Drivetrain Clutch, Torque Converter, Transmission, Driveline, Axles, Rear Ends

anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 6, 2005 | 11:59 AM
  #1  
Mr. Merk's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 96
From: NW Arkansas
anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

did you notice it much? what kind of rpm increase was there at hwy speeds?

gas mileage drop much?
Old Oct 6, 2005 | 03:20 PM
  #2  
Injuneer's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 71,098
From: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

Your RPM and your rear wheel torque will increase by 5.8%. Doesn't seem like a whole lot, but you should be able to feel it. Currently you should be about at about 2,075rpm at 70mph in O/D. The rpm will increase to 2,200.
Old Oct 6, 2005 | 03:50 PM
  #3  
Mr. Merk's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 96
From: NW Arkansas
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

which on a stock 3.4 auto would equal roughly a 9ft-lb increase in torque
Old Oct 6, 2005 | 04:52 PM
  #4  
MustangEater82's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 4,738
From: Charleston, SC
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

I did it on my 5-speed 3.4L I noticed the differnce by seat of pants and times...

worth it in my opinon.
Old Oct 6, 2005 | 08:36 PM
  #5  
Mr. Merk's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 96
From: NW Arkansas
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

any mileage decrease???

also at the crank it would be a 12ft-lb increase over stock
Old Oct 7, 2005 | 09:48 AM
  #6  
Jameslt1TA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,152
From: Wyoming
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

I wouldnt bother with it . Too little of an increase for all the work and money involved.
Old Oct 7, 2005 | 10:50 AM
  #7  
viperkiller's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 464
From: cen-tex
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

i went from 3:23 to 3:73 to 3:42. didnt really notice much change on the first swap, but i never had an equal field to judge as i never got traction with the stock gears. but for the amount of highway driving i was doing the 3:73 turned more rpm's then i liked. so i went with 3:42. they do tons better on daily driving, but have not been to the track yet. as far as SOP testing i didnt notice much change in the 3:23 and 3:73, as i had spinning problem with both. but with the 3:42's they feel possibly a little bit slower off the line, but not really noticable. but the car is in the power range a little bit longer and actually feels a bit quicker in the mid range, like passing gear and such.

to sum all this up, if you dont mind running 2500 rpm at 70 and have sticky tires then 3:73 are cool, if you want a good middle of the road gear 3:42 are cool. you get a little more kick on the line and you can still run 75 or 80 without winding your car up to 3000+ rpm. i never really noticed milage differance in any of them. but then again with the cam i have if i go any higher gear i will get a ton of surge at hwy speeds.
Old Oct 8, 2005 | 02:26 AM
  #8  
Mr. Merk's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 96
From: NW Arkansas
Re: anyone gone from 3.23 to 3.42?

Originally Posted by Jameslt1TA
I wouldnt bother with it . Too little of an increase for all the work and money involved.
with what we have planned it would be more work keeping 3.23s

i'd say 9ft-lbs to the ground is a significant increase, esp on a V6 car
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
colts0455
LT1 Based Engine Tech
22
Jul 24, 2015 04:51 PM
vwb11356
Drivetrain
2
Jul 22, 2015 06:51 PM
Z28amustangklr
LT1 Based Engine Tech
0
Jul 18, 2015 11:05 AM
blac94Z
Drivetrain
4
Mar 2, 2015 06:03 PM
blue98SS
LS1 Based Engine Tech
4
Jul 3, 2002 04:18 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17 PM.