Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 79

4.10's ARE IN'S

This is a discussion on 4.10's ARE IN'S within the Drivetrain forums, part of the LSx Technical Help Section category; Originally Posted by 00z28bubba you should probably beef up the weakpoints before playing or else you might end up in ...

  1. #21
    Junior Member chocos_ls1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    east bay,ca
    Posts
    72

    white and black
    98 camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by 00z28bubba View Post
    you should probably beef up the weakpoints before playing or else you might end up in a bad situation. like without the car until you get the replacement parts in and install.
    i didnt get it? maybe cuz i just woke up but can u be more epecific?

  2. #22
    Yeah baby! Yeah! silverWS6's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    okc
    Posts
    2,571

    Silver 2002 WS.6
    Red 1989 Formula

    Quote Originally Posted by Rk ws6 View Post
    come on now.....
    Not kidding...

  3. #23
    Yeah baby! Yeah! silverWS6's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    okc
    Posts
    2,571

    Silver 2002 WS.6
    Red 1989 Formula

    Quote Originally Posted by Too Fast View Post
    That's what I was thinking.....only a small amount of time left for that diff then
    .
    I know Im starting to hear a faint whine between 45mph and 60mph so it'll bust soon but that only means one thing...

  4. #24
    Senior Member 00z28bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    las vegas, nv
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,390

    white
    2000 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by chocos_ls1 View Post
    i didnt get it? maybe cuz i just woke up but can u be more epecific?
    weakpoints that break in our cars can break under stock power and should probably be replaced before you break them and you end up stuck without the car while waiting for parts to be delivered and installed. unless of course you dont need the car then break them all you want. personnaly i cant go without my car because it is my daily driver.

  5. #25
    Moderator Cutlass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    6,998

    1999 Formula WS6 M6-sold
    2001 Silverado Z71

    Quote Originally Posted by chocos_ls1 View Post
    some people tell me that stock doin 80 doin 2grand in 6th aint right,what u think?because i had a 99 before and it was the same thing
    There are plenty of rpm vs mph calculators out there on the internet. Do a Google search and find one.
    The one I found shows this:
    * Differential Gear = 3.42 to 1
    * Transmission Gear = 0.50 to 1
    * Tire Diameter (Inches) = 26.13
    * Vechicle MPH = 80

    Computed Engine RPM is 1760
    * Differential Gear = 4.10 to 1
    * Transmission Gear = 0.50 to 1
    * Tire Diameter (Inches) = 26.13
    * Vechicle MPH = 80

    Computed Engine RPM is 2110
    Your tire height might vary

  6. #26
    Moderator 35th-ANV-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wherever life takes me
    Posts
    12,465

    Red
    02 35th LE Camaro SS

    I have a 4.11 gear and I am at 1900 RPM at 70MPH.

    Before the rear end swap with the 10-bolt 3.42 gears I was at about 1550RPM.

    This is running a 275/40R17 stock tire.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Too Fast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,170

    Black
    2000 WS6 6spd Hooker LT

    Quote Originally Posted by 35th-ANV-SS View Post
    I have a 4.11 gear and I am at 1900 RPM at 70MPH.

    Before the rear end swap with the 10-bolt 3.42 gears I was at about 1550RPM.

    This is running a 275/40R17 stock tire.
    That's what my tach shows, just over 1500 RPM. If I had my scanner, it shows a little lower, maybe I'll drive it and see what it really shows that way. Our tachs are a little optimistic.

    I wonder if GM engineers were thinking about 4.10s when they made 6th gear such a tall overdrive; if so, thanks! I know, it's all really about gas mileage, but you know some were thinking about a steep gear like 4.10.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,083

    SOM
    2002 SS

    I'm going to b honest here. I think 4.10s are the stupidest choice on the street. Our motors are torque motors. Meaning they are large in displacement which gives good torque, hp is just a calculation from that. In order to maximize the torque gears need to be long (numerically lower). Steeper gears are ok for cars with much more rpm capability. a 4.10 gear is for 7500 and beyond. it is just Stupid to have one in a f-body. To actualy say 6th is useable now with 4.10s is also the dumbest comment I've ever read. it was DESIGNED to work as it does with 3.42s. It is a fuel economy gear period. It was designed to be fuel efficient under light load and nothing else. Choosing gear ratios based on 6th gear cruising rpms is just downright retarded. Of course the rpms will be higher now with 4.10s but you've also just shortened each of the other 5 beyond any positive outcome.

