Rear end gear ratio 373 or 410

[Nightbiker07]

Mild build 5.0 engine
Explorer 8.8 rear end with disc brakes.

I bought the rear end with a 3.55
Switch it over to 3.73 And noticed a bit of a difference, but it wasn't earth-shattering.

Since I likely won't be doing any long-distance driving with it anymore, been thinking about switching to 4.10 gears to make it a little more peppy.

Wondering if anybody else has made the switch and loved it or didn't really notice much of a difference.

 

[pjtoledo]

3.55 to 3.73 is a 5% increase in torque.
3,73 to 4.10 is a 10% increase.

 

[RonD]

Its a 0.4 ratio change so twice as much as previous change, 3.55 to 3.73, so you would notice it twice as much, lol

If you have an automatic the ratio difference between 2nd and 3rd is usually about 0.4, should be about a 500-600rpm difference

The 4.10 rear end allows the engine to get to prime torque RPMs faster, less "load" on the engine as RPMs spools up to 3,300rpms(5.0l/302), where it has best "power", so quicker acceleration, but lower top speed

 

[Dirtman]

My truck came stock with 4.10s and I couldn't even conceive of using a higher (numerically lower) gear, and thats with tiny 27" tires....

I don't have a v8 though so every extra bit of help I can get from gearing helps. When I switch to 30" tires Im putting 4.56 gears in.

 

[Shadowrider6661]

I have 3.73s in my stock Ranger with a 4.0L, standard transmission, and 33 x12.5 x 15 mud tires. Living off-grid, I spend about equal time driving on and off road, so I guess it comes down to what your needs are. Everyone chooses the best setup for their own needs. As it should be. Enjoy !

 

[Nightbiker07]

This is just a "fun" vehicle at this point.
Only driven on the street, never off road.

Just trying to weigh my options and decide if I should make the switch.

Top speed is irrelevant, same with cruising RPM for MPGs.

Stupid thing is, at 75MPH, the v8 does better than the V6, MPG wise.

 

[racsan]

well if the “fun” factor is the important thing not mpg’s or top speed, run 4.10’s A 302 would easily handle 3.73’s but with 4.10’s youd have a better launch from a standing stop, assuming the tires hook up but then again burnouts can be fun.

 

[rubydist]

You haven't told us anything about the tire diameter, which is vital for us to give you much useful feedback on which ratio would make more sense.

 

[Nightbiker07]

You haven't told us anything about the tire diameter, which is vital for us to give you much useful feedback on which ratio would make more sense.

I have two completely different sets that I switch back and fourth with when I want to change the look of the truck.

 

[55trucker]

Dare I say that the Cragar SS wheels have OEM 235/60r15's mounted to them?...the other tires/wheels are a larger diameter which begs the question....what are you doing to keep the speedo in sync all the time?

 

[Nightbiker07]

The rears are 295's
I believe you are correct on the front size.


Because the v6 ranger took a signal from the transmission and sent it to the PCM for the speedometer, I got a BCM out of a 2wd stick shift ranger. That took the ABS signal from the rear end, converts it to a VSS signal to operate the speedometer and sends the signal to the PCM.

My speedometer isnt correct. I would need a Ford scanner to reprogram the BCM.


The explorer PCM controls shifts based on speed, not RPM.
But I have an SCT X3 tuner, so I can change my shift points with a few buttons, and swing the shift point one way or another to get the desired engine RPM for a WOT shift.

 

[rubydist]

Please describe your "mild build" 302 as that can mean nearly anything.

 

[Nightbiker07]

Cam, roller rocker conversion, TMH headers, custom X3 tunes, MSD coil packs, double roller timing chain set, stock GT40P heads except for the roller rocker conversion.
Emissions systems still intact, flowmaster super 40 muffler.

Rebuilt OEM bottom end, new OEM pistons. Block had some rust inside the cylinders, the pistons may be one size larger I can't remember for sure.