Long Ratios Are Are Fun Too..

[christopher 5 1 Cars]

Let me first say that such behaviour is neither advisable nor clever..

 

I've got the first gearbox (2CA08) fitted to my 1.3 Rallye. And I have to say I'm kinda getting used to it now and it's not really as bad as people have said on here. I think the XS has (2CA09). I think this could be why I get such good fuel economy on twin 40's.

 

I mean look at the benefits. I still measured 8.7 seconds to 100 km/h on my g-tech a while ago and yesterday I was cruising on the motorway at 160km/h. The sweet 1294cc's was only starting to sweat at between 4500rpm and 5000 rpm. I flew past a 106 Rallye phase 2 (1.6) which consequently followed me onto the outside lane to stay behind me. So I pull over to the middle lane and he starts to pass. So I drop to 4th revs fly up and I take it up to 7000rpm as I pass him again in 4th. Missus says enough is enough:-)

 

Silly antics I know which we are all guilty once in a while:-). But the longer ratios on the gearbox must pay a factor in this don't you think? I was thinking changing to the shorter but I'm not at all sure now..

 

 

 

2CA08 12 41 3,41667 20 39 1,95000 28 38 1,35714 37 39 1,05405 41 35 0,85366 14 60 4,28571 19/18

2CA09 12 41 3,41667 20 39 1,95000 28 38 1,35714 37 39 1,05405 41 35 0,85366 16 63 3,93750 19/18

Edited May 24, 2007 by christopher

[Jrod 7]

So is this the difference between XS and normal 1.4?

 

I'm also going to try out the normal box as with 135~bhp it should have another power to not need the extra low ratrio and a bit higher top speed will probally be beneficial on track.

[Rippthrough 98]

It's never really been the length that's the problem on the MA boxes - it's that bloody big gap between 1st and second gear, shortening the ratios just helps to mask it a little, but once rolling the longer boxes are fine.

[Casanova 0]

It's never really been the length that's the problem on the MA boxes - it's that bloody big gap between 1st and second gear, shortening the ratios just helps to mask it a little, but once rolling the longer boxes are fine.

Try driving a car with no second gear....

 

§

[Rippthrough 98]

Try driving a car with no second gear....

 

§

 

 

Driven one stuck in 4th....

[Jrod 7]

I was on my way to london when I realised the oil leak must of been gearbox oil as my gears started grinding and crunching.

 

Ended up stuck in 3rd on the motorway with an XS box. Wasn't until after about 2 miles with a amssive amount of force it went back into 5th....

 

Filled it up with oil and it lasted for another 6 months.

[TKH 0]

Agree the gap between 1st and 2nd is way to big. The 1.3 rally box is just a attempted to make up the 1.3s gutless perforce at low RPM. Really its a useless box especially for larger engine as you basically end up with a 4 speed box. Whats really need for track work and b roads at least is a close ratio gearset. Its amazing how much difference one makes to even a standard car.

[Jrod 7]

Yes but the Quaife gearset costs like £1500+

[TKH 0]

Its closer to 1k including the VAT but I see what your saying Jrod. It is a lot of cash to pay out for a single item, But that does not make it bad value. I got a close ratio box with LSD for less than what my ported head and cam are worth. Guess what one made the biggest difference to lap times?

 

Its easy to get carried away with going for peak power. But with out the brakes, suspension, tyres, gearbox, diff and driving skill to go with it all you are doing is wasting most of what you have done.

[bren_1.3 1]

for a grand id have stab at a BE conversion.

[Sandy 189]

I fitted a Quaife low gearset with 3.77 FDR to my old 205 Rallye, to replace the standard VTS box I was using (engine was cams and TB'd 1.6 16v). It was slower to 0-100mph after and drove me insane with the ludicrously short 5th. Needless to say I sold it. If you have a decent spread of power, the Quaife MA ratios are overkill, too close.

 

I've just finished a 205 1.4 16v, which I built a BE4R box for and it's so much nicer to use than an MA, chances are it'll last much longer too! It has a mix of standard ratios and the entire conversion came in at £600 less than I would have had to charge for a MA with Quaife ratios.

