I have been thinking on trying the 3.7 rear diff with the 4 spd. Not as big
a change in the 1st gear and a slightly better top speed (on paper anyway).
Has anyone tried this?
Daryl
'66 1600
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edgar Gonzalez" <datsunspl311@home.com>
To: "John F Sandhoff" <sandhoff@csus.edu>
Cc: <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: 1600 R engine
> I supposed I'll have to try both and make up my mind. :-) I'll probably
> start with the 4 speed, see how it goes, and then decide to do the 5
speed.
> I anticipate driving on the freeway quite a bit. Solvang and Shasta are
> very far from home.
>
> Edgar
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John F Sandhoff" <sandhoff@csus.edu>
> To: "Edgar Gonzalez" <spl212@home.com>
> Cc: <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 11:21 AM
> Subject: Re: 1600 R engine
>
>
> > It was asked:
> > > since I have begun my 69 1600 restoration I've been losing some sleep
> > > thinking about the transmission. Should I keep the four speed
original
> > > transmission or should I invest on a five speed?
> >
> > Well, you didn't comment on the most important question: What is the
> > intended use of the car?
> >
> > If you're building an around-town cruiser, IMHO the 4 speed is a nice
> > tranny. Light, clean shift pattern, reasonable acceleration, nice street
> > ratios. It does OK on the freeway with 'standard' tires (70 series or
> > taller - the originals were somewhere around 78!)
> >
> > On the 4 speed pull and check the countershaft and bearings! I didn't
> > and blew up a countershaft gear :-(
> >
> > The 5 speed is nice if you spend a lot of time on the freeway. The
> > gear ratios are different and again IMHO aren't quite as nice if your
> > time is spend hustling between stop signs in the city. The stick is
> > spring-loaded to drop into the 3-4 slot so if you're not paying
attention
> > you end up doing a 1 to 4 upshift.
> >
> > Also remember that the 1600 has a different rear end ratio than the
2000.
> > So not all of the difference between the 1600 and the 2000 is because
> > of the tranny gearing.
> >
> > -- John
> > John F Sandhoff sandhoff@csus.edu Sacramento, CA
> > "buy one of each - then decide!"
|