    Look at The dodge vipers stock rear ratio. Vipers went slower when people started putting gears in them. Look at the c6 z06. wonder why the rear gearing went LOWER numerically? Because they have engineers that understand that torque needs gear. If you can't load a torquey engine you are going through the powerband without using its biggest asset. Ever wonder why higher gear ratios dyno lower?

    Gears are great if you rev 7500+ or if you have a stock motor and have the ultimate suspension and huge slick and just want a nasty 60' time and quick (quick NOT fast) e.t. A gear helps by making 1st gear so much shorter it will help slingshot out of the hole. For everyone else...

  9. #29
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by 5abivt View Post
    I'm going to b honest here. I think 4.10s are the stupidest choice on the street. Our motors are torque motors. Meaning they are large in displacement which gives good torque, hp is just a calculation from that. In order to maximize the torque gears need to be long (numerically lower). Steeper gears are ok for cars with much more rpm capability. a 4.10 gear is for 7500 and beyond. it is just Stupid to have one in a f-body. To actualy say 6th is useable now with 4.10s is also the dumbest comment I've ever read. it was DESIGNED to work as it does with 3.42s. It is a fuel economy gear period. It was designed to be fuel efficient under light load and nothing else. Choosing gear ratios based on 6th gear cruising rpms is just downright retarded. Of course the rpms will be higher now with 4.10s but you've also just shortened each of the other 5 beyond any positive outcome.

    Look at The dodge vipers stock rear ratio. Vipers went slower when people started putting gears in them. Look at the c6 z06. wonder why the rear gearing went LOWER numerically? Because they have engineers that understand that torque needs gear. If you can't load a torquey engine you are going through the powerband without using its biggest asset. Ever wonder why higher gear ratios dyno lower?

    Gears are great if you rev 7500+ or if you have a stock motor and have the ultimate suspension and huge slick and just want a nasty 60' time and quick (quick NOT fast) e.t. A gear helps by making 1st gear so much shorter it will help slingshot out of the hole. For everyone else...
    while i agree with some of what you posted...i believe the lower gear in the z06 was for off the line low gear traction..so the z06 wouldn't blow its rubber off

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,083

    SOM
    2002 SS

    Quote Originally Posted by shady milkman View Post
    while i agree with some of what you posted...i believe the lower gear in the z06 was for off the line low gear traction..so the z06 wouldn't blow its rubber off
    from GM " Gears were further reduced to Take full advantage of the broad torque curve the 7.0L ls7 engine provides"

    If they wanted to reduce first gear they would have changed the ratio of the individual gears ala c5 z06. With the c5 z06 they reduced the ratios of specific gears to help keep the ls6 within its powerband 'between' gears because the powerband was shifted higher in the rpm range.

  11. #31
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by 5abivt View Post
    from GM " Gears were further reduced to Take full advantage of the broad torque curve the 7.0L ls7 engine provides"

    If they wanted to reduce first gear they would have changed the ratio of the individual gears ala c5 z06. With the c5 z06 they reduced the ratios of specific gears to help keep the ls6 within its powerband 'between' gears because the powerband was shifted higher in the rpm range.
    hmm good to know.

  12. #32
    Member TRANS-DAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    PASADENA,TEXAS
    Posts
    391

    BLACK
    2001 T/A VERT.

