horsepower needs??
- Thread starter MikeTaylor
- Start date
blucar
Well-known member
The practice of installing over-size tires, 750X16 and 820's has been around since the early days of hot rodding..
When traffic was lighter, and none of us had any clue as to what the associated problems caused by over-tiring a vehicle could cause, ignorance was bliss..
Large tires on wheels that are not designed to carry the larger tire, are one problem. The larger tires tend to act like big flywheels which impact braking and thereby reduce stopping distances..
Oversize tires can also come into contact with body/chassis parts, leading to tire failure..
A good friend of mine recently almost wrecked his '52 Chevy pickup. He put large bias ply tires on the rear to improve the gearing. I told him he might have made a mistake, he thought they looked cool..
A few weeks later I noted that he had new smaller radials on the truck.. Talking to a friend I found out that the guy with the '52 blew a rear tire on the freeway. One of the large rear tires was rubbing on the frame...
On the C-4 subject; Yes the C-4 is a 3 speed trans., they are quite small, therefore they fit into the X member frames nicely. The C-4 requires rear axle modifications, open drive line, springs and shocks. The easiest way to do this is with a later model rear end and suspension.. A more practical axle ratio can be used, something like 323/324 with smaller tires, maybe radials.. An added benefit would be the larger more modern rear brakes.
For my money it just does not get any better than a Columbia, they work great, and are correct for the car.. Ya know, if it ain't broke, don't fix it...
When traffic was lighter, and none of us had any clue as to what the associated problems caused by over-tiring a vehicle could cause, ignorance was bliss..
Large tires on wheels that are not designed to carry the larger tire, are one problem. The larger tires tend to act like big flywheels which impact braking and thereby reduce stopping distances..
Oversize tires can also come into contact with body/chassis parts, leading to tire failure..
A good friend of mine recently almost wrecked his '52 Chevy pickup. He put large bias ply tires on the rear to improve the gearing. I told him he might have made a mistake, he thought they looked cool..
A few weeks later I noted that he had new smaller radials on the truck.. Talking to a friend I found out that the guy with the '52 blew a rear tire on the freeway. One of the large rear tires was rubbing on the frame...
On the C-4 subject; Yes the C-4 is a 3 speed trans., they are quite small, therefore they fit into the X member frames nicely. The C-4 requires rear axle modifications, open drive line, springs and shocks. The easiest way to do this is with a later model rear end and suspension.. A more practical axle ratio can be used, something like 323/324 with smaller tires, maybe radials.. An added benefit would be the larger more modern rear brakes.
For my money it just does not get any better than a Columbia, they work great, and are correct for the car.. Ya know, if it ain't broke, don't fix it...
Ya have to help me out here....if I'm 1 to 1 in a 37 ****** in 3rd, how would being 1 to 1 in an auto in drive, allow me to run a higher geared rearend?
Plus the extra HP required for an auto vs manual...I'm just left scratching my head as to any benefit?
Mike, I'd like to know aswell. I have a flatomatic in stock for when my knees get worse and driving a manual trans becomes to painfull to use. Lots of stop and go driving in this here England.
So when that time comes, I was gonna re gear the axle, currently 4.29 to go with the BW overdrive, to prolly 3.7ish. He is a pickup and will be used as such, hence the ratio.
From what has been said above, I can plonk a 3.5 or 3.2 or such and not loose my low down punch but gain some legs on the big roads?
Anyone enlighten us?
Many thanks,
Martin.
So when that time comes, I was gonna re gear the axle, currently 4.29 to go with the BW overdrive, to prolly 3.7ish. He is a pickup and will be used as such, hence the ratio.
From what has been said above, I can plonk a 3.5 or 3.2 or such and not loose my low down punch but gain some legs on the big roads?
Anyone enlighten us?
Many thanks,
Martin.
JSeery
Member Emeritus
You can get away with a higher rear end gear with an automatic because the torque converter acts as a multiplier, but you also loose horsepower to the rear axle because of the torque converter. I like to run high performance engines with automatics, but that is a whole different ball game! In a flathead an automatic is not going to perform as well as a stick because of the power to weight ratio of the cars. As stated, in high gear 1 to 1 is 1 to 1, only difference is an automatic is going to loose some power to the wheels because of torque converter slippage. The only advantage here is the higher rear end ratio.
