Can someone point me to the Microsoft Excel gear ratio calculator that was posted several years back? It enabled you to input transmission gears, rear end gear, tire size, etc and calculated speed at RPM for each gear.
I want a better 1st gear ratio - or possibly different 1st and rear gears.
Rob, What do you have for first and rear gears?
Gonna cost you big bucks either way since you can't just change out 1st gear.
QuoteBorg Warner T5 five speed from a 1994-95 (SN95) Ford Mustang. (Input shaft and bellhousing are 1" longer than typical 5.0L Mustangs. Gear ratios: 3.53:1, 1.93:1, 1.33:1, 1.00:1, 0.68:1, and 3.15:1 reverse. 1-1/16" 10-spline input shaft. 0.668" input shaft pilot diameter. 28-spline output shaft. 8-tooth speedometer drive gear. ATF fluid.) King Cobra clutch. 1994 Toyota 4Runner slave cylinder.
Rear End: 1996 Nissan Skyline viscous limited slip differential (same R200S case as Nissan 240SX). 3.54:1 gears. Uprated halfshafts from "The Driveshaft Shop" in Salisbury, North Carolina.
Yeah, I wouldn't be happy with that 1st gear, either. I would like the 3:54 rear gears with my 2.95 1st gear. You could go with a 3.08 since you have that 302 torque.
Dan Masters' gear ratio calculator (in Excel) http://www.britishv8.org/Articles/chart.xls
Rob: Google Search found this
http://www.glenn-ring.com/tech/tranny_calc.xls
http://www.tremec.com/calculadora.php
Thanks. Note there's a typo in the HIWD, current 1st is 3.35.
Tires are 225/45/15 so about 23" diameter.
Carl - yeah, pretty much requires changing clusrer. There's a guy who'll build me what I'd need for about $1200 (with no core charge) I think I could resell my current trans for $600-750 so makes it fairly doable.
Rob, Ford Racing T5Z has the 2.95 first. Or like Carl mentioned the 3.08 rear gear. The V8 can pull a taller gear fine. The V6 guys like around 12 combined first and rear. Higher power V8 do better in the 10's. Unfortunately you would have to switch to the 8.8 for the 3.08. I think the Nissan 200R 3.54 is the highest ratio they have. Also the 2.95 only comes in the shorter pre 94 input length. I did find this aftermarket 94 and newer input shaft, you would use your bearing retainer:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Ford-Mustang-94-95-Z-SPEC-2-95-ratio-V8-WORLD-CLASS-T5-input-shaft/262909337211?epid=705138037&hash=item3d369e1e7b:g:VBUAAOSwc-tY1dwB&vxp=mtr
Mine comes out to 11.5 with a 25.7" tire (3.54 x 3.27). Equivalent to 10.7 with a 24" tire or 10.3 with a 23" tire. Still a kinda short 1st gear but at least usable and good for launches. Much better that the T5 that's in the car right now which works out to about 12.7 with a 23" tire or 13.3 with a 24" tire. That one is still usable but almost pointless. Tire diameter increases are roughly equivalent to steps in axle ratio, so keep that in mind too.
I'm going to need to swap out that tranny soon. Maybe this weekend would be good, I think I have everything now.
Jim
I'm seeing on the internet that Titans, Armada's, & XTerra's had a 2.95 rear so I did the following compares. What would you do based on these?
TransmissionRearGearswapgraphs1.jpg
TransmissionRearGearswapgraphs2.jpg
Rob, Those rears are much larger than your R200. I think about a 10" ring gear compared to your 8". I think the 2.95 first in the transmission would be your best bet. 2.95 x 3.54 = 10.44. Your lower profile tires, like Jim B mentioned above, also lower the rear ratio. I googled the R200 gear ratios and the ones you have are the highest available for that rear.
Tire size to gear ratio calculator, Shows your effective rear ratio is now 3.68 :
https://tiresize.com/gear-ratio-calculator/
Rob, 91-96 and 99-08 Infiniti G35 used 3.36 gears in the R200 with the automatic transmission. The older R200 longnose in the 280ZX turbo and 2+2 also used that ratio but has smaller holes in the ring gear and longer pinion so I don't think that would be viable. You may be able to find the Infinity G35 in a pick and pull. Gear tooth count is 37-11.
