Author Topic: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners (Read 9813 times)

Diogenes · « **on:** October 21, 2020, 05:31:01 PM »

I fell into a phenomenal deal over the weekend for my mild built 1966 390 Galaxie, a complete big in/big out toploader setup out of a 7 Litre. My 9in. has a 3.25 gear (I believe, will confirm soon). I'm looking for advice on ring and pinion and clutch selection. I cruise this car a lot, back country roads and highway speeds. I was assuming I'm going to need to change the rear gear, but I'm not certain. What experiences can those of you in the know share? I like "spirited driving", so off-line performance is fairly important. I've revisited an SLR discussion, but looking for Galaxie owner experiences--if possible.

It doesn't look like there are many clutch choices for the big in/big out.

Thank you....

gdaddy01 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 21, 2020, 07:55:05 PM »

with the high first gear in the trans , 2.32 and the fact you what to drive the car , I would go with something in the range of 3.50 to 3.73 with a 235-70-15 tire . I think that will put you about 2700 to 3000 rpm at 60 mph .

chilly460 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 21, 2020, 08:18:45 PM »

Not a toploader but I ran a T10 with the long first gear for a couple years in my '63 Merc. I tried a 3.00 gear, fantastic once rolling but it wsa a real pain in traffic and just not much fun at all. 3.50s helped a bit, but really it still felt lazy to me and it really wasn't a long enough gear to run on the highway with modern traffic. I went to 4.10s and finally it felt ok around town, but cruising was beyond awful. I'd go 3.50s and stay off the interstate.

bsprowl · « **Reply #3 on:** October 21, 2020, 08:43:45 PM »

The 7 Litre came with a 3.25 ratio from the factory (as did the 390). It also had 38 more cubic inches. The close ratio 2.32 first gear ratio is not your friend. The 390 had a 2.78 first gear ratio.

The difference is 0.46 and adding that to 3.25 gets you 3.71. Common Ford ratios are 3.89 and 3.91. Those ratios are not fun on the the interstate.

Nightmist66 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 21, 2020, 08:45:05 PM »

Quote from: Diogenes on October 21, 2020, 05:31:01 PM

I fell into a phenomenal deal over the weekend for my mild built 1966 390 Galaxie, a complete big in/big out toploader setup out of a 7 Litre.

I like "spirited driving", so off-line performance is fairly important.

Just trying to clarify, is the new purchase a close ratio or are you swapping from a current close ratio to a wide?

From your comment of off the line performance, I would highly recommend starting with a wide ratio. I don't see any downside to them. Cruising will be the same either way, they're both 1:1 in 4th and 3rd gears are very close as well. It just comes down to tire size and gearing.... A 3.89 is a good "compromise" gear in my opinion. Just my 2¢

427Fastback · « **Reply #5 on:** October 21, 2020, 08:56:02 PM »

Agreed.....Switch/convert the trans to a wide ratio and dont look back...I run W/ratio's in my stuff and every car i have built..Untill you get to 3.7's and higher the c/r is not your friend.

Its just math
2.78 x axle ratio
2.32 x axle ratio

cammerfe · « **Reply #6 on:** October 21, 2020, 10:00:34 PM »

Here's a point not mentioned above---and for all I know, material improvements over the past fifty plus years may have made it moot. I ordered my '64 Custom/427 with a 4.11 gear and it worked just fine. But in the early spring, (I got the car in February), we planned a trip from Michigan to Sebring for the 12 Hour Race. Even with the swapped-in 8.20X15 tires on the back, the 4.11 would have been too much of a buzz. I got a 3.50 'pig' and swapped it in. And since I only had a 90 day/3000 mile warranty, I wanted to save something for potential mishaps. I made up a chart of 4th gear engine speeds and car MPHs and then just plugged the speedo hole in the trans. The tach became my speedometer. 3000 RPM was just above 70 MPH, but we decided to fly and in every area we could get away with it, we were running better than 100 MPH as often as possible. This was before I-75 was finished so there were many stretches of two-lane. After the trip was complete, I left the 3.50 gear in the back for a period of time---and I had a clutch failure. Trying to launch a 4000+ pound car from stop lights with the combo of the 2.32 low in the trans with large diameter tires with that gear multiplication actually stripped the face off the disc on one side and I barely made it home.

I'd changed out the T-10 for a big in-'n'-out Toploader which necessitated a truck disc for the 11 1/2 inch clutch. The guys at Bill Brown Ford were willing to look out for me and replaced the disc. And they told me that the 3.50 gear was very hard on the disc. Having a face come off a disc was fairly common under the circumstances.

That was one of the reasons I traded the '64 to my Brother Lon and ordered a new '65 1/2 Mustang 'K' car. Within a few weeks, I'd removed the back seat and put the Shelby deck in its place, replaced the Motorcraft carb with a 715 Holley on the Cobra manifold, put in a Mallory ignition, a Gratiot Cam and a Shelby hood. I removed the 'gills' and replaced them with a pop-riveted cut-to-fit sheet-aluminum panel on each side and installed the rear brake-cooling scoops. All that got the car down to 2880 on the scale at Milan. And then I installed a Paxton VS 59 blower, the GT350 rear brakes, and a set of 4-tube headers.

