Food for thought

[waynedudes]

I have a 94 GL 1500 SE with CSC Trike. I have been told that the rear end is a modified Ford 3.0 rear end? Thinking about changing gears to below 3.0, if possible. I want to cruise faster with lower RPMs.

[CrystalPistol]

You mean you have a Ford rear with a 3.00:1 ratio ring & pinion set, I think you're gonna have the older Ford 8" rear like had the pumpkin that drops out the front of the housing in that trike. Used in a lot of '60s & '70s Fords. 3.00:1 is pretty high, not even sure they ever made a higher gear ratio set for it. Looks like this when dropped out.

I just don't think you're gonna find a taller gear.

Might be better to go taller on the rear tires.

What ever you do to lower RPMs at speed is gonna make the engine work harder.

[AZgl1800]

I have a 94 GL 1500 SE with CSC Trike. I have been told that the rear end is a modified Ford 3.0 rear end? Thinking about changing gears to below 3.0, if possible. I want to cruise faster with lower RPMs.

you need to quit worrying about what the Tachometer is showing you.

the 1500 engine will perform quite happily at 5,000 RPM all day long for the rest of time.
I have been in situations where after shifting up and down a lot, I ended up in 4th gear and rode for a couple of hours at 75 mph..... it did NOT effect the MPG on that tank of fuel...

I doubt seriously that the CSC has a 3.0 or even close to that gear ratio pumpkin.

3.23 maybe, but not a 3.0
the next step down, IIRC was 2.73 for Mopars and GM, I'm not a Ford fan.

[CrystalPistol]

OEM rear is like 2.88:1 as a bike. Mine has 3.08:1 with tall P215/70-15 tires, runs 3,100 rpm @ 64 mph (verified on GPS). Was a fellow told me it was 2.93, but I jacked it & counted once. Mine has a 6.75" Ford Integral type rear axle, a lighter & later axle. If his has the 8" which CSC used to use when plentiful, good chance it is a 3.00:1 I think.

I agree no need to worry about RPM, and lower ratios numerically (taller) gears will kill highway response and may hurt mileage as the engine works harder pulling those air brakes called fenders through the air. Not worth the hassle … even if you could do it.

[waynedudes]

I am running a little over 3000 rpm at 70 mph. Guess that is not so bad after all.

[CrystalPistol]

I am running a little over 3000 rpm at 70 mph. Guess that is not so bad after all.

Not bad at all. I'd be turning 3390 at 70 with my 3.08 rear, changing to a 3.00 gear would reduce mine to 3301 rpm. Not a huge difference.

… etc … the next step down, IIRC was 2.73 for Mopars and GM, I'm not a Ford fan.

I'm sorry. A little humor there, and I've had the GMs & Mopars, but that was a time since passed.

Gear ratios … Ford gear ratios … like all, It depends on which rear end family, ring gear size, applications anticipated. Ring gear diameter limits teeth (of sufficient strength) count among other things. I don't recall an 8" Ford rear being higher that 3>00:1 but it could be? My Lehman uses a smaller, later, 6.75" Ford integral type rear sometimes called a Sterling, it was offered in some applications as high as 2.45:1 but that would be a dog.

I had a GTO with Pontiac rear, 3.23 … then it had a Chevy 12 bolt with 4.10s. I had a Dart Swinger 340 that had the 8.75, ran 3.23, 3.91, even 4.88s once. It liked the 3.91s best. My '67 Chevelle was a 3.55 12 bolt, it was just a good all around ride. That 454 (with Corvette Tri Power set up) I put in pulled the gear great when the end carbs opened better in 4th than the tired 396 did in 3rd. Our Mercury has the Ford 8.8 with 2.73 interstate eating gears, the "Wife Unit"s Mustang has a 5 speed with a low 1st and the 3.31s wind up fast in first.

Happy with my 3.08, not such a dog in OD. I've even considered dropping rear tires from current 215/70-15 to something a little shorter like 215/60-15 or 225/60-15 … these 215/70-15 tires are same OD as the wider & heavier (4 pounds each tire heavier) 245/60-15 that came with the trike install.

Yeah, I'm bored. Did some yard work today, tired too. Sorry.