Changing gear ratio???

[Wolfgang]

@MLOffroad, as David mentioned the new ML has a higher ratio, but I'm not sure either if it fits. It also might still be too expensive, and few rebuilt units around...

@DelJ, here's how a German user sees the trip computer. A few years ago I checked its accuracy and turned out ok. We just leave it on moving average most of the time which I believe averages the last 100 or so kilometers.

[dakat]

Just to be clear. A higher gear ratio is a LOWER #. A lower gear ratio is a HIGHER #. Thus a 3.90 ratio is a lower ratio than a 3.70 ratio, producing a higher engine rpm for a given tire size over a 3.70 ratio. The original question was a lower crawl ratio, which a 3.90 would provide over a 3.70. RPM X tire radius
over
Gear Ratio X 168 = MPH
Don't forget the overdrive ratio is .83 to 1. So a 3.70 X .83 = 3.07 final drive ratio, whereas a 3.90 would be a 3.24 final. Not to bore you, but to inform you! [8D]

[dakat]

Just to be clear. A higher gear ratio is a LOWER #. A lower gear ratio is a HIGHER #. Thus a 3.90 ratio is a lower ratio than a 3.70 ratio, producing a higher engine rpm for a given tire size over a 3.70 ratio. The original question was a lower crawl ratio, which a 3.90 would provide over a 3.70. RPM X tire radius
over
Gear Ratio X 168 = MPH
Don't forget the overdrive ratio is .83 to 1. So a 3.70 X .83 = 3.07 final drive ratio, whereas a 3.90 would be a 3.24 final. Not to bore you, but to inform you! [8D]

[Frank500]

Wolfgang - 8/26/2005 4:59 PM

But that's only a 7% difference, and 16 MPG is still not good. Seems your problems lie elsewhere, maybe a lead foot, or all in town driving? My trip computer indicates 23.8 MPG at present after some airport runs on standard tires...

How right you are! His problem lies elsewhere - with the owner/driver.

Seems that he does not take care of his car. He deserves the gas mileage that he is complaining about. I pity the fool who buys that car from him.

I know several people who own ML’s and none of them has had as many problems as this bozo (probably because they take care of their cars).

Did a little research on this website. His car is a 2000 ML320. First road trip in 2004 at 82,000 miles. How many people put 80,000 city miles on their cars in that amount of time w/o any highway miles?

new shocks delivered July 2003. Drove on 3 shocks for how long until 4th shock finally installed in August 2005?

Took 1 year to install the fuel filter he was complaining about in 2004.

Just some of his other reported problems: exhaust leak, trip computer, nav problems, CV joint, big brown cracks in leather seat (brown? Did he have an accident in his pants when he hit a bump in the road with only 3 shocks?), electric seat module.

How many wrecks has it been involved in? He admits to taking it to a non-MB dealer body shop for accident repairs. How many times has he had to do this? Seems to be quite knowledgeable about paint jobs.

He needs to stop whining. He knew the expected gas mileage when he bought the truck. If he wants better gas mileage, he should dump it and get a Prius.

[Wolfgang]

Frank500 - 8/29/2005 10:07 AM
His problem lies elsewhere - with the owner/driver.

Huh? That's what you said.

My point was simply that changing both diffs might not be worth it since it wont improve muchly on those 15 MPG.

[Wolfgang]

DelJ - 8/27/2005 8:34 AM

I would not believe the trip computer.

Here's a funny finding. When using the tripcomputer it apparently indicates less consumption when in kilometers than in miles. The difference is 1.05%. I haven't found a good explanation yet. Could it be related to different test cycles to determine fuel economy in the USA, based on the FTP75, and in Europe, based on the NEDC?

Here's the consumption shown both in MPG and Liters/100 km.