That car had a 2.32 Top Loader in it from the factory. Street-racing on Telegraph, I could get a running speed set-up that had a 396 Chevy II in second gear while I still had a useful amount of first gear left. I was running a 3.50 rear, but also having a set of tall Pirelli Cinturatos on the back on 15 inch Galaxie Station Wagon wheels. And a slightly smaller set on the front. So with 15 pounds plus of boost, I could just walk away.

Take advantage of planning where you'll be with each component.

KS

Diogenes · « **Reply #7 on:** October 22, 2020, 03:48:55 AM »

I already have the close ratio trans, so a wide ratio is not in the cards. I am going from a C6 (which recently went bad due to converter failure) to this set up. Many years back, I swapped a close ratio toploader into my old Merc wagon, replacing a C4. It had a 3.25 Detroit Locker. I changed to a 3.50, but it was still a dog, ended up going to a 3.89 and it liked it a lot. The wagon only weighed around 3800lbs, maybe a bit less. The Galaxie runs quite a bit more weight. My tire diameter is about 26". I'd say a 3.89 is probably where I'll have to go, as Nightmist66 stated, it's likely the best compromise.

Still concerned about a good clutch that won't break the bank--any thoughts???

GerryP · « **Reply #8 on:** October 22, 2020, 07:21:24 AM »

Quote from: Diogenes on October 21, 2020, 05:31:01 PM

...My 9in. has a 3.25 gear (I believe, will confirm soon). ....

This is an important detail. Know for fact what you have. Your tire size is also wrong. Unless someone put the wrong size tire on the car, it is taller than 26". Tire size too makes a difference.

If you want to get into theoretical outcomes, use 9:1 as a target. The 9:1 is the overall gear ratio to the axles when you multiply your First gear ratio by the final drive ratio. If you really do have a 3.25, and you multiply that by your close ratio First gear of 2.32, you end up with 7.54:1. A 3.50 gear gets you to 8.12. A 3.73 to 8.65. And a 3.91 hits the target at 9.07.

What's magical about the 9:1? Nothing. It's one of those things many people -not just me- have come to by many years of experience. It just about guarantees the car will pull easily from a stop and, while not ideal, you can still hit the strip. I run a close ratio toploader with a 3.89 gear with a 26" tall tire on my Fairlane. It can easily pull away from a stop in Second gear. I have a Linelock and do burnouts on street tires in Second dry, and Third wet. Here's another magical theory: For flywheel weight, shoot for 1lb. of flywheel weight for every 100lbs. vehicle weight.

It should go without saying that above or below those magical numbers still work. You will not have made any fatal mistakes when using those guidelines, but like everything in the tune up, you can hone that edge just a little sharper depending upon what you're wanting to do.

If you have this transmission and you have an unfavorable final drive that will make it hard on the clutch and hard to drive the car, you have an alternative others have brought to your attention: Convert the close ratio trans to a wide ratio trans. It's very easy to do. David Kee Toploaders can hook you up.

shady · « **Reply #9 on:** October 22, 2020, 08:00:32 AM »

I have a big i/o in my 63 Gal. with a 3.50 rear and 225/75/14 tires and have no problem driving it. The 390 has enough torque I can leave the clutch out at an Idle and not stall. I would never go the trouble and expense changing to a steeper first gear. Plus I like the fact that I can stretch first gear out a little longer and then second is right there. If it's behind a small block, different story. A taller first gear is also stronger than a steeper one due to less torque multiplication.

e philpott · « **Reply #10 on:** October 22, 2020, 08:33:51 AM »

Close ratio is terrible for street and strip unless it's a 5 or 6 speed , wide ratio is the way to go

BattlestarGalactic · « **Reply #11 on:** October 22, 2020, 10:38:42 AM »

Many decades ago I broke my WR toploader and buddy gave me a CR to run. UGH, even with 4.56 gears I hated that CR box around town. Light to light you hardly ever got to 2nd gear(it seemed). Granted my 428 was cammed up and didn't like anything below 2000 rpm.

I would highly recommend 3.89 gears. That is what is in my black car and it runs the highway just fine at 65 mph at about 3000 rpm with 275/60/15 BFG tires.

19cougar68 · « **Reply #12 on:** October 22, 2020, 11:57:12 AM »

As far as clutches go I am leaning toward the Ram 98988 clutch and pressure plate kit for my big in/out toploader application.
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988?rrec=true

frnkeore · « **Reply #13 on:** October 22, 2020, 12:55:49 PM »

It says that it is a diaphragm clutch?

?

I like diaphragm clutches but, it sure looks like it has springs. I also like that it doesn't have centrifugal weights, makes shifting much better.

Diogenes · « **Reply #14 on:** October 22, 2020, 01:24:50 PM »

Quote from: GerryP on October 22, 2020, 07:21:24 AM

Quote from: Diogenes on October 21, 2020, 05:31:01 PM
...My 9in. has a 3.25 gear (I believe, will confirm soon). ....

This is an important detail. Know for fact what you have. Your tire size is also wrong. Unless someone put the wrong size tire on the car, it is taller than 26". Tire size too makes a difference.

I've yet to pull the pig on the 9 to seal a leak, so ring gear will be identified before purchasing parts. the tire size is a 245/60 15, which online info states is 26.6"--rough measurement with a tape measure was 26". Purchasing a WR gear set from Kee is not in the budget at the moment.

