Question for anyone who's driven a 4 speed 930
 

'Coz I never have :D


How is the factory 4-speed 1st for moving off the line/around in traffic?

Does it need a little finesse/slipping - or basically fine?

Does it seem too tall once clutch is home and rolling at low speeds - eg transmission snatch, have to feather the clutch etc?

Spoogie, first is just about perfect for moving from a stop, normal around town driving, etc (not too tall, not too short, and doesn't require any special technique to use it).

For me, second could be a little taller for city driving, as it is too short to stay in that gear unless you like high RPM puttering around, and shifting into third lugs too much for that type driving.

The 4 speed is a great tranny, I like it more than the 5 speed. The ‘89 is not premium in my book, even though it is to the mkt. The clutch isn’t nearly as hard to work, and the H pattern is easier to use as well, besides the obvious that there’s less shifting involved. That’s just my two cents.

On a separate note, I’m shocked that Rawk addressed a post with Spoogie and nothing dirty followed it! :eek:

4 speed works great. 1st gear is fine for take off. Only time I ever felt it was lacking was when I was playing with timing curve and had too little advance in the lower RPM range. Otherwise, car basically drives off as soon as pedal is released.

I do often think I still want to adjust ratios for 2,3,4 to bring them closer together. I don't need to go 185mph with stock ratios but would like even more slingshot to outerspace acceleration with shorter ratios...!!

Minivans beat me across the intersection when the light turns green. Though I think that's more a result of the stock turbo lag, as opposed to the tallness of the gearing or the clutch. Besides, in a proper race car, isn't 1st supposed to be geared towards the slowest corner on the track, as opposed to getting away from a stop?

I disliked the stock 4 speed. You could go from 10-85mph in 2nd gear. I remember doing 125 down the straight at Laguna in 3rd, forget using 4th. This was in my mostly stock '78 930.
When Wevo did the trans in the DP we decided to go to a Andial 8:39 instead of custom 2/3/4. I find it a much better set up than stock, and cheaper than custom gearing.

I guess it’s nothing out of the norm for you, talking trannys and spoogies at the same time. Just don’t spoogy in your tranny! :eek: (S)he might get pissed off.

Thanks for the input guys!

Yeh, kicking around regearing the G50/01, as an N/A G50 on a 930 is basically a 3 speed box with a 1st/5th that're both too short to be ideal, and I've been tempted by a taller 1st gearset..

My goal is to actually be able to just use 1-2-3-4 like a regular car (oh! what a concept!), with 5th as an long-legged gear. (Had a 38:29 5th in my 915, and it was great to cruise 2600 RPM @ 70 or 2800 @ 80. Even with CIS, it'd still out-accelerate most things by just flooring it in 5th,...)

But 1st is too short on either a 915 or a N/A g50 to be useful (41-42 MSIG @ 7K - who the heck would do that?) - and the G50/50 1st not very different, at 47 MSIG...

A tall (2.6) 1st - identical to a 930 4-speed 1st ratio, allowing for the C&P, hence the question - gives 57 MSIG, on the gear calculator I was doing comparisons against (w/ 7K redline, 24.5" tires).

Plugging those ratios and my old CIS dyno #'s into a shift point calculator gives:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1567395262.jpg

1-2 possibly a smidge close; but I think that would work.

I remember turbo lag; wasn't a big fan. Must be agonizing in a stock car that makes less off-boost than an SC due to soft cams, conservative ignition timing and compression...

Boost per gear? Can make 1st more tame then have the psi really wind in for second and third etc

MBC works like that too but you get taper after max.torque if you dont use a pressureregulator with it.

1st being too short is one of my biggest complaints in the G50/50. I’ve got that tranny in one of my 930s, and when combined with higher horsepower and a quicker spool turbo, that gear is nearly worthless. As soon as the turbo is kicking in you are topping out the gear if you’re not spot on with your gear shift right away. It’s not ideal by any means.

As you can gather from the comments, perception of the 4sdp depends on engine modifications.
The stock engine is horribly mis-matched with the stock 4spd. It grows into the too-few long gears at about 325whp. Below that HP/torque level the 915 or Carrera G50 has gearing that better matches the power. Bottom line is don't go changing anything on your tranny until you have settled on power mods.

Exactly; same thing but even more extreme with an N/A 1st of course - but a G50/50 1st didn't look to me like it went far enough to address the issue/make the gear actually useful either, so thanks for confirming.

There seems to be a pattern here - WTF was the factory thinking with the 996TT 1st ratio? 3.82? I cannot figure that out - it just does not make any sense to me in any scenario I can imagine.

