Thanks for the answer. It runs pretty well at freeway speeds now with
its shorter tires and stock rear end, but I just wanted to find out if
leaving the rear end alone was the best choice.
--- CalSpeed@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 2/8/01 1:14:10 AM !!!First Boot!!!,
> ambradley@yahoo.com
> writes:
>
> << It was suggested
> to me that I might want to replace my 1600 rear end with a 2000 rear
> end, as the lower tires turn my 3.90 into more like a 4.11, reducing
> my
> top speed... >>
>
> If you are running with a 1600 then i would keep the stock rearend.
> Afterall... how much top speed do you really need? And at the same
> time, you
> are running with about 40 percent less horsepower then a U20. You
> wont have
> the motor to utilize the 3.70 rearend.
>
> I went with a 1600 rearend in my 2 liter. It made a big difference.
> Off the
> line is noticably better but the rolling starts are great! The RPM
> difference on the highway is not really noticable. I feel that our
> Roadsters
> are at its best by feeling peppy and agile at low speeds. They just
> are not
> high speed cruisers. Keep the stock rearend.
>
> Michael "Calspeed" Carion
> <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/calspeed1/motorsports.html";>
> http://members.aol.com/calspeed1/motorsports.html</A
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
|