Low Range Options

[Ratbag]

Gidday NL

I would be more interested in something between the current SG LR (1.196:1) and the original SF LR (1.447:1). While not particularly unhappy with the 1.196:1, I think that something around 1.25-1.30:1 would probably be just that bit better behind the EJ-253.

Do they do other LR gearsets?

Speaking of the EJ-253, I discovered today that the inlet manifold in SWMBO's SH EJ-253 is about 1-2 inches higher than the one in Roo2. Interesting. The longer the inlet manifold, the higher the low down torque (in particular).

It would be interesting to compare the inlet manifold lengths from the EJ-18 through to the EJ-253.

Sorry, that is just a bit OT ... .

 

[NachaLuva]

Not sure if they do other ratios, but seriously why would you? RB, If you put it into LR, you want that to make a real difference. Otherwise, just leave it in 1st high. We all know your view of not needing anything better, but I am POSITIVE if you drove a Subie with a decent LR you would love it!

Remember there is a reason why Suzukis have 1.8:1 & Landcruisers, Patrols, etc have 2.0:1. Its because if you need to select LR then you need a decent ratio. Otherwise, please leave it in 1st high.

You can easily put a 1.447 LR in your box which will be a big improvement over your current 1.19. But if you're going to open the box, you might as well put in their 1.6:1. I know you wouldn't like the mods to fit the L series lol

 

[Ratbag]

^ NL, I don't think you really understand where I'm coming from. I have owned a LC with its 1.995:1 LR. Fantastic for the use I had for that vehicle.

And it would take the torque of the (modified) 3.8L engine with consummate ease.

The Subie gearbox and drive train are very tightly configured for the torque curve and maximum torque of the specific engine in front of it. Small changes are fine with the EJ-253. Large changes are possible with the EJ-18; EJ-20 and the EJ-22 (to a lesser extent).

If one were to go overboard with the LR behind the EJ-253, one really ought to look at upgrading all the drive train components with those from a WRX in order to preserve strength and thus reliability.

IMHO, putting the 1.447:1 LR behind the EJ-253 would be a mistake. One just has to take the square law into account when contemplating the increase in the stresses involved.

It's not just the fact that the maximum torque is much higher; that torque is delivered at very low revs. The EJ-253 in Roo2 is delivering more than the maximum torque of the SF's EJ-20 by around 1200 rpm ...

I know that you consider the LR in the SG series to be completely useless, but it isn't. It works, and works well. IMO, changing the LR ratio to 1.25:1 or slightly higher would fulfil the above outcomes well. Going over 1.3:1 would be stretching the friendship between the engine and drive train - just IMO.

Going from 1.447:1 to 1.6:1 in the SF is really much the same as what I have described above for the SG.

Anyway, just a few thoughts.

 

[taza]

People run 1.59 behind turbos ratbag. Their torque and power come on strong and are more likely to break gearboxes. I am not concern about the low range breaking. Only 1st, 2nd and reverse. As you stated earlier the SG 1st gear is 69% stronger than the SF first gear.
It's the size of a turbo first in a 5 speed subaru box. Wo I'm not concerned that the engine will break it. If anything it'll be because of MY driving style. Harsh, abusive and rough. I choose to drive like that with hard, fast gear shifts. I slam between Low and High range in my daily driving o make full use of the 10 speed gearset.

For example with RedXS in my car today I did a lightning start from the lights in the wet. Dumped the clutch from 3k in 1st low, spun all 4 through 1st, hit 2nd. Had a little wheel spin, clutxh in, smashed into high range, poweree upto 80kmhr, then 3rd upto the limit. From yhere straight into my rubbish overdrive 5th.

Non the less I choowe to drive like this. I drive like this most days and my current SF box has held up fine behind my EJ25.

Now don't go saying your 253 has more torque down low, etc.... I highly doubt it considering I have a freshly rebuilt motor with 100k km less than you that is modified. Running behind a shorter ratio box.

I'm in NL. I dont get back into the country till the 1st of September so it'll have to be around then for me.

 

[El_Freddo]

Sorry Ratbag, but I gotta laugh. I know you hold your EJ25 in high esteem, but I'm sure this gearset and an average subaru gearbox will hold up just fine.

And most WRX gearboxes are no different to the L series gearboxes in terms of overall strength - other than being single range and AWD there's really not much difference until you get into the later gearboxes.

As for the low range being too much for the engine/gearbox combination - have a look at Venom's H6 with dual range - with correct driving technique (aka, nothing that Taza does ) the reliability of your drive train will be just fine.