My G50/50 is in a modified DP 935 which magnifies the problem for me. I'd bet that with a stock motor it wouldn't feel nearly as short as it does in my car. With mine I have to shift into 2nd almost instantly, I don't really like it like that. If you're not aware of this you'll definitely top out the gear when driving it. The rest of my 930s are all 4 speeds, and I much prefer them. The longer gears allow one to enjoy being on boost longer before needing to shift gears, to me that is more enjoyable. I think many people prefer more gear shifting, but not me, the 4 speed is the sweet spot.

I’m with Jim on the 4 speed. If I could have afforded a short 930 4 speed for the bus, I would have gone that way.

Exactly. With cams and a quick-spooling turbo, you get off the line with the smallest amount of throttle and short-shift ridiculously soon, taking an RPM drop in order to get into 2nd sooner so you can get on with it.

More than once, I have pulled away in 2nd from standing still. Which isn't ideal either, but eliminates that shift.

Seems to me that a taller 1st would be much more flexible/suited to a tuned 930; could actually use power in it. Hold onto it long enough to minimize rpm drop for the 1-2 shift. Or even hold it long enough to avoid a shift to 2nd at all.

ironically for me just driving 1st is fine. its funny, if I start off ion 2nd in my 330ci its a struggle which seems to that "Should" be like starting off in 1st in the 930.

with lots of turbo lag I think the 4spd is horrible, especially on the street if you really want to enjoy driving it unless you want to down shift to 1st for turns.

I have only had mine on the track once and for me, needing the right gear was just not there with all the turbo lag.

A stock 4 speed is definitely laggy, whereas the stock 5 speed helps keep it on boost better. Even mildly modified however, and some of that lag is gone. And when heavily modified, the 1st gear on the 5 speed becomes an annoyance, the gear is just too short.

If you want a stock 930, the 5 speed is the better tranny for staying on boost. If you want to modify for more hp, however, I prefer mating it to a 4 speed. Less rowing equals more going.

My stock ratio 4 speed works fine in city driving even in 3rd or 4th. My 964 cams are max.advanced and I have 20deg of spark timing from 1100 and 30 from 1300 rpms so I can run really low revs on 4th if I wanted and it is not lagging. boost starts to build up at 2000 on 3rd so over 2000rpms is sweetspot on twisties but I usually end up driving in 4th and around 1600 rpms because it runs so nice.

IMO, the G50/50 has the perfect 1st gear (3.15:1 IIRC).

Low enough for quick launches but enough rollout to load the turbo nicely.

My G50/01 is way too low in 1st (3.50:1). Virtually useless.

Ditto

how about lower 2 and 3 a bit and forget 1st?
a dogleg 4 speed..

I did say with lots of lag its a dog...

even with a short 1st if you had a closer 2-5 (or even 2-4 for that matter) I think the stock 930 would be more fun. when I had my 930 on the track I could have used 1st for one of the turns but I really did not want to down shift to 1st for it, just did not want to tear it up even though mine does go into 1st nicely.

we don't have the autobahn over here so 100+ for long periods on public roads really isn't an option. yes I have hit 160 but scared to death of going to jail.
my opinion a 4spd geared for maybe 140-150 tops would be more fun especially with the stock turbo.
just my opinion.

I am working on reducing my turbo lag so I have not driven one that the boost does not come in below 3500. (mine had a 7006).

^I love this

My 930 was decently modded and I learned to really appreciate the 4 speed. 2nd gear was perfect for many of the tighter twisty bits of road I like to run. On the track (where I spent most of the time in the car during the latter part of my ownership), mostly was 2nd and 3rd gear. Only real issue was a hairpin turn on my home track that was just a bit too slow to get out of the hole in 2nd...I started downshifting to 1st for this corner, but it wasn't easy to do.

Only in Rowing, does more rowing equal more going. 😏

I used to think that, and was keeping my eyes open for one.

But reading what Jim says - and seeing max speed in 1st between G50/0x and G50/50 is only a few MPH (depending on shift point, naturally) - starting to think not tall enough to be flexible/useful.

The factory used 3.154 for 1st gear in 2 N/A cars (both the Swiss 964 with the G50/04, and the 964 RS with the G50/10). So not all that tall...

Hence asking how folks got on with the 4-speed 1st - quite a bit taller at 2.6..

I disagree that the 3.154 is too short. Even the modern GT2 RS, which is also a 3.44 final drive uses the same 3.167 as a 997 Cup Car. All the 1000hp 996Tt builds we do retrofit the 3.167 and 1.89 2nd of the RS.

