range rover transfer ratios

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Sep 9, 2004

• #1

anyone know 'em?

specifically the 1987-vintage 3.5i and the VM 2.4.

a mate has just bought an 87 (E-plate) which was a 3.5i and is now fitted
with a 2.4 turbo, he reckons it's no use and he has to use lower gears all
the time, I wondered if the VM 2.4s had lower transfer ratios than the V8s?

 

E

EMB

Guest

• Sep 9, 2004

• #2

Austin Shackles wrote:

> anyone know 'em?
>
> specifically the 1987-vintage 3.5i and the VM 2.4.
>
> a mate has just bought an 87 (E-plate) which was a 3.5i and is now fitted
> with a 2.4 turbo, he reckons it's no use and he has to use lower gears all
> the time, I wondered if the VM 2.4s had lower transfer ratios than the V8s?
>

I don't know them specifically, but I remember (from investigating
conversions for a customer) something about ratios of approx 1.2 and 1.4
in high ratio being the V8 and diesel ones respectively.

<runs off to telephone>

These thoughts have been confirmed by a quick chat with the local
Landrover specialist mechanic, but he's not near his books to check.

--
EMB
change two to number to reply

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Sep 10, 2004

• #3

On or around Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:57:54 +1200, EMB <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>> anyone know 'em?
>>
>> specifically the 1987-vintage 3.5i and the VM 2.4.
>>
>> a mate has just bought an 87 (E-plate) which was a 3.5i and is now fitted
>> with a 2.4 turbo, he reckons it's no use and he has to use lower gears all
>> the time, I wondered if the VM 2.4s had lower transfer ratios than the V8s?
>>
>
>I don't know them specifically, but I remember (from investigating
>conversions for a customer) something about ratios of approx 1.2 and 1.4
>in high ratio being the V8 and diesel ones respectively.
>
><runs off to telephone>
>
>These thoughts have been confirmed by a quick chat with the local
>Landrover specialist mechanic, but he's not near his books to check.

aha. so it might indeed have the wrong ratio, unless it also had a suitable
transfer box swap.

wonder how you tell which you have?

It's currently got an LT77 main box, is that normal for a 2.4 or were they
LT95s?

 

I

Ivor Clegg

Guest

• Sep 10, 2004

• #4

EMB wrote:
> Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>> anyone know 'em?
>>
>> specifically the 1987-vintage 3.5i and the VM 2.4.
>>
>> a mate has just bought an 87 (E-plate) which was a 3.5i and is now fitted
>> with a 2.4 turbo, he reckons it's no use and he has to use lower gears
>> all
>> the time, I wondered if the VM 2.4s had lower transfer ratios than the
>> V8s?
>>
>
> I don't know them specifically, but I remember (from investigating
> conversions for a customer) something about ratios of approx 1.2 and 1.4
> in high ratio being the V8 and diesel ones respectively.
>
> <runs off to telephone>
>
> These thoughts have been confirmed by a quick chat with the local
> Landrover specialist mechanic, but he's not near his books to check.
>

Transfer ratios for LT95 combined gearbox/transfer case-
http://members.shaw.ca/red90/gears.html#lt95tcase

Ratios for LT230 transfer case-
http://members.shaw.ca/red90/gears.html#lt230


Don't know about the LT95 box, but when the LT230 came out of the
factory, there SHOULD have been a sticker on the back of it (beside the
handbrake drum) stating the gear ratios.


Ivor.

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Sep 10, 2004

• #5

On or around Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:52:26 +0100, Ivor Clegg
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>EMB wrote:
>> Austin Shackles wrote:
>>
>>> anyone know 'em?
>>>
>>> specifically the 1987-vintage 3.5i and the VM 2.4.
>>>
>>> a mate has just bought an 87 (E-plate) which was a 3.5i and is now fitted
>>> with a 2.4 turbo, he reckons it's no use and he has to use lower gears
>>> all
>>> the time, I wondered if the VM 2.4s had lower transfer ratios than the
>>> V8s?
>>>
>>
>> I don't know them specifically, but I remember (from investigating
>> conversions for a customer) something about ratios of approx 1.2 and 1.4
>> in high ratio being the V8 and diesel ones respectively.
>>
>> <runs off to telephone>
>>
>> These thoughts have been confirmed by a quick chat with the local
>> Landrover specialist mechanic, but he's not near his books to check.
>>
>
>Transfer ratios for LT95 combined gearbox/transfer case-
>http://members.shaw.ca/red90/gears.html#lt95tcase
>
>Ratios for LT230 transfer case-
>http://members.shaw.ca/red90/gears.html#lt230
>
>
>Don't know about the LT95 box, but when the LT230 came out of the
>factory, there SHOULD have been a sticker on the back of it (beside the
>handbrake drum) stating the gear ratios.

