hardtop be faster than the convertible?
    Lack of charisma can be fatal.
    Visca Catalunya!

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    brisbane - sub-tropical land of mangoes
    Posts
    16,251
    driver/conditions maybe. or the hardtop hadn't deteriorated as fast as the other two.
    Andreas Preuninger, Manager of Porsche High Performance Cars: "Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eindhoven, The Netherlands
    Posts
    7,833
    On the Fiesta it is 3.82, nothing special.

    The 0.8 2-speed Automatic muscle car:
    1st gear: 1.688
    2nd gear: 0.927
    Final drive ratio: 4.579
    Last edited by drakkie; 03-16-2009 at 03:08 AM.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    No(r)way.
    Posts
    2,467
    I have invested in a super-tight dog-shift gearbox for the Alfa for 2009 season, and has decided to build up a second rear axle with a different final ratio, since it is much quicker to change the whole axle, than just the ratio.
    So now i have one with 4.57:1 and one with 4.11:1

    The ratios on the gearbox is something like this:
    Gear 1 2 3 4 5
    Ratios: 2.060 1.530 1.230 1.050 0.950

    The 4.57 will work perfect on the two slower tracks we have up here and the 4.11 will be perfect for the fastest track, and if I should want to drive on other tracks in Europe the later will probably serve well.

    In the Saab, I have no clue.
    Last edited by LotusLocost; 03-16-2009 at 09:18 AM.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    No(r)way.
    Posts
    2,467
    Quote Originally Posted by drakkie View Post
    On the Fiesta it is 3.82, nothing special.

    The 0.8 2-speed Automatic muscle car:
    1st gear: 1.688
    2nd gear: 0.927
    Final drive ratio: 4.579
    What is the size of your wheels on the later? 10"?

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    the hague, the netherlands
    Posts
    64
    i recently got a new car my other was a getting old so i traded it in for a mercedes
    so it's :
    Mercedes-Benz CLS63 AMG
    7G-Tronic 7 speed Automatic
    Final Drive Axle Ratio: 2.650

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    the hague, the netherlands
    Posts
    64
    i just found them for all gears:
    First Gear Ratio (:1)4.38
    Second Gear Ratio (:1)2.86
    Third Gear Ratio (:1)1.92
    Fourth Gear Ratio (:1)1.37
    Fifth Gear Ratio (:1)1.00
    Sixth Gear Ratio (:1)0.82
    Seventh Gear Ratio (:1)0.73
    Reverse Ratio (:1)3.42
    Reverse 2 Ratio (:1)2.23
    Final Drive Axle Ratio (:1)2.65
    Last edited by DFH; 03-16-2009 at 10:20 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Land Rover e-Terrain Concept 2006
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-28-2006, 08:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •