![]() |
|
|
|
Porsche Junky
|
Thinking out of the box......
The difference between my 3.6 and 3.0 is remarkable, but they both have a pleasing personality...kinda like riding a stallion v. riding a well mannered but nimble horse......
What I'd like to hear is if anyone has ever taken the 930 4 speed tranny and put it in a 3.0 N/A......I think that looooonnnggg first gear would be beneficial...... TIA....
__________________
1986 930 RUF equipped |
||
![]() |
|
Porsche Junky
|
I suppose I could just start out in 2nd.........
![]()
__________________
1986 930 RUF equipped |
||
![]() |
|
Recreational User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: A Mile High
Posts: 4,159
|
Isn't 1st gear pretty tall in a 930? I would think the 3.0 would benefit much more from shorter gearing, not taller. I don't know much about the 930 though.
|
||
![]() |
|
Porsche Junky
|
I'm not happy with the 'short' duration of 1st gear.....I'd like to really spool this thing up to speed before shifting, as is the philosophy behind the 930....
__________________
1986 930 RUF equipped |
||
![]() |
|
Recreational User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: A Mile High
Posts: 4,159
|
With taller gearing you can shift later, but acceleration suffers. The car will be more sluggish. The turbo's boost allowed that car to take advantage of the taller gearing (lag notwithstanding), but the 3.0 NA doesn't have that.
OTOH, you could possibly use the 930 with a 7:31 RnP instead of the 8:31 you have in there now. Someone else would have to chime in and verify if that's feasible. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 758
|
I knew a guy with an SC who's first gear was out and he started out in second for years until he sold the car, with no obvious ill effects. He actually said he liked it better anyway. You are right 1st basically just gets you rolling and it's time for 2nd. Are there any serious downsides to starting out in second, presuming that you are not on an uphill grade?
|
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Back in the saddle again
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Central TX west of Houston
Posts: 56,190
|
Quote:
__________________
Steve '08 Boxster RS60 Spyder #0099/1960 - never named a car before, but this is Charlotte. '88 targa ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Back in the saddle again
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Central TX west of Houston
Posts: 56,190
|
Quote:
If it was in a 2000# car it'd probably be fine, but if it was a 2600# SC it would probably not be ideal. More weight would also mean more stress on the engine like when an engine is lugged.
__________________
Steve '08 Boxster RS60 Spyder #0099/1960 - never named a car before, but this is Charlotte. '88 targa ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Porsche Junky
|
Quote:
I'm really surprised no one has attemted this in the past.....
__________________
1986 930 RUF equipped |
||
![]() |
|