Notices
GM Drivetrain & Suspension Chassis | Transmission| Driveshaft | Gears/Rear End/Differential | Traction Aids

Weight VS. RPM VS. Gear Ratio

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-25-2009, 08:57 PM
  #1  
Teching In
Thread Starter
 
wahlstrom1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Weight VS. RPM VS. Gear Ratio

I'm putting together more parts for my LQ4 swap into my 97 ranger and have run across an issue. I am currently running 4.56's with 35's and run 2400RPM at 65mph which is great with the 4.0L v6 but I'm unsure of this setup with the 6.0L. I'll be effectively doubling my HP and getting a 50% increase in TQ with the 6.0L, and am looking to run a 38" tire in the future. My truck weighs around 4700lbs+- 200lbs with any given daily load.

I can run these different options giving me 4 different choices, if you guys have an idea of what would work best, please let me know.

6.0/NV3500/NV241

4.56 - 35s - 2173
5.13 - 35s - 2445

4.56 - 38 - 2000
5.13 - 38 - 2250
Old 06-25-2009, 09:06 PM
  #2  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (27)
 
GMCtrk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 12,275
Received 17 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

The sweet spot on the 6 liter for gas mileage is about 1700 rpms. Unfortunately, the torque there isn't adequate (at least for me on highway cruising). So now I cruise @ 70 around 2100 rpms with 4.10 gears and 31" tires and I like it a lot better. Throttle response is tighter, gas mileage went down about 2-3 MPG's though, no big deal. Truck probably weighs 4650 without me in it.
Old 06-25-2009, 09:12 PM
  #3  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
1Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Jones Creek, Texas
Posts: 1,410
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

While I have no idea of what your planning on doing with your truck, the LS type motors tend to get the mileage turning somewhere around 1700 to 1900 rpm when cruising down the highway. So if that is what your concerned about, stay with with the 4.56's. If your wanting to go rock crawling and damn the mileage the lower gears will help. By the way, that little fellow is still pretty damn heavy. I'd have to say though, if you were content with the six, the 6.0L should should flip your wig!
Old 06-25-2009, 09:27 PM
  #4  
Teching In
Thread Starter
 
wahlstrom1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The 4.0L is basically a small ford FE 390, makes stupid torque for it's size down low but falls on it's face in the upper end. I'm gaining .40 in gearing in first gear in the tranny, and another .30 in the transfercase when compared to the stock ranger ratios so the low end of things shouldn't be hurting much.

I daily drive the truck, put on about 30-35,000km's a year and use it for everything from wheelin to towing and everything in between. I get 18mpg now hwy, and around 14 in town so I'd like to keep around the same mileage if possible.

It's a flying brick going down the road, more then 24" clearance under the frame rails with winch bumper and no aerodynamic considerations at all.....oh, and stock weight was around 4200lbs.

Last edited by wahlstrom1; 06-25-2009 at 11:41 PM.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bluecollar Hotrods
TOWING & OFFROAD PERFORMANCE
11
06-11-2024 11:37 PM
Oobray
8-Lug Truck Performance
70
06-13-2022 03:38 AM
Corvette454l88
Trucks and SUV Classifieds
19
09-01-2016 01:24 AM
thunder550
Trucks and SUV Classifieds
9
10-08-2015 04:53 PM
Noah Burns
GMT K2xx Trucks General Discussion
12
10-05-2015 06:46 AM



Quick Reply: Weight VS. RPM VS. Gear Ratio



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 AM.