Gear ratio problem?

[eddiii]

alrite, ive always been wondering, how come my rev drops so much, eg. 1st gear up to 7000rev+, change to 2nd gear it drops to 4500rev, is that normal? u guys have the same thing? coz i thought i normally drop like 1000-2000rev? a friend tried driving my car, an same thing happen, so its not my shifting problem. He said it mite b coz i change gearbox before, and the gear ratio is different, any idea guys? its manual btw guys ^^

[aza013]

That sounds about right.
I change up on the track at about 7800-8000rpm and it drops to aprox 5500-5800rpm.

[eddiii]

lol ooo kk, coz my friends were like, "after the 1st gear, it has no power" coz it drops too much rev, they say their car doesnt drop much rev, like 1000rev, their talkin abt their evos, done up civics, an soarers lol, guess problems solved lol

[aza013]

Ok but how meany of there cars have turbos?

[eddiii]

the only thing is that even ones that drives civic says they dont drop THAT much rev though, so i thought it wasnt normal lol

[Gholdwayne]

yeah at times when i shift around 7500-8000 to 2nd , its around 4,500, but definitely before 2nd gear's mivec

[evoman]

Yeah, for a high revving engine, I've always thought that the FTO's second gear should have been a fair bit shorter to keep it in its sweet spot. Oh well.

[koolio1234]

Yeah, for a high revving engine, I've always thought that the FTO's second gear should have been a fair bit shorter to keep it in its sweet spot. Oh well.

Well the trick is to change around 7500rpm in 1st so that your met with a good head start for mivec when you get to 2nd.

[payaya]

The second gear on the FTO is too tall. Goes to 140km redlining 2nd.

[aza013]

There is nothing wrong with that
if your going down the 1/4 it's beter to have less gear changes, as more changes = less time on the power.

[payaya]

There is nothing wrong with that
if your going down the 1/4 it's beter to have less gear changes, as more changes = less time on the power.

Not when a car produces peak power at close to red line and has not torque! Even then six speeds are quicker than a four speed and it requireds more shifting

[I8A4RE]

There is nothing wrong with that
if your going down the 1/4 it's beter to have less gear changes, as more changes = less time on the power.

THIS

[koolio1234]

Yeah I think the less gear changes the better and the ratio's suit the fto perfectly

[evoman]

There is nothing wrong with that
if your going down the 1/4 it's beter to have less gear changes, as more changes = less time on the power.

THIS

Sorry, but I would have to strongly disagree with you both. There are a lot of factors that influence appropriate gearing for a car, most notably the particular engines torque and power characteristics.
While your statement makes some sense in the case of a very high performance car, it makes no sense in the case of a relatively stock FTO. Sure, ridiculously low gearing can have a negative impact on performance, but in the case of many high revving NA engines such as the FTO, it’s the only way of keeping the car on song.

Hypothetically just to state the obvious, if I made 1st gear in the FTO extend to 100km/h and second gear go from 100-200km/h, the FTO ¼ mile time would be a joke – definitely not faster just because it only requires one gear change and therefore one lift off the throttle. The car would spend half its time winding up into its peak power range, only to fall out of it again.

For a stock FTO with peak torque and power so high in the rev range, I personally feel that the performance of the car could be greatly enhanced by a slightly shorter ratio box that could keep it higher in the rev range with each change. Second gear is just waaay too long, shifting from first to second flat chat drops well out of the peak power band.

I’ve been in corollas with identical black top 4AGE’s, one with low ratio 6 speed gearbox, and the other with standard 5 speed ratios. Same engine, more gearchanges, yet much much faster everywhere on the track or the strip.

Having said all that, for a modified FTO such as yours aza, you probably find the gearing a little better as your engine is more able to overcome the drop in revs.

[Gholdwayne]

i agree, i think that when shifting from first at 7500~8000, 2nd should at least start at the start of mivec, around 5700~6000rpm, same for the rest of the gears

[mr-charisma]

Don't Civics rev to like 9000 anyways? so the drop you're experiencing is probably right for the FTO..

So if you're dropping from 7500 - 5000 a civic might drop from 8500 to 5500 / 6000 instead?

