3:43 to 3:73
12-27-2009, 02:49 AM
#22
my friends 2000 Z28 A4 came with 3.42s from the factory, so those cars are out there. but to the OP of you are an auto dont bother changing them, focus on other mods. my friends LS1 i just mentioned with 3.42s is running mid 11s in the 1/4 with Heads/cam/boltons. but if you are a manual at least do 4.10s, if you are more of a track car 4.30s would work well
12-27-2009, 11:50 AM
#24
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ringoes/Flemington, New Jersey
Posts: 2,852
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I went with 3.73s in my M6 car. 4.10s seemed really steep for a car that I drive on the road a lot. I woulda prefered like 3.90 
4.10s seems to me pretty steep and I would have to start messin with tire sizes and need some sticky tires 
4.10s seems to me pretty steep and I would have to start messin with tire sizes and need some sticky tires
12-27-2009, 12:46 PM
#25
10 Second Club
iTrader: (66)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you check the rpo codes sticker (usually in the glove box) look for these codes...
gu2 = 2.73's
gu5 = 3.23's
gu6 = 3.42's
I've done alot of research on these cars in the past 5 years, and all I have been able to come up with is that all of the V8 A4 cars had 2 options 2.73's and 3.23's.
In 93 TA's and Z28's with an M6, they had a 3.23 gear and the transmission had a steeper 1st gear.
In 94 and up TA's and Z28's, they used a less steep 1st gear in the 6 speeds and bumped up the rear gear ratio to 3.42's.
In this time period nothing was changed in the A4 cars though. Still the same 2 options from 93-02. (2.73's or 3.23's only)
And to verify on the v6 cars, YES the 3.42 rear gear ratio was offered as an option. (My 44,xxx mile 96 RS has this option as well) It has a GU6 rpo code on the label in the glove box to verify.
With that said, IDk wether or not ANY V8's did slip out of the factory with 3.42's or not, but it isn't documented anywhere that I have seen. Is it Possible??? YES! But they would have to note it in the RPO codes label as well as use a whole different tune as for the shift points and etc. It would not be able to use the same as the V6 due to the fact of the power difference, the car will not shift in the same spot. The mph and rpm's would vary slightly.
If I have said anything that you disagree with, please lmk.
And to answer your question, 3.42's to 3.73's will not help very much, but in some cases have shown a little improvement in some cars. If I were you I would look more into either making power or adding some suspension. (IMO)
However; There's no reason to have a high horsepower car if you can't plant the power to the ground. It becomes more of a PITA at the track when a car with half the power walks right by you, b/c your spinning and they are hooking.
All I'm saying is suspension makes a world of difference. I'm having the same issue with my car now, not enough suspension to plant 550-600hp! It pretty much speaks for itself once you do suspension mods. The car will drive completely different and actually do something with the power.
Best of Luck
James
gu2 = 2.73's
gu5 = 3.23's
gu6 = 3.42's
I've done alot of research on these cars in the past 5 years, and all I have been able to come up with is that all of the V8 A4 cars had 2 options 2.73's and 3.23's.
In 93 TA's and Z28's with an M6, they had a 3.23 gear and the transmission had a steeper 1st gear.
In 94 and up TA's and Z28's, they used a less steep 1st gear in the 6 speeds and bumped up the rear gear ratio to 3.42's.
In this time period nothing was changed in the A4 cars though. Still the same 2 options from 93-02. (2.73's or 3.23's only)
And to verify on the v6 cars, YES the 3.42 rear gear ratio was offered as an option. (My 44,xxx mile 96 RS has this option as well) It has a GU6 rpo code on the label in the glove box to verify.
With that said, IDk wether or not ANY V8's did slip out of the factory with 3.42's or not, but it isn't documented anywhere that I have seen. Is it Possible??? YES! But they would have to note it in the RPO codes label as well as use a whole different tune as for the shift points and etc. It would not be able to use the same as the V6 due to the fact of the power difference, the car will not shift in the same spot. The mph and rpm's would vary slightly.
If I have said anything that you disagree with, please lmk.
And to answer your question, 3.42's to 3.73's will not help very much, but in some cases have shown a little improvement in some cars. If I were you I would look more into either making power or adding some suspension. (IMO)
However; There's no reason to have a high horsepower car if you can't plant the power to the ground. It becomes more of a PITA at the track when a car with half the power walks right by you, b/c your spinning and they are hooking.
