I have read that the commodore auto has a lower first gear than the falcon. I have been told that the commodore bellhousing has the same bolt pattern as the falcon. I have read that the commodore first gear cannot be fitted to the falcon gearbox.

So, can the commodore gearbox be fitted to a falcon?

anything is possible but i think not at an economical price....adapter plate would be required as a bare minimum..

hey would u have some pics of your raised EB?

t5 conversion and diff gears? or just diff gears alone would give u more punch off the line and would be cheaper.
falcons gearing is better than a commodores (besides first). every commodore ive come up against my car starts realing them in once i click second

The guy that told me they have the same bellhousing bolt pattern was a wrecker . . . but he's been wrong before. I figured he might be right because i was under the impression commo's have a BTR auto as well, but i'm not even sure of this?

Gearing wise, i would most like a six speed auto, otherwise, practically speaking, an auto with a slightly lower first gear would be nice. I like a reasonable first gear, plus a top gear that lets you roll down the hills without too much impedence or fuel consumption. Changing the diff ratio doesn't improve the range of the gearbox.

My EB has only std wheels at present because until it's finished the big wheels will be on my XG. The lift so far is about 15mm, it's at the limit of being noticed/unnoticed. It will be a few more weeks before it's running, plus i'll also need to get some 30mm hub adapters before i can fit the bigger front wheels. I have tweaked-out the front of the front guards in anticipation of the bigger wheels, it also makes the front look meaner. Plus i have painted black the front light surrounds and the grill area, i'll run it without the grill and it will look neat, and meaner, and probably run cooler. The bonnett may also be black. A camera is in the wings too.

he's wrong again

Okay. I will be happy with the overall result of this enquiry as long as the idea isn't being discounted on the grounds of the box being tainted by being fitted to a crapbox car.

The box is alright...i would say in stock form not as strong as the BTR..

it has a big 1st to 2nd gap... but a slightly better cruising gear... 0.62 ours is .68

yea the s**t they are fitted to makes them look real s**t. Cant even take me off the line in my half a mil ks ed motor(mods: exhaust, EL injection thus far) although the EL efi makes a hefty difference off the line

Sorry went off track....

Seriously your better off fitting 4.11s and no dont jump to the conclution your revving to much... 2300 at 100kph is nothing.

I had an OVERALL improvement on fuel economy... i gained about 50km to a tank with having 4.11's I think due to low load on the motor accelerating so effortlessly. They HAMMER off the line with 4.11s by the way, you will need nice rubber, my EB spun and spun and spun.

Freeway economy probably suffered .5L per 100

They have the Turbo 700 Auto box...

Have you driven any auto commos?
Theyre s**t compared to a BTR - no bias - this is experience.

If i lived in a city then yes i agree a lower diff ration would probably bring better economy since you spend so much time accelerating from standstill and so little time above 70km/h.

I live in the country though where acceleration from standstill is mostly unimportant, and highway economy is important.

With my 29"O.D. rear tyres my 3.27 is equivalent to a 2.81! No wheelspin with this ratio and this much rubber on the road. It makes for good acceleration on wet dirt/clay roads. In time i might go for the 3.55 ratio, but maybe an AU IRS will happen first.