    Quote Originally Posted by 5abivt View Post
    I'm going to b honest here. I think 4.10s are the stupidest choice on the street. Our motors are torque motors. Meaning they are large in displacement which gives good torque, hp is just a calculation from that. In order to maximize the torque gears need to be long (numerically lower). Steeper gears are ok for cars with much more rpm capability. a 4.10 gear is for 7500 and beyond. it is just Stupid to have one in a f-body. To actualy say 6th is useable now with 4.10s is also the dumbest comment I've ever read. it was DESIGNED to work as it does with 3.42s. It is a fuel economy gear period. It was designed to be fuel efficient under light load and nothing else. Choosing gear ratios based on 6th gear cruising rpms is just downright retarded. Of course the rpms will be higher now with 4.10s but you've also just shortened each of the other 5 beyond any positive outcome.

    Look at The dodge vipers stock rear ratio. Vipers went slower when people started putting gears in them. Look at the c6 z06. wonder why the rear gearing went LOWER numerically? Because they have engineers that understand that torque needs gear. If you can't load a torquey engine you are going through the powerband without using its biggest asset. Ever wonder why higher gear ratios dyno lower?

    Gears are great if you rev 7500+ or if you have a stock motor and have the ultimate suspension and huge slick and just want a nasty 60' time and quick (quick NOT fast) e.t. A gear helps by making 1st gear so much shorter it will help slingshot out of the hole. For everyone else...
    Dude if you wanna disagree then ok but don't be an ass hole & post on here
    say-n people are stupid for their choice's I personaly am very happy w/4.10's that's why I started this post!! & I will agree that if my car made 550+ to the wheels then yes I would back off on the gear!!! but most of us are closer
    to the 400mark & 4.10's are ok really!!!!!

  13. #33
    Senior Member Too Fast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,170

    Black
    2000 WS6 6spd Hooker LT

    Quote Originally Posted by 5abivt View Post
    I'm going to b honest here. I think 4.10s are the stupidest choice on the street. Our motors are torque motors. Meaning they are large in displacement which gives good torque, hp is just a calculation from that. In order to maximize the torque gears need to be long (numerically lower). Steeper gears are ok for cars with much more rpm capability. a 4.10 gear is for 7500 and beyond. it is just Stupid to have one in a f-body. To actualy say 6th is useable now with 4.10s is also the dumbest comment I've ever read. it was DESIGNED to work as it does with 3.42s. It is a fuel economy gear period. It was designed to be fuel efficient under light load and nothing else. Choosing gear ratios based on 6th gear cruising rpms is just downright retarded. Of course the rpms will be higher now with 4.10s but you've also just shortened each of the other 5 beyond any positive outcome.

    Look at The dodge vipers stock rear ratio. Vipers went slower when people started putting gears in them. Look at the c6 z06. wonder why the rear gearing went LOWER numerically? Because they have engineers that understand that torque needs gear. If you can't load a torquey engine you are going through the powerband without using its biggest asset. Ever wonder why higher gear ratios dyno lower?

    Gears are great if you rev 7500+ or if you have a stock motor and have the ultimate suspension and huge slick and just want a nasty 60' time and quick (quick NOT fast) e.t. A gear helps by making 1st gear so much shorter it will help slingshot out of the hole. For everyone else...
    True about what the car was designed to do, but what things are designed for are most always compromises. You make some good points, but 4.10s do result in quicker acceleration. The compromise being slightly lower fuel economy. Wonder what the 6-speed cars would do with 2.73 gears? 6th would definitely be unusable. GM could have gone that route and used a cheaper, 5-speed manual, but overall acceleration would suffer.

    You don't have to have an engine that revs to 7500 to take advantage of the higher numerical gears.

  14. #34
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    i know my car will love the 3.73s i put in or similar when i get a new rear

  15. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,083

    SOM
    2002 SS

    Quote Originally Posted by TRANS-DAD View Post


    Dude if you wanna disagree then ok but don't be an ass hole & post on here
    say-n people are stupid for their choice's I personaly am very happy w/4.10's that's why I started this post!! & I will agree that if my car made 550+ to the wheels then yes I would back off on the gear!!! but most of us are closer
    to the 400mark & 4.10's are ok really!!!!!
    You're right I probably shouldn't have added my initial feelings in my first post but I'm just out to help people understand. I was happy when I first put 4.09s n my 93 vette 10 years ago. Until i raced a friends vette who I had beat previously and now barely lost to (at higher speed roll ons) with the addition of 4.09s it made me wonder. Off the line they do help. They are torque multipliers and they give a good amount more acceleration off the line and low speed starts. BUT do the math and see what happens when a 4.09 car starts in 3rd on a roll and a stock gear car would be in 2nd.

