I seem to remember something about Westmaster from Houston destroying his diff. at some point after getting an SC; however, I could be mistaken.

 

4.10 gearing may sound low but I agree on wanting 4.4 or maybe even 4.6:1. I mean, I don't need 150+ MPH top end. How many road race tracks do you actually see that speed on? I would trade top end for more low speed grunt.

 

In my experience (and Comptech's for that matter) upgrading the clutch will significantly improve your chances or destroying your differential.

 

There's a good Editor's article in the November SCC magazine about how MOST cars are geared for the 0-60 numbers and therefore hurt the total performance of the car. The editor points out that it's not a coincidence that most cars shift to 3rd at 62 MPH, right after the 60 MPH mark. The magazine actually blames magazines for this problem...interesting read.

 

It's absolutely true that just about every car will make it over 100km/h in second gear. I just assumed everyone knew this - I guess not.

It's not actually 60mph they gear second to, it is 62.5 mph or 100km/h. In metric countries, that is the benchmark for sprints.

Anyways, even with 4.4 gears, the S2000 will still hit 60 in second.

 

Yeah, that's exactly what I said.

 

Heh,

Maybe I should have read your whole post before I replied, huh?

 

I agree that gearing choices of modern cars have been twisted to post good 0-62 numbers. Auto mags and car enthusiasts alike have an unnatural draw to the 0-60. Go figure. 1/4 mile times provide a better benchmark of straight line performance. Better than that, trap speed is even a better indicator.

I have no problem with the concept of changing the rear pumpkin to get better performance. However, lower gearing puts more stress, not less, on the drivetrain and rear end components.