Bummer on the 2.95 rear gear. I googled R200 ratios & found it there; must not have looked close enough at the page :(.
So, sounds like the 2.95 1st gear transmission & find a 91-96 Infinity G35 will be my best answer.
Rob, The Newer 99-08 G35 have that ratio too. That combo would be perfect for your car. Lots of the newer ones, some with Limited Slip on Ebay.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=91-96+infiniti+g35+3.36+differential&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.X+infiniti+g35++differential.TRS0&_nkw=+infiniti+g35++differential&_sacat=0
I seem to be thinking along the same lines. I have the R200 w/3.54 and a T5 with 3.35 1st. and I would like more range in 1st gear.
In traffic, I am shifting too soon. I suppose it would be O.K. for a heavy vehicle, and it keeps me from stalling it, but the 302 torque
would seem to allow something taller. Now I have 3.35X3.45=11.86, and a change to 2.95 would be 2.95X3.54=10.44, which would be better.
Changing the input, cluster and the 1-2-3 gears on the mainsheet gets pricey, and leaves you with a .59 ratio 5th, which is very tall.
I have not found a combination of 5th gears that suit me, but the T5Z has a .63 5th, which would do. Of course, they are $1750!
I'll watch here for a while and see what the wiser folks do.
Dennis
If you don't have a super powerful (over 300HP) V8 you may get by with the NWC 83-84 Mustang T5. It had the 2.95 first and some had the .72 OD. Probably hard to find and I would still do a rebuild, use Synchromesh fluid and a aftermarket shifter with stops.
Rob, Look at this link, it refers to a Pathfinder with a high ratio in the 3. something range.
More research to see if the info is valid!
http://zilvia.net/f/showthread.php?t=267957
Dennis
Dennis, Good find! 3.113 ratio. That would be 10.43 combined with the 3.35 first you already have. Rob would be lower with his 23" diameter tires at 10.82.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/2012-NISSAN-PATHFINDER-4-0L-REAR-CARRIER-ASSEMBLY-DIFFERENTIAL-RATIO-3-13/162679881226?hash=item25e079fe0a:g:x6AAAOSwD5ZZwWh-&vxp=mtr
Oh, something else that popped into my head was the notion that the point of greatest torque multiplication has the greatest stress.
I may be wrong on that, and someone can jump in here, but a numerically high rear ratio would move the stress to the transmission,
which in the case of the T5 is around 300 ft lb. in the better models. Higher capacity can be had for a price of course.
So, I'm leaning toward a 2.95 1st gear and leaving my 3.54 ratio R200 as is. That's still 10.4 overall.
Dennis
I've been researching the Pathfinder 3.13 - seems like it only came in an open differential. No LSD. Anyone familiar with Phantom or Traction Concepts? They advertise these things that can be installed to give it LSD... https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nissan-Pathfinder-fits-R200-diffs-Limited-Slip-Differential-Conversion-Kit/252021217093?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649
Rob, Those limited slips work at first, then the springs weaken and blocks wear and then become a open diff again. 2004-2007 Pathfinder diff should be Viscous Limited Slip.
That's great if true. So far the Nissan boards haven't been able to confirm. There is a salvage yard near me with a 2005 2wd pathfinder with 3.13 gears; I may just have to drive out & look at it (supposedly there's an orange sticker labeled "Use LSD Oil only" that survives the age).
Rob, The orange sticker should say Viscous LSD. It is a separate sealed unit with thick silicone in the diff. You would use conventional lube in the rear. There was a thread where a guy removed one and switched to a clutch type rear. The Pathfinder rear has a larger pinion and 13mm bolts on ring gear vs 12mm on yours. The axle stubs from 5 to 6 bolt may swap if yours is VLSD too. Also the rear cover will have to be swapped. The front mount spacing may also be different.
viscous.jpg
Jim, your ability to find this stuff continues to amaze me!
