2014 Ultimate 1 Ton Challenge results

Turtle n Peeps wrote:


It would have been negligible. Gearing does not make horsepower. Shorter gearing would have kept the big 6 in the power band slightly better but that's about it. And with a 6 speed I do mean slightly.

Would it have made a difference? Yes; but only a few seconds. The difference in fuel economy would have been more than negligible though.

I wish they would have put all 3 on a chassis dyno to see how much power is lost through the drive train. Crank horsepower is meaningless.

It does not make power, but it does increase or decrease the power depending on the ratio.

850 ft/lbs in direct they 3.73's is 3170 ft/lbs to the wheel, 4.10's would put 3485ft/lbs to the wheel, 9.9%, for the same engine output and fuel consumption. That is the difference in 775 ft/lbs or 850 ft/lbs for the same gearing. At 2500 rpms that is like an additional 35hp... So yes it does make a difference.

I also don't believe that the difference in rpms, 9.9%, is going to make a huge difference in fuel economy on a modern HPCR engine, 20 years ago absolutely.

Gearing is very important, but many people only thing that the rear end ratio is important. Ford engineers know this, and that is why the trans gears are lower than the other transmissions. Report a higher rear end, but end up with the same overall gearing and you get good marketing with good gearing. IMHO perception is also why they built a V-8 from the ground up when an I-6 is a better design, just ask any trucker.

I agree compleaty on the dyno, I think Ford would have dropped a bit and GM/Ram would have been closer, just a guess based on stock dyno sheets I have seen.