I'll tell him, though he may get more info from the seller, if the seller
knows.

mind, the 2.4 VM hasn't got quite the grunt of the TDi anyway, so it might
be just lower power, or it might need a good service, tune and check the
turbo boost pressure.

hohum. I fail to believe that the info isn't online somewhere, but I've yet
to find it.

 

L

Lee_D

Guest

• Sep 11, 2004

• #6

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> hohum. I fail to believe that the info isn't online somewhere, but I've
> yet
> to find it.

Right , off the top of my head ;-).....1989 Borg Warner transfer gearbox.

High 1.206 :1
Low 3.244 :1

Manual gearbox Lt77 ratios
5th 0.770 : 1
4th 1.000 : 1
3rd 1.397 : 1
2nd 2.132 : 1
1st 3.321 : 1
Reverse 3.429 : 1
Diesel Models low 1st gear 3.692 : 1

Overal ratios final drive
High Low
5 3.29 8.84
4 4.27 11.48
3 5.97 16.04
2 9.10 24.48
1 14.18 38.14
Rev 14.62 39.38

Diesel- low 1st gear 15.76 42.40

These are all pre TDi figures... i.e. VM diesels.

HTH

Lee D


--

www.lrproject.com

Workshop photos from Landrover repairs
& other such tinkerings.
Home of Percy the Jag powered Landrover

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Sep 12, 2004

• #7

On or around Sat, 11 Sep 2004 19:43:01 GMT, "Lee_D" <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> hohum. I fail to believe that the info isn't online somewhere, but I've
>> yet
>> to find it.
>
>Right , off the top of my head ;-).....1989 Borg Warner transfer gearbox.
>
>High 1.206 :1
>Low 3.244 :1
>
>Manual gearbox Lt77 ratios
>5th 0.770 : 1
>4th 1.000 : 1
>3rd 1.397 : 1
>2nd 2.132 : 1
>1st 3.321 : 1
>Reverse 3.429 : 1
>Diesel Models low 1st gear 3.692 : 1
>
>Overal ratios final drive
> High Low
>5 3.29 8.84
>4 4.27 11.48
>3 5.97 16.04
>2 9.10 24.48
>1 14.18 38.14
>Rev 14.62 39.38
>
>Diesel- low 1st gear 15.76 42.40
>
>These are all pre TDi figures... i.e. VM diesels.

sort of, but the vehicle in question is pre-BW as well - AFAIK all the BW
transfer boxes were 1.206, but some of the LT230s in V8s are higher than
that. Although it's interesting to note the fact that there may be
different mainbox ratios for the diesel. I'd imagine the diesel would have
a lower transfer ratio in the same way as the 90s and 110s did pre-TDi.

 

R

Richard Brookman

Guest

• Sep 12, 2004

• #8

Lee_D wrote:
> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> hohum. I fail to believe that the info isn't online somewhere, but
>> I've yet
>> to find it.
>
> Right , off the top of my head ;-).....1989 Borg Warner transfer
> gearbox.
>
> High 1.206 :1
> Low 3.244 :1
>
> Manual gearbox Lt77 ratios
> 5th 0.770 : 1
> 4th 1.000 : 1
> 3rd 1.397 : 1
> 2nd 2.132 : 1
> 1st 3.321 : 1
> Reverse 3.429 : 1
> Diesel Models low 1st gear 3.692 : 1
>
> Overal ratios final drive
> High Low
> 5 3.29 8.84
> 4 4.27 11.48
> 3 5.97 16.04
> 2 9.10 24.48
> 1 14.18 38.14
> Rev 14.62 39.38
>
> Diesel- low 1st gear 15.76 42.40
>
> These are all pre TDi figures... i.e. VM diesels.
>
> HTH
>
> Lee D

That was from *memory*??? Jeez.

--

Rich

Series 2a
RR 4.6
V8 trialler
dog, wife, kids, whatever