3.42 vs 3.73
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,029
Likes: 0
From: Chi-Town
3.42 vs 3.73 looking to get a 12 bolt real soon. got a vig 3200. I know a 3.73 combo works great with this converter, but i think that will be too much gear for my highway travels. How would a 3.42 work. I currently have a 3.23.
SSU Moderator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 4,857
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Re: 3.42 vs 3.73 there's always a trade off with drag racing. for the track, 3.73's would be better (grunt wise and rpm wise)...for the highway, 3.23's are better. 3.42's are great if you can get them free for a 10-bolt. for me, traction is an issue (vig3200...shitty track), im staying with 3.23's. if i hooked well, 3.73's or maybe even a 3.90 in a 12-bolt would cross the line at the perfect rpm (for boltons). i guess if i was in your shoes id be looking to cross at the optimum rpm for your setup/redline. boltons would be like 6200-6300 at the most...heads/cam i would say to cross at like 6600 or so.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
From: West Monore
Re: 3.42 vs 3.73 Sorry for the double but I screwed up. Anyway, as I was stating, I have a 99SS with a 3200 vig and 3:73 gears. On the highway going a steady 70 MPH I average 22 MPG. I did have traction issues with this setup and took a while to figure it out. It your time at the strip is limited, then go for the lower gear, if a faster time is important to you and losing a little gas mileage is not important--------then decide between these factors. I hope this assists you. Happy motoring. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />
Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,029
Likes: 0
From: Chi-Town
Re: 3.42 vs 3.73 well, what kind of ET gain would there be going from 3.42 to 3.73? i hear theres only like .1 going from 3.23 to 3.73.
i dont care about mpg- i dont want to be cruising at a high rpm on the expressway- more wear, more annoying noise....
i dont care about mpg- i dont want to be cruising at a high rpm on the expressway- more wear, more annoying noise....
SSU Moderator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 4,857
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Re: 3.42 vs 3.73 for me, gears are for the right rpm at the big end...I (personnaly) wouldnt change them without a cam or aftermarket rear going in the car. no need. by the time you maximize launch tq (mechanical), you blow away the tires. Trevor told me once that he didnt feel much of a difference at all between 3.23's and 3.42's. there is a noticable difference driving 3.73's and 3.23's. i assume 3.42 to 3.73 would be minimal like 3.23 to 3.42. gain? you prolly wont gain more than a tenth with either....but since you are putting in a rear end...piece of mind will be there and you might as well go with 3.73's at that point.
Trending Topics
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo Thread Starter
TECH Junkie
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,029
Likes: 0
From: Chi-Town
Re: 3.42 vs 3.73 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by steve350:
<strong>I am interested in the same thing. Looks like we are pretty evenly matched.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">*ahh, didnt see your note about times before the cam.
i have since added an underdrive pulley, et streets, and tuning (engine tuning, !TM...)
hoping to see some decent gains. we have almost the same setup otherwise <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> . little larger converter though <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
i hear people lose ET with different rearends because they are heavier and what not too <img border="0" title="" alt="[Embarrassed]" src="gr_emb.gif" />
i think i will go 3.42s just because its more of a daily driver than a race car.
<small>[ April 01, 2002, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: DriveATransAm ]</small>
<strong>I am interested in the same thing. Looks like we are pretty evenly matched.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">*ahh, didnt see your note about times before the cam.
i have since added an underdrive pulley, et streets, and tuning (engine tuning, !TM...)
hoping to see some decent gains. we have almost the same setup otherwise <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> . little larger converter though <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
i hear people lose ET with different rearends because they are heavier and what not too <img border="0" title="" alt="[Embarrassed]" src="gr_emb.gif" />
i think i will go 3.42s just because its more of a daily driver than a race car.
<small>[ April 01, 2002, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: DriveATransAm ]</small>
