Got a 225 with Four Speed and 2.93 Rear End. My Question is how do i find out what gear ratio and transmission I have? This thing has been a nightmare since i got the thing. I need a new hub assembly for the front left. Do i Do disc brakes? If so where can i get them? Do i keep the Trans and Motor or blow them off? HELP

_________________
"Fortune Favors The Bold!"

The 4-speed is called a New Process 833
The rear end is likely a 7 1/4 inch ring gear size, you state that it is a 2.93 ratio which is pretty common.

As with any 40+ year old car, you need to evaluate what it needs and do the repairs to get the car back to good working condition.
DD

Let me see if i can be more elaborate. On the rear end when i pulled the pumpkin, and the carrier ring gear assembly, i got a hand full of metal. The ring gear was missing two teeth and razor sharp. So, i counted the number of teeth on the pinion and the number of teeth on the ring gear and got the 2.93. ( 14 teeth on the pinion and 41 teeth on the ring gear. ) Here is the problem I am pinned on the freeway in fourth gear as it is. if i cant find the same size gear or smaller, wont i just go slower?

_________________
"Fortune Favors The Bold!"

Where are you located? People on this site could help you with a cheap used axle, I bet.

You should probably stick with the 2.93 gears (randy's ring'n'pinion has parts, or find used axle) or go to 2.76. 833 4spd is 1:1 4th, but you can also get an "OD" version that has 0.76:1 4th gear.

Lou

_________________
Home of Slant6-powered fun machines since 1988

What exactly do you mean by "pinned on the freeway"? Stock ratio with manual transmission was 3.23; if you have a 2.93 it's most likely somewhere along the line somebody swapped in a rear axle from an automatic car. Neither 3.23 nor 2.93 would come anywhere close to maxing out the engine revs (or even seeming particularly "busy") at 70 or 75 mph. With 3.55 or 3.91, yes, you would get a lot of engine noise at 60+ mph.

With a direct-top-gear manual transmission such as yours, the stock 3.23 rear axle ratio usually makes a nice all-around driving experience, particularly if the tire size is thoughtfully selected. A case can be made for 2.93s with manual trans, if you do a lot of high-speed highway driving (lower engine RPMs). 2.76s would be an unwise choice; you'd burn the clutch early and often and the car would be a real slug around town.

It sounds like you've got multiple problems at work...please take a step backwards and carefully describe the overall problems you're having — the symptoms you're experiencing — so that we can try to help you sort them out. You run the risk of picking the wrong ratio and making your problems worse otherwise.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

The possibility of the rear end being swapped at some time is very good. The 225 with 4 speed is out of a 66' would that mean anything? I don't show the engine number being out of a truck. Lets put it this way. My friends nick named my car the UPS truck because they sound so much alike. I pulled the rear seat out to pin point the hum and the whine, thats what lead me to the rear end. When i say pinned I mean wound out. I am located in California

_________________
"Fortune Favors The Bold!"

If you drive 80MPH routinely (CA normal?), then 2.93s or 2.76s are the best choice, or taller tires.

Lou

_________________
Home of Slant6-powered fun machines since 1988

Heck, 90 is normal on California freeways. Under 70 and you will get run off the road.
By the way it sounds do you have a 8 3/4 under it ? If so you are one lucky guy as rear changes are infinite.

It would mean one heck of a rare officially-nonexistent car. The 4-speed was available with the 273 V8 in '66, but not with the slant-6. The 4-speed was offered with the 225 in '64 and '65, and then not again until '75. It would be interesting to figure out what your first-gear ratio is. The V8 4-speeds had a 2.66 first ratio; the slant-6 4-speeds had 3.09.
Then strange things are definitely afoot at the Circle-K, dude. Let's do some math. I'm going to guess at a tire size of 195/70R14. It might not be exact, but it'll certainly put us well within 10%.

A 195/70R14 tire rotates 815 times per mile. We calculate the revs/mile of the driveshaft (and of the engine, in 1:1 fourth gear) when we multiply this 815 by the rear axle ratio. The result equals engine RPM at 60 mph, and we get engine RPM at 75mph and 90mph by multiplying by 1.25 and 1.5 respectively:

2.93: 2388 rpm @ 60mph. 2985 rpm @ 75mph. 3582 rpm @ 90mph
3.23: 2632 rpm @ 60mph. 3291 rpm @ 75mph. 3949 rpm @ 90mph
3.55: 2893 rpm @ 60mph. 3617 rpm @ 75mph. 4340 rpm @ 90mph
3.91: 3187 rpm @ 60mph. 3984 rpm @ 75mph. 4780 rpm @ 90mph

Taking a look at these numbers, and even making the dubious assumption you're trying to cruise at 90 mph, there's no way you're wound out on the highway with 2.93s or 3.23s unless there's something the matter with the engine that's stopping it reaching normal operating speeds -- if it's a whupped engine that's too tired to do what you're asking, if it's got excessive exhaust restriction or improper cam timing, really screwed-up ignition timing or carburetion or another such problem, for example. Even with the 3.55s, at 90 mph a stock 225 will be really busy/noisy, but it won't be wound out. Only with the 3.91s do the RPMs start getting out of the comfortable range of a stock 225.

So, before you arbitrarily decide you need a different rear axle ratio, I really think you need to narrow in on what the other problem(s) is/are.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Theoretically you're correct Dan; but I had a 62 with a 3 speed and 3.23 rear gears. I didn't have a tach so I don't know what the engine RPM was but 90 mph +- 5 depending on the terrain was all she would do pedal to the metal. True the RPM probably wasn't maxed but the car would go no faster. I also had a 63 Valiant with an auto; don't know the rear gear on it. Same deal; she would run the autobahn all day at 90 mph but she would go no faster.

_________________
David Kight
'62 Valiant Signet, White
'98 Dodge Dakota
'06 Jeep Liberty

Growing older is unavoidable but growing up is strictly optional.

We didn't calculate wind resistance

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Yep, I understand. Of course I'm just trying to explain what he probably means by "pinned" or as I would term it, "pegged."

_________________
David Kight
'62 Valiant Signet, White
'98 Dodge Dakota
'06 Jeep Liberty

Growing older is unavoidable but growing up is strictly optional.

Aside from all this good information... it sound like this owner need a replacement rearend if gear teeth are "worn & broken".

The big question is if it is a 7 1/4 rear.
Does it have a rear cover?
DD

You guys rock! I love the tech talk. I have 205/60//R15 tires. I have a 7.25" Rear end. I measured the back of the ring gear. Is this the correct way to measure in this instance? I will agree that "pegged" is a better term than "pinned", that term comes from motorcycles. As for the car not going any faster, it just sounded very noisy. Maybe this is the way it is supposed to sound, but i dont think so. Then again that rear end was making so much noise. Again you guys rock. Beers on me

_________________
"Fortune Favors The Bold!"

9 Bolt cover

_________________
"Fortune Favors The Bold!"