|
|
|
|
12-11-2010, 11:56 AM
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 615
Likes: 56
Liked 165 Times in 59 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
george :just .010 not anything big but its consistant,,over all the the trans swap was a huge gain a solid 2 tenth gain and 2 mph, the trans is trans i put together with a few aluminun pieces ,,also it was 45 pounds lighter than the th400 gmonde
|
|
|
|
12-11-2010, 01:40 PM
|
#2 |
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: cloquet mn
Posts: 466
Likes: 17
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
I have tried both 2.75 and 2.91 first gears and the 2.91 makes the car a animal in 60
feet .03-.04 better in sixty ft but hurts et from 60 to 330 it seems like the motor gets pulled down to much to recover efficiently. i think a higher torque lower rpm engine may be better suited to this application.
__________________
Ron Mattson 5015 STK |
|
|
|
|
12-11-2010, 02:26 PM
|
#3 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
Likes: 11
Liked 20 Times in 14 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2010, 02:50 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: cloquet mn
Posts: 466
Likes: 17
Liked 67 Times in 30 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
I have tried it with both 1970 350/290 hp and 1972 350/278 with similar results in
both applications. im thinking if you could get the torque to a higher level between the converter flash and 1-2 shift rpm it could work.
__________________
Ron Mattson 5015 STK |
|
|
|
|
12-12-2010, 02:08 AM
|
#5 | |
|
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Anthem, Arizona
Posts: 2,766
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
Quote:
__________________
Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX |
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2010, 07:46 PM
|
#6 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 69
Likes: 41
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
I have a 65 chevelle 283/230 SS/MA @3390 lbs, changed from 208 glide to light weight 2.75 Turbo, found nothing, changed converters 600 higher, stall still nothing.
Glenn |
|
|
|
|
12-13-2010, 01:50 AM
|
#7 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sterling,Illinois
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
Do you think I would show a gain with a low compression big block Chevy? It is a foot brake car. It's weighs 3300# and has a 2.48 gear in it now. Just looking to better my 60' and 1/8th mile time.
|
|
|
|
|
12-12-2010, 01:24 AM
|
#8 |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Beavercreek Or.
Posts: 272
Likes: 31
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
How about your reaction times, did they get quicker with the low gear set, seeings how you 60 footed better?
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2010, 03:47 PM
|
#9 | |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hammonton NJ
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
Quote:
About .015 difference in reaction time. |
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2010, 08:06 PM
|
#10 |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Beavercreek Or.
Posts: 272
Likes: 31
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
|
Re: ET Difference with 2.75 low gear
Thanx for the response guys
|
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
