302
Post Fiend
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,462
Likes: 4
From: Durant, OK (SOSU)
You have a cable driven speedometer, so you're going to need a tranny with a speedo cable drive gear, and thus will have to match said gear to your rear end gears to have a properly functioning speedo.
Basically, higher (numerically lower) gears will help out your highway MPG and keep RPMs dow, whereas lower (numerically higher) gears will lower your highway MPG and keep the RPMs up. Lower gears also promote quick acceleration due to the additional torque.
3.08 <-- optimal highway cruiser
3.55
3.73
4.10
4.56 <-- insane off the line acceleration
4.56 is going to put you at rediculously high RPMs on the highway, even with an overdrive transmission. If you use a C4, C5, C6, or any other non-OD tranny, I'd suggest nothing higher than a 3.73. 4.10 wouldn't be bad with an OD tranny, and anything higher (again...numerically lower) than 3.73 is desired only if it's a truck you're going to use for a lot of long distance highway traveling.
Hope it helps.
Basically, higher (numerically lower) gears will help out your highway MPG and keep RPMs dow, whereas lower (numerically higher) gears will lower your highway MPG and keep the RPMs up. Lower gears also promote quick acceleration due to the additional torque.
3.08 <-- optimal highway cruiser
3.55
3.73
4.10
4.56 <-- insane off the line acceleration
4.56 is going to put you at rediculously high RPMs on the highway, even with an overdrive transmission. If you use a C4, C5, C6, or any other non-OD tranny, I'd suggest nothing higher than a 3.73. 4.10 wouldn't be bad with an OD tranny, and anything higher (again...numerically lower) than 3.73 is desired only if it's a truck you're going to use for a lot of long distance highway traveling.
Hope it helps.
FTE Chapter Leader
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 21,094
Likes: 245
From: Fresno, CA.
You definitely do NOT want 4.56 gears in your truck unless you want to climb the side of buildings! 
If you do a lot of highway driving your truck will suffer a huge penalty in reduced gas mileage. My '76 has 4.56 gears (no idea what the person who ordered this truck was towing, but it must have been heavy!) and it is well over 3,000 rpm at 55 mph. I average 10.9 mpg. You gas mileage will vary and of course a Ranger is a lot lighter than an F-250. Still, I would not recommend 4.56 gears.
If you do a lot of highway driving your truck will suffer a huge penalty in reduced gas mileage. My '76 has 4.56 gears (no idea what the person who ordered this truck was towing, but it must have been heavy!) and it is well over 3,000 rpm at 55 mph. I average 10.9 mpg. You gas mileage will vary and of course a Ranger is a lot lighter than an F-250. Still, I would not recommend 4.56 gears.
Elder User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 649
Likes: 1
From: north carolina
tire size effects "end gear ratio". ie. if you truck with stock tires (215/70/r15) and ratio of 3.73 your going about 2k rpms at 60 mph, now if you lower the gears and keep stock tire size then the rpms will increase just to go the same speed as previously said. now if you up to say 33"s and still use the 3.73 then @60 mph your going under 2k rpms probally around 1500, BUT your truck will take longer and work harder to get UP to speed. so if you go with larger tires you really should regear to compensate.
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: cedar rapids Ia
Hi I have had several rangers with v8 mre gives complete instructions on how to do this, and is afordable
mre-books.com
click the link v8 ranger it gives step by step instructions
it give you ideas on what to use either from other cars or new
good luck
mre-books.com
click the link v8 ranger it gives step by step instructions
it give you ideas on what to use either from other cars or new
good luck
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
montana_highboy
1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
14
Sep 10, 2012 12:44 AM
Mike Mckenna
1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
3
Apr 7, 2012 12:55 PM
Mike O.
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
7
Mar 27, 2007 03:24 AM