This is the clutch kit I'm looking at, mainly because it won't bust out the budget. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mcl-75148

frnkeore · « **Reply #15 on:** October 22, 2020, 01:48:57 PM »

Personally, I would go with their diaphragm clutch and try to get a solid hub, clutch disk. I cannot tell you how many spring hubs I have either broken (springs not hub) or collapsed the springs on. Once the spring loosen, they chatter.

Tom Gahman · « **Reply #16 on:** October 22, 2020, 05:56:25 PM »

I would check with Brent Lykins on a clutch.
The Ram long style I purchased from him works fine.
I've used a close ratio for decades in my 390 Galaxie but I will be doing the wr conversion.

Diogenes · « **Reply #17 on:** October 23, 2020, 01:12:59 AM »

Quote from: Tom Gahman on October 22, 2020, 05:56:25 PM

I would check with Brent Lykins on a clutch.
The Ram long style I purchased from him works fine.
I've used a close ratio for decades in my 390 Galaxie but I will be doing the wr conversion.

What are your experiences? Year, gear ratio, etc. Why does the WR conversion call to you?

Diogenes · « **Reply #18 on:** October 23, 2020, 01:34:16 AM »

Quote from: 19cougar68 on October 22, 2020, 11:57:12 AM

As far as clutches go I am leaning toward the Ram 98988 clutch and pressure plate kit for my big in/out toploader application.
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988?rrec=true

I guess as a cruiser, which my car is, I find $625 for a clutch kit waaaaaaay over the top. I presume you do some racing?

First generation Cougars--love those cars....

blykins · « **Reply #19 on:** October 23, 2020, 05:21:20 AM »

I generally recommend wide ratio transmissions.

As for the clutch kit, a 98988 is a Powergrip HD, with a sintered iron (both sides) disc. If you don't need a clutch kit for 650 hp, then I wouldn't buy one. There are many other choices.

Solid hub discs are generally not optimal for a street car as they transmit a lot more NVH. The only solid disc clutches I recommend are the twin disc clutches and they are only solid because there's no room for extra goodies. They are also noisier, but they are also organic, which helps with some of the driveability. A great deal of your solid hub discs are paired with some rather hairy friction materials and they will give you an on/off engagement, which is not good.

I also try to pair factory style applications with Long style pressure plates. Most people think that Long style plates are always harder on the clutch leg, but that's not the case now. In the 60's/70's, the clutch plan was to put a disc with a pressure plate that had a ton of clamping force. Now days, we balance the pressure plate clamping force with different materials. In a lot of scenarios, the Long style pressure plates actually have less clamping force than some of the diaphragm plates out there. The RAM HDX/Powergrip/Powergrip HD are 2200 lbs I believe.

Obviously, the clutch kit will also depend on your flywheel. Your aftermarket flywheels from Ford Racing, McLeod, and RAM will all have 11" and 12" patterns on them. Factory flywheels will depend on which engine the flywheel came off of.

19cougar68 · « **Reply #20 on:** October 23, 2020, 07:20:41 AM »

Ram has the Powergrip and the Powergrip HD series. The HD series is for the higher 650 HP rating and I think would be a little "harsher" for street usage. Here is the link for the HD series Powergrip. It seems strange to me that it is cheaper than the lower HP rated plain Powergrip series.
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988hd

The on I selected is the Powergrip series rated at 550 HP which I think would have more street-able manners. Unfortunately I am not done with my project so I have no first hand knowledge of the clutch operational characteristics, just selected this one after watching the Ram clutch video. Here is the link again to the one I selected:
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988?rrec=true

Here is the link to the Ram video about clutch selection
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988?rrec=true

Tom Gahman · « **Reply #21 on:** October 23, 2020, 07:28:35 AM »

My 64 galaxie weighs 3970 with me in it.I call it an entry level street/strip wannabe drag racer.
With the cr the 390 liked 4:71 rear gear best for the quarter mile.(13.0 something @107)
With a wr I can change the rear gear to say 4.3, have a better starting line ratio and it will mph better at the top end.
Hope this helps

blykins · « **Reply #22 on:** October 23, 2020, 07:40:08 AM »

Quote from: 19cougar68 on October 23, 2020, 07:20:41 AM

Ram has the Powergrip and the Powergrip HD series. The HD series is for the higher 650 HP rating and I think would be a little "harsher" for street usage. Here is the link for the HD series Powergrip. It seems strange to me that it is cheaper than the lower HP rated plain Powergrip series.
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988hd

The on I selected is the Powergrip series rated at 550 HP which I think would have more street-able manners. Unfortunately I am not done with my project so I have no first hand knowledge of the clutch operational characteristics, just selected this one after watching the Ram clutch video. Here is the link again to the one I selected:
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988?rrec=true

Here is the link to the Ram video about clutch selection
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ram-98988?rrec=true

I have never heard anyone complain about any of the RAM products chattering and I have first hand experience with the HD series clutches on the street. However, the disclaimer I give my customers is that they *could* chatter, but that's the risk you take with a single disc clutch that will support that kind of horsepower.

Maybe we can get towd56 to chime in on how much stronger his wagon feels with the wide ratio swap.