[TKH 0]

Thats odd, perhaps you were running a low rev limit or were using small wheels? I am running a lower final drive and the only place I have found I hit the limiter was Rivett straight at Snetterton. Thats with the lower of the gear clusters as well.

[Sandy 189]

I was running 1790mm rolling circumference and 7800 rpm limit. It surprised and disappointed me at the time. A friend of mine had built the box for his hillclimb 1.4 8v 205 which was previously running a VTR box, which is blatantly too tall for hillclimbing anyway, so the benefit was probably skewed. He was also running a cam which was stupidly peaky. My engine pulled much harder across a much wider rpm range and worked tangibly better (subjectively as well as the times I recorded) with a standard VTS box.

What I didn't know then and I know now, is that gearing has to suit the engine's power delivery, you can't just bolt a close ratio box on and go faster (unless the outgoing box was mismatched to the engine/use). The gear ratios need to drop you back to the lower end of the effective power band and the final drive ensures that the overall gearing is suited to the speeds you expect to use it at.

The Quaife "low" ratios (3.417...etc) are the old PTS homologated ratios, which were optimised for tuned S1 1.3 106 Rallyes, which were peaky by nature of the single throttle inlet and small capacity with a peaky cam. A 1360 or 1587 with well designed throttle bodies/inlet, suitable headwork/compression and well matched cams and exhaust geometry, should be providing usable power over a much wider rpm range and as a result will be more effective and arguably easier to drive quick, with slightly wider gearing (unless there are specific venue features that demand a certain ratio).

Edited May 26, 2007 by sandy309

[Casanova 0]

What I didn't know then and I know now, is that gearing has to suit the engine's power delivery, you can't just bolt a close ratio box on and go faster (unless the outgoing box was mismatched to the engine/use). The gear ratios need to drop you back to the lower end of the effective power band and the final drive ensures that the overall gearing is suited to the speeds you expect to use it at.

One of the things I really like about my XS is the gearing (apart from the missing one at the moment ) - being nice and low you get good acceleration and the engine likes to rev. But also as Sandy says above, the ratios are perfect for the engine, dropping you just where you want to be in the rev range when you're going for it. I have the philosophy that acceleration is more fun than high speed anyway, and much easier to exploit on the public road. What use to me is being able to go over 100? I'd rather be able to quickly accelerate at usable speeds, the only sacrifice being high revs on the motorway which I don't mind as a trade-off. The standard XS box suits my needs (rallies, daily driver and the occasional track day) really well, I love it

[205Rallee 59]

I was running 1790mm rolling circumference and 7800 rpm limit. It surprised and disappointed me at the time. A friend of mine had built the box for his hillclimb 1.4 8v 205 which was previously running a VTR box, which is blatantly too tall for hillclimbing anyway, so the benefit was probably skewed. He was also running a cam which was stupidly peaky. My engine pulled much harder across a much wider rpm range and worked tangibly better (subjectively as well as the times I recorded) with a standard VTS box.

What I didn't know then and I know now, is that gearing has to suit the engine's power delivery, you can't just bolt a close ratio box on and go faster (unless the outgoing box was mismatched to the engine/use). The gear ratios need to drop you back to the lower end of the effective power band and the final drive ensures that the overall gearing is suited to the speeds you expect to use it at.

The Quaife "low" ratios (3.417...etc) are the old PTS homologated ratios, which were optimised for tuned S1 1.3 106 Rallyes, which were peaky by nature of the single throttle inlet and small capacity with a peaky cam. A 1360 or 1587 with well designed throttle bodies/inlet, suitable headwork/compression and well matched cams and exhaust geometry, should be providing usable power over a much wider rpm range and as a result will be more effective and arguably easier to drive quick, with slightly wider gearing (unless there are specific venue features that demand a certain ratio).

I'm running a TU24 rallye with an AP Suretrac diff, std FDR, 175 50 x13 tyres and the lower of the Quaife ratios. I drive to hillclimbs and sprints and it is an awful thing to drive on the roads, with 6,000 rpm in 5th just about 75mph on the motorways (Can't tell the real speed cos the speedo is so far out with the tyre size). The gearing is perfect for places like Croft and Knockhill. Its just a shame that the Quaife machining tolerances aren't brilliant. Plus it whines like a b...er!