People with low range boxes...

[Doug Krebs]

How much gearing do you feel is adequate?

For example, in my imaginary buggy, i'm going to be running a 4.3, I'm trying to decide between a doubler or a custom 465/465. I'm either going to be running a 39.5 or a 42. So now you know the engine and tires what do you think would be the more suitable gear selection?

In the diffs right now there are 4.10's, so with a doubler the lowest over all would be 105. If i put 5.13's (lowest a 14 bolt can go) I could get a 131.7.

Now with my gay 465 doubler and a 205 and 4.10's the ratio's would be: 344.7, 188.4, 175.9, 103, 96, 82.6, etc… I realize the 344.7 would probably be unusable, but what do you think about the rest? To spread out?

What are ya'lls final crawl ratio? I'm I going for too much here?

[stinger7401]

mines like a 76:1 ratio or something close to it

edit: 60:1

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by stinger7401
mines like a 76:1 ratio or something close to it

Thanks ass:flipoff2:

I'm wanting to know what you feel is adequate... I know you have a 4.3 also, what if you were running larger tires, what would you want?

[robertf03]

doug I drove a jeep with a 4.3, sm420, and dana 20 and 4.10s (7x2x4.10) with 35"s and it still felt like it was going a little fast. The 4.3 was idling around 800. 57.4



I'll be at 74:1 with the dana 300 and 4.10s crawls so slow it hasn't left the driveway

I think around 80-100 would be about right to be able to really control where you are going instead of letting up the clutch and going until you crash into something, which is what I had to do with the t150,dana 20, and 3.55's (21.3:1)

[Doug Krebs]

I've got around 70 in the blazer with 35's and a 350 and i'd like it to be lower... When you're going threw a bed a rocks, even if it's flat, sometimes it's to fast to just let it idle through without having to step on the clutch and start over. Larger tires and a smaller motor would only complicate things more.

I'm thinking I'll at least want a 130, and the 180 may be usable at times. I know scott has crazy gearing, he must be out of the office today. I actually think I talked to him about this when I was drunk and I'm pretty sure he told me i was gay:rainbow:

Oh the thing i'm worried about with this 465/465 is nothing between 100 and 175

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
...the ratio's would be: 344.7, 188.4, 175.9, 103, 96, 82.6, etc… I realize the 344.7 would probably be unusable, but what do you think about the rest? To spread out?
are you talking about the difference when you shift gears? How often do you actually shift gears when your crawling? I'm usually in 1st or 2nd the whole time, and I start out in whatever gear I'm gonna use. My gears are pretty high (1:47?) and I use the clutch a lot though. I'm sure that spread would be fine on the street.

Oh, yeah, Scott's crazy gearing is all in the boxes...stock 4.10s in the diffs (yota r&p gets weaker the lower you go). His lowest is probably about 1:140 with his 3 cylinder :flipoff2:
Your 4.3 will probably idle a little lower (mounted on the shop floor) than our Yota motors do (about 900 rip'ems) so 180 would probably be overkill for you

what kind of a driver are you? Do you like to crawl slower or faster? The only trip I've been on with you, you spent the whole time changing a tire :flipoff2:

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
are you talking about the difference when you shift gears? How often do you actually shift gears when your crawling? I'm usually in 1st or 2nd the whole time, and I start out in whatever gear I'm gonna use. My gears are pretty high (1:47?) and I use the clutch a lot though. I'm sure that spread would be fine on the street.

Oh, yeah, Scott's crazy gearing is all in the boxes...stock 4.10s in the diffs (yota r&p gets weaker the lower you go). His lowest is probably about 1:140 with his 3 cylinder :flipoff2:
Your 4.3 will probably idle a little lower (mounted on the shop floor) than our Yota motors do (about 900 rip'ems) so 180 would probably be overkill for you

what kind of a driver are you? Do you like to crawl slower or faster? The only trip I've been on with you, you spent the whole time changing a tire :flipoff2:

I'm not going to be driving this on the street... I think you are interpreting the spread out part as the shifters are far apart. I'm talking about the the gear selection being far apart as in nothing between 105 and 180.

And I do both when I crawl, I usually start out slow, but getting the blazer over stuff you usually have to use the skinny pedal sometimes. With a buggy I have no idea how I'll drive.

[fbronco86]

mine is like 55 and it sucks balls.