So, if I'm following, 2004-2007 2WD is viscous limited slip.
* Need to verify if front mount spacing is the same or different so might need to modify IRS cage to accomidate.
* Need to swap rear covers (presumably to get same mount bolt spacing/size? If not that, why swap the rear cover?
* May be avle to swap my VLSD axle stubs (if not, I'd simply need to replace my Nissan 5-bolt to Porche 930 CV adapters with new ones that go from Nissan 6 bolt to the 930).
Rob, You got it. Probably not all are VSLD. My guess was optional. Ebay has new OBX Helical gear type posi's (Tru-Trac/Quiaiffe type)for $388 and used Viscous LSD for $119 to $ 190. I still would switch to the 2.95 T5 because of your lower tire diameter. Pic of Viscous LSD:
viscous2.jpg
Did some more research and finding that 3.54 was the tallest gear Nissan offered in an R200 with LSD. So now trying to figure out if I can use the ring/pinion from a 3.13 in my Skyline diff. Or if I can use my Limited slip (or one of the ones you listed above in a pathfinder diff. I'm just worried there may be a reason they never put limited slip in the 3.13 or 2.95 diffs. Thinking something might not fit?
Rob, The Infiniti automatic G35 3.36 are pretty common with VLSD. The Pathfinder has a larger pinion and won't interchange. I think your best bet is the Infiniti G35 3.36 and 2.95 T5. Here is the thread where a guy took the VSLD out of a Pathfinder 3.13 and installed a clutch type LSD:
http://zilvia.net/f/showthread.php?t=267957
I have followed this discussion with considerable interest, since I am not entirely satisfied with my 3.35 low gear and 3.54 diff.
I believe, that changing the rear ratio to solve the 1st gear issue may be disappointing since doing so will effectively reduce the overall
ratio on every gear. This may be most apparent in 5th, where the rpm would lower also, perhaps to a value too low. This would
mean the cruising rpm would result in sluggish acceleration in that gear, and possible sluggish performance on hills. (maybe not an issue in the South?)
Anyway, I am happy with my 5th gear cruise rpm, and would only change to a 2.95 1st gear trans. I do know that the 5th will change to .62,
but there are few options around that.
Dennis
Dennis, you can simply change the 2 OD gears to .73 if you went to the 3.36 rear and in my opinion would be perfect with the 2.95 first T5. I conversed with Carl awhile back on the tooth count of the gears. I'll do a search to find the thread.
Dennis, I found the thread:
http://www.mgexp.com/phorum/read.php?40,3265232
Making progress -
* Have a transmission guy in Austin area who said he could build me a T5 with the longer SN95 input shaft like I have, but the same gears as a T5Z. Price is $1295; no core; no shipping (I travel to Austin pretty regularly). I never told him I want it, but he sent me a note last night saying he's built it & sent pics. What should I ask to get a feel for quality of what he did? Pics below. See anything odd (I see some rough edges on some of the gears & what looks like wear on the ends of some, but having never rebuilt a transmission, I have no idea if those are concerns)?
* On the rear end, Narrowing in on 3.36 or 3.13 (3.36 better for my current tire size; 3.13 better if I go back to 225 or 235/50/15's. 3.36 has LSD options; 3.13 less clear but am connected with a Nissan diff guy who believe's it's doable... But, I'm going to hold off getting parts for this till I have the transmission swapped and figure out if I want to go back to 24" tires. Also, considering a cam swap to shift torque lower in RPM range. Want to decide that too before I do anything with the rear end. Kelley Stevenson had a comp cam XE264HR-14; 2.95 1st gear, 3.55 rear gear; and 24" tires (same as 225 or 235/50/15) & thought that combination worked very well. So, may not need to change the rear axle.
For now, I have plenty to do:
* Install Edelbrock EFI system I got (means I have to fix my exhaust leaks & figure out how to fit the big cap distributor due to clearance [lack of it] to my air cleaner)
* Swap transmissions
* Fix my cracked windshield
* Align my doors (they're not aligned right & that's bugged me since day 1)
IMG_1993.JPG
IMG_1994.JPG
IMG_1995.JPG
IMG_2002.JPG
Changed the subject on this thread since it's evolved past just the initial calculator question.
