M/T a bit frustrating

[SecondTJ]

Holy crap that's nuts if true.

True.

The JK’s NSG370 was 4.06

Sponsored

 

[8flat]

It's a 4.49 reverse. Hardly what I would call tall.

For cars, no.

For a full frame 4x4 with a trailer package and an engine with no torque at idle, yes.

 

[8flat]

It's a 4.49 reverse. Hardly what I would call tall.

Uhhhh.....WUT?
The SM465 is 6.09
The NV4500 ranges between 5.04 to 6.34

And those trannies almost without exception are paired to engines that make a lot of torque at idle.

 

[word302]

Uhhhh.....WUT?
The SM465 is 6.09
The NV4500 ranges between 5.04 to 6.34

And those trannies almost without exception are paired to engines that make a lot of torque at idle.

They're also paired with vehicles designed to tow more than 3500#.

 

[jdubya421]

I don't understand your point in the slightest. You keep going on and on about other vehicles, engines, and transmissions.

First, it doesn't matter what other vehicles use because that isn't what is in this Jeep. The engine and trans work, crawl rocks, tow, get good MPG, etc. There are videos of stock JL wranglers tackling insane obstacles - obviously the pairing works.

If you do wan't to compare it, that is a hard one to sell. The NV4500 was mostly put on Silverado 2500 and 3500s and Ram trucks that had V8 and V10 engines (some diesel). How does that comparison hold any water here? Those engines had more torque and the trans had a shorter R gear: so what? That doesn't just make it better.

Look at the new Tacos - arguably a much better comparison to the JL. They produce 60-70ft-lbs of torque at 2.2k rpms which is exactly in line with the 3.6L.

 

[8flat]

I don't understand your point in the slightest. You keep going on and on about other vehicles, engines, and transmissions.

First, it doesn't matter what other vehicles use because that isn't what is in this Jeep. The engine and trans work, crawl rocks, tow, get good MPG, etc. There are videos of stock JL wranglers tackling insane obstacles - obviously the pairing works.

If you do wan't to compare it, that is a hard one to sell. The NV4500 was mostly put on Silverado 2500 and 3500s and Ram trucks that had V8 and V10 engines (some diesel). How does that comparison hold any water here? Those engines had more torque and the trans had a shorter R gear: so what? That doesn't just make it better.

Look at the new Tacos - arguably a much better comparison to the JL. They produce 60-70ft-lbs of torque at 2.2k rpms which is exactly in line with the 3.6L.

Point is very simple. An engine with very little torque off-idle should not be paired with a reverse gear this high (low numerically). A big v8 could get away with it, but a high-strung V6 is not a good fit for such a high reverse gear. Even if it had enough torque to manage a reverse this high, you just don't want to back up a trailer that fast.

This is why we're having to shift into 4LO just to backup a trailer, unless you want to smell your clutch.

Other MFGRs understood these concepts, and used a lower reverse ratio.

Funny you mention tacomas, I saw a toyota forum where they were complaining about reverse being to high...I had to chuckle

 

[word302]

Point is very simple. An engine with very little torque off-idle should not be paired with a reverse gear this high (low numerically). A big v8 could get away with it, but a high-strung V6 is not a good fit for such a high reverse gear. Even if it had enough torque to manage a reverse this high, you just don't want to back up a trailer that fast.

This is why we're having to shift into 4LO just to backup a trailer, unless you want to smell your clutch.

Other MFGRs understood these concepts, and used a lower reverse ratio.

Funny you mention tacomas, I saw a toyota forum where they were complaining about reverse being to high...I had to chuckle

Again, if you're burning up your clutch backing up in 2h you're doing it wrong.

 

[crazy90'skid]

A jeep is not and will never be a truck, it has smaller brakes, axles, and it frame is smaller, weaker, and narrower to boot. At best you have roughly 1200 lbs payload and 3500 lbs towing, you have plenty of power for that application if you are towing more than that just understand the limiting factor is never power but brake performance and handling.

 

[jdubya421]

Again, if you're burning up your clutch backing up in 2h you're doing it wrong.

Agreed, just doing it wrong.

 

[Pig-Pen]

i was hoping for a 3.73 when i bought mine but was disappointed to find out only 3.45 was available no matter what options (D44 rear option). except for Rubis of course. im sure its because the masses buy sports and saharas which jeep needs them to pass epa requirments. the rubis are for the "enthusiasts" and more limited in numbers. thankfully we can upgrade though it is not an easy/cheap endeavor. im sure jeep brass thinks just that. if the sport/sahara guys want it, they can always upgrade it. (then we can deny their warranties and save $$! win win for everyone!)

 

[DanW]

i was hoping for a 3.73 when i bought mine but was disappointed to find out only 3.45 was available no matter what options (D44 rear option). except for Rubis of course. im sure its because the masses buy sports and saharas which jeep needs them to pass epa requirments. the rubis are for the "enthusiasts" and more limited in numbers. thankfully we can upgrade though it is not an easy/cheap endeavor. im sure jeep brass thinks just that. if the sport/sahara guys want it, they can always upgrade it. (then we can deny their warranties and save $$! win win for everyone!)

Regear and enjoy. Over 26 years of Jeeping, I can't think of one issue with ring and pinion gears I've come across that was relared to a defect. I've only seen issues with water intrusion from deep water crossing, and one of those few was my own YJ. I had the ring/pinion gears and axles replaced, front and rear, and never had an issue with the new ones, either. No reason to worry. Put 4.10 or even 4.56 gearing and 35's on there and you'll have it made.

 

[8flat]

Again, if you're burning up your clutch backing up in 2h you're doing it wrong.

Hook up a trailer and back up a slight incline with a manual JL <slowly> without slipping the clutch or lugging the engine to the point where it sounds like it's dying, and post a video. Then we can enlighten the entire world with your vast knowledge and skills!!!!!

I'll wait.

 

[805Dirtdog]

For anyone wanting the manual, but are worried after reading forum posts, don't listen. It is a great tranny and is super fun to drive. I'm of the opinion that real jeeps have an I-6, but even with the dismal low end torque of the pentastar the fun factor is still very high. That's why we have low range.

 

[rid34fun]

For anyone wanting the manual, but are worried after reading forum posts, don't listen. It is a great tranny and is super fun to drive. I'm of the opinion that real jeeps have an I-6, but even with the dismal low end torque of the pentastar the fun factor is still very high. That's why we have low range.

Totally agree! I love my manual, and the more I drive it, the better I get at maximizing the gearing and fun. I would not trade it for an auto. For me, it really adds to the experience and is a great tranny and motor combo, you just need to learn how to use them together. 3.6 liters is a pretty small motor and we ask for so much torque from it. Pistons are too small, and the flywheel is lighter so it revs. So rev it up a bit and enjoy.

 

[DanW]

Here's a fun article on the little Sport 2 door with a manual. 6.1 seconds 0-60. I doubt any CJ, (even with a V8), YJ, Tj, or JK could do that in its wet dreams. This thing would be a hoot, on and off the road.

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...gler-v-6-4x4-manual-instrumented-test-review/

Sponsored