All I'm saying is suspension makes a world of difference. I'm having the same issue with my car now, not enough suspension to plant 550-600hp! It pretty much speaks for itself once you do suspension mods. The car will drive completely different and actually do something with the power. Best of Luck
James
12-27-2009, 02:58 PM
#26
If you check the rpo codes sticker (usually in the glove box) look for these codes...
gu2 = 2.73's
gu5 = 3.23's
gu6 = 3.42's
I've done alot of research on these cars in the past 5 years, and all I have been able to come up with is that all of the V8 A4 cars had 2 options 2.73's and 3.23's.
In 93 TA's and Z28's with an M6, they had a 3.23 gear and the transmission had a steeper 1st gear.
In 94 and up TA's and Z28's, they used a less steep 1st gear in the 6 speeds and bumped up the rear gear ratio to 3.42's.
In this time period nothing was changed in the A4 cars though. Still the same 2 options from 93-02. (2.73's or 3.23's only)
And to verify on the v6 cars, YES the 3.42 rear gear ratio was offered as an option. (My 44,xxx mile 96 RS has this option as well) It has a GU6 rpo code on the label in the glove box to verify.
With that said, IDk wether or not ANY V8's did slip out of the factory with 3.42's or not, but it isn't documented anywhere that I have seen. Is it Possible??? YES! But they would have to note it in the RPO codes label as well as use a whole different tune as for the shift points and etc. It would not be able to use the same as the V6 due to the fact of the power difference, the car will not shift in the same spot. The mph and rpm's would vary slightly.
If I have said anything that you disagree with, please lmk.
And to answer your question, 3.42's to 3.73's will not help very much, but in some cases have shown a little improvement in some cars. If I were you I would look more into either making power or adding some suspension. (IMO)
However; There's no reason to have a high horsepower car if you can't plant the power to the ground. It becomes more of a PITA at the track when a car with half the power walks right by you, b/c your spinning and they are hooking. All I'm saying is suspension makes a world of difference. I'm having the same issue with my car now, not enough suspension to plant 550-600hp! It pretty much speaks for itself once you do suspension mods. The car will drive completely different and actually do something with the power.
Best of Luck
James
gu2 = 2.73's
gu5 = 3.23's
gu6 = 3.42's
I've done alot of research on these cars in the past 5 years, and all I have been able to come up with is that all of the V8 A4 cars had 2 options 2.73's and 3.23's.
In 93 TA's and Z28's with an M6, they had a 3.23 gear and the transmission had a steeper 1st gear.
In 94 and up TA's and Z28's, they used a less steep 1st gear in the 6 speeds and bumped up the rear gear ratio to 3.42's.
In this time period nothing was changed in the A4 cars though. Still the same 2 options from 93-02. (2.73's or 3.23's only)
And to verify on the v6 cars, YES the 3.42 rear gear ratio was offered as an option. (My 44,xxx mile 96 RS has this option as well) It has a GU6 rpo code on the label in the glove box to verify.
With that said, IDk wether or not ANY V8's did slip out of the factory with 3.42's or not, but it isn't documented anywhere that I have seen. Is it Possible??? YES! But they would have to note it in the RPO codes label as well as use a whole different tune as for the shift points and etc. It would not be able to use the same as the V6 due to the fact of the power difference, the car will not shift in the same spot. The mph and rpm's would vary slightly.
If I have said anything that you disagree with, please lmk.
And to answer your question, 3.42's to 3.73's will not help very much, but in some cases have shown a little improvement in some cars. If I were you I would look more into either making power or adding some suspension. (IMO)
However; There's no reason to have a high horsepower car if you can't plant the power to the ground. It becomes more of a PITA at the track when a car with half the power walks right by you, b/c your spinning and they are hooking.
All I'm saying is suspension makes a world of difference. I'm having the same issue with my car now, not enough suspension to plant 550-600hp! It pretty much speaks for itself once you do suspension mods. The car will drive completely different and actually do something with the power. Best of Luck
James
Any GM tech on this forum should be able to easily find that out and report back with the information.
As for the owners in this thread who report that they do own such a rare vehicle IMO a call to a dealership asking if their car can be reflashed since it has the 3.42 would also answer the question if there really are factory completely stock A4 3.42 Z28/SS f-bodies.
Were you?
12-28-2009, 05:54 PM
#30
No I was at home talking **** to people on the internet about what they can accurately claim, were you there?
