Did you guys see this

[07JeepXK]

I also agree both would be nice. If they are only making one or the other it doesn't really matter to me. But 4.56's would be great for my next rig. Hey quick question cause I can't remember. Does the QD II front axle use the same part number for the ring and pinion as the QT II?

[NoMatter]

Yes they are the same #. The QDII has a different, larger front housing. I'd imagine someone superlifted or 33's plus would upgrade before anyone else so it would be a good sales decision to produce 4.56s first.

[T1RKaZz]

Also, don't make the same mistake most people make by comparing the worst OEM gear option to the next step. Think about it this way... whats the best OEM gear option available in your platform? (in this case, 3.73). So now pretend you're not "handicapped" already and have 3.73s.... what gear ratio would you like to have?

I've seen this with multiple truck platforms. There's no reason to handicap yourself just because your OEM options set you up with the weakest gears from the factory. Pretend you have the "best" gears from the factory and work up from there.

I do agree with you I'd rather run 32s with a 4.56 than 31s with a 3.07. 4.56 is the best option for all engines just because we are ifs and limited by our lift

Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk 2

[stites-xk]

4:56's would be nice for my soon to be 35's!

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[07JeepXK]

I'd pull the trigger on front gears the first day they are available!

[Cloud6221]

My vote goes to the 4.56s. I think you would see a nice improvement on both 32s and 33s. The 4.11 gears are okay if you want to return to a more normal performance, but it seems like a lot of work and money just to go back to stock performance. I'm basing this on a tire to gear ratio chart and not any real experience with re-gearing.

[Matt]

You would actually have less performance than stock since those charts dont account for added weight from larger tires or additional wind resistance from the lift. To get closer to stock performance you find the equivalent gear to stock then +1 ratio... hence 4.56s are a more rounded gear for the majority of the market.

[Matt]

Epiphany .... thought it is worth noting that 3.7L owners with the NAG1 might be better suited with 4.10s; i forgot the trans gearing was steeper already for 3.7L owners. I'll put together a quick table to see how the final drive ratios work out.

Edit: heres a spreadsheet with final drive ratios
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/24438380/Gears.xlsx

You can definitely see why the jump in performance from 3.07 to 3.73 for the V6 guys is well worth it! That's like the 4.7/5.7L guys getting 4.56s BTW

Based on this information, I still think the next gear option for our platform needs to be 4.56s since the majority of owners who will do this mod aren't concerned with a 200 RPM difference on the highway, and 3.7L owners have a good option already with the 3.73s.

Then, coming out with 4.10s would be a good gear for 3.7L guys to go a bit more extreme with their gears and the 4.7/5.7L guys to be a bit more conservative with theirs.

Also, don't make the same mistake most people make by comparing the worst OEM gear option to the next step. Think about it this way... whats the best OEM gear option available in your platform? (in this case, 3.73). So now pretend you're not "handicapped" already and have 3.73s.... what gear ratio would you like to have?

I need to take back what I said here.

What I said only holds true when you're dealing with the same trans gearing. It completely escaped me last night that the 3.7L owners who have 3.07 (or 3.55 option) gears stock have completely different trans gearing.

3.07 in the W5A580 actually has (practically) the same final drive gearing as 3.73 in the 545RFE.

So, you guys with 3.07's are not "handicapped".