4.56 or 4.88 gears for 3.4 auto
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4.56 or 4.88 gears for 3.4 auto
I did the search guys and after reading pages on gearing I can't find the solution for my situation. Anyway, I have a 2001 3.4 auto 4runner with 4.10 rear end that I just put a 2" suspension lift on and 33" tires. Now it is time to re-gear but I want to make sure that the re-gearing is still suitable for highway use going 80mph. What I want to eliminate is the constant downshifting on hills as I go down the interstate. Looking at the previous gear posts I do know that I want either 4.56 or 4.88 Can any of you guys elaborate on which would be best for my situation or what your experience has been? Thanks for the help. This site is an awsome source of info.
Last edited by realmccoy; 05-03-2005 at 07:13 AM.
#3
You almost have to wonder though, if regearing from 4.10 to 4.56 is worth it. There really isnt that much difference between the two from a cost versus performance perspective. With my jeep, stock gears were 3.07s, and I run 4.88s with 35s, and 4.56 with 33s would be great also, however, if I had a set of axles with 4.10s, it would not be worth the cost to re-gear versus the performance. But then again, a 4runner is slightly more luxurious than my 92 Jeep
#4
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By no means am I one of the smart guys around here on gearing but this is my feedback. I am currently running 4.88s with my 285/75s. My RPMs now are a little higher at 75-80mph than they were when I had the stock 4.10s with 265/70s.
When I was doing my research, most of the tables told me that 4.56 would get me closer to the stock RPM numbers and performance. I went 4.88s because it gave me a little extra oomph when I was doing low speed work offroad and I was willing to accept the slight increase in RPMs at highway speeds. I am happy with the performance I have from my setup.
When I was doing my research, most of the tables told me that 4.56 would get me closer to the stock RPM numbers and performance. I went 4.88s because it gave me a little extra oomph when I was doing low speed work offroad and I was willing to accept the slight increase in RPMs at highway speeds. I am happy with the performance I have from my setup.
#6
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember right my RPMs at 80 mph are ~3000 RPMs. I wouldn't say they "yell" but it is noticably louder. I don't usually go faster than 75 so it doesn't bother me. The one person that I know of that does alot of driving with 4.88s and 285/75s is Jeff the Marmot. He may be able to give better info on the highway performance with this setup.
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the replys. I think you can see the dillema I'm having. Is 4.56 that much better than what I already have? Is it good enough to justify the cost? The 4.88 are a bigger jump but would they be hard to bear on a 400 mile interstate drive at 75-80mph? Hopefully, somebody with one or the other setup can reply with what rpm they have at variable speeds.
#9
Originally Posted by Road Head
You almost have to wonder though, if regearing from 4.10 to 4.56 is worth it. There really isnt that much difference between the two from a cost versus performance perspective. With my jeep, stock gears were 3.07s, and I run 4.88s with 35s, and 4.56 with 33s would be great also, however, if I had a set of axles with 4.10s, it would not be worth the cost to re-gear versus the performance. But then again, a 4runner is slightly more luxurious than my 92 Jeep
regearing from 4.10 to 4.56 is a little more than a 10% increase in gearing.
that's the equivalent of going from 33's down to 30's. would that make a big difference in "feel" and performance of the truck? hell yes. you can't say that a 10% difference isn't VERY noticable.
a jump from 4.10 to 4.88 is nearly a 20% jump. when going up only 10% in tire diameter, why go up nearly 20% in gears unless you really think you're going to need the extra ummph?
#12
match your change in gears to the change in tire size to get back to "stock feel".
4.56 - 4.10 = 0.46
0.46 / 4.10 = 0.1122 or 11.22% increase in gearing
4.88 - 4.10 = 0.78
0.78 / 4.10 = 0.1902 or 19.02% increase in gearing
33" - 30" = 3.0"
3.0" / 30" = 0.10 or 10% increase in tire size
35" - 30" = 5.0"
5.0" / 30" = 0.1667 or 16.67% increase in tire size
4.56 - 4.10 = 0.46
0.46 / 4.10 = 0.1122 or 11.22% increase in gearing
4.88 - 4.10 = 0.78
0.78 / 4.10 = 0.1902 or 19.02% increase in gearing
33" - 30" = 3.0"
3.0" / 30" = 0.10 or 10% increase in tire size
35" - 30" = 5.0"
5.0" / 30" = 0.1667 or 16.67% increase in tire size
Last edited by bamachem; 05-03-2005 at 02:40 PM.
#13
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bamachem
match your change in gears to the change in tire size to get back to "stock feel".
4.56 - 4.10 = 0.46
0.46 / 4.10 = 0.1122 or 11.22% increase in gearing
4.88 - 4.10 = 0.78
0.78 / 4.10 = 0.1902 or 19.02% increase in gearing
33" - 30" = 3.0"
3.0" / 30" = 0.10 or 10% increase in tire size
35" - 30" = 5.0"
5.0" / 30" = 0.1667 or 16.67% increase in tire size
4.56 - 4.10 = 0.46
0.46 / 4.10 = 0.1122 or 11.22% increase in gearing
4.88 - 4.10 = 0.78
0.78 / 4.10 = 0.1902 or 19.02% increase in gearing
33" - 30" = 3.0"
3.0" / 30" = 0.10 or 10% increase in tire size
35" - 30" = 5.0"
5.0" / 30" = 0.1667 or 16.67% increase in tire size
#14
I just had 4.88s instaled on my runner with (currently) 32" SSRs. It screams 3000 rpm at 65 mph, I am hoping that a future change in tire size will correct this some what as to re-gear right now (unless cost is nill) would be out of the question. If I had to re do it all over again I would go with the 4.56 especially since you run it alot on the highway.
#15
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the help guys. I am really leaning towards 4.56 after everyone's input. I see the value of 4.88 or even 5.29 as you progressively get more serious about off-roading but I am becoming convinced that the 4.56 is a better fit for a daily driver that is still reasonably capable off-road. Now to determine how much body lift and raise funds for some lockers.
#18
I guess my line of thinking is that 4.10s are pretty low gears anyways, and re-gearing will cost along the lines of $1k for parts and labor. That is a lot of money in comparison of a 10% increase. It would be different if the starting gear ratio was 3.XX, but in all reality, 4.10s are a nice gear set. 4.56 are always better, I am not disagreeing, I am just trying to justify cost versus performance. Does anyone have any gas mileage #s for 265/70s and 4.10s versus 285/75 and 4.10s versus 285/75 and 4.56? That would be a really interesting set of numbers to compare.
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drive a lot on the highway, and wheel probably only a few times a year. And I'd say if I could do it over again, I'd definitely go 4.56's. But then again, I jumped from 3.90's so the increase to 4.56's would be significant for me.
70 mph = 2500-2600 rpm
If you're looking for gas mileage comparison, you'll find a particular thread that was posted a while back where a bunch of us stated what our mpg was before and after a regear
70 mph = 2500-2600 rpm
If you're looking for gas mileage comparison, you'll find a particular thread that was posted a while back where a bunch of us stated what our mpg was before and after a regear
Last edited by AznSky; 05-04-2005 at 08:21 AM.
#20
Originally Posted by AznSky
If you're looking for gas mileage comparison, you'll find a particular thread that was posted a while back where a bunch of us stated what our mpg was before and after a regear
Thanks, Ill look for it.