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
I'm talking about the the gear selection being far apart as in nothing between 105 and 180.
aight how about this:
at 1000rpms with 1:105 gearing, your axles are turning 9.5 rpm
at 2000rpms with 1:105 gearing, your axles are turning 19 rpm

at 1000rpms with 1:180 gearing, your axles are turning 5.5 rpm
at 1000rpms with 1:180 gearing, your axles are turning 11.1 rpm

you've already got some overlap only using 1000rpm range, since you'll probably use at least 2000 or 2500 rpms, that gives you over 50% overlap btw gears

[redcagepatrol]

Get your overall gear reduction to around 100:1 or more. I have like 173:1 and use it all the time. It is a luxury that makes driving of hills etc. a whole lot easier

3.93 first x 2:28 first case x 4.7 second case x 4.1 axles = 173:1

EDIT: I fixed my first gear ratio

[Doug Krebs]

so would 180 be just plain gay? Thing is I already have everything in need for the 465/465 minus the adapter and the shaft.

If i did the regular doubler, I'd have to get another 465 with the 203 behind it and then the adapter and shaft.

The 465/465 will no doubt be more of a pain in the ass because not many people do it and it will weigh a little more.

[redcagepatrol]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
so would 180 be just plain gay?

Nope, I used to have 197:1, I was cool then:laughing:

I looked up my first gear ratio, I have 173:1 right now

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by redcagepatrol
Nope, I used to have 197:1, I was cool then:laughing:

I looked up my first gear ratio, I have 173:1 right now

Ok but the 339.5:1 would be gay! 6.5x6.5x1.96x4.10 = 339.5

I just wish I could find a closer range transmission for the first box, something with a 4,3,2

then in low range it would be

4x6.5x1.96x4.1 = 209
3x6.5x1.96x4.1 = 156
2x6.5x1.96x4.1 = 104

and in high

4x6.5x1x4.1 =106
3x6.5x1x4.1 =79
2x6.5x1x4.1 =53

and all the other ranges with different gears in the tranny

[uglyota]

Originally posted by redcagepatrol
Get your overall gear reduction to around 100:1 or more. I have like 173:1 and use it all the time. It is a luxury that makes driving of hills etc. a whole lot easier

3.93 first x 2:28 first case x 4.7 second case x 4.1 axles = 173:1

EDIT: I fixed my first gear ratio
scott, you don't think it matters that he's got a lot more torque, and probably uses his bottom end more than us high-end squirrel-power guys? ;)

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
scott, you don't think it matters that he's got a lot more torque, and probably uses his bottom end more than us high-end squirrel-power guys? ;)

Yes but with my 350 in the blazer right now and on 35's i have around a 70:1 and it's not near what I would want.

I'm thinking i'll go ahead with the 465/465, if it ends up being to heavy, etc... I'll just chalk it up as a learning experience and run it for a couple years.

Oh don't forget the gayness of rev/rev and going forward and having multispeed reverse.

[redcagepatrol]

Originally posted by uglyota
scott, you don't think it matters that he's got a lot more torque, and probably uses his bottom end more than us high-end squirrel-power guys? ;)

That's why I said over 100:1 and didn't say 150:1.:D

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
Yes but with my 350 in the blazer right now and on 35's i have around a 70:1 and it's not near what I would want.

I'm thinking i'll go ahead with the 465/465, if it ends up being to heavy, etc... I'll just chalk it up as a learning experience and run it for a couple years.

Oh don't forget the gayness of rev/rev and going forward and having multispeed reverse.
sorry-didn't mean you should stay with your 70:1, I was implying that your 105:1 would probably be plenty, and 180:1 would be overkill

I think you should go with 2 trannys though, just to set a precedent of heavy-ass useless bling for this buggy :flipoff2: Not only that, but you can say stuff like "this isn't your ordinary everyday buggy buildup" when people ask why it's taking so long. :D

PS where's austin? His motor's probably putting out that kind of power and he's like 100:1 on 37s

PPS I think you'll break your rear tranny if you do this...if the first case is in low, you'll be putting like 600 lb-ft into the second one

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
sorry-didn't mean you should stay with your 70:1, I was implying that your 105:1 would probably be plenty, and 180:1 would be overkill

I think you should go with 2 trannys though, just to set a precedent of heavy-ass useless bling for this buggy :flipoff2: Not only that, but you can say stuff like "this isn't your ordinary everyday buggy buildup" when people ask why it's taking so long. :D

PS where's austin? His motor's probably putting out that kind of power and he's like 100:1 on 37s

PPS I think you'll break your rear tranny if you do this...if the first case is in low, you'll be putting like 600 lb-ft into the second one

A couple people have done this with WELDED shafts between the 1st and 2nd tranny and have not broken it. It's on some crazy contraption with rockwells and huge tires too.

I know this buggy isn't going to be the "lightest" thing around. One of the main goals of this is to have fun and learn alot from it and not spend an incredible amount of money.

The next will be more weight oriented, etc...

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
The next will be more weight oriented, etc...
wow, what a tease...tell me more about the second buggy you haven't built yet...

Is the main point here that you already have 2 465s and that's therefore cheaper than doing the 203/205 combo?