In addition, his 4600 lb wagon launching at 5500 on slicks went through a Powergrip and a Powergrip HD as well. Slicks and heavy weight is hard on any clutch. Seems to be doing ok with a McLeod RXT twin disc though.

Gregwill16 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 23, 2020, 08:17:22 AM »

Martin for your engine that will be a good clutch setup. It comes down to what you do most with your car highway vs city. I would go with a 3.70 gear with your current tire or a 3.89 gear stepping up to a 275/60 rear tire.

Diogenes · « **Reply #24 on:** October 23, 2020, 02:53:07 PM »

Certainly a lot to consider here, and a lot of good information. While a WR conversion would be nice, it is not in the budget, and budget considerations will have an impact on clutch selection. Of course value plays in the selection as well, since I want a clutch that will live for a while.

I've never had problems with any clutches I've had in the past, meaning I've never had to replace them due to being worn out. My Cougar was a 400-450 HP small block, but a fairly light car, my wagon was a mild Cleveland 2V, but a bit heavier at 3800lbs or so. The Galaxies is probably 400-450HP ballpark, but I'm guessing weighs 4000lbs or more. I was figuring a 3.89 with my tire would be the way to go, but I need to revisit MPH and RPM calculations.

The flywheel that came with my purchase appears to be an aftermarket steel piece, as I can find no part number and it is fully machined--no casting marks. I has paint pen marking with "184 Ford 360-390 T10", but that is all I see on it. It has a wear pattern for 11", and looks to only have a bolt pattern for an 11" clutch.

Perhaps its time to clean out the parts stash and free up some capital.

Hipopinto · « **Reply #25 on:** October 23, 2020, 06:37:52 PM »

I have a 1966 with a wide ratio

It has 3.89 gears and I love the take off

I also have a gear vendors overdrive so it is kinda “cheating” but in 4th no OD it’s tolerable on the street

I would suggest with a CR to run no less than a 3.89 if not a 4.10

Good luck

Dave

blykins · « **Reply #26 on:** October 23, 2020, 06:40:29 PM »

Quote from: Diogenes on October 22, 2020, 01:24:50 PM

Quote from: GerryP on October 22, 2020, 07:21:24 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on October 21, 2020, 05:31:01 PM
...My 9in. has a 3.25 gear (I believe, will confirm soon). ....

This is an important detail. Know for fact what you have. Your tire size is also wrong. Unless someone put the wrong size tire on the car, it is taller than 26". Tire size too makes a difference.

I've yet to pull the pig on the 9 to seal a leak, so ring gear will be identified before purchasing parts. the tire size is a 245/60 15, which online info states is 26.6"--rough measurement with a tape measure was 26". Purchasing a WR gear set from Kee is not in the budget at the moment.

This is the clutch kit I'm looking at, mainly because it won't bust out the budget. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mcl-75148

You can also do a RAM 88988. Save you a few bucks.

Towd56 · « **Reply #27 on:** October 24, 2020, 06:43:02 AM »

My wagon destroyed both the regular power grip and the HD in short order. At the advice of Brent - I swapped it over to a twin disk McLeod. Which also required me to change the input shaft to a 26 spline so I wouldn’t have to run a hydraulic TOB. During the swap I converted trans to wide ratio. What a difference!!

All I can say is that with the wide ratio trans the car seems like I’ve added a 100 hp, is easier to drive, and so much more fun. At the strip with slicks it did much better. It weighs 4640 and has gone all this year with no signs of trouble.

The only down side I see to the twin disk is that it is a little more grabby in traffic. I found that this can be easily addressed if you just use a little higher rpm before you start releasing the clutch pedal.

Was overall very pleased with both the clutch and conversion to wide ratio.

frnkeore · « **Reply #28 on:** October 24, 2020, 10:31:16 AM »

Is the McLeod a diaphragm or Long and does it have a spring hub? Also, does it have a aluminum or steel cover?

blykins · « **Reply #29 on:** October 24, 2020, 10:53:03 AM »

The McLeod and RAM both that were recommended are Long style, sprung hub, and have steel pressure plates.

Diogenes · « **Reply #30 on:** October 24, 2020, 03:58:12 PM »

If the close ratio is so unpopular, as it appears to be given all the negative feedback here, why did Ford put them in the big cars from the factory? I am wondering about their rationale, and looking to apply it to my situation.

Brent, I will likely be giving you a call regarding a clutch purchase in the future. Thank you for your info.

Diogenes · « **Reply #31 on:** October 24, 2020, 04:24:27 PM »

Quote from: Towd56 on October 24, 2020, 06:43:02 AM

...I converted trans to wide ratio. What a difference!!

Was overall very pleased with both the clutch and conversion to wide ratio.

What does the wide ratio conversion entail? ADD...I just found the gear set on David Kee website.

Your wagon is cool. I should have never sold mine....

frnkeore · « **Reply #32 on:** October 24, 2020, 05:16:43 PM »

Quote from: frnkeore on October 24, 2020, 10:31:16 AM

Is the McLeod a diaphragm or Long and does it have a spring hub? Also, does it have a aluminum or steel cover?

