Notice: We request that you don't just set up a new account at this time if you are a previous user.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
Recovery:If you cannot access your old email address and don't remember your password, please click here to log a change of email address so you can do a password reset.

Diff Ratio 4.90 or 4.88 it is the same ???

Tech Talk for Mitsubishi owners.

Moderator: -Scott-

Post Reply
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chile, South America

Diff Ratio 4.90 or 4.88 it is the same ???

Post by caxtrol »

Hey Guys

I have a short Mitsu 98 with 3.5 V6 and 4.27 Diff Ratio.

I got a 4.88 front diff from a Short Mitsu 94 3.0 V6, but I found a Rear Diff from 2.8 TDI in 4.90....

My question is for the rear diff, it is the same 4.88 with 4.90 ???, because I saw in the Forum that:

3.5V6 & 2.8TDI :-
front axle = 28 spline, 29mm diameter, diff = 8" diameter (high pinion)
rear axle = 31 spline, 33.5mm diameter, diff = 9.5" diameter

and

Gen 2

3.0 V6 = 4.625, 4.875
2.8D = 4.875
2.8TDI = 4.90

Please, If somebody could give me a hand with it .....

Thanks

Caxtrol
Posts: 1130
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 7:25 pm
Location: New Zealand

Post by NJV6 »

No they are not the same.

The 4.900 is the bigger one.

Dare I say it, if you had free wheeling hubs and never used super select on the highway then you'd not notice the 0.25 ratio difference.
1994 NJ SWB, 3.5, 5 speed manual, 33's, XD9000, 4.9 diffs, Front & Rear ARB's, Safari Snorkel

2008-2009-2010-2011 Pavlova in the shed.
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chile, South America

Post by caxtrol »

Ok

I do not have free wheeling hubs and I used super select, because my Mitsu is year 98, and for this reason I am understanding that I can not use 4.875 in the fron and 4.90 in the rear, I am thinking in the correct way ????

Thanks

Caxtrol
Posts: 14209
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Adelaide

Post by -Scott- »

The difference in ratios is .025, or a little over 0.5%. You'll get a bigger difference due to tyre wear & tyre rotation.

For example, if you have 33" tyres, 0.5% would be less than 0.2", or less than 5mm in diameter - which is 2.5mm in tread depth.

Just do it.
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chile, South America

Post by caxtrol »

Ok, if I have 33` the diference is nothing, and I will not have a problem with 4.875 in the front and 4.90 in the rear ????

It is correct ???

Thanks again

Caxtrol
Posts: 6314
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:49 am
Location: Newcastle, NSW

Post by Hekta »

Scott was just using the tyre size as an example.

Just do it. The difference in ratios is small enough that it won't cause a problem.
wtf is an acronym

[color=yellow]Ctrl + W[/color]
Posts: 14209
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Adelaide

Post by -Scott- »

Hekta wrote:Scott was just using the tyre size as an example.

Just do it. The difference in ratios is small enough that it won't cause a problem.
Yes. I was trying to show that it's less of a difference than new tyres on one axle, and part worn tyres on the other.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest