Here I am

Swapping from 3.73 to 3.42 Gears

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Isspro transmission guage quit

Smarty Speed Limiter

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not so much concerned with a mileage increase. What I want is cruising with the big dogs without getting completely out of the sweet spot where the brake specific fuel consumption is best. We G56 folks need another gear on top, and the gearing change along with a tire diameter change can make that happen. What I want is for my 5th gear in the future to be equal to what my 6th gear is now. I think I can trouble myself to push it down to 5th gear on a steep enough incline.
 
Well here is a little input them... . at 85 mph I went from 2400 roughly to 2175 rpm. Dont ask me on mpg... i don't really have any figures and until I get on a long trip 200 miles or more i cant give you guys any figures. I can tell you that before the gear change I would see 17. 5 to 17. 8 mpg @ 85 mph. I shoud see a little improvement on those figures. The gears also spool the truck a bit slower(sb turbo) but it hits harder since the engine is loaded a bit more. My truck is auto w/DTT trans and a very tight converter for reference.



Richard
 
If anyone does a swap on a 4x4 with 3. 73's and wants to get rid of the 3. 73's cheap let me know, the 4. 10's in the wifes grocery-getter are killing me.
 
The good news in all this is by the time I get back from Iraq next Christmas, you guys will have the numbers crunched. By that time my truck will be paid off, and I'll probably be thinking "Buy a new truck, Tony!" You don't know how nice it would be to have a 68RFE instead of having to shift in town and backroads every stop sign.
 
Wow! does this one generate interest. me too. I agree with those that say you won't enjoy the "solid 2 MPG" increse. Aerodynamic drag is the culprit. After all, these trucks are nor Porsches, they are aerodynamically more like a box. So the big difference you see slowing from 65 to 60 is due to decreased drag. Remember drag is proportional to the square of the speed. You will always get better milage at a lower speed, as long as you are not lugging the engine or in the case of the automatic, causing it to unlock or downshift. The lower RPM may help a bit, but the big improvment will always be SLOW DOWN. But please go ahead and let us all know how it turns out. Most of all, HAVE FUN. MIKE IN FLORIDA
 
I have never had an issue when pulling the fifth wheel, I keep it around 65 but driving empty on the interstate, it gets old running near redline just to do the speed limit! How much additional wear is there if you run 75-80 mph and is it worth the $$ to do it?
 
If you save 2GAL per mile stop and add up miles you are going to put on the truck. If you put those miles on you will brake even. Them the miles you put on will start to save you money. Also you are saving your eng. How meny miles do you drive A year???
 
Just an update. . My 3. 42's are in. . Nothing hand calculated. . With the 3. 73's, the best my overhead read was 18. 0 (most of the time just a hair less). Today right after the install I got on the interstate and it read 21. 5-21. 6. Same road at approximately 75 mph. . RPMs were approximately 18-1900. I know the overhead is never correct, yet it could still give a good comparison. .



By the way, it used to get much better mileage with the 90hp injectors. . The big injectors use much more fuel.
 
Hey Morse, thanks for the update. It would be great to get some hand calc mpg's; from what I understand the overhead is not getting the right info anymore from the ecm to calculate mpg correctly. In any case, how do you LIKE driving it with the 3. 42?? Also wondering if you have the G56 or automatic and if you tow much?? TIA
 
CFish I agree, the overhead is rarely correct. . I just thought it might give a general idea since programming was the same for both comparisons. . I'll get some hand calculated numbers pretty soon. I have an auto, and haven't pulled a trailer with it yet having the new gears. .
 
Just an update. . My 3. 42's are in. . Nothing hand calculated. . With the 3. 73's, the best my overhead read was 18. 0 (most of the time just a hair less). Today right after the install I got on the interstate and it read 21. 5-21. 6. Same road at approximately 75 mph. . RPMs were approximately 18-1900. I know the overhead is never correct, yet it could still give a good comparison. .



By the way, it used to get much better mileage with the 90hp injectors. . The big injectors use much more fuel.



sorry if you already covered this but did you change the ECM programming to reflect the 3. 42 gears?
 
There should not be any need to reprogram the ECM for the gear changes. My understanding is that the sensor is at the wheels, not the drive shaft, so any change to gearing is automatically accounted for.
 
There should not be any need to reprogram the ECM for the gear changes. My understanding is that the sensor is at the wheels, not the drive shaft, so any change to gearing is automatically accounted for.



Klenger, if what you say is true, then Morse's numbers show that he is getting approximately a 2% increase in gas mileage, under highspeed, highway driving conditions with the AT; EVEN if the ecm does not calculate accurately to real world driving (and I still don't understand why DC cannot get it right unless it's to fool the EPA) :-laf it should be good at least for relative readings. At an average of 20,000 miles driven per year, a 2% increase in mpg a person will recoup about 150 gallons per year (Did I DO that RIGHT??) which translates to $500 annually (Much more, of course, as the price of diesel goes up) In 5 years or less the swap out to 3. 42 differential gears will have payed for itself; ((Also assuming that I did the math correctly and Morse's #'s are indicative of an average improvement for anyone with a 3rd gen, and that nothing else on our trucks breaks because of the swap)). Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, it will let anyone who wants to DRIVE highways a little faster and let our CTD do it closer to it's sweet spot at highway speeds. How this mod fairs for driving under various towing conditions with the AT remains to be seen, but with Morses' numbers, I am pretty sure this will be an excellent mod for all trucks with the G56 6speed, as obviously one can simply shift to adjust for load and terrain. And the G56, as MRFrost and others have pointed out, is simply geared to low for fast highway driving with the 3. 73's. Speaking of the G56, I have been rereading the old posts on this thread, and I can't tell if anyone with the 6speed is going to try this mod or if all of us G56 drivers are waiting for someone else to do it first?! #@$%!

I do know that based on Morses' #'s I would eventually like to do this mod, but it will for sure be AFTER the pac brake, the brake smart, the modified headlights, and probably even after the hydraulic winch; But it's always nice to plan ahead:-laf. Hell, now even CaptainMike might want to see what kind of mpg's he'll get with the 3. 42 at slower highway speed--I'd imagine payback might even be quicker, though of course still not near enough to buy a new Porsche. But what can you haul with a Porsche, except *ss?? Thanks to everyone for their ideas, experiments, insight and plain old hard work!! Please, someone check my math?!
 
The second gens use a tone ring beside the ring gear and no computer changes are needed, as long as the 3rd gen is the same no computer changes would be needed.



Also going from 18 to 21. 6 mpg is actually a 20% increase in mileage but you are right it is around 150 gallon, I actually came up with 186.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top