John Harris wrote:
>
> Peter and Folks,
> I haven't been following this thread, but I put a non-OD differential
> (3.27:1, I think) in the back of my GT6 because the manufacturer, in its
> wisdom, put a higher ratio (3.89:1) in OD cars. Beats me why they would
> offset the advantage of the longer-legged (back to Uma Thurman again) OD
> gearbox with a higher ratio diff. BL would have said it was to maintain
> acceleration;
Hmmm, I'll think about it a bit in print. With first and second locked
out by the shift switch, the acceleration is quite good, but the top
ratio is still the same, so the overdrive, in a sense, improves
acceleration, but doesn't actually perform as an overdrive, in the
strictest sense. It's very possible that with 4th, in overdrive, the
stock engine may have actually had a worse top end than the non-o/d car
with a 3.27:1 rear. I suspect that's the case for the decision of the
factory for installation of the 3.89:1 rear for US overdrive. Just not
enough torque multiplication for the stock engine with the 3.27:1.
I sometimes wonder why the factory did not offer the 3.54:1 in the US as
was offered in Europe, but I suspect that was the bottom limit for the
slightly stronger European engine before top-end performance began to
suffer.
> however, the diff. ratio was never an option to my
> knowledge.
Only late in the Mk. III production was there a differential option,
either 3.89:1 or 3.27:1, I believe.
Cheers.
--
My other Triumph runs, but....
|