Archive through November 03, 2003

[cmccarty]

MM,MB,NQ;

What is the source for SO76 decals?
CJM

 

[kmcconaughey]

Charles, you have email.......

 

[dvogt]

Paul you're like a magnet to those low serial number originals. and you always said you don't care for them.

 

[digger]

Kraig,
Got the PD's CD today, THANKS CHIEF!!!!!
Now I have to get busy putting it all together.

 

[jpierson]

SNOWSNOWSNOW!

 

[kmcconaughey]

Charlie, I'll be sending more stuff in a week or so. )

Jeff P., nice 149!

 

[aaytay]

Jeff P.-
If I were you, I'd change my tune to...
CHAINSCHAINSCHANS!

 

[till]

Paul,

What S/N's do you have now??

Engineer type guys...
I'm having trouble figuring out axle ratio's vs. milage. Case in point 3.55 vs 3.77 vs 4.10...

BTW can you tell I cleaned my desk today.

(Message edited by till on November 04, 2003)

 

[aaytay]

Tedd-
I can tell you from experience...
4.10 = ZERO mpg!

 

[digger]

Tedd,
3.55 & 3.77 good gas mileage less towing power, increases the tow capacity by 1000# vs 4.10 less gas mileage, better towing power.
Just my 3 cents.

 

[till]

Thanks Art. That is waht I was thinking. The tow weight capacity does not change a whole lot from ratio to ratio in the book I looking at. It is only about 200 LBS per ratio.

 

[digger]

Tedd,
My Tahoe has 3.73's in it and towing a load of Cubs, weighing out around 13,000 GVW, I can get 11 to 15 MPG. With the truck alone and interstate roads it jumps up to as much as 23 with no head wind and out of Minnesota, I dunno why but we leave the state and honest to goodness, the gas mileage increases!!!!!

 

[sblunier]

Tedd,

The tranny is in direct drive or overdrive at road speeds => engine speed (or .7 to .85 x engine speed in OD )= output shaft speed.


Rear axle ratio is the only gear reduction at this point. Lower gearing (4.10/4.11) => more rear wheel torque but higher engine speeds for a given road speed. 3.55/3.73/3.78 are "std" truck gear ratios for medium duty towing (compromise between MPG and tow power) 3.08 gears are mileage gears, typically found on fleet or light duty trucks....BIG towing and MPG difference!!!!

Remember, as wheel/tire sizes get bigger axle ratios get lower to get similar performance. The new 16/17/18+ inch truck rims may run lower than "normal" ratios to get the same towing performance.

 

[mrgadget]

Tedd - Case in point to follow up Steve's last statement. My dually diesel has 4.10:1 rear axle and 215x75R16 (small,wimpy) tires. I get about 14mpg on a good day!

Now, if I go out and buy tires and pick a "taller" tires, say a 215x78, I will I will get a larger circumference (by about 10%), and consequently more "distance" out of each turn of the tire.

This will create the psuedo effect of lowering my rearend ratio by about the same amount from 4.10 to the effectively 3.73 or so, and should effectively increase my fuel mileage by 10%.

Increasing tire size will also increase my relative SPEED and DISTANCE traveled comparative to the speedometer and odomoter, Hence I will have to use a little Kentucky windage to know how fast I am going... i.e. when the speedometer tells me I'm going 60, I will more accurately be moving along at 66mph, an unwitting candidate for a ticket! Gadget

 

[pbell]

Tedd
I have S/N 409 and now, 510. 516 is owned by a friend about 50 miles away, in southern Indiana.

Don V.
I still don't like 'em

Craig C.
The engine S/N is 478549, and the spec number is 28543E. The engine data plate is screwed on like the other early ones. Hour meter shows 0614.2, the drawbar only has one hole, no hole in the bottom rear of the dash pedestal, and the front spindles have the pinned caps on the top.

Found this IH 2000 tilt bed trailer and another 1250 today. I'm through, not buying anymore, <font size="-2">maybe</font>,

,

.

 

[mrgadget]

And before anybody jumps on me to say that I cannot change my rear end ratio by changing tire diameter...read that again: I said it will create the "psuedo" (fake) effect of changing the ratio. In actuallity I will still have 4.10 rear's, I will just be covering more DISTANCE with each revolution, making it SEEM like I lowered the ratio. G

 

[ccarney]

Thanks for the info Paul!

I've got a recoil engine here, s/n 478093 spec 28498e, that has a screwed on nameplate too. Too bad I don't have the tractor it came on!

(Message edited by ccarney on November 04, 2003)

(Message edited by ccarney on November 04, 2003)

 

[ccarney]

Thanks for the info Paul!

I've got a recoil engine here, s/n 478093 spec 28498e, that has a screwed on nameplate too. Too bad I don't have the tractor it came on!

What's the casting code on the rear? (x-x-F)?

 

[till]

I thought you had 515 also. Kewl trailer. Looks like one of the straps down the length is missing. ??

Thank you Steve, Gadget, Charlie and Art. I was looking at thing backwords again. Planning for the new tow vehicle (1 ton extend van) and trying for a good balance on milage vs tow capacity. I have ruled out the diesel at this point due to cost vs. towing increase vs milage, just not worth it to me at this point.

 

[aaytay]

Tedd-
I've got 285's (tires) on the burb with 4.11 gears. I think it originally had 235's, but the PO switched them out before I bought it.

The truck "shows" that it gets 12.X mpg on my mixed speed (county highways with some slow-downs for small towns.) commute to work, but it may in fact be better and because of the tires I'm not "seeing it on paper". We got 9.8mpg on the trip to and from Travis'. We had 4 guys and all their gear in the truck plus three snow/grader blades in the back and 4 tractors on a tandem axle car hauler both ways.

As is typical with 4.10 gears, the truck drove great and towed that load like it was nothin'. I also tow an 8,000 boat with it in the summer and it does fine with that, (It's rated to tow #10,000) but next time I'll buy the 3.73 gears and take the hit in the towing dept. as 99% of my 20,000 yearly miles are non-towing miles.

As Kraig says....
<FONT SIZE="-2">IMO, FWIW, YMMV, My $0.02, Yada, Yada, Yada...</FONT>