What's the goal you have in mind?

I was excited about the idea when I did it in a 904 put together for my '65. That was a rod-shift transmission, and if I recall correctly (maybe not!) that was because the wide-ratio gearset couldn't be swapped into a cable-shift transmission such as you're asking about. The "upgrade" (note the sneer quotes) required a different driveshaft, different steering column, shift linkage, and other adaptations.

After all the work and expense, I wound up disappointed in the results. I tried to like it for a couple of years—I really tried—but the idea I'd had, to use the wide ratios for extra acceleration and performance with 3.23 rear gears, did not work out. Second gear was too low, first was much too low, and the gaps between 1—2, 2—3, 3—2, and 3—1 were too wide. It was a very annoying transmission to drive, made more so by the extra-noisy first gear whine inherent to the wide-ratio gear set. Eventually I wound up much happier after swapping in a stock '66 transmission.

These wide-ratio gears can work strategically in certain race car setups, I'm told. And they were the only thing that made the heavy, weak-engined '80s cars with ridiculously tall rear axle ratios like 2.45 or 2.26 (barely) safe to drive in traffic.

If you figure out a way to put the wide-ratio gears in your cable-shift trans, do not fail to also install the matching governor weights, inner and outer. If you leave the standard governor installed, the transmission will be even more annoying: no matter how you adjust the shift linkage or the bands, it will not shift correctly; you'll find you can adjust the linkage to get acceptable upshifts or acceptable downshifts, but not both, and if you're really pouring on the coal to get up to speed, it'll stay in second, engine screaming, until you back off the accelerator.

What's the goal you have in mind?

I was excited about the idea when I did it in a 904 put together for my '65. That was a rod-shift transmission, and if I recall correctly (maybe not!) that was because the wide-ratio gearset couldn't be swapped into a cable-shift transmission such as you're asking about. The "upgrade" (note the sneer quotes) required a different driveshaft, different steering column, shift linkage, and other adaptations.

After all the work and expense, I wound up disappointed in the results. I tried to like it for a couple of years—I really tried—but the idea I'd had, to use the wide ratios for extra acceleration and performance with 3.23 rear gears, did not work out. Second gear was too low, first was much too low, and the gaps between 1—2, 2—3, 3—2, and 3—1 were too wide. It was a very annoying transmission to drive, made more so by the extra-noisy first gear whine inherent to the wide-ratio gear set. Eventually I wound up much happier after swapping in a stock '66 transmission.

These wide-ratio gears can work strategically in certain race car setups, I'm told. And they were the only thing that made the heavy, weak-engined '80s cars with ridiculously tall rear axle ratios like 2.45 or 2.26 (barely) safe to drive in traffic.

If you figure out a way to put the wide-ratio gears in your cable-shift trans, do not fail to also install the matching governor weights, inner and outer. If you leave the standard governor installed, the transmission will be even more annoying: no matter how you adjust the shift linkage or the bands, it will not shift correctly; you'll find you can adjust the linkage to get acceptable upshifts or acceptable downshifts, but not both, and if you're really pouring on the coal to get up to speed, it'll stay in second, engine screaming, until you back off the accelerator.

Sounded like to me the 3.23 ratio was the main issue in your situation

Sorry guys, but the later low gear set cannot be installed into a PB trans, without major mods. I have tried it. The splines on the planetary, are different then the splines on the early output shaft. You would have to change to the later output shaft, that means swaping to the late tailhousing, which doesn't work, as the early tailhousing contains the rear pump and park mechanism.

In that regard of wide ratios, what would happen if I put an A833OD in my own car, with a lower geared rear end like a 3.55 or 3.73? (The current 2.76 would be way too high with an OD trans, and the other two ratios would be like a 2.6 and 2.72 in top gear)

Off topic subject, needs to move to it's own thread....