901 Shifting: Do you go through all the gears?
 

I have heard that it is best for the 901 to go up and down through all the gears. Is this correct? Say I am running in fourth and come to a light, should I go into third and second before letting the clutch out in neutral?

I'm not sure about that. But 901 guru Otto (of Otto's Venice) taught me to get into first from neutral by first shifting into third, then over to first.

Downshift only when you want more engine torque or to keep the engine at it's most efficient speed. Use the brakes to slow down.

Thus when slowing down while in fourth gear, use your brakes. If it's a gradual stop, I'd shift to neutral, then coast and apply the brakes when necessary.

Doing this will also have the cumulative effect of reducing wear in your gearbox and clutch.

Sherwood

I'll have to try that. I always shift into second before attempting 1st. Even then I have to be at a crawl or it'll let me know with a nice sharp grind.

Edit: Is that third to first for a 5 speed 901 or a 4 speed? I have a 4 speed.

I don't downshift until just before I need a gear. So if I'm deccelerating from 5th to a 2nd gear corner, I'll do most of my braking in 5th gear, and then just down shift prior to picking up the throttle. This is as opposed to downshifting throughout the entire braking zone. I find it much easier to be smooth since I'm not periodically trying to match rev's with the drive train.

That being said, when I do downshift, whether I step through the gears or jump (like from 5th to second) depends on the corner and how busy I am. If I'm unsure I'll try the corner using different strategies and see what works best.

Their no "religious" answer that will fit all situations

We were talking about our 5 speeds. But it may be applicable for 4 speeds. Going from third to first stopped my grinding.

Re: 901 Shifting: Do you go through all the gears?
 

That's silly.

Re: Re: 901 Shifting: Do you go through all the gears?
 

Its not silly if he wants to practice heel/toe.. its the only way to learn... nobody can afford enough track time to learn how to do it really well.. I heel toe downshift everywhere just so I can do it at a moments notice.. Its not very tough on the trans if you match revs perfectly.. in fact; I'd be inclined to say it causes 0 wear.

Besides.. A) It sounds cool and B) it pisses people off

EarlyPorsche didn't mention anything about heel and toe, just downshifting before coming to a stop. Yes, it does save the gearbox synchros, but the extra revs consume gas.

A better way to practice h&t is to do it going around corners at normal traffic speeds or when doing the accordian shuffle on the freeway. You know, slowing down for traffic just before accelerating. Another good time to h&t is just before going into a 10/10ths drift a block away from home.

Sherwood

engine braking is the way they teach it in Europe...and we don't generally have automatics here, 99% of us know how to shift from the getgo...

Engine braking is very acceptable, it allows for many things that you just can't do otherwise , and is generally considered to be safer because it offers an extra method to slow down, and is a gradual way to get your gears right from 5 to 1 ( or 4 to 1 on a 901) so you don't accidentally misread wheel speed and get the wrong gear by going one to low and then overrevving the engine...

and for the record, i do whip my cars hard, and have never ever had a clutch go on any of my cars... so don't tell me that it will kill clutches in doing so...

gas beeing wasted, well if your throttle valve is closed, i assure you that you won't waste much fuel either... on most efi cars you won't waste any at all

newbies practicing heel and toe on a 911 in public traffic is a liability imho... while you are figureing out how to put your foot right, somebody might do something in front of you requiring a full stop, which won't work if you jam your foot inbetween brake pedal and accelerator... explain that one to your insurance if you please

:confused: :D

excuse the typo, i'm not native english and i sometimes get these things dislexicly wrong based on a phonetical similarity...

obviously i mean braking.

Racing is one thing, street driving is another. It's cheaper to replace brake pads than transmission parts.

driving schools in Europe teach you to engine brake
because for one thing it is safer, and for another thing it's easier and for another thing no street driver has to heel&toe or revmatch anyway , since that's why we have synchro's in the first place

like my clutches, i've never ever had a tranny fail either...
trannies should not fail from engine braking ,they are designed to take torque , that's what trannies do

if you properly break on the engine , with good timed and smooth declutch, there is no terrible wear & tear ...

or else us Europeans would all burn our clutches and trannies like nothing else.. and we don't...


keep in mind that our roads are a lot narrower , smaller, twistier and we tend to drive faster too...with shifters instead of automatic supersized cars...

I too have never experienced a failure through engine braking, but I do not use it in a situation where I might be approaching the limits of traction. Think of how you do a handbrake turn. Adding the retarding force of the drivetrain can give you a good view of where you've been, if you had little or no margin left.

If someone tried to sell you a car with a braking system which worked only on two wheels, you'd probably write him off as a nutcase.

That said, when slowing for a corner, I will match speeds with the 5-speed 901 and love every minute of it, but the brakes are doing 90% of the work.

When I am stopped, if the old syncro on 1st is not feeling up to the task, I will use the 3rd-then-1st method.

Les

well yeah , you don't rely 100% on your engine for braking,
not 50% either, realistically , depending on the situation , you would barely brake on the engine at all, but you simply spool up your engine a bit trough well timed clutch release

if for instance you'de do to rough it in the wet , you'de be looking for a world of trouble...

if done well , it's a smooth operation for all components involved
and smooth driving means optimal for cornering and speed

All this logic and thoughtfulness bores me. I heel-toe downshift (carefully matching revs) all the time in my '71 911 with a 901 5 speed because it is sooooo much fun and the engine (even in stock form) sounds incredible!

Do you need to do it? No, Porsche brakes are incredible. Do you want to do it? Then do so.

My father is a professional photographer and has been shooting cars for over 45 years. I went with him years ago to shoot a Ferrari F355 (incredible car, by the way). The writer of the feature was telling me that he had just come from testing the then-new 993 Twin Turbo at Mosport, with Hurley Haywood in the passenger seat as he went around the track.

After a few laps Hurley Haywood looked over and said, "You know, you don't need to keep downshifting - the brakes are more than up to the task." The writer replied, "You clearly don't get why I'm downshifting." :p

John

Absolutely correct. You guys who don't downshift to use brake pads instead of clutches are weinies! :p

I ALWAYS heel/toe downshift and always have. My '73 clutch went over 100k. So, I'm doing something right (or at least, not wrong).

Yeah, sure it's not necessary to be in the right gear, ready to get on full torque at all times. But, then again 80%+ of the performance features of our 911s are not necessary 100% of the time for non-racing driving either! Heck, get a Honda Civic if you want to drive without the joy of downshifting to wear brakes instead of clutches.

Or clutch parts!

I am with you, John ;)

Why use the clutch, or stirr around in the gearbox, unnecessarily?

It's street-driving, not the track.

Sequential shifting, especially with double-clutching, is a macho-thing IMHO. :rolleyes:

Ok, so to my point, then why drive a Porsche on the street? Why drive a stick on the street at all? Why have stiff, performance oriented suspension? Why have brakes that won't fade from high heat cycles? Why have sticky noisy tires that wear out faster and don't provide the better street ride? Why have a car that exchanges gas mileage for acceleration at rates that are not remotely useful on the street?

Instead, why not have a car that is optimally designed for street driving, that is, a Honda Civic? For street driving, a Civic really is the better car. Heck, even the new Porsche Turbo is faster with the automatic than the manual. Give up on them all together.