Calling all 4.10 Users
- Thread starter GregH
- Start date
rtiqulatendisco said:
Although in Britain talk to Steve at Lund Engines He sponsors Team Saluki with engines that race in the middle east. They are currently winning beating factory teams from, Nissan, Mitsubishi etc....
I have a 4.6 from him in my RRC with his mildest upgrades and this is pushing out about
250Bhp. His race engine (before FIA restrictor) is at 328Bhp....
It certainly puts a smile on your face....
110 Km/h in 2nd gear at about 4700 RPM and it doesnt take long to get there....
Last edited:
Greg,
Any word from Bill on getting a 3.8 or 3.9 Kam r&p?
I run an equivalent tire size to yourself and have always felt that 4.11s would be undergeared for a 32" tire. Of course, I think the rovers should come with a 3.75 stock to begin with, but that's irrelevant.
I'm really liking the idea of a 3.9 gear.
Did you find out price or availability?
thx.
Any word from Bill on getting a 3.8 or 3.9 Kam r&p?
I run an equivalent tire size to yourself and have always felt that 4.11s would be undergeared for a 32" tire. Of course, I think the rovers should come with a 3.75 stock to begin with, but that's irrelevant.
I'm really liking the idea of a 3.9 gear.
Did you find out price or availability?
thx.
Jack-
Bill says he can get the 3.8 from KAM but doesn't carry it-no demand. He does, however, have some 3.9's that he bought that are made by Santana (spain). He doesn't seem to think there would be much difference in freeway engine revs between 3.9 and 4.1 (he said maybe 300 rpm) I'm not sure if he's correct on that. As far as quality he claims alot of Land Rover's trans parts are actually made in spain subbed out to Santana-he thinks quality is good. Cost is a bit less than 4.1's.
Bill says ashcroft doesn't make the 3.8's any more.
Bill says he can get the 3.8 from KAM but doesn't carry it-no demand. He does, however, have some 3.9's that he bought that are made by Santana (spain). He doesn't seem to think there would be much difference in freeway engine revs between 3.9 and 4.1 (he said maybe 300 rpm) I'm not sure if he's correct on that. As far as quality he claims alot of Land Rover's trans parts are actually made in spain subbed out to Santana-he thinks quality is good. Cost is a bit less than 4.1's.
Bill says ashcroft doesn't make the 3.8's any more.
Interesting....
Now, every Santana I've seen looked like the most budget Rover ever assembled.
I mean 10 times more bootleg than those South African jobs.
I'm not sure how that would reflect on the quality of something as simple as a gearset, but it makes me wonder.
Now, every Santana I've seen looked like the most budget Rover ever assembled.
I mean 10 times more bootleg than those South African jobs.
I'm not sure how that would reflect on the quality of something as simple as a gearset, but it makes me wonder.
P
PHARAOHDISCO
Guest
GotRovr said:
There isn't much difference then between 3.8's and 4.1's. I am running 265/75R16 and 4.1 R&P also from Ashcroft, UK. On the highway I achieve exactly 122 km/h (speed measured by GPS) at 3000rpm, which is equivalent to 76mph.
What is the life expectancy of a ring and pinion? I'd like to swap mine out for the 3.80, but can't see burning the cash for such a minor variation if the current ones are still good. I have stock or close to stock tires,(245/70-16), and feel that the 4.10 would be too low for my needs. Especially considering that there may be a diesel in my Rover's future. I wouldn't want to run out of it's power curve.
Disco 1
Disco 1
Darn! I was afraid of that. Oh well, I guess when I put the TTs in, I'll just bite the bullet. Hopefully with in the next few months.
Or just put up with the 3.50s. I'm sure they're better for diesels anyway. But that's another project down the road.
Or just put up with the 3.50s. I'm sure they're better for diesels anyway. But that's another project down the road.
K
Kyle
Guest
A 3.73 is a pretty common ratio in most trucks. Most trucks also take a change in tire much better then the Rover does. The 3.8 isnt much higher then that but is still lower then the 4.1. Someone metioned that it might only be a 300 RPM difference.. I think 300 RPM difference would be nice... Going to a 3.8 with a truck on stock tires would put you in the same boat as running the 4.1 with 32s. I think it would be a bit too busy at speed...
my 2 cents
i have an 89RRC with the GBR 4.1s and 255/85/16 and it is perfect. Nothing against the 3.8 or whatever, but for me the lower the gear the better and road manners are fine. I only use it for a toy but often drive several hours to get there. The gearing makes a nice difference in the hills too. A couple buddies run the 4.7s and they are loud and low for sure! Gordo
i have an 89RRC with the GBR 4.1s and 255/85/16 and it is perfect. Nothing against the 3.8 or whatever, but for me the lower the gear the better and road manners are fine. I only use it for a toy but often drive several hours to get there. The gearing makes a nice difference in the hills too. A couple buddies run the 4.7s and they are loud and low for sure! Gordo
Greg,
For 265/75's I'm with Kyle - 3.8/3.9, the issue is that "busyness" Kyle refered to, the 4.10's in my D2 and D90 seem to have really created additional NVH, I wish I'd have done the gears and Detroit's in stages, this way I could have more accurately pinpointed the source of the harshness.
Bruno.
For 265/75's I'm with Kyle - 3.8/3.9, the issue is that "busyness" Kyle refered to, the 4.10's in my D2 and D90 seem to have really created additional NVH, I wish I'd have done the gears and Detroit's in stages, this way I could have more accurately pinpointed the source of the harshness.
Bruno.
I ran 32"s and stock gears for about 5 years and I didn't mind that at all. When I changed to 255/85s I put in 4.11s. I think it is a little busy on extra long trips. However, it is almost exactly back to stock with this setup. At least the odometer is dead on GPS over thousands of miles. If the 3.8 would have been available when I got the 4.11s, I would have bought the 3.8s.
Matt
Matt
DiscoDino said:
4.11 and 4.10 are basically the same ratio. The two ratios just have different tooth counts. 4.11's have 37 teeth on the ring gear and nine on the pinion. 4.10's have 41 teeth on the ring gear and 10 on the pinion.
Bill's 4.11's differ from his old 4.10's in more than tooth count though. Bill's 4.11's have a reverse rotation for the front gears. Standard gears like the Rover factory gears and Bill's older 4.10's are the same for front and rear. That is, the front and rear rings and pinions are identical. Accordingly, the ring and pinion are optimized for the rear axle, with the rear gears driving on the drive side of the teeth. This is theoretically weaker for the front because the front ring and pinion are driving on the coast side of the teeth instead of the drive side. Bill's 4.11's are reverse rotation on the front and thus both the front and rear rings and pinions drive on the drive side of the teeth.
DiscoDino said:Hey Kyle...if you go the Toy route you can have a choice of up to 13 ratios (teasing...teasing...)
What good are 13 different ratios if you don't know the difference between 4.11 and 4.10?
D
DiscoDino
Guest
john said:
Well, I can't answer that question, cause I know what the difference is...4.88 and above is the difference...