Really though for whats its worth I never said the car with no doubt in jesus's name came with 3:42's I said thats what was in there and that its doubtlful they were changed by the condition the car was in when I got it, and the guy that has been building rear ends and only rear ends for somewhere around 40 years said he had seen it before from the factory, and others on here have had it happen to.
Really though for whats its worth I never said the car with no doubt in jesus's name came with 3:42's I said thats what was in there and that its doubtlful they were changed by the condition the car was in when I got it, and the guy that has been building rear ends and only rear ends for somewhere around 40 years said he had seen it before from the factory, and others on here have had it happen to.
12-28-2009, 11:30 PM
#31
After I bought my car, I found the inside of my passenger door is red (my car is silver). So should I assume that GM, just for the hell of it, painted it a different color? Or should I more accurately assume the previous owner did something to the door?
I wasn't talking ****, I was bringing up a legitimate argument to your statement. If you don't like what I have to say, then ignore it.
12-29-2009, 03:02 PM
#34
There is a thread on this forum where the OP posted his results with different gear changes. Contrary to what you might think his results were measured in tenths in the quarter mile.
For example: if you are running mid 12's it's not like likely you will be running mid 11's with a gear change all other things being equal.
Suspension work, torque arm, sticky tires, and weight reduction dollar for dollar will get you better peformance than the cost for parts and labor to change gears (probably around $700).
If its a daily driver and you don't race street or dragstrip - IMO stay with the 3.23 and spend the dollars on something else.
3.23 gears won't break as easily a 3.73's if you still have a stock rear end.
Gas mileage will decrease going to 3.73.
I have a Moser 12 bolt and went from 3.73 back 3.42. Couldn't go back 3.23 and with the next lower ratio a 3.08 instead. So I chose 3.42 but hindsight tells me since car is a daily driver I should have went to a 3.08 because I have almost BIG rwhp (565). It's pretty easy to blow the tires.
My setup: ATI Procharged D1SC h/c bolt on stock bottom end 347 running 10 lbs of boost matched to a Yank PY3400 and Performabuilt Level III outputting 565 rwhp on a Mustange dyno with plans to replace with an LS2 forged 364 or iron block 370.
I want driveability and cruising at a reasonable rpm - 3.73 is too high for me.
Bottom line - depends upon how you to want to drive the car and its purpose.
For example: if you are running mid 12's it's not like likely you will be running mid 11's with a gear change all other things being equal.
Suspension work, torque arm, sticky tires, and weight reduction dollar for dollar will get you better peformance than the cost for parts and labor to change gears (probably around $700).
If its a daily driver and you don't race street or dragstrip - IMO stay with the 3.23 and spend the dollars on something else.
3.23 gears won't break as easily a 3.73's if you still have a stock rear end.
Gas mileage will decrease going to 3.73.
I have a Moser 12 bolt and went from 3.73 back 3.42. Couldn't go back 3.23 and with the next lower ratio a 3.08 instead. So I chose 3.42 but hindsight tells me since car is a daily driver I should have went to a 3.08 because I have almost BIG rwhp (565). It's pretty easy to blow the tires.
My setup: ATI Procharged D1SC h/c bolt on stock bottom end 347 running 10 lbs of boost matched to a Yank PY3400 and Performabuilt Level III outputting 565 rwhp on a Mustange dyno with plans to replace with an LS2 forged 364 or iron block 370.
I want driveability and cruising at a reasonable rpm - 3.73 is too high for me.
Bottom line - depends upon how you to want to drive the car and its purpose.
12-29-2009, 06:30 PM
#35
I considered this talking ****.^^ So thats where my comment came from.
But you wanna say I cant assume this and that blah blah, well accept the fact that you cant either, and quit acting like that just because something wasnt supposed to happen, that it cant.
Anyway, I understand your point, ill stop thread highjacking now and im outta here, along with my factory 3:42 gearset
But you wanna say I cant assume this and that blah blah, well accept the fact that you cant either, and quit acting like that just because something wasnt supposed to happen, that it cant.
Anyway, I understand your point, ill stop thread highjacking now and im outta here, along with my factory 3:42 gearset
12-29-2009, 08:01 PM
#36
I find this subject interesting. If I had to put money on it, I would say it is extremely unlikely that an auto was built with 3.42's. Especially if the speedometer is correct, since there is no factory calibration for this, and they certainly wouldn't do a custom change for 1 car.
