Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TR3\s+rear\s+axle\s+ratios\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TR3\s+rear\s+axle\s+ratios\?\s*$/: 11 ]

Total 11 documents matching your query.

1. TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Jim Gambony" <britbits@tiu.net>; Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:57:28 -0600; I've got a friend in the area that posed the question of what ratios were available for the solid axle TRs. He'd like something more appropriate to highway cruising, which here in Texas involves spee; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00088.html (7,386 bytes)
2. RE: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Randall Young" <Ryoung@navcomtech.com>; Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 17:25:55 -0800; 3.45 is the tallest that will fit in the original housing. Since it's only 5% below the original 3.7, it's hardly worth the effort. It's also possible to build up an OD with a taller ratio, using pa; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00089.html (7,878 bytes)
3. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Bill Sohl" <billsohl@mindspring.com>; Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 08:53:48 -0500; Has anyone actually encountered a 3.45 ratio rear-end? Personally, I've never found a 3.45. The vast majority of rears with non-OD gearboxes was 3.7 or higher. Bill Sohl were to only possible ...; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00093.html (8,525 bytes)
4. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: Rikrock@aol.com; Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 10:15:58 EST; Only in TVR's. That's what was usually used in the TR6-powered ones. Rich Rock; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00095.html (7,317 bytes)
5. RE: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Randall Young" <Ryoung@navcomtech.com>; Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 07:41:25 -0800; They were standard on fuel-injected TR5 and TR6. That of course means they were not commonly found on US-spec cars, where 3.7 was standard. Still available new from a few sources, and used ones turn; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00097.html (7,602 bytes)
6. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "John Kipping" <johnkipping@inet.net.nz>; Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:29:56 +1300; Also the standard ratio for a Triumph 2.5 (except autos) and Dolomite they TR; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00099.html (8,108 bytes)
7. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "ejmajor" <ejmajor@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:07:31 -0500; Check with Charles Runyan at the Roadster Factory, he took one out of his TR5, it didn't pull too well in the PA mountains. Ed M; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00101.html (7,258 bytes)
8. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Bill Sohl" <billsohl@mindspring.com>; Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:14:00 -0500; But this discussion originated on the TR-3 rear axle choices. A 3.45 rear axle in the TR-6 is a different differential altogether. Bill they TR; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00129.html (8,171 bytes)
9. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: Herald948@aol.com; Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:56:37 EST; True, but the pertinent "inside bits" are the same...or interchangeable. I happen to know of a TR4 rear axle that gave it's R&P to help get a TR6 going again (right, Bob?). --Andy Mace "The secret of; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00131.html (7,809 bytes)
10. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Bill Sohl" <billsohl@mindspring.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 09:31:03 -0500; Thanks for the details. So while a 3.45 can be fitted to a TR3 diff, it seems no one yet recalls any TR-3 actually being delivered with the 3.45. Cheers, Bill my; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00223.html (9,293 bytes)
11. Re: TR3 rear axle ratios? (score: 1): Author: "Bill Sohl" <billsohl@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 07:53:52 -0500; were to only Actually it is about 7% (6.75 to be more exact). For someone that does any amount of highway cruising, that drops the 70mph rpms of a TR3 from about 3500 to about 3250 which isn't a bad; /html/fot/2004-02/msg00256.html (8,650 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 11
Page: [1]