Quote:
Originally Posted by masraum
I have driven a 915 that was rebuilt and shifted EXTREMELY well, but the 915 transmissions in most of the 911s that I test drove were in horrible shape needing a rebuild.
Porsche replaced the 915 with the G50 because the 915 wasn't as robust as they wanted behind the more powerful 3.2L engine.
The 915 is a weaker transmission than the G50.
|
Yes, the 915 is certainly a weaker box. Which was the reason the 930 box existed in the early 70's; the 915 couldn't be made to last for a 24 hour race with a 600+HP turbo RSR bolted on it and driven at full chat for that long.
The G50 is surely a better, more modern, stronger (and heavier) box - and 915's in good shape do drive very nicely. And impart a period charm...
Many folks run a 3.6 or a 930 with a 915, myself included. Service life doesn't even seem to be much of an issue, with some care. I don't think a stock 3.2 makes too much power for a 915, nowhere close.
Rather, I think that the 915 was a dinosoar by the mid-70's, it was just obviously badly overdue for replacement by the 80's - the 924 and 944's (which, with the 928, were supposed to have replaced the 911 by then) got transaxles with modern gates/synchros/shift lever ergonomics beginning 11 years earlier.
Once the 911 was no longer slated for retirement, it needed an update - yuppies were probably complaining loudly
- and the future obviously held bigger, more powerful engines, homologation for production-based classes meant the road cars needed something capable of scaling to racing outputs.