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
wow, what a tease...tell me more about the second buggy you haven't built yet...

Is the main point here that you already have 2 465s and that's therefore cheaper than doing the 203/205 combo?

Maybe... but the combo would have more of a crawl ratio obviously, thats why I'm trying to figure out what I want, I've never driven anything but my blazer.

Oh and the second buggy is going to have a kick ass shock setup like the ugly!:flipoff2:

[jerryg79]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
The next will be more weight oriented, etc...

Jesus Tits now we are talking about a second buggy to keep your first non-existent buggy company.

Will your 13 kids all be able to ride in it?:flipoff2:

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
Oh and the second buggy is going to have a kick ass shock setup like the ugly!:flipoff2:
glad I could offer you some inspiration! :D

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by Snatch Adams
Jesus Tits now we are talking about a second buggy to keep your first non-existent buggy company.

Will your 13 kids all be able to ride in it?:flipoff2:

No, at least 11 of them are going to ride in your bronco!:flipoff2:
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
By the way, where did 13 kids come from?

[CRaSHnBuRN]

I'm at 223 to 1, and is crazy low. Its nice to have, but for the most part not needed. When I want to crawl, I normally just use the rear case (100:1). Then I use the front case (47:1) for higher speed stuff like sand and mud. I say 100-140 is plenty. I only did what I did cause it gives me so many options, is easy to do, and works well with the toy drivetrain. I say definitely use tranny and tcase gearing to make up for axle gearing. I'm gonna go back down to 4.10s for realiability later on.

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
By the way, where did 13 kids come from?
since you'll be busy building 2 buggys, I'd say the ol' proverbial milkman :flipoff2:
Edit: and 2 blazers :flipoff2:

[jerryg79]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
No, at least 11 of them are going to ride in your bronco!:flipoff2:
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
By the way, where did 13 kids come from?

That is the second time someone has insulted me by mentioning the bronco. The 1st was when samantha saw that POS motorcycle and said "You better not go all '78 Bronco on it!"

*******s!

Oh and the 13 kids they come from......FECKIN'

[Graystroke]

One word...Automatic
gear ratio=infinite
:D

[BigRedFord04]

mine's 75:1.... 5.72x2.69x4.88. desktop dyno showed today that my 302 is putting out ~325HP and my power band is 3000-4000. torque peaks much lower. 75:1 is plenty to get BigRed moving, but cant definately see the need for even more gearing for a purpose built rig. if you're in CS anytime soon you can come test it out in LOW and see what you think.

[fbronco86]

Originally posted by Graystroke
One word...Automatic
gear ratio=infinite
:D

yeah all you guys with the standards stall out all the time.

2.46*2(torque converter)*2.71*4.10

what number should i use for the torque converter?

[Shaggy]

i like automatics too... i burnt up too many clutches in my isuzu

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by fbronco86
yeah all you guys with the standards stall out all the time.

2.46*2(torque converter)*2.71*4.10

what number should i use for the torque converter?

I stall out cause the crawl ratio sucks, and in las cruces because I hadn't fixed the 75 pound push on the clutch.

I'll admit, it's a little easier with automatic, and if I did competition I'd want an automatic, but with the 465 braking the transmission is the last thing on my mind.

[uglyota]

better just hold off on the automatic for buggy #2, huh? :flipoff2:

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
better just hold off on the automatic for buggy #2, huh? :flipoff2:

no, thats for buggy #3 or #4 :flipoff2: :rainbow: :laughing: :cheers: :texas: :flipoff2:

[uglyota]

Originally posted by Doug Krebs
no, thats for buggy #3 or #4 :flipoff2: :rainbow: :laughing: :cheers: :texas: :flipoff2:
haha, the smiley equivalent of !!!!!!!??????? :flipoff2:

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
haha, the smiley equivalent of !!!!!!!??????? :flipoff2:

It wouldn't let me do anymore, it says to many graphics are attatched or some BS.

Actually i was trying to immate the people over at ColoradoK5:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

[uglyota]

Oh, yeah, now I get it! I read that board ALL the time! :flipoff2:




hey what happened to all the tech?

[Doug Krebs]

Originally posted by uglyota
Oh, yeah, now I get it! I read that board ALL the time! :flipoff2:




hey what happened to all the tech?

You people killed the tech and I'm not helping.

Here is just one example, now just imagine people doing this all the time.

http://coloradok5.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/1090947/page/0/view/collapsed/sb/5/o/all/fpart/1

PS you have to scroll down just a tad to get the full effect.

[uglyota]

glad we don't have any of those tools from that board over here! :flipoff2:
now go back to the last 3 posts from each of us and jerry's post about Feckin', hit "report to moderator" and make our elected officials earn their keep :flipoff2: