4:10 Gear Opinions !! o.0

[TurboFreak]

I absolutely hate 4.30 gears. 3000 rpms at 60 when you only have a ~6000 rpm rev limit? Horrrible for highway driving. And 1st gear is wayyyyyy too short.

Haven't tried the 4.10's though.

And I lovedddd my 3.73's in my 89 turbo that I used to have.

 

[Datsrboi]

This sucks. I have a N/A LSD rear with a soon to be 1JZ drop in......... I can imagine how much gas Ill waste.

 

[TurboFreak]

I don't really notice a MPG problem. I still got about 24-25 highway (~65-70mph) in my old '88 with the 4.30's. I havent checked the 92's MPG but I don't notice it being horrible right now...

 

[Buddafucco]

I'm at 72mph at 3k rpm. And I get around 200 miles per tank

 

[OneJoeZee]

And I get around 200 miles per tank

?

 

[Buddafucco]

If I fill it all the way up, I usually go 200 miles before its on E and have to fill it up again.

 

[bountykilla0118]

200 on a full tank ....thats pretty poor

 

[Buddafucco]

I never said it was good, I was just throwing out my example of using a 4.3o rear. I'm sure I can tune it and get a lot better mileage if I wanted. I haven't been on any long trips in a while so I don't have a good highway mpg to throw in there.
13miles 1 way to work + lots of traffic & lights. My idle is at 900- 1ooo rpm, & I'm running it a little rich right now. Plus I have a lead foot.

 

[annoyingrob]

where might one find a 3.54 gear, I've got a th350 swap that i love except for highway cruising

www.jawsgear.com

$200 or so for a 3.54 ring and pinion that'll bolt into the MKIII pumpkin. I don't believe It's on their site, but if you email them, they can sort it out for you.


Alternatively, just PM Jawsgear on this forum.

 

[Jeff Lange]

I'd love to take your money, but the car was crushed over 5 years ago.

Yeah, this is usually the story that I get told. The person sold the car, the car was crushed, it was a friend of a friend. Not that I don't think that you remember it being that way, but I've just never seen it happen and never seen any proof to back it up. Everything I've seen shows the opposite.

I'm sure it's possible, I mean it's not like Toyota's never made a mistake before, but it seems highly unlikely. In any case, I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong. Let me know if you come across it again.

It's a G305

3.73:1

Jeff

 

[phillipthe1st]

if it was me id rather go the other way than have a 4:10 or 4:30...like someone said, turbos need so load and boost time. The more boost time the more power...

 

[mkIIIman089]

Yes, I've heard things like this before, but not once has anyone ever actually ever posted up any sort of proof, showing an 89 with a 3.91 differential. Every 89 I've seen (including 1st-2nd month production vehicles), has had a 3.73, and all of my documentation shows all 1989's came with 3.73:1 rear ends.

Not that you really need more proof, but my 09/88 production date car has a 3.73 in it.

 

[becauseican]

I made an offer of $20 USD about 2 years ago to anyone who could post a picture of an AE86 GT-S with an A/T, nobody ever has.

Jeff

I have..... I am actually going to pick it up some time in the next few weeks.....new shop race car. I will send you pics once i get the car.

Randy

 

[Jeff Lange]

Hooray, the first person to actually say they know where one is... We'll see .

 

[joliroger4]

if it was me id rather go the other way than have a 4:10 or 4:30...like someone said, turbos need so load and boost time. The more boost time the more power...

You are only looking at half the theory. The reason the turbo is making boost earlier and load is greater at that point is because it is now harder for the engine to move the car. It's a trade off and the rear should be matched to what the car is and what the car is doing, it should not be generalized for all MKIIIs.

You can argue theory all you want, but theory is just a theory. There's no substitute for hands on experience. Run a 3.73 vs a 4.30 in a 450whp, 26" tire car in the 1/4 and the better matched rear will make itself very clear. The 3.73 wont even get halfway through 4th when passing the traps. In an 800whp car, you'll want that 3.73 because then it'll be more closely matched to run through the traps at a decent RPM.

Choosing a rear is not voodoo and there is no opinion involved when you disregard streetability. Given a certain tire size, powerband, weight and redline, there is a difinitive faster rear than other rear choices.

 

[phillipthe1st]

You are only looking at half the theory. The reason the turbo is making boost earlier and load is greater at that point is because it is now harder for the engine to move the car. It's a trade off and the rear should be matched to what the car is and what the car is doing, it should not be generalized for all MKIIIs.

You can argue theory all you want, but theory is just a theory. There's no substitute for hands on experience. Run a 3.73 vs a 4.30 in a 450whp, 26" tire car in the 1/4 and the better matched rear will make itself very clear. The 3.73 wont even get halfway through 4th when passing the traps. In an 800whp car, you'll want that 3.73 because then it'll be more closely matched to run through the traps at a decent RPM.

Choosing a rear is not voodoo and there is no opinion involved when you disregard streetability. Given a certain tire size, powerband, weight and redline, there is a difinitive faster rear than other rear choices.

you are correct...i guess i was being more specific with the kind of car I would have to be in a position make a decision about the rear. To each their own.

 

[Datsrboi]

Sooo lets say I have a 1JZ single turbo, around 4-500whp.. Lots of city driving and highway driving, and lots of "racing", What would you want not thinking about gas. My rear is currently a 87 NA LSD. Full weight.