4.56 gears?

[tristan_rock]

Hey everyone!
I have a 2011 Ford Ranger 2WD XLT Supercab automatic 4.0. According to the door sticker, I have an 8.8 rear end with 3.55 gear ratio. I was wondering if I could just order 4.56 gears and throw them in my rear end. I'm looking to go up to 33s from 31s. Any help would be appreciated. I do not know much about gears and rear ends. I included gears I was looking into.

JEGS 60028K: Ford 8.8" Ring & Pinion with Install Kit 4.56 Ratio - JEGS High Performance

Most 1981-Up Ford light trucks (not 1997-2002 Expedition 5.4L or 1998 F-150 5.4L) 1985-Up Ford Mustang 4.6L/5.0L 1987-Up Ford trucks require 7/8

www.jegs.com

 

[JOLENE_THE_RANGER]

yes you can

 

[Bgunner]

OK just a very quick simplified version of what is in the tech section: https://www.therangerstation.com/tech/axles/

The 8.8 axle refers to the the height of the ring gear itself from top to bottom and doesn't affect the amount of teeth of the gear itself so as long as the gears are meant for the 8.8 inch ford rear end they will bolt in. A word of caution since you mentioned that you know little about the the gearing, have a reputable shop install the gears or you will find there is a major learning curve and specialty tools required to install them yourself.

 

[1986RangerXL]

Why a 4.56 though? Many people run 33s with a 4.10, unless you're planning on even bigger tires in the future or rock crawling

 

[Dirtman]

I'm putting in 4.56 gears with 29.5" tires...

If you consider that some trucks come stock with 4.10s, moving up from a stock 2wd tire (which is generally 27") to a 33" tire a 4.56 gear is not at all too aggressive, especially in an automatic.

My truck came stock with 4.10s and 27" tires. When I switch to 29.5s and 4.56 gears my true ratio will only be something like 4.20:1 which is barely above stock.

 

[Shran]

I'm assuming the truck came with like 255/70/16's or something like that... just going from that to 33's, you'd need 4.10s to be back where it was from the factory. 4.56s would be an excellent choice. You'll be able to maintain highway speed without very high RPMs and it'll be a lot better for low speed/crawling type stuff.

 

[1986RangerXL]

I'm putting in 4.56 gears with 29.5" tires...

If you consider that some trucks come stock with 4.10s, moving up from a stock 2wd tire (which is generally 27") to a 33" tire a 4.56 gear is not at all too aggressive, especially in an automatic.

My truck came stock with 4.10s and 27" tires. When I switch to 29.5s and 4.56 gears my true ratio will only be something like 4.20:1 which is barely above stock.

Interesting. I do not know much about gearing, I thought 4.56 was really aggressive. Would a 3.73 be good for a 30" tire? Or need something lower?

 

[RonD]

You have 3.55 ratio now with say 29" tires
If you change the rear ratio to 4.10 with 33" tires

The truck would drive exactly the same as it does now, with simulated 3.6 ratio

4.56 change would be simulated 4.0 ratio with 33" tires, so better pulling power for trailer or loads in the bed, but higher RPMs on the highways so lower MPG at say 65MPH

Lower ratio = less pulling power but better high speed MPG
Higher ratio = more pulling power but less MPG at higher speeds

Larger diameter tires LOWER actual ratio
Smaller diameter tires raise actual ratio

 

[Dirtman]

It also matters automatic or manual trans. Manual transmission trucks can get away with higher gear ratios because you can physically hold the shift longer to stay in the power band (say shifting at 3,500rpm instead of 2,500rpm). Automatics obviously just shift when they want so lower gears help compensate for the transmission shifting at lower rpms. At least this has been my experience.

Dont quote me on this but I think the overdrive gear ratio is slightly higher in an automatic too. I think... I'm too lazy to go look but I sware someone told me that once.

 

[gw33gp]

I have 4.56 gears for my 33" off-road tires. I think that is near ideal for that combination. Originally, it had 4.10 gears with 31" tires from the factory. The 4.56 gears/33" tires bumped up the rpm just slightly compared to the 4.10 gears/31" tires, but the gas mileage on the road is pretty much the same. Around town the 33" tires give a little less mpg.

With an automatic, I think 4.10 gears would work just fine with 33" tires if you don't do any heavy off-road stuff and that is probably the case since you have 2WD. It may accelerate slightly slower but probably not that noticeable. Your around town gas mileage will most likely drop a little due to the 33" tires but your highway mileage should improve a little. The 4.56 gears should give you better acceleration and lower gas mileage overall.

When I am not going off-road, I run my 31" set of tires with the 4.56 gears. It accelerates very nice but gas mileage dropped overall except when I am towing my race car. With the 4.10/31" combination I got around 13.5 mpg average while towing. With the 4.56/31" combination, I get around 14.5 mpg average while towing. I think that is basically due to using 4th gear maximum with the 4.10 gears and I use 5th gear with the 4.56 gears.

 

[1986RangerXL]

Lower ratio = less pulling power but better high speed MPG
Higher ratio = more pulling power but less MPG at higher speeds

Well, the PO of mine must've wanted a lot of pulling power. 8.8 swap with 3.2(x) gearing on 30in tires.

 

[Dirtman]

Some early rangers even came with 3.08 gears... they were truly awful but they were sold as economy trucks with good highway fuel economy not hauling or towing vehicles. I think 3.55 is even too high a gear (numerically low) for any ranger. But some people just want the highway economy those gears give you. If you do mostly city or around town driving though I really cant see using anything less than 4.10 even on stock tires. With stock 4.10s mine still cruises at 80 just fine though...

 

[RonD]

Well, the PO of mine must've wanted a lot of pulling power. 8.8 swap with 3.2(x) gearing on 30in tires.

3.2X would be LESS pulling power

 

[Shran]

I think 3.55 is even too high a gear (numerically low) for any ranger.

Depends. I've had a bunch of trucks with 3.45s, and while that is a fairly tall gear (and I'm definitely a low geared type of guy) they do make a pretty good combo for certain trucks. My '86 had those, a 2.9 and FM-145 trans, and would make 26mpg on 215/70/15 tires. And it still felt like it had power on the highway.

I'd really like to find a 2wd first gen with a 2.8, 3.08s and some tiny little tires. Build an M5OD with 2.3 or 3.0 2wd guts (easy to find) and I bet you could tune that thing to the moon for gas mileage.

 

[Dirtman]

Depends. I've had a bunch of trucks with 3.45s, and while that is a fairly tall gear (and I'm definitely a low geared type of guy) they do make a pretty good combo for certain trucks. My '86 had those, a 2.9 and FM-145 trans, and would make 26mpg on 215/70/15 tires. And it still felt like it had power on the highway.

I'd really like to find a 2wd first gen with a 2.8, 3.08s and some tiny little tires. Build an M5OD with 2.3 or 3.0 2wd guts (easy to find) and I bet you could tune that thing to the moon for gas mileage.

Are you secretly a genius like Ron and walt?