IMO most are focusing on the wrong gear. 1st just gets you going regardless. 2nd gear is the one you use most. Having that ratio provide a usable range of speed top to bottom is key. It’s a tick too tall in a stock 930 4spd and a tick too short in an NA G50. I like 1.938 personally for cars in the 400-600 hp range. More power? Go up to a 1.895 or 1.842.

I don't make a 1,000 hp but I have a 1.25 second gear. So at 60 mph you can pull shift knob back into 2nd and be at 4,000 rpm and pull to redline. Perfect for the street as most speeds are 55mph,

Question for anyone who's driven a 4 speed 930
 

I guess its just me but the fact you only have a 4 speed and that’s the way it was intended.. I like that.

You could get a 5 speed in any 911. The 930 is a 4 speed.

As things get older it’s the odd or irrational attributes about them that make them cool and unique.

I really feel the fact that porsche installed a 4 speed vs a 5 speed makes driving a 930 that much more special experience over driving a 911.

Porsche put a 4spd in the 930 because it was what they could fit. They were a small company without deep pockets. They had started racing turbo rsrs with 915s and couldn’t get them to last a 24 hour race. They needed wider gears, and in order to fit the gearbox in the same space within the existing chassis it could only have 4 of them. It was a practical decision, not a performance driven one. The 917, 908, 910, and everything else was 5spd. The 930 was a compromise based on nothing more than the chassis.

Interesting true comment.

All true but doesn't belie the comment about it being the odd, unique, or irrational things that make a car unique or interested.

At the end of the day its all personal preference. Enough personal preference leaning one way or the other makes the market swing one way or another.

Its your car, do what you want with it :)

Your closing comment is more relevant imo. 93079isthebestyearever has made many comments in the past about how the cars are perfect as delivered and nobody could ever improve upon what the factory did with them 40 years ago. It’s your car. Leave it stock or modify it as you wish. The other part is rubbish

:rolleyes:

My friend had a 965. The 1st was so much more useful than my NA 87 Carrera 3.2 G50/01. The rollout made 1st so fun. Mine just hits the rev limiter in no time, then off to 2nd. I have too much torque to benefit from the low 1st gear - hence my belief the G50/50 is the PERFECT gearbox for most turbo 911's IMO.

The more torque you make, the less gearing you need. Small displacement 4 cylinder cars use 4:1+ 1st gears with 4:1+ rear diff ratios (at least back in the day).

Top fuel dragsters run direct to 36" tall tires.

All relative I suppose..

To add a little fuel to this conversation.. I have a 77 short bellhousing 930 5 spd trans in a 77 930 that does not have a RUF nose cone, and the car has Andial fingerprints on the vintage build.
A 5 speed was built by Ruf early 80s and possibly by Andial even before that . The 4spd was in the 930 chassis for homologation purposes for the 930 project to comply for the production requirements as most reading this know.
I wonder if they got away with a 5spd in any 934 as the Andial partners has long had an affiliation going back then and may predate the RUF 5spd? Just wondering / musing.
First is a dogleg against a spring with reverse in the same place with a gear ratio that gets around 50MPH, the second gear is the old first gear place, with a ratio of around 85MPH, 3rd 120 MPH, 4th around 155 all @ 6800 redline and 5th seems to be close to the stock 4th ratio.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1567791203.jpg
Also a 4spd with a 8:41 R&P is an improvement for our roads with a top speed of around 145 MPH. Sort of like a G50 without the 5th gear. Or just use the stock R&P and regear 3rd and fourth so it gets to around 120 in 3rd and 145 or so in fourth. A g50 is so much work and expense as the alternative and a converted 4spd to a 5spd by RUF is also very costly and rare.

Question for anyone who's driven a 4 speed 930
 

Has nothing to do with “improving” although I would like to call into question the quality and soundness of these “mods”...

It has everything to do with maintaining a historically significant porsche that is historically correct as possible.

I have recently spent the past month studying the 4 piston calipers and have learned that the casting changed from early to late model 930s as did the manufacturers..

I’m saying that I am trying to be the best historical steward I can be..

You are trying to be a modifier and that is a slippery slope.. really easy to end up with a project that is all wrong .

^^^A historical steward? It sounds like you run a museum with rare antiquities, as opposed to owning a Porsche 930, which aren’t rare, nor really old enough to be talking in historical terms. You definitely take this ownership experience way beyond the norm.

Fewer than 500 RoW 79 930 remain worldwide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I keep forgetting this is 1979 MY specific with you, even though nobody else cares much about that at all.