....When you pry it from my cold dead fingers.
Thats the verdict after 1200 miles and 4 mountain ranges in 3 days. I'm throwing away my 3.07.

Can you provide some additional feedback on how often you would drive in third going upgrade?

Would you leave it in fourth, with full boost, or would you drop it down to third?

If you did drop it to third, would you reduce speed to 65 mph or so, or would you maintain the typical 70+?

All driveability issues are of interest.

Astroman, I sure like my 2.88 behind the 617 turbo and 240D automatic.

__________________
'83 240D with 617.952 and 2.88
'01 VW Beetle TDI
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD
'89 Toyota 4x4, needs 2L-T
'78 280Z with L28ET - 12.86@110
Oil Burner Kartel #35

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b1...oD/bioclip.jpg

The only times (3 to be exact) I had to downshift into 3rd were when I got jammed up by traffic going up a hill and had to slow way down. Then I just stepped onto the kickdown solenoid and away we went. Nothing better than motoring past all the new japanese cars buzzing thier way up the mountain...
In short, it's very driveable, and yes, I prefer to let the turbo carry the car up hills, not 4k rpm..

My car will downshift into third at 75mph pretty easily with the 2.47. Plenty of acceleration, too. I really think the 2.47 is the way to go.

Jim

See? put your findings on the "easter egg post" as well. Pretty fun driving at that low RPM eh?

__________________
1983 Mercedes 300SD
1987 Mercedes 300SDL
2001 VW Passat 2.8 AWD
2007 OM642 Jeep WK 4x4

You can also have the same effect by installing larger tires. I ran the biggest tire that would fit in the wheel wells in my 83 300D. They were large enough that the speedo was significantly off (80mph speed with the speedo at 65). It drove very well though and did increase the fuel economy.

-Tad

The stock tire is 195/70/14.

I currently run 215/70/14's on the SD.

I might guess that you could possibly run (but possibly not) 235/70/14's.

The difference between this huge tire and stock is 9.3%.

When your speedometer reads 65mph, the vehicle is travelling 71 mph.

You cannot come anywhere near the effect of a 2.47 rear with a change in tires.

Thank you for running the numbers. I should have before I opened my mouth. I was happy with my tire change, and it is certainly an option for people.

-Tad

I don't see how tire width would change anything. Seems like going up to a 75 or a 15" would only achieve this.

__________________
Jimmy L.
'05 Acura TL 6MT
2001 ML430 My Spare

Gone:
'95 E300 188K "Batmobile" Texas Unfriendly Black
'85 300TD 235K "The Wagon" Texas Friendly White
'80 240D 154K "China" Scar engine installed
'81 300TD 240K "Smash"
'80 240D 230K "The Squash"
'81 240D 293K"Scar" Rear ended harder than Elton John

remember that as the width increases, the aspect ratio for the sidewall (70% of the width of the tire in mm) stays the same, but the height increases.

__________________
2002 VW Golf TDI-169,000 miles B20

What are your RPMs at say 65MPH
Also how can you tell the ratio from one that is installed on a car (ex. part number and location)