This is the post I'm referring to:

Quote

At the advice of Brent - I swapped it over to a twin disk McLeod. Which also required me to change the input shaft to a 26 spline so I wouldn’t have to run a hydraulic TOB. During the swap I converted trans to wide ratio. What a difference!!

I looked on McLeod's site and I found only two choices, for twin disk clutches. The Diaphragm and B&B. No spring hubs shown or listed. I don't think there is enough room for springs in multi disk clutches.

GerryP · « **Reply #33 on:** October 24, 2020, 08:21:35 PM »

Quote from: Diogenes on October 24, 2020, 03:58:12 PM

If the close ratio is so unpopular, as it appears to be given all the negative feedback here, why did Ford put them in the big cars from the factory?

I don't know that CR toploaders are all that unpopular. You're hearing from a very tiny population and drawing a false conclusion.

If you simply must have as much torque multiplication as possible starting off, then you need a WR. Me? I love my CR box. It's a custom Kee nodular case big in and out long tail close ratio box. I could have had David build a WR box at no additional cost but chose the CR box. I like banging gears in a CR box since you have less RPM drop between gears and I like that roadrace sound running through the gears even when I'm not buzzing it. I am running a 3.89 gear and I can slip the clutch at idle and the car will easily get rolling. For a pure street car, I wouldn't have it any other way.

If I was drag racing a lot and was on slicks, or had an engine that made very little torque below 3kRPM, I'd consider that steeper First gear with a WR box. I had a fairly light weight car with a small but peppy engine, 4.57 gear, and a WR box. On the street, First gear was useless. I could leave the throttle at idle and side step the clutch and it would not kill the engine. I usually started off in Second. I was running 30" tall slicks and it was great on the strip. I needed as much gear as I could get.

You still need to figure out your rear ratio. It would be a disaster to try using a CR box with a 3.0 rear gear unless you're converting to a Power Stroke.

BattlestarGalactic · « **Reply #34 on:** October 24, 2020, 11:29:11 PM »

My .02.

Each style transmission has it's perks depending on what you are driving and how you drive it. Talk with road course drivers and they would likely all tell you how great a CR is compared to a WR. The long legs of the CR first gear makes it much more suited for road course racing.

I remember back 20 yrs ago when a friend had a foxbody with a T5 and 2.73 gears. Geez, you nearly never needed to shift in town it was so long legged in first gear. Everyone put 3.73 or 4.10 gears in their car to wake them up light to light. Granted, even with 2.73 gears it pulled up to speed just fine. Those motors make decent torque for just a 302. It just didn't suit the "drag racing" crowd.

shady · « **Reply #35 on:** October 25, 2020, 09:11:00 AM »

The 7 Litres were a performance luxury car. They were heavy but torque monsters, I think Ford just wanted to enhance the four speed experience. You are always in the power band with a CR, great for banging gears. No big rpm drops when changing gears. I like mine. If you want to drop the clutch at every light or plan on drag racing it, then no. And a 3.50 rear is the minimum and just about right if you do any interstate driving.

My427stang · « **Reply #36 on:** October 25, 2020, 10:40:31 AM »

I ran a close ratio in my Mustang for years with a 433 inch 427 and I would not likely choose one again.

It's always a choice of gearing for 1st or 4th. Although I do understand those who have them are likely doing just fine, nobody loses their birthday or breaks their car, but don't only consider the added launch, consider 4th gear

As an example

3.89 gear - 2.32 X 3.89 = 9.02:1, that's acceptable, and runs well, but then look at 75 mph and with a 26 inch tire, you are at about 3800 rpm

Now, gear for the same 1st gear with a wide ratio, 9.02/2.78 = 3.24. So that means, that torquey FE will come out of the hole the same with a 3.25 WR as with a 3.89 gear in a CR. If the torque curve accepts the shift recovery, which I really have not seen an FE so peaky that it can't, then you now get to cruise at 3200 rpm. Significant difference in NVH, not only the engine, but driveshaft speeds and fuel economy also improve

I do not know why Ford did it, in the SCJs and a 4.30 gear, you had a healthy truck-like torque curve, it didn't need that tranny other than potentially strength that was on the shelf from the past. 1st gear was 9.97:1 compound, that's barely better than a 3.50 geared wide ratio, without the top end fuss behind a mild hyd cammed engine.

I generally say that small blocks like the close ratio, and I suppose if you really need to twist them and they don't want to recover from a wide ratio shift, then yes, but years ago, we swapped a CR 4 speed into a stout 302 Maverick (for the time, not fast now) replacing a 3 speed, and in the end the 3 speed gearing was better for the car with the deeper first gear. The owner ended up swapping back and sold the 4 speed

In the end though, building a big in/out WR isn't cheap, and that's a valid reason. If it's a mild FE, go with a small in/out, sell the big one, and when the budget allows you have a lot of the parts to make a big in/out wide ratio cheaper than tossing out extra big in/out pieces

plovett · « **Reply #37 on:** October 25, 2020, 05:34:29 PM »

Quote from: GerryP on October 24, 2020, 08:21:35 PM

Quote from: Diogenes on October 24, 2020, 03:58:12 PM
If the close ratio is so unpopular, as it appears to be given all the negative feedback here, why did Ford put them in the big cars from the factory?

I don't know that CR toploaders are all that unpopular. You're hearing from a very tiny population and drawing a false conclusion.

