280SE 4.5 rear end in a '69 280SL?

I have 4.08 rear end in my '69 280SL, RPMs are too high on the freeway. I'm thinking of changing to a 3.69 or 3.27 rear end from a 280SE 4.5. Does anyone have the 3.27 rear end in thier 280SL? How slow is it off the line? Do you recommned this change? Look forward to your comments.

Pete
1969 280SL

[Aaron]

Pete,

I am amlost certain that the 3.27 rear end was an option on the W113 SLs. You can swap one in to cut down a few RPMs on the highway, but also remember, these engines were built for high revving. Although it may seem they are stressed, they are really in their prime at these speeds. And besides, that exhaust note is wonderful! It's all part of it's sports car characteristics. The last true SL "sports car" in my opinion.

[Arthur Dalton]

The ratios on 113s were :

3:69
3:75
3:92
4:08

The 3:27 will fit and was only in the 280se -4.5

You are not going to get both accel and cruise.
That is why the ZF 5 speed trans was the option.
They accomplished both by making the 5th gear O.D.

The 3:27 comes close to the 5 speed OD if you do the math
for top gearratio, but you lose it on the other end.
I have done one fo mine [ 250SL] and like it very much. But I am not looking for acceleraton.
The 280 handles it better than the 230/250 with more power.
Long , on-going discussion and opionions amoung 113 owners .
Seems the ones that have actually done it and made the comparisons behind the wheel are happy.
An added note .
The original tires on the 113s wre Euro profile [80% aspect ratio]
and because they are hard to get, most 113s on the road have gone to a smaller tire diam. ,which adds to the gearing high RPM.

Though it's not an SL...I put a 3.69 rear end in my 4-speed manual 250SE years ago. It did lose a bit of low end acceleration, but then I'm not trying to climb trees with it. I don't think I would go as low as a 3.27 for the sake of drivability. If you do a swap, remember that the speedometer has to be re-calibrated.
Regards,
Randy D.