Rob, I think you got the ratios switched for tire size. Ford Racing E303 cam has excellent midrange and designed for fuel injection. I have a Desktop Dyno program and can run simulations for you on different cams. If your existing cam is not already, you can advance it 4 degrees to lower the torque curve.
Yes Jim - I got the ratios switched for tire size. Existing cam is not advanced. I'll take you up on your desktop dyno offer as soon as I've narrowed 2-3 options.
Anyone have thoughts on the transmission - what questions to ask to figure out if quality components were used &/or thoughts on condition of the gears in the pics?
Maybe Jim B will pop in. He tore into the MG Roadmaster T-5 earlier this year.
In my book, a 2.95 1st & .72 or .73 5th gear with a 3.5 rear gear is about perfect for a LBC V8.
What about the Mighty B Cam?!
RE: 5th -- I'm already checking with him on that. I have .68 currently & that puts me a little low in the RPM range. But, from what I've read, the only options with the 2.95 1st is either .59 or .63.
RE: Mighty B cam -- I'll likely also swap cams. Have been on the road this week; no time to call Comp Cams or others to narrow down options. Goal will be more lower end torque. Will also look at effect of advancing current cam per Jim's earlier note.
"All Hail the Mighty "B" cam!!"
I did what to the Roadmaster? Oh. The T-5, yep I did. Replaced a couple synchros.
Now the RM is a special case I think. It has that thunderous 455 BBB, and that makes it perfectly happy with about any gearing you can stuff in it. I think the axle ratio is about 2.88 or 2.87 and that works just fine. The rear tires are a little larger too. And it's still getting about 20mpg. But I wouldn't use that ratio in my car I don't think. I can give my impressions as soon as I get to drive it with the new transmission though, might be another week or two. 3.27 1st gear, 0.68 OD I think, 3.54 axle gears and 25.7" rear tires. That is about equivalent to 3.08 gears with 24" tires which a 350 cid engine should easily support. Should be a pretty good combo I think. Lively off the line. Overall 1st gear ratio is 11.5 which would be equivalent to 10.8 with 24" tires.
Carl would know what the 1st gear ratio in the RM would be. If it's that 2.95 that gives a 8.5:1 overall ratio plus the taller tires. I don't recall at the moment their diameter but it is a bit larger, maybe not much. The RM feels like it is geared about perfect, though you have to remember the massive torque.
Jim
Rob, the 2.95 T5 has a OD available of .73(.72?) also. It was in a few Mustang and Camaro's.If you go to the 3.36 gears the .63 will be pretty tall. Check out the link above regarding tooth count. A lot of guys like the earlier HO cam with 1.7 rockers too.
Or a .80.
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/Detailed/349.shtml
The MG Roadmaster has 2.95 1st & .63 5th gears.
Carl, I forgot about the Ford .80. I think it may be better for racing. I like the lower RPM's for cruising on the Interstate. Just not too low in the hills.
Rob, Here are examples for the cams I mentioned above. The HO cam with 1.7 rockers only makes sense if you already had that cam. The E303 beats it in lower RPM TQ and is about a tie at upper RPM. EDIT: 272 TQ on HO cam.
HO1.7rockers001.jpg
E303001.jpg
B303(your cam) Advanced 4 degrees moves TQ curve from 5000 RPM to 4500 RPM. Surprisingly the mildest HO cam still is at 5000 RPM when 4 degrees advanced.
B303001.jpg
Jim, I am curious, since Larry Shimp changed from the B cam to Comp's XE264HR. If I recall correctly,
it has 212/218 duration @ .050 and would have .512 lift with 1.6 rockers. Would you plug that in to see?
(truth in advertising, or whatever-it's what I have)
Thanks,
Dennis
Dennis, Here you go! This is fun but rather addictive! It looks very similar to the "B" cam advanced 4 degrees. The same cam Kelly has. I don't know why the bottom of the chart is cut off but, max TQ is at 4500 RPM, HP is at 6500 RPM.