If you simply must have as much torque multiplication as possible starting off, then you need a WR. Me? I love my CR box. It's a custom Kee nodular case big in and out long tail close ratio box. I could have had David build a WR box at no additional cost but chose the CR box. I like banging gears in a CR box since you have less RPM drop between gears and I like that roadrace sound running through the gears even when I'm not buzzing it. I am running a 3.89 gear and I can slip the clutch at idle and the car will easily get rolling. For a pure street car, I wouldn't have it any other way.

If I was drag racing a lot and was on slicks, or had an engine that made very little torque below 3kRPM, I'd consider that steeper First gear with a WR box. I had a fairly light weight car with a small but peppy engine, 4.57 gear, and a WR box. On the street, First gear was useless. I could leave the throttle at idle and side step the clutch and it would not kill the engine. I usually started off in Second. I was running 30" tall slicks and it was great on the strip. I needed as much gear as I could get.

You still need to figure out your rear ratio. It would be a disaster to try using a CR box with a 3.0 rear gear unless you're converting to a Power Stroke.

My experience has been more like yours with regards to gear ratios in real world use in street cars. I have had a couple of combo's where 1st gear was just like a fuzzy idea that could maneuver you to 2nd gear where you could start doing some real work. I've never had a heavy car like a Galaxie, with a high rear gear, and not a lot of power. I think that would be bad.

The internet wisdom now seems to be to use huge amounts of gear ratio and huge displacement, but in real life on real street surfaces with real street tires, it's not so simple. Not too many people actually try to run their machines in the 1/4 in street trim, on the street.

That said, with only 4 gears in a big Galaxie, with some importance placed on highway cruising, I'd lean to a wide ratio Toploader.

...........or get two sets of rear tires and wheels and use the close ratio. Get one set tall (29"?)and one short (26"?), then get a rear gear that compliments both.

JMO,

pl

Diogenes · « **Reply #38 on:** October 25, 2020, 06:29:12 PM »

It is good to see some positive experiences with the CR.

Ideally, I would have a WR small in/small out and maybe go up to a 3.50 gear, as this is a mild 390 and don't really require the big in/out, but this was the deal I fell into. I will likely go with the 3.89. I can still enjoy the CR, but will not be out on the 70MPH interstates for extended driving where I've been known to occasionally fracture speed limit laws-- back roads are far more enjoyable anyways at posted 55MPH. In the end, having a manual trans Galaxie will be cool regardless of some of the "rough" edges. Big block and a four speed-- a partial recipe for bliss.

plovett · « **Reply #39 on:** October 25, 2020, 06:42:31 PM »

We are lot softer today. We want to be able to let out the clutch with little throttle and accelerate immediately. Nothing wrong with that. It is just that expectations are very different in 2020 vs. 1970. It is a half of a century I am talking about so keep that in perspective. If you are old school, it will be no problem with a close ratio toploader and a moderately low rear gear ratio.

paulie

frnkeore · « **Reply #40 on:** October 26, 2020, 01:34:29 AM »

The CR, TL, came in 271 hp, 289's and 427 Galaxies, both by 1964. I had 2 of them in, '64 271 hp Fairlane and a 65 1/2 Mustang, both small shafts, that also, includes the cluster shaft.

The CR was designed to be usable for race applications, with narrow power bands. In that regard, you gear for max mph you need, at your desired rpm and it has progressively less, rpm drops i. e. For a 7k engine, 1-2 ~1900, 2-3 ~1700, 3-4 ~1600. That keeps you higher in the power band, as speed increases. You can have wider spits and lower speeds, as the you have more tq multiplication, in lower gears and then, you need your higher power band, with less gear and more wind resistance.

The WR was a more streetable transmission, usually used in lower hp engines and is also progressive. For 7k it's, 1-2 ~2100, 2-3 ~2200, 3-4 ~1900 rpm. With more modern, lower rpm, wide torque band, 450+ ci engines, I can see where it would be useful but, for the HiPo cars of the day (7k+ 289 & 427), the WR wouldn't cut it.

Today, the 5 & 6 speeds are what are best for the street. Low cruise rpm and lots of gear reduction.

e philpott · « **Reply #41 on:** October 26, 2020, 08:33:31 AM »

This was new science back in the 60's is why Ford did what they did , Ross has it right that with a CR you're either gearing for take off or gearing it for highway , CR's need a 5th or sixth gear if you want good take off and good cruise rpm

shady · « **Reply #42 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:24:42 AM »

4.56s and a Gear Vendors OD would be deadly.

plovett · « **Reply #43 on:** October 26, 2020, 09:54:29 AM »

Quote from: e philpott on October 26, 2020, 08:33:31 AM

This was new science back in the 60's is why Ford did what they did , Ross has it right that with a CR you're either gearing for take off or gearing it for highway , CR's need a 5th or sixth gear if you want good take off and good cruise rpm

For sure, having only four gears (or three!) will always be a compromise of some sort. Even in my 5 speed Saturn I catch myself trying to shift into "6th" sometimes.

pl

427John · « **Reply #44 on:** October 27, 2020, 01:05:01 PM »

Quote from: Diogenes on October 24, 2020, 03:58:12 PM

If the close ratio is so unpopular, as it appears to be given all the negative feedback here, why did Ford put them in the big cars from the factory? I am wondering about their rationale, and looking to apply it to my situation.

