![]() |
|
|
|
drag racing the short bus
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Location, Location...
Posts: 21,983
|
901 vs 915 gearbox & a short stroke 3.2
Just wondering how either gearbox will hold up to a 3.2 short stroke (a 3.0 with 98mm pistons), putting out about 240 hp.
Any ideas?
__________________
The Terror of Tiny Town |
||
![]() |
|
No Expert
|
I'm currently running 240hp on a fresh 901. I've heard they are reliable up to 300 hp, except in first gear. Don't dump the clutch in first gear, or you might break it off. Also, you'll need a good clutch to hold the torque if you are running a 215mm flywheel. the stock clutch will not hold it or last very long. I would assume a 915 would be no problem, since it was built to support more torque than the 901.
Good luck, JP
__________________
-- Last Engine rebuild project, Now a coffee table. -- New engine rebuild project, Alive and well. -- '72 911 Martini RS, '69 911E Targa, a 2004 Cayenne S, and a Miata too... Looking for a Cayman S |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
The limiting factor in the gearboxes is the torque, not the HP. As the engines grew larger (torque is directly proportional to engine size), Porsche redesigned the gear boxes to deal with the increase in torque. This is why 930s got special gear boxes even though they put out about the same HP or less then RSRs -- because they made significantly more torque.
Initially I'd uses the gearbox that you have and take it easy in 1st gear. If it wears out too quick for your taste, you can just replace the box with a later style box at that time.
__________________
John '69 911E "It's a poor craftsman who blames their tools" -- Unknown "Any suspension -- no matter how poorly designed -- can be made to work reasonably well if you just stop it from moving." -- Colin Chapman Last edited by jluetjen; 04-09-2004 at 04:52 AM.. |
||
![]() |
|
Moderator
|
Here are the specs, The original 901 had a max input torque of 19mkg(138 lb-ft), this was increased on the B series in '69, due to a new die cast Al. case, to 20.5 mkg(148.5 lb-ft).
I wouldn't do it. There was a recent post on Rennlist from a fellow that regretted the decision to use a 901.
__________________
Bill Verburg '76 Carrera 3.6RS(nee C3/hotrod), '95 993RS/CS(clone) | Pelican Home |Rennlist Wheels |Rennlist Brakes | |
||
![]() |
|
Navin Johnson
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wantagh, NY
Posts: 8,804
|
My 914 has a 3.2 probably putting out 250HP, wont know the torque till I get it on a dyno
The 901 has a short gearstack So far the gearbox seems to be holding up well, no sparkly surprises when I check the gear oil. First is used to to get the car in motion, no dumping the clutch or things like that I do however have a spare gearbox ready to install if the box in the car grenades
__________________
Don't feed the trolls. Don't quote the trolls ![]() http://www.southshoreperformanceny.com '69 911 GT-5 '75 914 GT-3 and others |
||
![]() |
|
Stay away from my Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Agoura, CA
Posts: 5,773
|
There are a number of extremely powerful race cars running 901's. Otto has one - a 3.8RSR monster 914-6; something over 360hp in an 1800lb car. The trans has survived multiple seasons of track duty. So, it can be done.
But a street car sees a whole lot more 1st gear launches, and overall miles. The general concensus seems to be the 915 trans for high-torque longevity. I'm with the recommendation to "try it" and then decide. 901 trannies are relatively cheap so if you blow it up, you would always have the option of swapping in another one, and you would still be well ahead of the conversion cost to a 915 or later unit.
__________________
Chris C. 1973 914 "R" (914-6) | track toy 2009 911 Turbo 6-speed (997.1TT) | street weapon 2021 Tesla Model 3 Performance | daily driver 2001 F150 Supercrew 4x4 | hauler |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
drag racing the short bus
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Location, Location...
Posts: 21,983
|
Thanks guys for your help.
![]()
__________________
The Terror of Tiny Town |
||
![]() |
|