|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-25-2014, 06:47 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Differential Usability
I have a nice tight 3.54:1 differential that I plan to sell. I had it in my '53 Victoria for a few months.
Do I remember correctly that such a differential will fit '49 through '54 Ford and Mercury passenger cars, and perhaps even '55 and '56? Are there exceptions which should be noted? |
11-26-2014, 02:42 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,593
|
Re: Differential Usability
The Merc used a Dana 41 and dana 44, both rear loader types, from 49- 51, don't know after that.
So this diff is no good for these. Martin. |
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|
11-26-2014, 10:22 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Re: Differential Usability
I found my old sheet of info on this, and you're right about those years. However, the '49-'55 Ford and the '52-'55 Mercury all used this type of differential.
|
11-26-2014, 11:09 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Star, MS
Posts: 4,024
|
Re: Differential Usability
Richard, we know that you are searching for the best efficiency with your flathead/5-speed. Did you replace this differential for another ratio for better economy? What did you change to?
|
11-26-2014, 03:44 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Re: Differential Usability
Quote:
When I later anticipated some long trips, it seemed likely that putting in a 3.54 would result in REALLY good mileage. However, soon after I put it in, the long trips evaporated and I ended up just driving around locally with the 3.54. Although the car drove quite well with the 3.54, even climbed the same "test hill" in 5th gear, the car wasn't as much FUN. The crisp neck-snapping acceleration just wasn't there. It was like driving my mother's '50 Buick. So I put the 4.10 back in and the fun came back. This is how we learn, I guess. I never made any mileage runs with the 3.54, but I suspect the number would have been noticeably better. I'll never know. |
|
11-26-2014, 05:36 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Star, MS
Posts: 4,024
|
Re: Differential Usability
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)
What are your RPMs with the 4.10 at 60 mph? 70 mph? |
11-26-2014, 06:08 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: oshkosh wi
Posts: 216
|
Re: Differential Usability
Very interesting... Everyone seems to want the low reving at 60 mph. We all know that Speedway makes a 3.54 and even now, a 3.25, and I have been thinking about them. I have heard about better milage, lower reving, more miles per gal. As well as higher miles per hour. But thank you for covering a part that we don't always think about, " More FUN " Thanks for another perspective !
|
11-26-2014, 08:28 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Re: Differential Usability
Quote:
With the 4.10, at 60 mph I turn about 2200 rpm in 5th, and at 70 mph I turn about 2600 rpm in 5th. With the 3.54, at 60 mph I turned about 1900 rpm in 5th, and at 70 mph I turned about 2200 rpm in 5th. |
|
11-26-2014, 08:40 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Re: Differential Usability
Quote:
Perhaps the best lesson I've learned is that you can "work out" on paper how you want your engine and car to perform, but you must be prepared to have your theories blown to bits during actual road testing. |
|
11-26-2014, 09:08 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chester Vt
Posts: 8,862
|
Re: Differential Usability
Richard is probably the most knowledgeable person I know, when it comes to tuning a flathead. While visiting me here in vermont he tuned the 294/L-100 with 3 Stromburges. Welre changing the rear to 3.73 from 4.10 as well. He trys most everything, just to make it better and to learn what doesn't as well.
|
11-26-2014, 09:09 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Star, MS
Posts: 4,024
|
Re: Differential Usability
Quote:
Just joking, the 3.54 gears do seem a little high. Thanks for sharing your experiences. |
|
11-26-2014, 09:19 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 603
|
Re: Differential Usability
I think they used the Dana in some of the later wagons as well.
|
11-26-2014, 10:31 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Re: Differential Usability
|
11-26-2014, 10:49 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 696
|
Re: Differential Usability
Quote:
When you've been used to punching it in 1st and having the front end look like it's gonna come off the ground (never actually does but it exercises the shocks pretty good!) you miss that. Punching it in 5th gear with the 4.10 is like punching it in 4th with the 3.54. My "Frankenstein" Big Chevy magnetic trigger distributor and my Crane CDI/HEI ignition both add to the fun -- big time. |
|
|
|
Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements) |
|