I'm sure with your old LC even if you dropped the clutch or abused it the thing would've broken something - they always have and always will when someone does something stupid. No two ways about it.

Back to the topic at hand, if you're after a simple drop in low range for your subaru this would be the way to go that's "extra mods" free (compared to L series low range swap) - just drop and go.

Ratbag should get one then come out with us - I've heard Walhalla is good

Cheers

Bennie

 

[taza]

Yes don't listen to what I say. My point is I abuse my box (in knowing so) and it holds up fine to the abuse. With normal driving a standard box should not break behind a EJ25. They should hold up fine behind most stock turbo motors if treated right.
Im not stupid enough to dump the clutch in the dry though. In the wet there is somewhere the torque can go, the gearbox doesn't take the brunt of it.. I know how I drive, what I do and what can happen. If it breaks I know what ive done and only have myself to blame.

 

[NachaLuva]

I am intrigued by the difference between the Heavy and Light duty sets.

I believe its the material its made from, possibly also treatment

A smaller diameter syncro ring would help as this it the first part that hits bit with the 4.44 really both gears on the input shaft need to be smaller as well which I would have thought would make it very difficult to obtain the 1.6:1 ratio.

I should make sure it fits with the 4.44 without mods but I think it does. It definitely fits with the 4.11 without mods

Do you know what the exact ratio is? because 1.6 could be anywhere between 1.55 (which wouldn't be as good) and 1.65 (which would be awesome!)

Again not 100% sure. I believe 1.59:1

trying to navigate around their websites but they don't seem to have a lot of info online

Do you know what they were asking for this? This I am very interested in.

I've sent them an email asking

 

[Ratbag]

People run 1.59 behind turbos ratbag. Their torque and power come on strong and are more likely to break gearboxes. I am not concern about the low range breaking. Only 1st, 2nd and reverse. As you stated earlier the SG 1st gear is 69% stronger than the SF first gear.
It's the size of a turbo first in a 5 speed subaru box. Wo I'm not concerned that the engine will break it. If anything it'll be because of MY driving style. Harsh, abusive and rough. I choose to drive like that with hard, fast gear shifts. I slam between Low and High range in my daily driving o make full use of the 10 speed gearset.

For example with RedXS in my car today I did a lightning start from the lights in the wet. Dumped the clutch from 3k in 1st low, spun all 4 through 1st, hit 2nd. Had a little wheel spin, clutxh in, smashed into high range, poweree upto 80kmhr, then 3rd upto the limit. From yhere straight into my rubbish overdrive 5th.

Non the less I choowe to drive like this. I drive like this most days and my current SF box has held up fine behind my EJ25.

Taza, how long do you expect your car to last without major repairs and maintenance?
What's your track record so far?

On average, over the last 5-6 cars, mine give me between 125,000 kms and 250,000 kms, (relatively) trouble free. I fully expect the current one to give me around the 250-300,000 Kms before I need anything drastic done to it. I do tend to drive them like I stole them a lot of the time, in both wet and dry ...

Perhaps this is what I am talking about?

Sorry Ratbag, but I gotta laugh. I know you hold your EJ25 in high esteem, but I'm sure this gearset and an average subaru gearbox will hold up just fine.

You are "sure"? Or do you think you know? Or are you taking a punt with my money? :rotfl:

And most WRX gearboxes are no different to the L series gearboxes in terms of overall strength - other than being single range and AWD there's really not much difference until you get into the later gearboxes.

That's why the WRX drive shafts are around 2 mm bigger in diameter than the ones in my Forester, and the STI ones are about 3 mm bigger. Work out what that translates into in cross-sectional area, then apply a square law to it to arrive at the increase in resistance to torque and stress ... :iconwink:

As for the low range being too much for the engine/gearbox combination - have a look at Venom's H6 with dual range - with correct driving technique (aka, nothing that Taza does ) the reliability of your drive train will be just fine.

I'm sure with your old LC even if you dropped the clutch or abused it the thing would've broken something - they always have and always will when someone does something stupid. No two ways about it.

It managed to do around 270,000 miles before I needed to drop a reco short motor into it, Bennie. The transfer case had to be done because I was sold a pup with a rooted seal between the TC and the gearbox, and was too young an inexperienced to realise it. Somewhere around 26 y.o. ... During the time I owned it (around 150,000 miles), it would have done very heavy work for at least 25-35,000 of them. That's with a tonne in the back, with two tonnes on behind of live load, but sometimes just concrete fence posts, or bore casing, or whatever. Sometimes off the bitumen, sometimes on it, sometimes on rough bush tracks, towing horses.