    4.10s 'feel' so much better I agree. Just realize they ARE accelerating you faster BUT you are now going much slower at the top of that gear. If you have street tires you run the risk of blowing off 1st gear and when you get to 2nd? you're just worse off now than a stock rear in 1st.

    Don't look at rwhp look at torque and rpms. If you are a stroker having short gears is the WORST mod you can do. The whole point of a stroker is to have Huge torque and you want steep gears to let the torque do the work.
    If you have a heads/cam and have moved the power up in the powerband and especially if you have gone aggressive and sacrificed low end torque for more top end power and added some 500 rpms to peak then short gearing will be beneficial.

    You're right. You don't 'have' to have higher numerical gears to to take advantage of 7500 rpms. you 'WANT' to Ask me how I know !

    My last 388 stroker I had in the vette was a torque monster. The builder had used a high duration high lsa cam which stupid enough gave a higher redline but also gave up top end peak power to give more torque across the range. I have all the calculations, races with friends and recorded datalogs that proved that when I switched to a 3.73 gear it made my car much faster. a 388 is still a large cube motor and all the torque was being wasted. My mph also went from 124 to 128 on street 19s.

    Dodge viper 465 lbs torque 6000 redline 3.07 rear axle ratio
    from dodges press release ' Ninety percent of the torque is available to the driver across a wide band -- the 1,500-5,600 rpm range' make sense?

    Acura Nsx 224 @5500 rpm 290 hp @ 7100 rpm 4.06 rear axle ratio
    Make any sense? The motor makes torque higher up and peak so high that it needs to rev fast to get up in rpms to 'maximize' the motors attributes.

    I wont go into motorbike stuff but I've had a gsxr 600, 750 and r1. Imagin what would happen if you put the steep gear of the 600 into the r1? Anyone know what its like to ride the 'torque' of a literbike flat out in 4th on the highway? remember what it's like and you'll know what i'm talking about

  16. #36
    Senior Member 00z28bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    las vegas, nv
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,390

    white
    2000 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by 5abivt View Post
    You're right I probably shouldn't have added my initial feelings in my first post but I'm just out to help people understand. I was happy when I first put 4.09s n my 93 vette 10 years ago. Until i raced a friends vette who I had beat previously and now barely lost to (at higher speed roll ons) with the addition of 4.09s it made me wonder. Off the line they do help. They are torque multipliers and they give a good amount more acceleration off the line and low speed starts. BUT do the math and see what happens when a 4.09 car starts in 3rd on a roll and a stock gear car would be in 2nd.

    4.10s 'feel' so much better I agree. Just realize they ARE accelerating you faster BUT you are now going much slower at the top of that gear. If you have street tires you run the risk of blowing off 1st gear and when you get to 2nd? you're just worse off now than a stock rear in 1st.

    Don't look at rwhp look at torque and rpms. If you are a stroker having short gears is the WORST mod you can do. The whole point of a stroker is to have Huge torque and you want steep gears to let the torque do the work.
    If you have a heads/cam and have moved the power up in the powerband and especially if you have gone aggressive and sacrificed low end torque for more top end power and added some 500 rpms to peak then short gearing will be beneficial.

    You're right. You don't 'have' to have higher numerical gears to to take advantage of 7500 rpms. you 'WANT' to Ask me how I know !

    My last 388 stroker I had in the vette was a torque monster. The builder had used a high duration high lsa cam which stupid enough gave a higher redline but also gave up top end peak power to give more torque across the range. I have all the calculations, races with friends and recorded datalogs that proved that when I switched to a 3.73 gear it made my car much faster. a 388 is still a large cube motor and all the torque was being wasted. My mph also went from 124 to 128 on street 19s.

