Joined
·
15 Posts
I’ve been looking at getting a new Mustang GT for a few years now (never owned a Mustang and only drove a base V6 Mustang 2.73 rear manual). 2011 seems to be the year to get one.
I’ve pretty much figured out what options I want on the 5.0 GT, but the gear ratio has been difficult to resolve which will be best for my needs. The conventional wisdom on the site has been get the 3.73 on the 2010 and earlier, but does the same still hold true for the 5.0 and 6-speed?
A few people with the 2011 GT have said 1st gear is very low with the 3.73. Even someone with the 3.55 said they might have gone with the 3.31 and made 1st more usable and saved $400 to boot.
Before we look at the data, note I don’t care much about 0-60 times. I want sporty daily driver that is fun to drive. But I also didn’t want some overly tall-geared vehicle that zapped some of the fun of rowing the gearbox myself.
So I compared the 2010 3.73 vs. a 2011 with a 3.31, 3.55 or 3.73. Most people seem to be happy with the 2010-3.73 (except for high RPM freeway cruising), so I consider this to be the benchmark for comparison sake.
![Text Font Line Monochrome Number]()
When comparing the transmission ratios for the 2010 vs. 2011 the thing I noticed first is how low the 2011 1st gear is compared with the 2010. Top gear 2010-5th vs. 2011-6th is closer percentage wise, but 2011 1st is quite a bit lower.
The spreadsheet (also attached the XLS file) shows the 2011-3.31 is 3.9% taller than the 2010-3.73. The 2011-3.31 2nd through 5th ratios are closer than the 2010, which should help keep the 5.0 on boil. Then the 2011-3.31 6th is 15.2% taller over the 2010-3.73 5th for good fuel economy on the freeway and lower RPM cruising (I hate cars and motorcycles that run too high an RPM on the freeway and I always feel the need to shift one higher).
The 2011-3.73 1st gear is 8.3% lower than a 2010-3.73. This makes the 2011-3.73 1st gear about the same at a 2010-4.10 which is much too low for my needs. Then the 2011-3.73 6th gear is only 4.4% higher than the 2010-3.73 5th, which will reduce RPM by about 100 at 70MPH. The 5.0 has so much power, I wanted 6th to be an overdrive for better highway MPG and not have the 6th equivalent to the 2010-3.73 5th.
I’ve been trying to locate a 5.0 manual for a week or two now, and can’t find one. So the likelihood of finding a 5.0 with various gear ratios to try back-to-back is low. Hence, I’ve got to rationalize my gear ratio choice without actually having a back-to-back comparison.
The 2011-3.73 just seems to be geared too low for my needs. The 3.55 might be considered as well, but for $400 I’m not sure that I’ll gain much benefit for my driving style.
So it seems the 3.31 is the right choice for me. It compares well to the 2010-3.73. 1st gear is a bit taller, but 2nd though 5th are closer and 6th is a nice overdrive. A taller first gear might be more daily-driver-usable anyway, especially with the extra power of a 5.0.
Anyway, that is my gear ratio rationalization. Maybe this will help someone else. Let me know what you think.
I’ve pretty much figured out what options I want on the 5.0 GT, but the gear ratio has been difficult to resolve which will be best for my needs. The conventional wisdom on the site has been get the 3.73 on the 2010 and earlier, but does the same still hold true for the 5.0 and 6-speed?
A few people with the 2011 GT have said 1st gear is very low with the 3.73. Even someone with the 3.55 said they might have gone with the 3.31 and made 1st more usable and saved $400 to boot.
Before we look at the data, note I don’t care much about 0-60 times. I want sporty daily driver that is fun to drive. But I also didn’t want some overly tall-geared vehicle that zapped some of the fun of rowing the gearbox myself.
So I compared the 2010 3.73 vs. a 2011 with a 3.31, 3.55 or 3.73. Most people seem to be happy with the 2010-3.73 (except for high RPM freeway cruising), so I consider this to be the benchmark for comparison sake.
When comparing the transmission ratios for the 2010 vs. 2011 the thing I noticed first is how low the 2011 1st gear is compared with the 2010. Top gear 2010-5th vs. 2011-6th is closer percentage wise, but 2011 1st is quite a bit lower.
The spreadsheet (also attached the XLS file) shows the 2011-3.31 is 3.9% taller than the 2010-3.73. The 2011-3.31 2nd through 5th ratios are closer than the 2010, which should help keep the 5.0 on boil. Then the 2011-3.31 6th is 15.2% taller over the 2010-3.73 5th for good fuel economy on the freeway and lower RPM cruising (I hate cars and motorcycles that run too high an RPM on the freeway and I always feel the need to shift one higher).
The 2011-3.73 1st gear is 8.3% lower than a 2010-3.73. This makes the 2011-3.73 1st gear about the same at a 2010-4.10 which is much too low for my needs. Then the 2011-3.73 6th gear is only 4.4% higher than the 2010-3.73 5th, which will reduce RPM by about 100 at 70MPH. The 5.0 has so much power, I wanted 6th to be an overdrive for better highway MPG and not have the 6th equivalent to the 2010-3.73 5th.
I’ve been trying to locate a 5.0 manual for a week or two now, and can’t find one. So the likelihood of finding a 5.0 with various gear ratios to try back-to-back is low. Hence, I’ve got to rationalize my gear ratio choice without actually having a back-to-back comparison.
The 2011-3.73 just seems to be geared too low for my needs. The 3.55 might be considered as well, but for $400 I’m not sure that I’ll gain much benefit for my driving style.
So it seems the 3.31 is the right choice for me. It compares well to the 2010-3.73. 1st gear is a bit taller, but 2nd though 5th are closer and 6th is a nice overdrive. A taller first gear might be more daily-driver-usable anyway, especially with the extra power of a 5.0.
Anyway, that is my gear ratio rationalization. Maybe this will help someone else. Let me know what you think.