CompcamsXE264HR-14001.jpg
Kelly's cam is ideal for fast street. I have never had so much fun passing cars in places mere mortals wouldn't even consider! :-0
All hail the mighty 'B' cam!
Here's copy from earlier pages of this forum. These pulls were for different timing settings. the most advanced was the great fuel mileage. the other pull was for max power. These points were determined over time from different dyno sessions. The A9L (std Trans.) (A3M ?? A/T) ECM was near top of chart for OBD1 technology. Time dims my memory, but was into Ford Tech at that time. Total package for my car, weight 2440# wet, no driver,T5Z (Ford racing), 3.55 Ford 8.8 Trac Loc,Ford Focus wheels w/205-50R16 tires 24.1" Dia, Similar engine configured to Factory Crate with Hyperutetic pistons, X-303 heads, XE-264-HR Cam, Roller Rockers 1.6 ratio, 65 mm T/B, Pro-M MAF on GT40 Tubular Intake ported Lower by T. Moss, March serpentine pulley system,& Explorer T/C & Crank Damper. Donor car odometer read 118K miles when I got the package to begin my conversion. Carl did initial run at Townsend 2006 after the Terre Haute unveiling in 2005. Usually returned 27-28 MPG at interstate speed with adequate performance. ;-)
Tx 2012 Dyno results.jpg
Kelly's pic is not showing. Here is the thread.
http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?10,26772,page=2
Good HP at the wheels and max TQ 700 RPM lower than the simulation. I used Rob's engine specs's for the cam comparisons. I picked the Performance Trends program because it doesn't show inflated numbers like some. Those simulations would be at the flywheel with open headers, electric water pump and no accessories. Typically chassis dyno's show peak HP and TQ 500 RPM's lower than engine dyno's. Deduct 20% from the engine simulations above to get approximate @ the wheels.
Here's the chart for Kelley's car...
Tx2012Dynoresults.jpg
Jim - do the simulations change if you assume my motor but with the Edelbrock Pro-Flo EFI system? It has a different intake & of course throttle body vs. carb.
Rob, It may, but generally equal carb or fuel injection show very little difference. What you will notice is better throttle response, easier cold starting with no warm up and better mileage. I would need the specs for injectors and cfm of throttle body, TBI or port injection and I'll run it to see.
Rob, My program had the Edelbrock Pro-Flow system in its library. Max TQ is 500 RPM's lower and HP 1000 RPM lower than with carb. This is with your cam advanced 4 degrees.
EdelbrockPro-FloInjection001.jpg
Fuel injection is very tuneable. I think if you change timing and A/F mixture you would increase HP and lower TQ a bit. I'm going to show that last chart again in a different scale and by itself so it is not cut off.
Pic:
Here Goes!
EdelbrockPro-Flo3001.jpg
Great info Jim!
I just talked to Comp Cams & they recommended their XE266HR -- pretty close to what Kelley had. Thoughts on 266 vs 264? Looks like I'm down to one of those or the E303 (which is about $100 cheaper).
Rob, Or advance your cam 4 degrees for free. I can run the XE266HR to see I there is any difference. I can do back to back carb and Edelbrock Pro-Flow fuel injected.
Rob, Here you go!
XE266HRFI001.jpg
XE266HRCarb001.jpg
The fuel injection moves the power curve down for more TQ and less HP vs carb for more HP less TQ. I think A/F and ignition tuning will fix the HP to TQ ratio. The XE266HR doesn't seem much different to the XE264HR or the B303. It's higher lift probably isn't utilized by your heads and it would be a good idea to check piston to valve clearance. Most street engines don't need more than .500 lift. It has .544 IN and .555 EX lift. XE264HR has .512 @ both. B303 has .480 @ both and E303 has .498 @ both.
If you wonder why I advance these cams 4 degrees it is not only to move the TQ curve down but also to get the Dynamic compression around 7. Straight up is only around 6.5.
Rob, Is your Edelbrock the 4 barrel type or front throttle body? Do you know the injector size? Stock 302/5.0 was 19lb. Most use 351 size 28lb.