Brent, I will likely be giving you a call regarding a clutch purchase in the future. Thank you for your info.

The comments you have heard have been based on a focus for street use.The factory rationale for using them was to improve acceleration performance when used in conjunction with lower rear gear ratios,but for street use in a heavy full size car with gear ratios that are appropriate for significant street driving wide ratio gears would probably be a better match.Having a Galaxie 4 spd. car myself with a close ratio box and with 3.89 gears I will be changing over to a wide ratio trans. and swapping back to a lighter flywheel.

GerryP · « **Reply #45 on:** October 27, 2020, 01:34:23 PM »

Everything written is 100-percent, absolutely, no doubt true. You make the choice as to what's best for you that you can do today. Ten years from now, it might be something different.

But here's the issue not qualified: How many of these cars are being used as daily drivers? All the "better for this", "better for that" are vital considerations for a daily driver. Am I bothered that my engine is buzzing 3,500RPM and 70MPH? Nope. Not at all. I have only around five miles of highway driving like that, and that's not very often. Most of my driving is 45MPH or there abouts. If you're putting a lot of miles on the car, then you have considerations to make. After all, back in the day, Ford built cars with Four speeds and 3.91 and 4.30 gears, so consumers had to make the same considerations.

If you have enough gear that you can easily get the car rolling, and not burning up the clutch, then you are most of the way there. If I had unlimited funds, then I would be flogging a roadrace Six speed with a Halibrand Quick Change. But I do the best I can with what I have.

427John · « **Reply #46 on:** October 27, 2020, 04:34:47 PM »

Gerry has a very good point,I guess it depends on if you live in town or in a rural area.I personally live in a rural area so that to go anywhere I drive a minimum of 15-20 min at highway speed,but if you were to live in town and most of your driving is at less than 50 mph and never take the car on long trips then Gerry is absolutely right the close ratio box will give better performance if used in conjunction with 4.11,4.30,or 4.56 gears in a Galaxie,or even 3.91's if in a big block Mustang or Torino.

427John · « **Reply #47 on:** October 27, 2020, 04:46:04 PM »

Back to the rationale for the close ratio,it was to minimize the rpm drops at shifts in an attempt to maintain the engine speed as close to peak power as possible which it did if you stretched the engine out in every gear before upshifting.That in itself tells you something about its expected use.

wayne · « **Reply #48 on:** October 28, 2020, 04:25:42 PM »

If you have a 2.32 and go to a 2.78 it will act like you added 75 hp the 2.32 was not one of fords better ideas.A friend of mine raced a 65 mustang 1/8 mi and took a 2.78 toploader out and ran a 3 speed 3.03 low gear i think the car ran a better et and won a lot.First gear means a lot.

GerryP · « **Reply #49 on:** October 28, 2020, 05:05:32 PM »

Quote from: wayne on October 28, 2020, 04:25:42 PM

...ran a 3 speed 3.03 low gear i think the car ran a better et and won a lot.First gear means a lot.

The 3.03 toploader didn't have a 3.03 First gear ratio. The "3.03" is the centerline distance between countershaft and mainshaft. Gear ratios varied by application. The tallest First gear was a 2.99 in a truck, then a 2.70-something, then a 2.40-something. With a stock WR TL, you get that 2.78 first. So even considering the tallest 3.03 gear, you don't really gain that much ratio. Theoretically, if you were running 100 lb.ft of torque through the trans, the tall three speed would output 299 lb/ft. while the WR would be running 278 lb.ft. More, but not startling more. But anyone who has run a car down the strip will tell you that you have to tune the chassis for more gear. Sometimes, that might just be tightening up the slapper bar, less compression in the shock, more axle preload, or some tire pressure adjustment.

frnkeore · « **Reply #50 on:** October 28, 2020, 05:39:08 PM »

Quote from: wayne on October 28, 2020, 04:25:42 PM

If you have a 2.32 and go to a 2.78 it will act like you added 75 hp the 2.32 was not one of fords better ideas.A friend of mine raced a 65 mustang 1/8 mi and took a 2.78 toploader out and ran a 3 speed 3.03 low gear i think the car ran a better et and won a lot.First gear means a lot.

I think it would be much easier to pull the 3rd member to drop the G/R than pull the trans, in that scenario.

427John · « **Reply #51 on:** October 28, 2020, 06:00:19 PM »

Since the OP stated that his car is cruised a lot on the street and at highway speeds,I agree with all the advice about the wide ratio and street friendly gears,if the car is driven a quarter or eighth mile at a time without a doubt the close ratio and steep rear gears are the hot setup,but it doesn't sound like that is the case with his car.It also sounds like he has obtained a big input tans that he wants to upgrade his original small input trans with,if this is the case if his galaxie has an original big block galaxie toploader it is currently a close ratio and will have the same gear spread and the only difference will be the big input upgrade.If the trans is in good shape and ready to go it may not be cost effective to rebuild it just to convert it to a wide ratio but if it currently needs to be rebuilt I would do a wide ratio conversion during the rebuild.

frnkeore · « **Reply #52 on:** October 29, 2020, 12:47:56 AM »

I thought it would be obvious that I was referring to the 3 sp, 1/8 mi car not, the OP, since Wayne was talking about changing out the trans, I guess not.

