California trucks will be cheap at that point. You rust belt guys ought to go out there and rescue them.
we will.
running the 410 gears is a bummer for me unladen. i really would prefer a 32 - 33 in tire and second od behind my 4l80 for street running at legalish freeway speeds at 18-2100 rpm and hopefully decent economy. cause the 410 gear my 60's came with is good middle ground for my off road tire use, and double od would allow me to do that. the costs of regearing to a 350 ratio stock type gearset verse running the military take offs left me rolling on wobbly lumpy takeoffs. the 37's are great above 65 mph but suck at 60 or less. i am about ready for a 3rd set and so far just been living with them feeling like bias plies that never warm up at lower speeds. they are scary on pavement in the snow and suck in the wet, but i can cruise 75-80 no problem now...of course mpg sux compared to 50 mph with a 33 in tire. with beads in them they do work acceptably, just not the same as a nice 33 in cooper or something similar though.
i assume parts for your particular unit are readily available, or you would not be allowing the downtime and cost investment to happen? i ran into a similar unit that was behind a 208 in a 85 or 86 truck....i was a bit excited as i have a 208 in the ranger and it would have been a cake deal to install, till i turned it and then pulled it apart...i stashed it in the yard and tried calling around to get parts but they said all i could do was send it in due to its particular vintage, and likely 15-1800 to rebuild it if they could. so i let that idea go.
pretty much thinking i will go to a taller gear, was hoping 3.23ish but 3.50 ish seems the limit on a hp d60, figure those gears and a double underdrive for off road and the bigger tires. i dont have the real estate in a ranger for a over under type brownie thing with a 4l80 that the big trucks have, but i like to trail ride so my footprint is about as big as i can allow as it is. i imagine you only goal is to split gears to get rolling and haul ass when dead heading and not maximum economy. killer setup regardless, and sorry to hear about the fleet woes and impending laws...though i would simply register the fleet in texas or south dakota or something personally..
and the need to even think about this doom of the 450 is bringing out my soapbox...
climbs on soap box...
better idea is to get rid of the assclowns making these rules. there are not that many people, even in cali that are that stupid about the reality of the emissions situation given the information available..... those truck killing clowns are heavily outnumbered, and just a matter of time before the tyranny is recognized. you would think the lobby power of the big three could stop stupidity but apparently that is not the case...since we can measure so small you can make **** look like a huge problem when its not with issues of this type..its enough to scare off any fight it would seem so far... i admit there is a big jump from 02 technology compared to current, but the reality of the results are not worth the cost in my eyes. the complexities and fail rates happening today are shameful...i am confidant there will be huge improvments in the next 2-5 years, but at what costs?? i am sure you guys keep these idi trucks around as toys because you prefer your 60-70 thousand dollar new cclb trucks as your daily drivers?
surely...most people will understand that there loved one died because the ambulance/fire-rescue vehicles shut down/depowered all in the name of some tiny fawking measurement..... right?
i say this with direct reference to the situations i have seen from florida to michigan to pa the past year....more then a few times an ambulance broke down on the side of the road or at a gas station stranded....new builds...some with 200k price tags some with less then 3k miles on em. dead or would hardly move. down in bradington just talked with a firefighter that claimed of four new vehicles 3 had cost them over 10 grand in related failures of emission components and left them stranded as well a few times. i would not have thought a ambulance or any rescue vehicle would have the new crap applied to them. issue at hand was the modified chassis...how the hell does that fly? most places can not afford those risks in equipment failures and costs from what i understand about the debt clock...
seems to me those on the political ends of these ridiculous demands should be finding themselves subject to a jury of their peers and potentially on the end of ropes or in the brig.
because....you cant fix stupid. and stupid is not a good place for lawmaking to be any where near in such a competitive world.
worst case......someday in the next few years i will be running a minty cc 350....hopefully 79 ish with a 12 valve....at a pricepoint i can easily afford for a summertime dd...
kicks soap box to corner......
carry on with manly excessive od use talk fellas
110 across open space az aint nothing to me....
), but thought I should point something out. Unfortunately, as it stands, the CARB effectively has no oversight whatsoever...the members are appointed by the governor, and IIRC the appointments are permanent and there's really no mechanism in place to remove a member. As I recall, these elements were deliberate, with the idea that the members wouldn't be influenced by politics and would stick strictly to the science of the matter...unfortunately, the powers that be didn't consider the idea that people appointed to the board would have an agenda of their own or such. Ironically, we actually have Ronald Reagan to thank for this; he's the one who signed the CARB into existence when he was governor 
