Author Topic: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners  (Read 2491 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Diogenes

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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.
1966 Galaxie 500 390 C6 Traction-Lock 9in.
1985 Toyota Celica Supra
71 Montego MX wagon 351C Toploader Detroit Locker Cyclone competition gauge/dash bucket seats/console
89 Texas DPS Police Mustang
71 Torino GT 351C 4V AT
68 Cougar 351W Toploader Traction-Lock 8in.
89 Dodge Omni modified 2.5 turbo from hell

Diogenes

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #31 on: October 24, 2020, 04:24:27 PM »
...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....
« Last Edit: October 24, 2020, 04:31:21 PM by Diogenes »
1966 Galaxie 500 390 C6 Traction-Lock 9in.
1985 Toyota Celica Supra
71 Montego MX wagon 351C Toploader Detroit Locker Cyclone competition gauge/dash bucket seats/console
89 Texas DPS Police Mustang
71 Torino GT 351C 4V AT
68 Cougar 351W Toploader Traction-Lock 8in.
89 Dodge Omni modified 2.5 turbo from hell

frnkeore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #32 on: October 24, 2020, 05:16:43 PM »
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.
Frank

GerryP

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #33 on: October 24, 2020, 08:21:35 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

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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.
Larry

shady

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 761
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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.
What goes fast doesn't go fast long'
What goes fast takes your money with it.
So I'm slow & broke, what went wrong?

My427stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3281
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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

---------------------------------
Ross

- 70 Fastback Mustang, 489 cid FE, Victor, SEFI, Erson SFT cam, TKO-600 5 speed, 4.11 9 inch.
- 71 F100 shortbed 4x4, 461 cid FE, headers, Victor Pro-flo EFI, Comp Custom HFT cam, 3.50 9 inch

plovett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1430
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #37 on: October 25, 2020, 05:34:29 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

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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.
1966 Galaxie 500 390 C6 Traction-Lock 9in.
1985 Toyota Celica Supra
71 Montego MX wagon 351C Toploader Detroit Locker Cyclone competition gauge/dash bucket seats/console
89 Texas DPS Police Mustang
71 Torino GT 351C 4V AT
68 Cougar 351W Toploader Traction-Lock 8in.
89 Dodge Omni modified 2.5 turbo from hell

plovett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1430
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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.


Frank

e philpott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 743
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« 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

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 761
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #42 on: October 26, 2020, 09:24:42 AM »
4.56s and a Gear Vendors OD would be deadly.
What goes fast doesn't go fast long'
What goes fast takes your money with it.
So I'm slow & broke, what went wrong?

plovett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1430
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #43 on: October 26, 2020, 09:54:29 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

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Calling All Close Ratio Toploader Galaxie Owners
« Reply #44 on: October 27, 2020, 01:05:01 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.