    Dodge viper 465 lbs torque 6000 redline 3.07 rear axle ratio
    from dodges press release ' Ninety percent of the torque is available to the driver across a wide band -- the 1,500-5,600 rpm range' make sense?

    Acura Nsx 224 @5500 rpm 290 hp @ 7100 rpm 4.06 rear axle ratio
    Make any sense? The motor makes torque higher up and peak so high that it needs to rev fast to get up in rpms to 'maximize' the motors attributes.

    I wont go into motorbike stuff but I've had a gsxr 600, 750 and r1. Imagin what would happen if you put the steep gear of the 600 into the r1? Anyone know what its like to ride the 'torque' of a literbike flat out in 4th on the highway? remember what it's like and you'll know what i'm talking about
    well i am fortunate enough to be able to resist playing on the street. did it for about 2 months after i bought the car, and since then just cruisin with a little quick accelerations to speed limits. mine will be a drag car that can drive on the street. but first and foremost a track car manners will be nice but screw gas mileage in that situation. when finished the gears will be a performance upgrade for how i want the car. being a track car it will not see ridiculous speeds because it only gets a 1/4mi to run. any more than that is irrelevent to me. the loss up top will not kill track performance. street i can see your point but at the same time its still racing and i dont think them folks race til 150 on every run. maybe they do, but ive never heard of a street race going past 100 here in town.

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,083

    SOM
    2002 SS

    great example of a geared stroker not performing to it potential.definitely never over 100 mph z06 is bolt ons only.
    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUtmyz_nkL4&feature=related[/ame]
    Last edited by 5abivt; 10-06-2009 at 09:39 AM.

  18. #38
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5

    1999 & 1998
    Camaro SS/ FRC C5

    Sorry to hijack the the thread, but I figured this would be a good time to ask this question. How would 4.30's work as opposed to 4.10's? I have a buddy who has a set of GM 4.30's in a box he's willing to sell for cheap. Is it too much gear for a bolt-on '02 LS1 M6?

  19. #39
    Senior Member JaycenK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Holiday,FL
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,378

    Green
    1997 Camaro Z-28

    Quote Originally Posted by Demon 383 View Post
    Sorry to hijack the the thread, but I figured this would be a good time to ask this question. How would 4.30's work as opposed to 4.10's? I have a buddy who has a set of GM 4.30's in a box he's willing to sell for cheap. Is it too much gear for a bolt-on '02 LS1 M6?
    It's not to much for a M6 but you are putting a lot of gear in that thing. Street car or track car?

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,083

    SOM
    2002 SS

    Quote Originally Posted by Demon 383 View Post
    Sorry to hijack the the thread, but I figured this would be a good time to ask this question. How would 4.30's work as opposed to 4.10's? I have a buddy who has a set of GM 4.30's in a box he's willing to sell for cheap. Is it too much gear for a bolt-on '02 LS1 M6?
    Way too much gear for an m6 unless your only goal is to waste more fuel in 6th.

    Think about it this way guys. there are 2 guys riding bicycles.

    Biker #1 Sumo wrestler. Huge, powerful, but cant pedal very fast.

    Biker #2 Bruce Lee. Skinny light but fast.

    NOW picture riding your bicycles. To make things simpler instead of a typical 21 speed think of a 2 speed. a Low gear, for comparison sake this is 3.42 (something you would use going down a hill). and the highest which is say a 4.30 gear (something you would use going up hill to make it easy).

    Imagine putting the sumo wrestler on the bike with the high gear from a stop. He cant pedal very fast but he is powerful. the extra torque from being in a high gear isnt being used because he cant pedal fast enough to take advantage of it. Get it?

    Put the sumo wrestler on the bike with the low gear from a stop and each revolution of his powerful legs will push the bike super fast.

    SO.. Think of what the ls1 motor is. A torque motor? or a hp motor ?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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