The paper math, by which I mean gear charts, are not accurate. They, and you, are making an assumption for your "good argument" about rolling radius that is not accurate and is disproved by observed results with calibrated equipment. If you are going to make a case on a false basis, at least caveat that for your poor user. The inaccuracy of gearing charts is common knowledge everywhere but here.
Observed results with calibrated equipment huh? Like a tach that only has marks ever 500rpm? And where was your observed result with 4.88's at 75? Oh, ya', you've never run 4.88's with your tires, so you can't have observed results on the rpm, so the values must have just magically appeared.
BTW, I'm not using a chart, I'm using real calculations. Perhaps you're used to your Cherokee friends who need to have stuff explained to them like 315's aren't necesarily 35", but guess that's kinda common knowledge with most people (though I did restate it in one of my posts for clarity that it has an effect), and of course you're going to have to take into account actual tire size and not just what's printed on the side.
In any case, let's take a peek through the looking glass from the other side.
If we can agree that people might have a reason to drive under 70 mph (many of us do for very valid reasons that have been mocked on this thread, even by some supposedly extremely safety conscious people), and we can agree that often the reasons for driving under 70 mph correlate to an increased need for lower gearing (aggressive offroad tires, very heavy weight, etc.), then is it wrong to suggest that 5.29's might be a better ratio than 4.88's for those users?.
Nope, it's not wrong to suggest that 5.29's might be better for some people. I've not said they don't have there place. And that's pretty much what I said you should have said - though adding in that your 35's measure closer to a real 35" than most 315's, since that .5-1" will have an effect on 'actual observed results'
If it is wrong (a bad argument) to make that suggestion, especially when the title of the thread is "Don't try to stop me", please explain why.
Wrong and bad argument are two different things. You can be right and still have an arguement that is not well supported. If you'd started out with a statement of - for me, in these conditions, for these reasons - would have been fine.
But you didn't. You started out with 'You should go 5.29's
' 'They are the new black' and '4.88's are so 2005.'- ya' that's solid reasoning. Then you incorrectly say 4.88's get you back to stock - corrected by 2 people. Then a bunch of #'s on RPM and speed on 4.88's vs. 5.29's, which can't be substatiated by 'observed results' , since you've never run 4.88's, and you say 'paper math is always wrong', so we know it doesn't come from math. And if you do the math, you're a bit off. Oh, and Romer's hiding his Supercharger (by putting it in his sig line), so his input is not valid.
It's a bad argument cause you're #'s are wrong (4.56 not 4.88) or unsubstatiated (rpm w/ 4.88's), and you have more flippant remarks than facts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A good summary that will be hard for anyone to argue with
If going to 315's or 35's:
4.56 gears will get your cruising rpm back to roughly stock
4.88 gears will rev a little more than stock at hwy speed, but will give a little more pull to help with the extra weight of the tires and the other associated accessories that usually go with going ot 35's. They're still acceptable though for running 75-80mph down the interstate.
5.29 gears will rev up a bit more than 4.88's and a fair ammount more than stock, but will give you better acceleration and better crawling control. Worth considering if you're a slow lane driver, tow with your truck often, or live and drive at high altitude alot.