Back to the topic at hand, if you're after a simple drop in low range for your subaru this would be the way to go that's "extra mods" free (compared to L series low range swap) - just drop and go.

Ratbag should get one then come out with us - I've heard Walhalla is good

Cheers

Bennie

And Bennie, if I were driving a 25 y.o. car that's had more rebuilds than I've had hot feeds, I probably wouldn't be too worried about doing yet another rebuild either after smashing it up, yet again rolleyessarcastic: ... ). It also wouldn't worry me if I still had the use of a major workshop to do the work in. Or if I hadn't got this sort of thing out of my system many decades ago ... .

Sorry Bennie, but I've gotta laugh ...

You can make of that what you will.

 

[taza]

I'm happy to get 2-4 years from a motor or gearbox in my Forester Ratbag. I see those as general maintenance not overhauling. They are disposable and readily available.

As I said I know what I'm doing and I know what will happen. I have the sense to know that it's not good for it. However I enjor the trill factor to liven up my life by being an idiot. However I'm smart enough to not be stupid with other people/cars around so I'm only putting myself in a little harms way.
What I did today (a lightning start from the traffic lights) is not hurting anyone. Its just wear and tear on the car.
Probably not the car for what I do but it's what I have. I have no reason to conplain when something breaks unless it's not my fault.
I should probably start track driving with an appropriate vehicle to do my use and abuse on while having fun in a controlled area, not my daily driver.

 

[NachaLuva]

RB, the point we're trying to make is Venom has a L series LR behind his H6 with vastly more torque than any EJ25 & its just fine. He does drive it hard on occasion but treats the LR carefully.

A 1.59 will be fine behind a EJ253 if you treat the LR with respect. This means not driving around in LR as if it were just another gear.

 

[Ratbag]

I'm happy to get 2-4 years from a motor or gearbox in my Forester Ratbag. I see those as general maintenance not overhauling. They are disposable and readily available.

And I've done exactly the same things in my youth, Taza. With similarly predictable results. Roo1 did 236,000 Kms without a single major repair. Almost all of it in a manner guaranteed to put an unholy amount of stress on the car ... . I never broke it though ... nearly 18 years and around 236,000 kms. Not too bad for a fridge on wheels ... :iconwink:.

I should probably start track driving with an appropriate vehicle to do my use and abuse on while having fun in a controlled area, not my daily driver.

Probably an excellent outlet for that exuberance of youth, mate. Far safer for you, and for everyone else too! Get ST to take you along to the club/s he frequents for starters, maybe.

I'll stop here as I don't want to start an argument.

Me too. That was never my intent. It is very easy for some to forget that we all have different needs and requirements for a given vehicle. These days mine are to take me safely where I want to go - and bring me back again. I did all the stupid things in my youth, and have no need or desire to relive them now. Life has taught me just how fragile our hold is on life - that most precious commodity we have.
I have so many risk factors these days that I have no need to add more :rotfl:.

We are going off topix here.

Yup ... :iconwink: :lol: .

This is for a group buy from ADS.

That's why I enquired if they do any other specials as well as the 1.6:1 LR ...

 

[taza]

Good to hear mate.
Call and ask them. I think you'd be happy with 1.47 low range. I find it very useful for towing. No need to ride the clutch. Could be a good upgrade for you with your trailer and your trip

 

[Rally]

Taza- get yourself a WRX, throw in a late model 6 speed with DCCD and R180 plated rear end if not already installed and believe me, you'll have way more fun doing that than you will ever have in the Forrie AND it will last a hell of a lot longer! You can pick up a 90's model WRX pretty cheap these days, and installing the above drivetrain has never been cheaper. The Forrie will last longer and less likely to die on you at the most inconvenient times, while you will be saving $$$ and spending more time having fun.

 

[Dedman]

I should make sure it fits with the 4.44 without mods but I think it does. It definitely fits with the 4.11 without mods



Again not 100% sure. I believe 1.59:1

If it only fits with the 4.11s I can easily understand how they have done it but the 4.44s are meant to be that bit wider again so I cant think how they would have modified it to get it to fit.

 

[taza]

Might look down that path when I get back from overseas Rally.... If not a WRX I was thinking MX-5, they make a good track car as I've seen Stilson in his countless times.