Jim, the ProFlo is port injection. Throttle body is 4-barrel type with 1000 CFM # 1.5" hg. Injectors are 29lb Pico type.
Rob, a few more questions. Average runner length and port height. Then I can input custom and get a closer dyno chart. It sounds similar to what we did for Chris Gill on his stroker Buick. I think your B cam advanced is the best choice. Why buy another that is close to the same performance?
Can't seem to find that info online and am away from the parts till sometime next week so won't be able to measure till then. I vaguely recall reading somewhere that the Pro Flo intake is based on the Victor Jr. but not 100% sure if my memory is right.
Rob, Thanks. I'll figure it out.
Rob, I used the Victor Jr settings in my program. Looks like over 40HP over carb simulations. Still about a tie but Comp cam may idle better due to lower duration. You can see that the Victor Jr intake wakes up at 3000RPM.
EdelbrockProFloB303001.jpg
EdelbrockProFloCompXE264HR001.jpg
Rob, Your cam has 5 degrees advance built in. The Comp cam has 4 degrees advance built in. Even though they are put at zero the advance is already there.
Dan Masters uses the E cam with his Edelbrock Pro Flo injection. A little less duration and more lift than the B cam.
I knew Dan has an E cam and he is happy with it. But, if I'm going to swap cams, the XE264 or 266 seem like better choices. Either way, I'm going to try it with my existing cam. I'm just not sure how well the EFI system will like it.
Rob, I agree with the XE264 but the higher lift on the XE266 makes me worry about piston to valve clearance, for a small gain in power.
From my experience, the XE 264 HR is perfect for a EFI street car. As Jim noted earlier, the carbed and EFI Dyno very close. Larry Shimp and I confirmed this several times. Same engine combo, Carb vs EFI. No P to V problems. E & B Cams= OLD School Tech. OK to move up to early 21 Century tech. :-)
B-B-B-B-but Kelly.......
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XeOn5FjsYAI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yeah, yeah Carl... Kelley already sent that to me to harass me. You guys have convinced me. Need to swap transmissions and resell my current one before I can buy a cam.
Carl, that video "kills me", LMAO
I know. It's a riot! :)
brings a tear to my eye...
Jim
M.F!, never thought of using a B cam for "Tenderizer" Other good attributes including the Aliens and Mother Ship. Is there anything the Mighty B Cam cannot do????? Insert where?
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Rob, Just a bump to see how you're doing on the transmission / rear gear change?
Between the house flooding, selling a house (twice - long story!), some house remodeling, and moving our stuff -- on top of working 50-60 hrs/wk, I don't even have my cracked windshield from BV8 2017 replaced. I got as far as getting the new glass in the frame but stalled after that. I did figure out that my water leak on the passenger floorboard is due to how I grafted the metal dash cowl into my RB shell... There's a u-channel under the dash that's close to the middle wiper post. The wiper bar that runs under the cowl to the posts is being fouled by that U-channel keeping the middle and right wiper posts from seating properly. So, I need to cut a relief in the channel.
Back on gear ratios, Kelley & Carl convinced me my rear gear with a 2.95 1st gear works well. So, I bought a T5Z spec transmission in a SN95 case so swap should be pretty easy. Remodeling will have a break after April and we finish our move at the same time so I should be able to get back on the car after that.
Realistically, I expect to get the transmission changed and maybe the cam swapped before BV8 2018. But, very unlikely I'll do the EFI swap till after that.
Rob, Sorry to hear about your troubles. I was just curious how you were doing. I'm starting a 10 day stretch 12 hours a day my self. Good news is I get to retire in 20 months!. Did you decide to go with taller tires? The smaller diameter tires lower your rear ratio too.
Can't complain Jim. Our flooding was very minor; only about 2" of water and entire downstairs is tile so no carpet or wood flooring to deal with and only had to cut out about a foot of sheetrock/insulation. Biggest part of the job as been refacing kitchen cabinets because I had to cut out large sections of the cabinet bases to get air flowing to dry out under them.
We're just about done though so back to the car in a couple of weeks!!