Grabber2012

Pardon me if something like this got posted when the cars came out - but have folks noticed that the final drive ratios through 4th line up for a 2003 Mach 1 with 4.30s and a factory 3.7 with 3.31s?? Transmission ratios in first column, total ratio in bold type.

2011 with 3.31s
1) 4.24 14.02
2) 2.54 8.40
3) 1.67 5.51
4) 1.24 4.10
5) 1.00 3.31
6) 0.70 2.32

2003 with 4.30s
1) 3.38 14.53
2) 2.00 8.60
3) 1.32 5.68
4) 1.00 4.30
5) Who cares

Shift points are comparable, too - for the two DOHCs.....Whee! It sure isn't the old days any more !

Bokeo

Forgive my newbness but is this a good or bad thing? Because I plan on putting 3.73 on mine next month.

Grabber2012

I think it's freaking great. It's hard to ever have too much gear!

HareBrained

It's neither good nor bad ...

I would disagree with that. It isn't possible to have too much of a good thing, but it is possible for too much of a good thing to become a bad thing. I don't want to shift 3 times to reach 30MPH because there's a 5.56 in the rear.

The fact that the overall ratios are close is a coincidence. The target market of both cars is different. The engines are different and will perform differently. This is not a knock against the V6. I think you're trying to draw a conclusion for unrelated statistics.

BTW, 3.73 in the V6 stick is a good combo for improved acceleration without too much increase in rpm at 60 in 6th. IIRC from another thread, it would be ~2000.

Bokeo

Thanks hare. Im hoping a tune with the 3.73s will compliment the CAI and exhaust. I dont do that much HW driving but enough not to consider 4.10s.

stangs-R-me

Gotta put the tire dia's in you formula for a true comparison of torque multiplication.

'03/04 Mach 1 had 245/45ZR-17's which is 25.68" Dia. / 810 Rotations Per Mile

'11/12 V6 has:
Stk. A/T: 215/65-17 ... 28.00" / 743 RPM (9% less RPM)
or
Stk. M/T: 225/60-17 ... 27.63" / 753 RPM (7.6% less)
or
Opt. ALL: 235/50-18 ... 27.25" / 765 RPM (5.9% less)
or
Opt. PP: 255/40-19 ... 27.03" / 769 RPM (5.3% less)

Doug