Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Ford / Ford Trucks / March 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

92 F-150 rear end

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
dieselsrock@sbcglobal.net - 18 Feb 2006 18:27 GMT
I have a 92 F-150 with a 5.0L and from what I can tell a 3.55 rear end.
I am not real worried about mt towing capacity as I don't do much of
that.  I was wanting to possibly do some rear end swapping out to maybe
increase the gas mileage a bit.  I know there is a 2.73 ratio that was
used on 4.9L F-150s with 5 sp trannys.  Would this be a good swap to do
or not?  If not, I wonder if the 3.08 rear end would be worth the swap
or not.  Would appreciate any thoughts anybody has.

Thanks,

Matt
dieselsrock@sbcglobal.net - 18 Feb 2006 19:02 GMT
I forgot to add I have a E40D tranny.
CJB - 18 Feb 2006 22:51 GMT
Ok, here's what I've come up with.  If you really have an E4OD, which would
surprise me, it has an overdrive ratio of .71/1.  You don't say whether or
not you have a 4x4 or 4x2, but I've done my calculations assuming you have a
4x2.  If you do, you almost certainly have 235/75R15 tires, or at least
those were on it from the factory.  If so, then at 65 MPH, the engine is
turning 1906RPM.  Changing to a 3.08 would make the RPM at 65 1654, which is
not a lot of reduction in rpm, but would add noticeable load to the engine.

Reducing the axle ratio would not be wise, IMHO.  Your truck is not light,
and it has a lot of frontal area.  If you live in the mountains, it's an
even worse idea to reduce the axle ratio, because you'll constantly be
hunting in and out of OD and lockup, and will shorten the life of your
transmission.

If you have an AOD-E/4R70W transmission, your OD ratio is .67/1, and that
makes your RPM at 65 1799.  You really don't wanna go lower than that at
all.  Plus, all those numbers are skewed (even lower rpm) if your tires are
larger than 235/75R15.

I once had a GMC conversion van with a 2.73 axle, 235/75R15's and a TH700R4
and 350 in it.  The van could barely stay in OD on flat ground with no wind.
Even a headwind and it would have to shift to 3rd, let alone a grade. The
original owner had 3 transmissions in it in 75k miles because of the
constant shifting.

CJB

> I forgot to add I have a E40D tranny.
Spdloader - 19 Feb 2006 04:06 GMT
Yea,  but wouldn't he have a top speed of about 599mph?

Spdloader

> Ok, here's what I've come up with.  If you really have an E4OD, which
> would
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
>> I forgot to add I have a E40D tranny.
lugnut - 19 Feb 2006 05:58 GMT
>Ok, here's what I've come up with.  If you really have an E4OD, which would
>surprise me, it has an overdrive ratio of .71/1.  You don't say whether or
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>
>> I forgot to add I have a E40D tranny.

The E4OD was definitely an option behind the 5.0L and is
what I spec'd in the ones I have had.  The AOD/4R70W is/was
not a truck transmission in my estimation.  I have laways
had the 3.55 gears with this combination because I could
never find a 3.73 or 4.10 without ordering it.  At 70+ MPH
the 5.0L definitely needs more gear to let it breath a bit.
If you set the cruise at 80 which is common in this part of
the world, it will hunt in and out of OD with any grade or
headwind.  If I kill the OD under these conditions, I only
lose a mile or so per gallon but, that is spinning 40% or so
faster which is more than even a 4.10 gear would increase
it.  My current setup is a SC but, the experience is pretty
much the same as was the case with the reg cabs before.  I
just can't believe there is enough difference in fuel
economy to make it worth the hit on perfromance.

Lugnut
M D - 19 Mar 2006 19:15 GMT
Why would that surprise you!
   I have the same year truck with the same engine and tranny E4OD. What a
piece it is. Rebuilt it 4 times already in 300K miles. And I vary rarely
haul much....afraid to blo0w the tranny again!
   I tried to find out once if there was another type of tranny I could put
in the truck, but didn't have any luck without having to do some real
radical mods!

Mike

> Ok, here's what I've come up with.  If you really have an E4OD, which
> would
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
>> I forgot to add I have a E40D tranny.
lugnut - 19 Feb 2006 05:46 GMT
>I have a 92 F-150 with a 5.0L and from what I can tell a 3.55 rear end.
> I am not real worried about mt towing capacity as I don't do much of
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>Matt

The problem with the 5.0L is that it needs a few more revs
than a 300 six to get to an efficient operating range.  The
3.55 is probably the best economy gear for the 5.0L with an
E4OD if your are not working it with a load or a tow.  If I
had it to do over again, I would go for the 3.73 with the
better performance and minimal hit on fuel economy.  This is
especially true where the speeds are 70+ and the 5.0 could
use a few more RPM for more torque so it doesn't work it's
little a.s off.  If you are towing heavy, a 4.10 won't hurt
it much at all.

Lugnut
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.