Will a 2.83:1 Standard Differential on 1967 Mustang work with a v8 engine?, those are the specs on the rear axle on my 67 Mustang and I was wondering if I could swap out my inline 6 for a 289 , preferably 302 without having to change rear ends
263567
Joined
·
167 Posts
Mine originally came with a 351w 2v and a 2.79 rear axle ratio with the FMX auto. With some 80s 4v intake on it and that 2.79 rear gear it still felt great and “fast” for the 90s as a high schooler BUT the 3.89 rear gear and the 5 speed it has now really livened it up!
That being said the 351w torque curve was probably a little better at making up for the 2.79 gear ratio than a 289 will be. You could always try it as is but if it were me I’d go to a steeper ratio. In my younger age I just threw a lower ratio at it that was lower than my friend had in his Camaro which actually was a little too steep until I swapped the cam later. Look up “starting line ratio” and step through that calc and then marry that with cruising speed/rpm you want and decide from there.
That being said the 351w torque curve was probably a little better at making up for the 2.79 gear ratio than a 289 will be. You could always try it as is but if it were me I’d go to a steeper ratio. In my younger age I just threw a lower ratio at it that was lower than my friend had in his Camaro which actually was a little too steep until I swapped the cam later. Look up “starting line ratio” and step through that calc and then marry that with cruising speed/rpm you want and decide from there.
Joined
·
167 Posts
As far as what you’d feel they’re the same. It’s the ratio of the teeth counts between the ring and pinion so for every 2.83 teeth on the ring gear, there’s 1 pinion tooth. Ring teeth divided by pinion teeth = 2.83 in your case. Mine is a 9” rear gear so the ratio was just slightly different than yours (2.83:1 vs 2:79:1) but they’re basically the same.
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
