Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a '96 RT/10?

[Matt]

Re: Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

In my opinion, 3.73 are to steep. With the massive amounts of torque we have, you would be fighting for traction at anything but minimal throttle. Also, first and probably second gear would become useless. They would go by in a blink of an eye.

If you really want to do a gear swap, I would suggest a 3.54. It will give you a seat of the pants improvement in accelaration.

I personally prefer the stock 3.07 gear since it allows you to take off quite nicely with street tires.

Matt

 

[JonB]

Re: Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by viperprowler1:
Is this too much gear for a stock '96 RT/10? I am not so concerned about top speed as I am about
-excellent acceleration
-cruise at legal speeds without excessive engine rpm
-and with reasonable gas mileage for traveling.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Skip the 3.73.

Excessive Wheelspin - unmanageable on compromised surfaces.
Excessive TRANNY output shaft speed and trans heat
Excessive rear end heat
Excessive motor wear due avg RPMs 21% higher
Excessive gas consumption 25%+ more gas

Go with 3.54.
Please invite me to bid on your purchase. Thanks

 

[SNKBYT]

Re: Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

This reply comes from someone who has actually used 3.73 gears, 3.54 gears and stock gears in both gen1 and gen 2 cars. My experience with 3.73 in a gen one stock with filters, tubes and pipes were car was fun on the street, great for autocross,and ok for drag strip at sea-level and much better at high altitudes. Never experienced excessive tranny heat, engine wear, rearend wear that others express as opinions. It is a little tougher to launch at the drags, but you can learn how adjust. I've ran a 12.46@ 115mph with this set-up. 4th gear, not 5th in the 1/4. 3.73 in a gen 2 dynoed at 440rwhp is again fun on the street, great for autocrossing, and ok at the strip. 12.22@122mph, Times improve about .1-.3 sec with 3.54 gears on a good track using street tires. My next choice of gears are 3.31 for running 450rwhp. Hope this helps,just the facts, no B.S, !

 

[Marv S]

Re: Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

Dan had a great post on gears:
http://vca1.viperclub.org/ubb/Forum14/HTML/005365.html

 

[viperprowler1]

Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

Is this too much gear for a stock '96 RT/10? I am not so concerned about top speed as I am about excellent acceleration and the ability to cruise at legal speeds without excessive engine rpm and with reasonable gas mileage for traveling. I would appreciate your reasoned opinions! Thanks!

 

[Viper Wizard]

Re: Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

viperprowler1,I've driven a few Vipers with the 3:73 rear-A little to tall for me[squirrel-ley]. In my opinion the 3:55 is a good all around gear.
Mopar Performance now offers complete Diff Assemblis-3:55,3:73&4:10! VCA Members-Diff $2100-Labor $90 here at my store.

 

[jwwiii]

Re: Are 3.73 rear gears too much for a \'96 RT/10?

Viperprowler1;

Don't do the .373 rears. I put .355's on my 98' and really enjoyed them around town.

There is more wheelspin, you will need a speedometer recalibration computer, and be prepared to burn tires up faster. The choice is yours of course, but I believe the factory .307's are faster for those of us without alot (or none) drag experience.

I think I will do a lightweight flywheel mod for the throttle response around town. People on the board here seem to really like the flywheel change, and I don't
believe it causes much warranty concern or wear and tear.

For what it is worth, I did not bother to install a differnt rear-end on my 01'. I left it stock, and I am glad I did. My 98' did benefit from the rear-end change, however. My 2 cents.

Jim