 

[NachaLuva]

Its great you have the SG box in. Are they all stock gears? How bout the LR, stock too? 1.19 would suck lol

 

[Ratbag]

Its great you have the SG box in. Are they all stock gears? How bout the LR, stock too? 1.19 would suck lol

Only if it were sitting behind an EJ-20 .... :iconwink: :biggrin: :rotfl:.

Seriously, NL, the EJ-20 engine has about the same torque curve and power to weight ratio as the EJ-18 had in my '93 Impreza.

OTOH, the EJ-253 is developing more torque at 1,200 rpm than the EJ-20 does at its maximum, and this is only just 80% of the EJ-253's maximum torque. It is putting out over 90% of its maximum torque from about 1,800 rpm to its red line at 6,300 rpm.

This makes a huge difference to the driveability and tractability of cars with this engine when compared with those that were underpowered to heck, even when they were new. They really needed lower ratio LR gears. The EJ-253 engined cars don't need these gears to be as low as that. The benefits of this is that there is usually no need to change up from 2nd/LR to 3rd/LR in a long climb, which is specially bad if one has a trailer on behind, but bad even if no trailer.

If I had wanted a LC with its 1.996:1 LR, I would have bought a LC ... :iconwink:

 

[taza]

NL; Yes stock SG box.

RB; I'm not saying it lacks at 1500rpm. It still has power but doing 60kmhr up a hill at 1400-1500rpm in 5th gear with a 1600-1700kg car just isn't healthy for any small petrol engine.
doing 70kmhr is fine at 1800rpm. Its fine on a flat and will maintain speed uphill but doesn't really have any acceleration. However I wouldn't expect any better from a turbo subie in the same situation.
while before I'd be doing around the 2000-2200rpm mark at 60-70kmhr which gave heaps of pulling power up hills.

The box is very smooth, not quiet like a turbo box but not far off. Doesn't make any noises which is wierd to me. Both the foz and my brumby have noises from the gearbox and have done for well over a year.
the Brum only has a whine in 4th at certain speed, that being said its allowed to considering its done a good job for almost 30years.

Ratbag the LR might be suitable for your application but for most of us here (OFFROAD Subarus) it isn't adequate. I bet you any money you couldn't go on a soft beach, drive and take off without burning, riding and dumping your clutch. Both Stilson and RedCS can't manage and they have the same vehicle as you. I could manage with my 'old skool' engine and 1.47 LR.

The LWF is great.. even in neutral it revs much more freely.. I feel this will help wiyh fuel economy when cursing.

 

[Ratbag]

^ I know what you mean, Taza.

The EJ-253 is happy at those revs, and will happily accelerate from there - not fast, but not labouring either.

In lower gears (either using LR, or just changing to 2nd or 3rd in HR), it is more than happy at 1,200 rpm. Not fast off the mark at those revs, but again, not labouring.

I agree with you that it's not healthy to drive any modern engine like this all the time, and you can rest assured that mine isn't! That's why I get the fuel consumption figures I get - heavy right foot ... .

Modern engines are made to such fine tolerances that coking up is a very real threat to their health; particularly modern Japanese engines. Most oil companies make a special engine oil for them for this very reason.

 

[kiwifoz]

I agree with you Taza, the 1.19 just isn't low enough for proper offroad work. Going uphill, it's a (barely) sufficient reduction as the torque of the 2.5 means you can make it uphill at engine speeds of only 1000-2000rpm, but the main problem for me is coming down the other side. Tracks in NZ are steep, and a good reduction is necessary to prevent excessive and dangerous braking downhill.

1.19 is okay for going down skifield roads, which is probably what it was intended for, but I find the engine braking doesn't really kick in until ~3000rpm, by which time I'm already going ~20kph. Which is WAY too fast in many of those situations. And the other time the lower gears would be good are low-speed river crossings on our many braided gravel river beds and for maneuvering on rocky sections.

Lead foot seems to be a common problem around here. I know my economy has definitely gone down since owning the Foz, it's such a fun car to drive and I'm forever tempted to flog it. Although I can still get around 500km out of a tank around town so I'm not doing too badly either, especially as Dunedin isn't exactly a flat city.

Driving around town I usually stick to 4th top, unless I'm on a 60kph speed limit road. The EJ251 doesn't like cruising at less than ~1500rpm. On the open road I get about 2700rpm at 110kph, but I am running near new 215/65s. There's a bit of a gap between 4th and 5th compared to Dad's old Impreza I drove sometimes. That pulled ~3000rpm at 110.