stock gear ratios in the 930?

[byndbad914]

Anybody out there have the stock ratios for the 930 transaxle? If it changes between the early short bell and late longer bell, I have the late model.

I think the R&P was 4.22:1, but maybe verify that too please.

Thanks
Tim

[byndbad914]

jeez, the 911 forum moves FAST, one day and already this question is page 4! Sorry for the bump, but I'm afraid it will get overlooked

[OSI930]

For transmissions 930/30, 930/32, 930/33 and 930/34, the ratios are as follows:
1st gear 2.25
2nd 1.3043
3rd 0.8929
4th 0.6563(0.625 for 930/34)
reverse 2.4375
final dr. 4.222

Hope this helps.

[byndbad914]

helps a ton!! thanks for the reply... thinking about using a Mendeola if they come out with the LSD next spring (as they claim) and want a good starting point for ratios as I am talking to them now about building one for my 914-v8. Have the 930 now and want to up the gears all around.

searched the net until my eyes bled and couldn't find it. thanks again.

[PatrickB]

Are you doing a conversion, or are you just upgrading the trans for your 914/8?
I've been thinking of doing one myself for quite sometime....

[byndbad914]

If I am going to use the Mendeola, I will sell all my 930 stuff and adapt the Mendeola into the 914-8 and make new mounting brackets, etc.

Their gear ratio choices suck (for a V8 racecar especially) and they don't have an LSD yet, so probably not going to happen. I need to really talk to Mike and see what options we can come up with. At minimum, running a 4.57 r/p with a 2.97 1st gear is completely useless unless I intend to go climb sand dunes. That is the highest r/p and first gear they list (yep, everything else is LOWER). Granted this is Mendeola's past focus, it makes sense it doesn't mate well with other forms of racing.

At SEMA, they implied they want to do a street version, etc but their current intentions of how they plan to do that are frankly stupid, so I am doubtful about the situation. Someone there needs to buy a P-car and try adapting the transaxle, then they would immediately realize all the mistakes they are going to make.

Firstly, they want to make it inverted, which ruins all the CV angles and puts the engine (any engine, type IV, flat 6, V8, whatever) REALLY low in the car. I know this for fact since I have the 930 inverted in mine. Considering I would be scared to go over a speed bump with the car, it is clearly not a street car option. I want to run the Mendeola partially to move the engine back up for those occassional "off-track escursions" I am bound to encounter. If I went off track right now at certain spots at Willow or Buttonwillow, I may not have an oilpan left, which is worrysome.

And any car with a transaxle tends to have the ouput flanges below crank centerline, so inverted always puts it above, to the tune of lifting the CVs at the trans end 2-3" minimum.

With my inverted 930 and SHALLOW v8 pan (it hugs the oil pump and I paid a chunk-o-change to have the shallowest pan for ground clearance I knew would be dear), to better correct the axle geom, I would have to drag the pan on the ground. So why the fro Mendeola wants to set their stuff up like that is beyond me.

So, I will probably ultimately end up spending the $8-10K to rebuild the 930, regear all four gears it for what I want, and invert it upright to lift the engine for ground clearance. I just like the idea of the sequential shifting and would pay the $13K (with LSD) to get it if I am going to have $10K in the 930 - the additional $3K would be worth the driveability to me.

[byndbad914]

oh yeah, and either the S boxes or the MDs are about 32" long, which puts the trans at the back bumper. I already have that with the 930 since it is the long bellhousing (late) version, by the time it is in 2nd or 4th gear, the shift rod out the back misses the inside of the bumper panel by about 1/8"! The overall length is, oddly enough, right at 32".

Either way, if I get rearended, someone is buying me a transaxle