What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Trans and case thought's and opinions.

1-tonmudder

1-tonmudder

1/2 ton status
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Posts
3,052
Reaction score
0
Location
In a junkyard somewhere
I have a Th400 and stock (1.96-1) figure eight style 205 in my M1009 and I do not have enough lo-range.I have the 203 and adapter for a Th400.

I really dont want to sink the money into a doubler(but I probably will) to get more lo-range.I have a 465/205 that I could put in but I really dont want a third pedal to deal with in some situations.Theredically would the 465/205 swap be almost as good as the doubler or should I just pony up and drop the dime on the doubler.

I also have the 203 adapter and case for the 465,but the only way I would use it would be on a doubler.I dont think I need that much gearing.

Would a lower first in my TH400 help that much??

I have looked at ORD's stuff as well as NWF's,and from the look of NWF's adapter it only takes one X-member.Is that correct or am I missing something??

I am running a moderately built FI 350 with 4:88's and Detriots with 38.5 boggers.

An Atlas,Stak or Black box is out of my budget.
 
For what I ended up spending on doubler kit, range box, T-case, and Trip stick shifters, I could have bought a Stak or an Atlas...

More spendy than you think...

Of course my range box and T-case are pretty much brand new inside and out so that added some costs. Then again the Atlas and Stak are also new cases so it really is a fair comparison cost wise.

i thought the 1009's had 208's...or did you swap in a 205?

If you still have the 6.2 diesel I'd say go with the 465/205. When I ran that combo I didn't feel any pressing need for deeper gearing even after wheeling at Blazer Bash in Moab. I never actually used my clutch pedal in the rocks, never really needed to. There was definitely none of this feathering the clutch or repeatedly stalling the truck even in the nastiest spots. The diesel is a big part of that though, I don't think it would stall when in low range and first gear...it'd likely smoke the clutch at idel first.

Rene
 
crawl ratio's
4.88x2.48x1.96=23.72 right now
4.88x2.48x2.72=32.92 with a 241
4.88x6.55x1.96=62.65 with the 465

so even with the doubler, 23.72x2=47.44; not taking into account any additional variables with the auto and the torque converter.
 
Of course my range box and T-case are pretty much brand new inside and out so that added some costs. Then again the Atlas and Stak are also new cases so it really is a fair comparison cost wise.

i thought the 1009's had 208's...or did you swap in a 205?

If you still have the 6.2 diesel I'd say go with the 465/205. When I ran that combo I didn't feel any pressing need for deeper gearing even after wheeling at Blazer Bash in Moab. I never actually used my clutch pedal in the rocks, never really needed to. There was definitely none of this feathering the clutch or repeatedly stalling the truck even in the nastiest spots. The diesel is a big part of that though, I don't think it would stall when in low range and first gear...it'd likely smoke the clutch at idel first.
Click to expand...

My M1009 originally came with the 400/208 and the 6.2,but it has all been changed.About all that is still a true M1009 is the VIN,frame and body.The 205 I'm running came out a brush truck that a local Vol fire dept got to close to a fire and burnt the front off of and it only had around 60k on it when I got it.The 400/203 was a relative lo mile unit also so I really think I could get by with a reseal.
NP 241 = 2.72 low range
Click to expand...
Nothing personal toward anybody but I dont want a chain drive case.

not taking into account any additional variables with the auto and the torque converter.
Click to expand...
My conv stalls at 1800-2000.So if I decifered this right I will still have more lo-range with the 465/205 than the 400 and a doubler??
 
The numbers for the 465/205 gear ratios are lower, but you get a certain amount of torque multiplication from the slush box. I am running a 400/203/205 ORD doubler w/ 5.13's & 42's. Granted I have not had mine running long, but the lowest range is very low. I really think you would be happy either way. It mainly boils down to whether you would rather run the auto or the manuel.
 
I defently understand, Doubler = $$$. If you were closer I would let you drive mine, so you could see how you liked it.
 
I probably wont do anything till winter anyway.I was weighing my option's.Mine is not a hard core off road rig by any means and I dont really want it to get to where we can't take it out to get a pizza if we want,but I would like to have a little more.
 
I hear you, I will be looking to ride quite a bit for the rest of the year, if you see me on the trail my offer is still good, you are welcome to drive it.
 
I don't have plans to ride anywere yet. I am planning on riding Coon Creek on the 28th of July. I just got through w/ the engine breakin. Coon Creek is near Dyersburg, it will be the K5's fisrt real outing.

Here is a link, there are a few other buil-up threads of mine in the Southeast forum.

http://coloradok5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=210083

Here is a pic of my tow rig & the trail rig
maiden_voyage1.jpg
 
1-tonmudder said:
I have a Th400 and stock (1.96-1) figure eight style 205 in my M1009 and I do not have enough lo-range.I have the 203 and adapter for a Th400.

I really dont want to sink the money into a doubler(but I probably will) to get more lo-range.I have a 465/205 that I could put in but I really dont want a third pedal to deal with in some situations.Theredically would the 465/205 swap be almost as good as the doubler or should I just pony up and drop the dime on the doubler.

I also have the 203 adapter and case for the 465,but the only way I would use it would be on a doubler.I dont think I need that much gearing.

Would a lower first in my TH400 help that much??

I have looked at ORD's stuff as well as NWF's,and from the look of NWF's adapter it only takes one X-member.Is that correct or am I missing something??

I am running a moderately built FI 350 with 4:88's and Detriots with 38.5 boggers.

An Atlas,Stak or Black box is out of my budget.
Click to expand...




Why not just get a Lo Max? It is 3-1 Lo and only about $1000 in kit form.
 
why dont you just put that 465/205 AFTER your 400? then you wont need a clutch and you would have infinate and really really low gearing....?
 
oneofthefewbmx said:
why dont you just put that 465/205 AFTER your 400? then you wont need a clutch and you would have infinate and really really low gearing....?
Click to expand...

Its heavy, long, and the input shaft on the 465 goes boom :eek1:
 
why dont you just put that 465/205 AFTER your 400? then you wont need a clutch and you would have infinate and really really low gearing....?
Click to expand...

Its heavy, long, and the input shaft on the 465 goes boom :eek1:
Click to expand...

and in a blazer your bound to have rear shaft issues.


Why not just get a Lo Max? It is 3-1 Lo and only about $1000 in kit form.
Click to expand...

I have looked at them and meant to include that,but forgot about it.I would have to look again but I think they are around $1300 without the sticks.If I were to spend that much I would want all the gearing options I could get and go with a doubler.
 
Take another look at NWF's Black Box. Not the cheapest way to go, but that and a round np205 make a sweet set up.
 
I really like my 465/205 vs the 700/208 I had before. I havent done any hard wheelin with it, just alittle trail driving and it did fine. If you already have the 465/205, just throw that in there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom