5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance

[Follow Ups] [Post Followup] [Dodge Power Wagon Forum]

Posted by Paul(in NY) on Tuesday, September 21, 2004 at 9:13PM :

I have never driven a PW or M-37 with 5.83 ring and pinions. My trucks all have 489's. I am wondering if a truck, with a 318LA engine/Np-435, driven 60% on road and 40% off road would be better just staying with the 5.83's for a good off road performing truck and just running at reduced highway speeds. For those
of you who have changed from 5.83's to 4.89's is there really a noticable change of power off road ? I am totally aware of the RPM changes between the two ratios, but whats the real 'perveived' off road power change?

Thanks
Paul

Follow Ups:

A Winning Combination - Vaughn 10:39AM 09/23/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Keith in Washington 11:22AM 09/22/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Lucian Drumond 8:32PM 09/22/2004
- Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Keith in Washington 12:35PM 09/23/2004
- Re: transmission ratios... - Ken Dunnington 11:10AM 09/23/2004

Thanks for all the great info - Paul(in NY) 10:34AM 09/22/2004

There you go.... - MoparNorm 7:00PM 09/22/2004
- I really like the front Bumper - Paul(in NY) 7:11PM 09/22/2004
  - Re: I really like the front Bumper - MoparNorm 10:24PM 09/22/2004
    - Oh Well............ - Paul(in NY) 11:06PM 09/22/2004
      - Don't forget..... - MoparNorm 0:02AM 09/23/2004
Re: Thanks for all the great info - Tim Holloway 3:01PM 09/22/2004
- Sure Tim - Paul(in NY) 3:19PM 09/22/2004
  - Re: Sure Tim - Tim Holloway 5:54PM 09/22/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Fred Coldwell 9:09AM 09/22/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - RDavis 11:59PM 09/21/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Dave Speed 11:36PM 09/21/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Paul(inNY) 11:22PM 09/21/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Paul Cook 10:52PM 09/21/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Steve 9:37PM 09/21/2004

Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Mark Cutter 7:34AM 09/22/2004
- Re: 5.83 vs 4.89 Difference in Performance - Mark Cutter 7:40AM 09/22/2004
Steve - Paul(in NY) 9:47PM 09/21/2004
- Re: Steve - Steve 10:17PM 09/21/2004

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:
Subject:
Message:

Optional Link
URL:
Title:
Optional Image Link
URL:

This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com