HELP diff nightmare

Post by **suprasurf** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:33 am

I have helped a dude here get some new C & P's for a GQ patrol 4.2

One supplied from here for the rear is 4.636 ( 51 / 11 )
The one from Oz for the front is 4.625 ( 37 / 8 )

This shouldn't cause any problems ??

The supplier here said that the 4.636 is from a 2.8 turbo GQ.. I thought they were all 4.625 ?

HELP :?:

Post by **Wendle** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:46 am

is the patrol a wagon/shortie?
are both ring gears 9.25"?

Post by **suprasurf** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:52 am

His truck is a shorty

But he's lowering the ratio to fit bigger tyres.
Both C & P supplied are 9.25 ??

Post by **christover1** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 11:23 am

believe it or not, some trucks use a slightly higher ratio in the front, for to stop back end overtaking down steep hills (accelerating pulls truck straight. )and fer better pull round corners. I have no idea if this is the case here. worth considering, tho, christover

Post by **christover1** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 11:29 am

my calculator makes it a 0.2% difference. so at 1000k front tries to go 1002k. I personally would not be cocerned, but I aint a mechanic/engineer. christover

Post by **Wendle** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 11:40 am

i think it wil lbe fine, it just seems weird...
REason I asked if they were both 9.25", is that one may have been some oddball H260 gearset?

Post by **chimpboy** » Wed Nov 19, 2003 1:28 pm

Compared to the difference in distance travelled just from the left side of the vehicle to the right on any vehicle that turns corners, the difference you'd be getting front vs back would be completely insignificant.

Assuming you only engage the front diff when off-road, I don't see how it could matter one little bit. If you were running permanent AWD it might matter more.

Just my 2 cents worth. (nb Those are Australian cents.)

I do agree that it seems weird, and if it were me I'd be trying to get an exact match... but I am a bit uptight.

Jason

ps if anything it will enhance the vehicle's ability to erode and damage the surface of the earth, which is after all the point of 4WDing... so it's a good thing!

Post by **dumbdunce** » Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:40 pm

it's insignificant.

there are 4WDs out there with factory gears with greater differences front/rear.

Post by **Area54** » Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:54 pm

dumbdunce wrote:it's insignificant.

there are 4WDs out there with factory gears with greater differences front/rear.

exactly, not to mention different tyre wear rates.

Post by **suprasurf** » Thu Nov 20, 2003 6:48 pm

The numbers sound so close its not going to technically an issue. But if you put them side by side they look so different its hard to get you head around the actual ratios being so close

Considering hes paying $600 per C & P i am going to try and get a matching set.

I was hoping someone knew why Nissan did this ???

Post by **big red** » Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:45 pm

the 4.636 is out of a navara rear and the 4.625 is out of a 2.8td patrol.
the navara rear will also fit a GU .

Post by **suprasurf** » Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:54 am

big red wrote:the 4.636 is out of a navara rear and the 4.625 is out of a 2.8td patrol.
the navara rear will also fit a GU .

Thanks now I see why this may have happen. Interesting, the local supplier mentioned he has sold some 4.636 for a replacement in a 2.8td.

Does this automatically mean that the Navara 4.636 C&P will fit onto a GU carrier ??

My thoughts are the 51 / 11 C&P would be stronger than the 37 / 8 anyway, so it may not be such a bad idea to run them.

Outer Limits 4x4 Board

HELP diff nightmare

HELP diff nightmare

Who is online