*edit* - This might help

[brad_gpx]

There is nothing wrong with that
if your going down the 1/4 it's beter to have less gear changes, as more changes = less time on the power.

THIS

Sorry, but I would have to strongly disagree with you both. There are a lot of factors that influence appropriate gearing for a car, most notably the particular engines torque and power characteristics.
While your statement makes some sense in the case of a very high performance car, it makes no sense in the case of a relatively stock FTO. Sure, ridiculously low gearing can have a negative impact on performance, but in the case of many high revving NA engines such as the FTO, it’s the only way of keeping the car on song.

Hypothetically just to state the obvious, if I made 1st gear in the FTO extend to 100km/h and second gear go from 100-200km/h, the FTO ¼ mile time would be a joke – definitely not faster just because it only requires one gear change and therefore one lift off the throttle. The car would spend half its time winding up into its peak power range, only to fall out of it again.

For a stock FTO with peak torque and power so high in the rev range, I personally feel that the performance of the car could be greatly enhanced by a slightly shorter ratio box that could keep it higher in the rev range with each change. Second gear is just waaay too long, shifting from first to second flat chat drops well out of the peak power band.

I’ve been in corollas with identical black top 4AGE’s, one with low ratio 6 speed gearbox, and the other with standard 5 speed ratios. Same engine, more gearchanges, yet much much faster everywhere on the track or the strip.

Having said all that, for a modified FTO such as yours aza, you probably find the gearing a little better as your engine is more able to overcome the drop in revs.

i suppose it is within reason
for an advanced driver who can shift gears extremely fast the more gears the better. i had a driving instructed who was an ex-race car driver who was about 60 or so and was still amazingly fast a shifting gears
i think for most average drivers they would be faster down the track in less gears

[I8A4RE]

Don't Civics rev to like 9000 anyways? so the drop you're experiencing is probably right for the FTO..

So if you're dropping from 7500 - 5000 a civic might drop from 8500 to 5500 / 6000 instead?

*edit* - This might help

a stock civic does not rev to 9000

[payaya]

There is nothing wrong with that
if your going down the 1/4 it's beter to have less gear changes, as more changes = less time on the power.

THIS

Sorry, but I would have to strongly disagree with you both. There are a lot of factors that influence appropriate gearing for a car, most notably the particular engines torque and power characteristics.
While your statement makes some sense in the case of a very high performance car, it makes no sense in the case of a relatively stock FTO. Sure, ridiculously low gearing can have a negative impact on performance, but in the case of many high revving NA engines such as the FTO, it’s the only way of keeping the car on song.

Hypothetically just to state the obvious, if I made 1st gear in the FTO extend to 100km/h and second gear go from 100-200km/h, the FTO ¼ mile time would be a joke – definitely not faster just because it only requires one gear change and therefore one lift off the throttle. The car would spend half its time winding up into its peak power range, only to fall out of it again.

For a stock FTO with peak torque and power so high in the rev range, I personally feel that the performance of the car could be greatly enhanced by a slightly shorter ratio box that could keep it higher in the rev range with each change. Second gear is just waaay too long, shifting from first to second flat chat drops well out of the peak power band.

I’ve been in corollas with identical black top 4AGE’s, one with low ratio 6 speed gearbox, and the other with standard 5 speed ratios. Same engine, more gearchanges, yet much much faster everywhere on the track or the strip.

Having said all that, for a modified FTO such as yours aza, you probably find the gearing a little better as your engine is more able to overcome the drop in revs.

i suppose it is within reason
for an advanced driver who can shift gears extremely fast the more gears the better. i had a driving instructed who was an ex-race car driver who was about 60 or so and was still amazingly fast a shifting gears
i think for most average drivers they would be faster down the track in less gears

What does an auto have to do with shifting gears? In a manual it's not hard to shift quick, you don't need to be an expert.

[payaya]

Don't Civics rev to like 9000 anyways? so the drop you're experiencing is probably right for the FTO..

So if you're dropping from 7500 - 5000 a civic might drop from 8500 to 5500 / 6000 instead?

*edit* - This might help

a stock civic does not rev to 9000

Your comparing an Auto to Manual in those videos.