mg-mmm
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: rear dif. ratios

To: <TATERRY@aol.com>, <DSBonar@aol.com>, <mg-mmm@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: rear dif. ratios
From: "Pete and Fran Thelander" <pthelander@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 19:01:29 -0700
References: <54.154a918c.2c40b632@aol.com>
Reply-to: "Pete and Fran Thelander" <pthelander@earthlink.net>
Sender: owner-mg-mmm@autox.team.net
Don, et al;
The difference between the 8:43 (5.375) and the 7:37 (5.285) is only 1.7%.
The 8:43 provides that little bit more torque multiplication and will give
very slightly better acceleration and hill climbing ability at the expense
of running about 70rpm higher at highway cruising speed.  This is generally
refered to as a "lower speed" (that's road speed, not engine speed) ratio.
The other frame of reference is the mathematical quotient of the ratio. Here
the mathematical fact is that the number 5.285 is lower than 5.375.  This is
always leads to confussion in discussing "higher" or "lower" gear ratios.
Are you referring to the mathematical value or the speed range application??
So what's "best" depends upon what you value - better acceleration or lower
cruising rpm.  If your cruising speeds are relatively low (say 50mph or
less) take the acceleration and driveablilty that you get with the 8:43.
So far as the durability goes...I have had both in the NE and both broke
after only a relatively few races.  The 8:43 was most embarassing.  It
failed on the first lap touring the old Ards TT circuit in Ireland last
month.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: <TATERRY@aol.com>
To: <DSBonar@aol.com>; <mg-mmm@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: rear dif. ratios


> In a message dated 7/11/03 14:14:28 Pacific Daylight Time, DSBonar@aol.com
> writes:
>
> << Dividing 43 by 8 you get 5.375
>               37 by 7            5.285
>
>  Not a significant difference to me. However, what does this mean (if
>  anything) to performance, top end speed, or other measurement? Seems nil
to
> me but
>  have been told 7/37 was "stronger" in that there were only 7 "fatter"
teeth
> cut
>  as opposed to 8.
>
>  Education on gears please? >>
>
> I'd say you are lucky to have a lower ration Don......but when you start
> driving it, you'll wish you had an even lower one.....I just put a 4.875
into an N
> type and the owner was greatly pleased with the roadablity on the
> highway......others will tell you that your engine won't pull that lower
ratio....I don't
> buy it and we don't have an endless series of roundabouts to deal
with.......j
> Terry
>
> ///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or
try
> ///  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
> ///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
> ///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/mg-mmm
> ///  Send list postings to mg-mmm@autox.team.net

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/mg-mmm
///  Send list postings to mg-mmm@autox.team.net


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>