Re: Rear end ratio -- Buzzy's Question and Answer Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

04 /19/ 24, 8:08pm

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8], 9, 10 ]

Subject: Re: Rear end ratio

Author:
Steve

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 08/ 16/ 01, 9:52am
In reply to: Lee Howard 's message, "Rear end ratio" on 08/ 9/ 01, 8:40am

>I have a 79 33 foot. We are the third owner and have
>a well documented history. The engine was changed out
>to a 250hp turbo (cat rebuild). It had 75,000 miles
>on it and it let go a valve. I am having it rebuilt
>at Cat. The rear end ratio in it is the original
>5.29. I just recently discovered your sight and can
>see we have the wrong gearing. Cat says it will pull
>a 4.33 rear with no problem. We are in Texas and
>seldom get into the mountains. We do take a few trips
>to the northeast. My question is what do you think
>about that gearing or should we stay with the 4.63. I
>am going to have it done next week. Any help would be
>appreciated. The 4.33 figures out at 77.40/2800RPM
>versus 72.4/2800 with 4.63.

I have also recently purchased a 79 35'FC. the documentation is for this rig is not all that complete, but, from what I have have been able to piece together, the original 3208NA was replaced with a new (not rebuilt) 3208T in 1984. At the same time the rear end ration was changed to a 4.10:1.
We live in Washington (hilly country by definition) and have recently returned from a trip over the Cascade mountains. I had been warned to expect hill climbing to be slow and laborious but was surprised to the contrary and found that I was able to keep up with slow traffic most of the time on the uphill. RPMs remain low shifts from 2-3 at 35 mph 3-4 at 45. I have not noticed lugging and feel that I have a sensitivity to that feel. So far I have been happy with the performance of the coach on the road but I will admitt to being conservative in the highway speed department

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Re: Rear end ratio
Author: Lawrence Thornell [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: 08/ 18/ 01, 9:28pm Before you go too far read Harvey's article in the March issue of Family Motor Coaching, "Teddy And The Two-Speed." Teddy says this is the answer. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]