S2000 Talk Discussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it.

question for some 4.77 owners

Thread Tools
 
Old Oct 31, 2007 | 06:03 PM
  #51  
s2000Junky's Avatar
Community Organizer
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 31,070
Likes: 566
Default

Originally Posted by leftyz,Oct 31 2007, 03:18 PM
I'm planning to just throw on a pair of 16in. wheels from a FF car to test. I assume the tire height comes into play to mimic the gears, correct ? Can anyone link the page to the gear calculator ??
Right, Its all about the total outside diameter of the tire that counts. Here are your options I have found for the 16" wheels--

225/45/16 = 4.26 these are about 23. 5 tall & my current wheel combination which is 215/45/16 =4.33 these are about 23.0 tall.

stock 16 with so2 225/50/16 are over 24" tall

Haven't researched sizes for the 17's since I don't have them.

Have fun
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2007 | 07:18 PM
  #52  
GinoGT's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,065
Likes: 1
Default

So....I assume the 0-60philes drive around with Road & Track's test gear strapped to their car to confirm they just shaved off a tenth of a second? This is assuming they can drive like the Stig and nail these marketing department derived measures of performance.

Of course I couldn't imagine losing the ability to cruise at 90mph or successfully race from a 50 roll

Cliff notes: if you drive for numbers and being faster than the next guy, look elsewhere. If you're not a mad tyte street racer like Vin Diesel, enjoy the 4.77's
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2007 | 07:20 PM
  #53  
nightcrawler7188's Avatar
Registered User
Member (Premium)
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,158
Likes: 2
Default

Originally Posted by GinoGT,Oct 31 2007, 11:18 PM
So....I assume the 0-60philes drive around with Road & Track's test gear strapped to their car to confirm they just shaved off a tenth of a second? This is assuming they can drive like the Stig and nail these marketing department derived measures of performance.

Of course I couldn't imagine losing the ability to cruise at 90mph or successfully race from a 50 roll

Cliff notes: if you drive for numbers and being faster than the next guy, look elsewhere. If you're not a mad tyte street racer like Vin Diesel, enjoy the 4.77's


fun > miniscule differences in numbers
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2007 | 08:06 PM
  #54  
s2000Junky's Avatar
Community Organizer
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 31,070
Likes: 566
Default

Originally Posted by GinoGT,Oct 31 2007, 07:18 PM
So....I assume the 0-60philes drive around with Road & Track's test gear strapped to their car to confirm they just shaved off a tenth of a second? This is assuming they can drive like the Stig and nail these marketing department derived measures of performance.

Of course I couldn't imagine losing the ability to cruise at 90mph or successfully race from a 50 roll

Cliff notes: if you drive for numbers and being faster than the next guy, look elsewhere. If you're not a mad tyte street racer like Vin Diesel, enjoy the 4.77's
Enjoy your 4.77's but you sound pretty silly knocking the people that are actually looking to increase the overall acceleration and performance of their s2000's and without draw backs to boot.

I'll put this in prospective for you because I am a nice guy and your statements tell me you obviously need some more information to learn to add to your rep.

Even if a particular gear choice did only equal to a tenth of a second which is way off by the way, if you choose the right one it can be as much as a half second in the quarter mile. So lets say you add 5 other mods to your s2000 (which is very conservative for some out there including myself) that equal a 10th faster as you say, guess what? You now have a car that is ...yes, half a second faster. Do you know how many car lengths that can be on the street or course? I'll let you figure this one out on your own

And hey...wile your having fun on the hwy feeling your new simulated Mustang GT torque multiplication from your $800 4.77 gearing, i'll be accelerating past you with my 4.33 rear tires ass!
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2007 | 08:19 PM
  #55  
qbmurderer13's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,140
Likes: 0
From: Orlando, FL
Default

ok i keep seeing somebody say that after 1st gear the 4.77's are a disadvantage but does anybody have proof of this or a valid explanation?

in that FD gear thread where that one guy (forgot his name) plotted out the 1/4 times and 0-60mph for all the gears vs stock, the 4.77's always came out on top... so what proof do you have that the 4.44's or 4.33 tire size thing will out accelerate the 4.77's?
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2007 | 09:27 PM
  #56  
s2000Junky's Avatar
Community Organizer
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 31,070
Likes: 566
Default

Originally Posted by qbmurderer13,Oct 31 2007, 08:19 PM
ok i keep seeing somebody say that after 1st gear the 4.77's are a disadvantage but does anybody have proof of this or a valid explanation?

in that FD gear thread where that one guy (forgot his name) plotted out the 1/4 times and 0-60mph for all the gears vs stock, the 4.77's always came out on top... so what proof do you have that the 4.44's or 4.33 tire size thing will out accelerate the 4.77's?
I know what gear thread your talking about, I participated in it. It was a really interesting and somewhat confusing method he imposed on getting the results he had.
His numbers he inputed were off 3to4 miles per hour and not understanding all his data he imposed in getting to his results, I can't say how sound It was. It was worth wile however, wonder if he has done any more with refining it?

It still is only paper and is only as accurate as the data being put in. Something specific he mentioned about the 4.44's was that he calculated somehow that these gears made it to a given mile per hour before any of the other gears but did not reach a given point first, something like that anyway. I'm not sure how this works, nor does this co inside with my real world experience.

Personally I could give you a list of reasons supporting why this is a better choice over the 4.77's and certainly already have to some degree on this thread but also others that I currently am and have bounced between in the past and so quite frankly I'm getting a bit burnt out on repeating myself for the time being. Besides can anyone prove anything on a forum? You may just have to go with your gut if you don't have the resources available to you to test these out for yourself. Good luck to you

Reply
Old Nov 1, 2007 | 06:42 AM
  #57  
GinoGT's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,065
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by s2000Junky,Oct 31 2007, 08:06 PM
And hey...wile your having fun on the hwy feeling your new simulated Mustang GT torque multiplication from your $800 4.77 gearing, i'll be accelerating past you with my 4.33 rear tires ass!
Speaking of which, I had a Mustang GT, and put 4.10's in that (stock = 3.27).

The situation there was identical, people would say "don't fear the gear". The choices for the Ford 8.8" rear end were pretty wide, since they also used that in their trucks. There were gears from the high 2.xx's all the way to 4.56 (and maybe even more....not sure though). 4.10's and even 4.30's are amazing on that car, but some guys get scared and do 3.73's (unless they're boosted, then they have some reason).

Street racing =
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2007 | 07:17 AM
  #58  
PalenkosBro's Avatar
Registered User
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 959
Likes: 2
Default

Would 4.44 be best for drag.....and 4.77 for Auto XXX???
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2007 | 07:55 AM
  #59  
leftyz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 461
Likes: 2
Default

Originally Posted by PalenkosBro,Nov 1 2007, 07:17 AM
Would 4.44 be best for drag.....and 4.77 for Auto XXX???
i think its the other way around. you want the most least amount of shifts in AX. you dont wanna be hitting the limiter around every cone, then having to shift, then downshift again for another bend. For drag racing, just bang the gears as fast as possible.
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2007 | 07:58 AM
  #60  
PalenkosBro's Avatar
Registered User
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 959
Likes: 2
Default

ahhhhhhhh......very well grass hopper
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:41 PM.