My point was it would be easier to swap 3rd members, that transmissions, if your focus is 1/8 mi.

427John · « **Reply #53 on:** October 29, 2020, 11:14:03 PM »

Quote from: frnkeore on October 29, 2020, 12:47:56 AM

I thought it would be obvious that I was referring to the 3 sp, 1/8 mi car not, the OP, since Wayne was talking about changing out the trans, I guess not.

My point was it would be easier to swap 3rd members, that transmissions, if your focus is 1/8 mi.

Agreed much easier.

My427stang · « **Reply #54 on:** October 31, 2020, 08:34:58 AM »

Lots of good info in this thread. A few punch lines I would reiterate to the OP

1 - With the intended use of this car as being a bunch of highway running, you would benefit from a wide ratio, especially with a car happy with a 3.25 rear. It's not an opinion, and it doesn't mean you have to, but it would allow the current gear with a bit more street manners

2 - Most cars are expenses not investments, so if you want to row gears, and you don't want to spend the cash, you don't HAVE to convert it. I drove a 433 inch Mustang with a Portosonic, 250@.050 LSA cam, 1000 Holley and 3.00 gear from Vegas to Huntington Beach and back with a close ratio and it was miserable in LA and Anaheim traffic, really miserable, but was also not built for that, but did OK on the highway. Would I recommend it in a heavier car, no, but if the engine is mild enough, and the clutch was happy, it'd work

3 - If you do want to set it up for highway and stoplight, maybe sell the big in and find a small input wide ratio, you may find you end up ahead. Clutches become much easier to find too, with more options

Remember, everything is a trade off, peaky engine, needs lots of close gears, mild engine, recovers from wide ratios well and actually prefers it. When I build or help spec a car, I start with use, it often takes longer than the build itself to get to the real goal of the owner, then you look at budget and realign if required. I think a good clean up, reseal and paint on a big in/out could get you a sale to fund a heck of a wide ratio and likely a clutch/flywheel too.

Diogenes · « **Reply #55 on:** October 31, 2020, 10:39:56 AM »

My427stang Your recap is on the money, and yes, a lot of good info.

Highway running is a small portion of my driving, and will become even smaller with the close ratio. In the end, I would prefer a small in and out for many practical reasons, clutch selection and a better match with my current setup being the top of the list. Unfortunately, I only have the big in/out to work with, as my C6 had to come out due to a trashed torque converter. The 7 Litre package deal was too good to pass up, an HEH-CG with all the trimmings (some unavailable and impossible to find trimmings as well).

At this point, a nice clean up and a 3.89 gear is where I'm going. I acknowledge the close ratio big in/out is not ideal for my application, and may be a bit overkill for the mild 450ish HP 390, but a less than ideal arrangement is not a deal breaker. I suppose if a Galaxie small in/out came into the picture, I'd be interested, but Galaxie toploaders don't seem to be anywhere as plentiful as Mustang/Cougar, Torino/Cyclone units. A less than ideal four speed in a Galaxie is still a four speed in a Galaxie--I'm looking forward to Spring 2021 driving season.

427John · « **Reply #56 on:** October 31, 2020, 05:39:08 PM »

Yes excellent summary,I wanted to like the post but don't know how.

Gettinther · « **Reply #57 on:** October 31, 2020, 06:52:48 PM »

I mean no discredit to anyone here, just a comment, I have a 65 Galaxie , 390 very mild, C/R 4spd. big in/out, 3:50 rear diff. and 235/70R15 tires. It can be a little doggy during take off but very livable, living in a small town I only use first gear in town anyway unless i just want to mess around a bit on a couple select streets. When i get out on the highway it doesn't matter how fast it needs the next gear I am going for fourth anyway and can run the 4lane highway pretty decent. The 390 doesn't mind if I drop a gear at 45 and take it to 70 but the chevy's of a similar category hate it. I never watch the tach. Brent did a custom cam for me after I had the car for a couple years and that has been well worth it, still has decent take off manners and great idle for a Dairy Queener and still haven't installed the new clutch. I will also state I have no experience with a wide ratio 4spd.as this car came to me this way except for noted changes.
I hope you enjoy yours when completed as I do mine.

frnkeore · « **Reply #58 on:** November 01, 2020, 07:54:11 PM »

Has anyone tried one of these? Not real high HP rating but, should be in the range of the small TL.

4.11 rear would be 3.24 final.

https://www.advanceadapters.com/products/760014m-27--ford-ranger-torque-splitter-overdrive-27-with-a-4848-retainer-index/

427John · « **Reply #59 on:** November 01, 2020, 09:51:06 PM »

I've never had one myself,but a friend had one in his 66 F-250 years ago I can't remember if his was a ranger or a browning they were available as an over or an underdrive.His truck had a nice built 428 with 406 shorties and used it for a lot of heavy towing and made a lot of trips back and forth between eastern WA and northern CA he loved it and ran it for years,he did have to modify his shifter cane with a reverse bend to clear the seat due to the trans setback.

News:

Author Topic: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners (Read 9813 times)

plovett

plovett

plovett