PDA

View Full Version : 4.9 final drive jdm dc2r!


dslt
27-03-2008, 04:43 PM
Hey guys, planning on changing my final drive from 4.4 to 4.9, just wondering if it was worth the change? what sort gains would i be expecting?

Also is a dc2r gearbox a cable or hyrdaulic transmission?

Any experienced this final drive before or similar 5.062?

Any opinion would be appreciated

cheers
destrukshn
27-03-2008, 04:45 PM
dc2r box is hydro
yes will be a massive difference from 4.4 to 4.9
90xsi
27-03-2008, 05:12 PM
good bye to your fuel economy when cruising dave
just leave your car as it is, its already quick
dslt
27-03-2008, 06:23 PM
lolz yeah, just want car to be quicker =)
blueintegraboy
27-03-2008, 07:14 PM
It will definitely accelerate quicker, but your RPMs will be higher at a certain speed.

Which 4.9FD are you interested in getting? ATS? MFactory?
dslt
27-03-2008, 07:27 PM
yeah might get the ATS
grumpy rooster
27-03-2008, 07:37 PM
OBX make a 4.928 ratio now as well. :)
Q_ball
27-03-2008, 07:44 PM
As above, ridiculously high revs for cruising spds of about 60km/hr and 100-110km/hr...

I wouldnt recommend it if your cars a daily.
dslt
27-03-2008, 07:46 PM
are they any good?

Do i have to take it to a gearbox specialist to get it changed?
Or can i take it to a mechanic?
bennjamin
27-03-2008, 07:54 PM
dont bother with a 4.9

get a actual 4.7 out of a 98+ ITR gearbox and be happy.
Elwood
27-03-2008, 07:56 PM
They are also rediculusly expensive for the B series.

K series is about half the price...
string
28-03-2008, 02:57 PM
good bye to your fuel economy when cruising dave

How much of an increase in fuel consumption are you implying?
The example increases engine RPM by 11% (4.4 -> 4.9) and keeps load constant. Where is the extra energy (from wasted fuel, ala bad fuel economy) going? Mechanical efficiency sure, where else? VE is probably still going [i]up if we are in cruising revs, still well below peak torque.

Does an 11% increase in fuel consumption satisfy the statement, "good bye to your fuel economy"?
Benson
28-03-2008, 03:00 PM
i went from a 3.9 FD to a 4.4FD...fuel consumption is better...

Only on freeways it might suffer, but mine been good so far...

Go for the 4.9FD....im also looking for a set. Pm me and we'll buy 2 haha
barefootbonzai
28-03-2008, 03:06 PM
i had a 4.9FD in my car. It revs 10% higher on the highway (3500rpm->3850rpm), i didn't find it that bad. I still got 400km's out of a full tank highway driving, and 350km out of city driving (B18CR in EK).
dslt
28-03-2008, 05:04 PM
i had a 4.9FD in my car. It revs 10% higher on the highway (3500rpm->3850rpm), i didn't find it that bad. I still got 400km's out of a full tank highway driving, and 350km out of city driving (B18CR in EK).

How was the performance of your car after changing? Could you feel the difference?
Hyper_Performance
01-04-2008, 05:50 PM
There are a lot of variables to consider when it comes to Fuel Economy. RPM is only one of those variables.

The common myth that changing to a 4.9 will be "bye bye to fuel economy" is just that, a myth. If you only cruise on the freeway, okay, this may have an effect on fuel economy, but if for everyday driving, you will find that it won't really have an effect.

As for using the 4.785 from the '98 Spec (as well as the ATS 4.928), this would require the additional purchase of the '98 Spec 1st Gear, Collar and Bearing.

The MFactory 4.785 and 4.928 however, are designed as a direct replacement to your '96 Spec and do not require the additional parts.