[LittleDoc]

Well I may have goofed, the new truck has 4.10 gearing and thinking that the engine would be more efficient than my 2000 7.3 w/ 3.73s the mileage would be about equal.

Boy was I wrong, the 7.3 would do 15 MPG City and 19 MPG highway. I've only got 4000 miles on the new truck but it is getting 12 City and 16 highway all thongs being equal.

So my question is has anyone done a 4.10 Limit Slip to 3.73 Limit Slip modificaiton and if so what impact did you notice on driveability.

Thanks

 

[SteveHeywood]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I may have goofed, the new truck has 4.10 gearing and thinking that the engine would be more efficient than my 2000 7.3 w/ 3.73s the mileage would be about equal.

Boy was I wrong, the 7.3 would do 15 MPG City and 19 MPG highway. I've only got 4000 miles on the new truck but it is getting 12 City and 16 highway all thongs being equal.

So my question is has anyone done a 4.10 Limit Slip to 3.73 Limit Slip modificaiton and if so what impact did you notice on driveability.

Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

Because of the design of the Dana 80 rear axle you'll have to give up your limited slip to change to 3.73s (different carrier). Given the overall cost you'll never recoup the cost. Besides that, it's my opinion that the 6.0 is better served by 4.10s than the 7.3 was. I ONLY tow 8,000 lbs with my 05 6.0 and wish I had 4.10s instead of 3.73s.

Your truck will loosen up with more miles. My mileage improved nearly 10% with 20,000 miles as compared to only 4,000 miles.

 

[superf350]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I may have goofed, the new truck has 4.10 gearing and thinking that the engine would be more efficient than my 2000 7.3 w/ 3.73s the mileage would be about equal.

Boy was I wrong, the 7.3 would do 15 MPG City and 19 MPG highway. I've only got 4000 miles on the new truck but it is getting 12 City and 16 highway all thongs being equal.

So my question is has anyone done a 4.10 Limit Slip to 3.73 Limit Slip modificaiton and if so what impact did you notice on driveability.

Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

So your 7.3 was a dually 4X4 also? If so I don't know how you got 19. My wife had a 7.3 F250 supercab shortbed 4X4 auto and the best she could muster was 18 highway and 14 in town. That thing was horrible in fuel mileage. Shoot I can get 18 with my 8400lb crew cab dually as long as I keep my foot out of it, which btw seldom happens! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/phoney.gif

 

[Old_Dog]

Gollie, I got 18.2-mpg on my last tank of diesel in my 7.3-L 4x4 crewcab
PSD dually, which weighs about 8500-lbs with my camper shell and crapola...
With my heavy Lance 1130 camper on the truck I get 12 to 15-mpg, depending
on terrain and how heavy my foot is on the go-pedal... The 3.73:1 rear-
end is fine hauling the Lance camper. Don't need no 4.10's! But with the
6.0-L being a higher revving engine to get any torque, the 4.10's may be
desirable in that case.

--Old_Dog

 

[superf350]

Well gollie I guess since your an "old dog" you probably never see 65mph either! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shrug.gif BTW I had a couple dyno sheets of a 7.3 and a 6.0 where the 6.0 made more torque at a lower rpm than the 7.3. Granted niether one of those were stock but who keeps there trucks stock anyway? The 6.0 had a broader torque curve also. Face it the 6.0 is just so much better than the 7.3 in everyway! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

 

[barrelhorses]

I don't want to get into which is better: the 7.3 or the 6.0. I've had both and both have done a good job doing what I've asked them to do.

I just told my wife the other day that I wish I had gotten 4.10 rear end on the current truck. (I tried to explain the difference to her, but she's still in the dark). I think for my purposes the 4.10 would make it just a little better. But for the cost of the gear swap at this point, it's not worth it. I'll just wait until it's time for a new truck.

 

[Old_Dog]

70's about the limit I go... Especially with $3/gal diesel.

I test drove a 6.0-L stick-shift crew cab 4x4 SRW a couple years ago and
even though it was about 1,000-lbs lighter relative to my dually with its
camper shell and crapola, my stock 7.3-L launched much better with more
low-end torque. I had to rev the engine and slip the clutch on the 6.0
to avoid stalling it! This was especially true on a slight grades.
Something I don't hafta do in 1st gear (not granny "Low") with the 7.3-L,
even with the heavy Lance camper mounted. I just let the clutch out and
the 7.3-L will walk away at idle speed.

However, once the 6.0-L got up to about 1,800-rpm or so it took right off.
Sooo, you gotta stay in the lower gears longer and rev that 6.0-L puppie
higher. In which case a 4.10 rear-end is probably more appropriate than
a 3.73 in a 6.0... But, you can't get a 4.10 in a 6.0 SRW -- just the
dually. And then with the 4.10 you're gonna suffer on the MPGs....
Which is what LittleDOc reported...

I know what the Ford specs say for the torque and HP curves on the 6.0-L.
But in practice its a different story at the low end. Remember, there have
been a bunch of software flashes that have changed the engine's performance
in various ways. Some people have reported better performance and many worse...
It is so unpredictable. Just look at the posts on this and the other
Ford/diesel sites... I do hope Ford gets it right with the coming 6.4-L as I'm
looking to buy an F-450 -- but not until they get the diesel engine
problems behind them. I may be waiting a long time or going to another brand.

--Old_Dog

 

[07HEMI4ME]

LittleDoc

I think we need to trade Trucks...

See My problem here, I think I need 4.10s

 

[07HEMI4ME]

barrelhorses what was the cost of the grar swap? 3.73 to 4.10

 

[barrelhorses]

[ QUOTE ]
barrelhorses what was the cost of the grar swap? 3.73 to 4.10

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't done it. I haven't even looked into cost. I'm sure it will be cost-prohibitive now. My truck does fine as it is, but would probably be better with the 4.10. I'll just wait until it's time to get a new truck.

 

[LittleDoc]

Thanks for the responses.

 

[agdodge4x4]

[ QUOTE ]
I just told my wife the other day that I wish I had gotten 4.10 rear end on the current truck. (I tried to explain the difference to her, but she's still in the dark).

[/ QUOTE ]

Just tell her how much its going to cost, they understand that much better.

 

[SAVAGESAM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just told my wife the other day that I wish I had gotten 4.10 rear end on the current truck. (I tried to explain the difference to her, but she's still in the dark).

[/ QUOTE ]

Just tell her how much its going to cost, they understand that much better.

[/ QUOTE ] LMAO. Now that's funny right there. May I be with the starving pygmies in New guinea.

 

[cattleman]

I have a 6.0 dully with 4.10 gears. If you bought the truck to pull heavy, heavy weight 4.10 gears is the way to go. If you just want to ride around and look pretty and pull a little boat or camper ever so offer you should have got 3.73 gears. A 6.0 with 4.10 gears will pull a 2600 square foot brick house down the high-way.

 

[Black05]

Not exactly right, but a good effort at humor. The truck in my signature pulls 11K - 12K with no trouble or effort. The SRW trucks like that in my signature are only available with 3.73 gears from Ford, yet the GCWR is around 23,500 lbs.

 

[rcchallenger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
barrelhorses what was the cost of the grar swap? 3.73 to 4.10

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't done it. I haven't even looked into cost. I'm sure it will be cost-prohibitive now. My truck does fine as it is, but would probably be better with the 4.10. I'll just wait until it's time to get a new truck.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just got a quote over the phone from a gear specialty shop recommended by my diesel tech. The price was quoted between 1,400 to 1,500 dollars. I'm hauling a raptor 3612 and really need the tow boss. Not sure what I'm going to do at this point.