I'm not sure how factories work, but I would assume that at the time of assembly the bar code on the "incorrect" 3.42 axle would conflict with the build procedure for an A4 and set off the alarms.
And yes, a Tech II can recalibrate to another STOCK axle ratio that was available on that model and year at the dealership.
Did we determine if the car in question had the GU6 RPO code?
I'm not sure how factories work, but I would assume that at the time of assembly the bar code on the "incorrect" 3.42 axle would conflict with the build procedure for an A4 and set off the alarms.
And yes, a Tech II can recalibrate to another STOCK axle ratio that was available on that model and year at the dealership.
Did we determine if the car in question had the GU6 RPO code?
12-29-2009, 09:22 PM
#39
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (96)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Turnin' Wrenches Infractions: 005
Posts: 24,241
Likes: 0
Received 79 Likes
on
70 Posts
There is a thread on this forum where the OP posted his results with different gear changes. Contrary to what you might think his results were measured in tenths in the quarter mile.
For example: if you are running mid 12's it's not like likely you will be running mid 11's with a gear change all other things being equal.
This is true, rediculous in thinking but true
Suspension work, torque arm, sticky tires, and weight reduction dollar for dollar will get you better peformance than the cost for parts and labor to change gears (probably around $700).
Thats not true, me and my buddy split the cost of all tools needed ($200) and learned to do our own gear swaps for free. Then I did half a dozen other cars for profit.
If its a daily driver and you don't race street or dragstrip - IMO stay with the 3.23 and spend the dollars on something else.
once again, no logic used here bc we dont have 500+ hp. Gears are great bang for the buck SOTP mod.
3.23 gears won't break as easily a 3.73's if you still have a stock rear end.
You cant prove that
Gas mileage will decrease going to 3.73.
This is true, not a big deal really though
I have a Moser 12 bolt and went from 3.73 back 3.42. Couldn't go back 3.23 and with the next lower ratio a 3.08 instead. So I chose 3.42 but hindsight tells me since car is a daily driver I should have went to a 3.08 because I have almost BIG rwhp (565). It's pretty easy to blow the tires.
My setup: ATI Procharged D1SC h/c bolt on stock bottom end 347 running 10 lbs of boost matched to a Yank PY3400 and Performabuilt Level III outputting 565 rwhp on a Mustange dyno with plans to replace with an LS2 forged 364 or iron block 370.
We dont have these hp numbers. Smaller hp needs a gearing advantage
I want driveability and cruising at a reasonable rpm - 3.73 is too high for me.
Other people may not agree with you, I felt the same way at first about my 3.73s but I wouldnt trade back to 3.23s.
Bottom line - depends upon how you to want to drive the car and its purpose.
For example: if you are running mid 12's it's not like likely you will be running mid 11's with a gear change all other things being equal.
This is true, rediculous in thinking but true
Suspension work, torque arm, sticky tires, and weight reduction dollar for dollar will get you better peformance than the cost for parts and labor to change gears (probably around $700).
Thats not true, me and my buddy split the cost of all tools needed ($200) and learned to do our own gear swaps for free. Then I did half a dozen other cars for profit.
If its a daily driver and you don't race street or dragstrip - IMO stay with the 3.23 and spend the dollars on something else.
once again, no logic used here bc we dont have 500+ hp. Gears are great bang for the buck SOTP mod.
3.23 gears won't break as easily a 3.73's if you still have a stock rear end.
You cant prove that
Gas mileage will decrease going to 3.73.
This is true, not a big deal really though
I have a Moser 12 bolt and went from 3.73 back 3.42. Couldn't go back 3.23 and with the next lower ratio a 3.08 instead. So I chose 3.42 but hindsight tells me since car is a daily driver I should have went to a 3.08 because I have almost BIG rwhp (565). It's pretty easy to blow the tires.
My setup: ATI Procharged D1SC h/c bolt on stock bottom end 347 running 10 lbs of boost matched to a Yank PY3400 and Performabuilt Level III outputting 565 rwhp on a Mustange dyno with plans to replace with an LS2 forged 364 or iron block 370.
We dont have these hp numbers. Smaller hp needs a gearing advantage
I want driveability and cruising at a reasonable rpm - 3.73 is too high for me.
Other people may not agree with you, I felt the same way at first about my 3.73s but I wouldnt trade back to 3.23s.
Bottom line - depends upon how you to want to drive the car and its purpose.
