I just got my 4.77's installed and I was wondering why people would get the 4.44's. What are the big differences (if any) between the two sets. I am happy with the ones that I got and I want to know why people wouldn't just go all the way to the 4.77's. Let me know what you guys think of your gears. Later

 

got the 4.44's because I do a lot of highway driving between 80 and 90. Felt the revs would be higher than I'd like.

If my driving was mostly around town, I would have gone with the 4.77's.

 

Also, some people (not me) don't like the idea that the 4.77's reduce the car's "achievable" top speed. Whereas, 4.44's will allow the car to still be able to reach the same top speed as with the stock gears. (Remember that with stock gears, the car cannot get to it's "calculated" top speed.) Addtionally, some folks don't want to shift quite so often when driving under similar conditions as when stock even though they can get there quicker.
Others may feel that they do not wish to subject their engines to 16% more wear and tear but 8% is "acceptable".
Lastly, those with FI, feel that 4.77's is just too much and would make it very difficult to keep the tires on the ground.

 

i saw this on Rick's site when i was reading into this...maybe this might help...

Rear Gear Sets

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
[B]

 

How would gears be harder on the engine?

 

At any given rpm, your piston slides over its corresponding cylinder liner, your crankshaft bearings roll over your journals, your wrist pins spin around in their journals so many times (you get the idea).
A stock car, say in 6th gear, travelling at 60 mph, will have a known amount of wear on the items mentioned above. A car with 4.77 rear gears, also in 6th, travelling at 60 mph, will spin the engine and tranny about 16% faster to cover the same distance. Although one can't definately say the wear and tear will be 16% more, it's not hard to see that there will be "some" additional wear.
We may be talking about metal to metal wear in a lubricated environment and would be hard to measure (and the percentages may not be directly applicable) BUT it's the same reasoning that if your tires rolled over 16% more pavement, that they would wear out 16% sooner (all else being equal).

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
[B]
At any given rpm, your piston slides over its corresponding cylinder liner, your crankshaft bearings roll over your journals, your wrist pins spin around in their journals so many times (you get the idea).
A stock car, say in 6th gear, travelling at 60 mph, will have a known amount of wear on the items mentioned above.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by vapors2k
[B]

it's hard to make that apply to running 600rpm higher in which case you do with the 4.77s. I believe your point in that you are increasing the wear and tear on the motor by increasing the Final Drive is a good argument but it doesn't hold water in that those running 4.77s haven't had premature engine failure or excessive wear and tear (oil analysis) therefore your argument is only speculation and hearsay. Until proven, it's merely an opinion. Many have said the same thing about running forced induction that it increases the wear and tear on the motor but supercharged motors have already been documented to go beyond 60k miles with no signs of loss in compression (piston ring wear).

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
[B]
Ardy, I think you may have taken what I said to the absolute limit of "doom and gloom".