94gt

I am not an expert by any means here, but I am wondering about the gearing of the 2011 cars. I thought the point of the 6 speed was to have an extra gear beyond 5th for a superoverdrive like the GT500 has. When the 2010+ GT500 was regeared for better mileage the 5th and 6th gears were lowered from 0.80:1 and 0.63:1 to 0.74:1 and 0.50:1 respectively.

Now for starters I realize unlike the GT500 both the lower end Mustangs have completely new powerplants. Now what I can't figure out is why the 6th gear is geared essentially the same as the old 5th gear. The new 5th gear is geared the same as the old 4th gear at 1.00:1. The Mustang GT in 6th is geared at 0.65:1 or slightly lower than the old Gt in 5th at 0.68:1. The V-6 is the same at 0.70:1 in 6th where the 2010 was at 0.72:1 in 5th gear.

Wouldn't for example a 0.55:1 in the GT and 0.59:1 in the V-6 have given better mileage? Isn't that really the point of the 6th gear for freeway driving at low RPM. My older 5 speed 5.0 GT revs about 1700 RPM doing 70mph down the freeway. I am surprised the new 2011 5.0 is doing closer to 2,000 RPM at these speeds.

jeff s

More/closer ratios below 1:1 and OD for better acceleration with the higher strung engines.

m4reapr

Mustangs have always been under-geared
if you've read comparison tests over the last 20 years the one thing that has stood out is that they have had a gearing disadvantage
these gearing disadvantages have been glaringly obvious the last few years since Mustangs are being compared to hi-hp V6 cars since there was no Camaro

fuel mileage was the reason for this

but now that VVT is on the motor and economy is up the gearing can be more aggressive
no more gearing handicap, the gloves have come off
the car now is rated a bit better than the 4.6 on mileage but with 97more hp

the dohc setup is a freer revving motor so it won't feel strained, i know where you're coming from, i have a 5-speed 2003 GT that turns 2000rpm@76mph

i guess they could have put a taller 6th in it but it may have been too big of a jump and if they messed with 5th then it would have domino'd to all the gears

thank you Ford for 3 ring/pinion choices even though i think they should be no-cost options like the 3.08 on my 1987 LX 5.0
mine is optioned with the 3.73

BLKCLOUD

IMO, this transmission is very much like having your cake and eating it to. To wit...

The MT82's 1st thru 4th gears with a 3.73 rear provides me with about the same torque multiplication as having a 4.56 gear with a 3650 tranny (less in 1st gear, more in 4th), and a closer spread between gears, meaning less rpm drop. The icing to that is that I get the MUCH better cruising rpm in 6th with that same 3.73 than I do in 5th with the 3650 - even if that car was equipped with a 4.10 rear gear.

A 6060 or a T56 simply wouldn't be able to get me all that gear multiplication in the first few gears, nor would I have the closer spacing.

Though I haven't driven one yet, based on what I have read, calculated, and witnessed, I think the MT82 is a GREAT choice for this car.

My opinion.

RandyW

That's what I thought, too, when I saw the gear ratios for the 2011 GT. I thought they would have made 5th a slight overdrive and 6th a deep overdrive, like about .55 or so. But it looks like this works out pretty well. It's a 3600+ pound car with a 412 hp engine that will do 0-60 in under 5 seconds and is rated at 26 mpg on the highway (with the standard axle ratio, at least). That's not too shabby. Heck, the 2010 V6 Mustang was rated at 26 on the highway and it only had 210 horsepower!

94gt

Correction on my vehicle. It is a 4 speed not a 5 as I incorrectly stated above which makes it all the more perplexing my car cruises down the highway at 70mph turning less rpm than the current 2011 6 speed 5.0.

The Camaro with an auto uses the 4th gear at 1.00:1 as I would have thought and the 5th at 0.84:1 AND 6TH AT 0.57:1. Quite a bit lower than the 5.0 at 0.65:1 in 6th.

Automatic Transmission Ratios (1994 others similar) Mustang
1st Gear - 2.40
2nd Gear - 1.47
3rd Gear - 1.00
4th Gear - 0.667 (Overdrive)

The 0.667:1 gear ratio with a 2.73:1 rear axle explains why my old 5.0 is turning over less rpm than the new 2011 model. So my 3rd gear or drive is the equivalent of 5th gear in the new car. Still I am shocked this is the case as even with higher 3.31:1 rear axle the new car does have an extra 2 gears and wonder what kind of mileage these new cars would delivered if the gear ratios were kept the same as last year using 4th as the 1.00:1 ratio and the 6th gear as the superoverdrive as many people would have thought it would have been. Mileage is very good for the power, but seeing the new gear ratios it appears the mpg easily could have been better!

cdynaco

The challenge with a close ratio for drag racing is a) holding traction with too steep a gear, b) losing seconds with having to shift too soon and having to shift to 4th. They're great on 2 lane twisties because you have more gear choices in the power band. (However, 2nd & 3rd with 3.73's are great for my 4.6...) And by not extending 6th gear they lost 1 or 2 mpg.

So I'm not convinced they did the 6 spd correctly with the choices of rear ends and the expanded power of the 5.0 with TiVCT.

Since my 315HP Bullitt (w/6500 redline) finishes the quarter in 3rd gear, imagine what it could do with 412+HP (w/7k redline) if it had the TR3650 & 3.73's!

BLKCLOUD

Somebody that drag races will want that shift into 4th - with proper gearing - as it means that all the gears are multipling torque much better than someone that only gets into the top of 3rd. If they are a very slow shifter, then they probably aren't trying hard enough to allow proper gearing to help anyway.

This is 100% speculation. What 6th gear would you use? What rpm would a deeper 6th put the 5.0 at on the highway, and at what efficiency is the motor running at that rpm? And was MPG on the highway at cruising speed the overriding determiner of tranny and rear end gearing?

Perhaps you should talk to the engineers and find out what their reasoning was.

It would go quicker based on the increase in power. Properly driven, the TR3650 would be slower than the MT82.

825LTRGT

Evan Smith ran low 12's with a 3.73 six speed shifting into 4th.

It looks like all of the gears get the car in the 12's.

Bigjohns97

I agree i would have rather had a t6060 type gearing with double overdrives and gears further away from each other.

RedCandy5.0

Even 3.15's with an auto get you into the 12's. This car is just set up anyway you get it.