Gears & Axles Driveshafts | Rearends | Differentials | Gears | 12 Bolt | 9 Inch | Dana

2.73's to 3.73's wow

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-05-2012, 08:59 AM
  #21  
FormerVendor
iTrader: (9)
 
Carl at CRP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by little_chewy_69
yeah i know my 10 bolt isn't gonna hold up very long with the nittos i don't intend on running it down the track with it. Have plans for an S60 soon but transmission is first on the list. Hopefully have that ordered within the next weeks. i'm more worried about wrecking a 900 dollar stall converter when the tranny goes. But it's not i drive it like a 16 year all the time so i think i'll be okay for a while.
The S60 has been a great choice for many of My customers, hope to hear from You when You get ready.

Thanks,
Carl
Old 06-08-2012, 04:28 PM
  #22  
TECH Fanatic
 
justin hover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

When I first bought my car I was not impressed with the down low/city fun factor with 2.73s. Couldn't really break the tires loose on a slow roll, no second gear chirp
(COME ON...really) only power braking. Now with good pedal control, 3.73s are meant for any dd auto.
Old 06-08-2012, 04:48 PM
  #23  
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
 
JWStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well I went to 3.73's a few days ago and the gas mileage is so bad the other rearend may actually go back in. If it doesn't pick up atleast .3 this weekend they are def coming out!
Old 06-08-2012, 05:19 PM
  #24  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (71)
 
lemons12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Winchester, TN
Posts: 11,088
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Gears feel amazing... Then you go to the track and you're brought to reality.

Glad you enjoyed the mod. The mpg decrease is worse than the perfornce gain.. I usually recommend 342, same gains with not as many cons.
Old 06-08-2012, 06:31 PM
  #25  
TECH Fanatic
 
justin hover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JWStevens
Well I went to 3.73's a few days ago and the gas mileage is so bad the other rearend may actually go back in. If it doesn't pick up atleast .3 this weekend they are def coming out!
After I was tuned by frost, it didn't seem to suffer mpg consumption as bad. Still 50$ a week so it's just the norm now.
Old 06-08-2012, 10:08 PM
  #26  
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (1)
 
JWStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm headed to Atl next weekend so ill be able to get an accurate number then. I spent at least 50 before the gears just judging from the last couple of days it seems like it doubled but I'm not sure.
Old 06-08-2012, 10:15 PM
  #27  
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (28)
 
whytryz28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 3,758
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

2.73 to 4.10 here, I dont know what traction is even with 315 NT05 tires.
Old 03-29-2013, 05:49 PM
  #28  
TECH Apprentice
 
NoHope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Mishawaka, IN
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

So would a stock car with 2.73's lose to a stock car with 3.42's? I thought gears just made a car FEEL faster.

My car has 2.73's :sad: but going 70MPH I get 27MPG! That's 6 speed territory.
Old 03-29-2013, 06:16 PM
  #29  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (4)
 
FirstYrLS1Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Euclid,Ohio
Posts: 4,166
Received 134 Likes on 118 Posts

Default

'pure' stock 2.73s' typically run 14.1s',3.23s' typically run 13.8s'.
Old 03-29-2013, 06:18 PM
  #30  
TECH Apprentice
 
NoHope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Mishawaka, IN
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by FirstYrLS1Z
'pure' stock 2.73s' typically run 14.1s',3.23s' typically run 13.8s'.
A pure stock LS1 with 2.73's runs 14.1's?
Old 03-29-2013, 09:04 PM
  #31  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (4)
 
FirstYrLS1Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Euclid,Ohio
Posts: 4,166
Received 134 Likes on 118 Posts

Default

since 2001 when I started taking mine to the strips,I would talk to the other LS1 f-bods there to find out their times and mods. 14.1s' with those crappy OEM tires and suspension were typical. Improve the tires and rear suspension will improve the 60ft. Knocking 3 tenths of the 60ft also knocks 3 tenths off the 1/4.
Old 03-29-2013, 09:29 PM
  #32  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (96)
 
01ssreda4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Turnin' Wrenches Infractions: 005
Posts: 24,240
Likes: 0
Received 81 Likes on 72 Posts

Default

.3 off the 60 usually nets twice that off ET from my experience. And all my time slips have proven this to me.
Old 03-29-2013, 09:31 PM
  #33  
TECH Apprentice
 
NoHope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Mishawaka, IN
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by FirstYrLS1Z
since 2001 when I started taking mine to the strips,I would talk to the other LS1 f-bods there to find out their times and mods. 14.1s' with those crappy OEM tires and suspension were typical. Improve the tires and rear suspension will improve the 60ft. Knocking 3 tenths of the 60ft also knocks 3 tenths off the 1/4.
Maybe I have a factory freak then? My car is an auto with 2.73's. I ran a 13.56 my very first time out to the track, all stock with Kumho tires. It wasn't just the car's first time out to the track, but mine as well, I'd never been to the strip before.
Old 03-29-2013, 09:54 PM
  #34  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (71)
 
lemons12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Winchester, TN
Posts: 11,088
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

I ran 8.4@84 with my 98 100% full weight base model Trans Am with only a lid and LM muffler.

That is considerably quicker than the times being posted.
Old 03-29-2013, 09:56 PM
  #35  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (71)
 
lemons12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Winchester, TN
Posts: 11,088
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by NoHope
So would a stock car with 2.73's lose to a stock car with 3.42's? I thought gears just made a car FEEL faster.

My car has 2.73's :sad: but going 70MPH I get 27MPG! That's 6 speed territory.
You can't look at a gear ratio and say car A would beat car B... That would be like saying a 98 would win because it has a slightly more aggressive cam grind than an 02.

I have seen it happen both ways... With traction, the 323 car should have an advantage.
Old 03-30-2013, 01:21 AM
  #36  
TECH Fanatic
 
dannyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: olympia, wash
Posts: 1,092
Likes: 0
Received 67 Likes on 48 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by 01ssreda4
.3 off the 60 usually nets twice that off ET from my experience. And all my time slips have proven this to me.
Thats been my experience as well.
If your trap speed is in the 100mph range anyway.
Old 03-30-2013, 01:24 AM
  #37  
TECH Fanatic
 
dannyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: olympia, wash
Posts: 1,092
Likes: 0
Received 67 Likes on 48 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by NoHope
Maybe I have a factory freak then? My car is an auto with 2.73's. I ran a 13.56 my very first time out to the track, all stock with Kumho tires. It wasn't just the car's first time out to the track, but mine as well, I'd never been to the strip before.
I don't think that makes it a "freak", but it is pretty quick.
My car ran a best of 13.82 when it was bone stock with the factory 2.73 gears.



Quick Reply: 2.73's to 3.73's wow



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:42 PM.