uli953

To me (and a lot of other 3.2 owners I know), it is typical for newies to ask for a 3.2 86-89 (with G-50) because this is what they read in merely any "purchase guide".

And then have to pay a premium of 2000 €/$ .
Again, the G-50 takes something around 5-10 PS. The hydraulic operated G-50 clutch costs around double the price.

When the 915 box is well maintained and the synchro works as it should, to me it is all ok. That´s the 911 feeling of the 70`and early 80´ !

If wanted, a short-shift-kit can be fitted. I won´t do so.

The biggest advantage of the G-50 is, that it can handle more torque. With the 3.2, the 915 is near to the limit.

When I bought my 3.2, the type of gearbox was no factor.

The only thing that counts is the overall condition of the car. And, maybe, the mileage.

cobalt

In the past I would have concurred. After driving several perfect 915 trans for 21 years it was no problem to finess it through. Short shifter helps. Now that I have been driving the G50/52 it is soooo much smoother and effortless. A flick of the wrist versus complete arm movement. Never a snag or a missed shift. A good condition 915 is not bad a good G50 is better.

npausch

sounds like someone has the exact same taste as me! thats what im digging for up here on the West coast (in canada) but its almost impossible to find!!!!!



i have a question to that... do you think starting at age 20 is too soon???

Steve Wilwerding

If I were going to buy another 911, I'd either get an early 70s RS replica with a 3.6 transplant (a la Jack Olsen) or a 964 C2.

Paul491 Cadrobbi

Aye! npausch, you are on a worthy quest indeed, young sire! 'Tis never too soon nor too early to start saving thy shekels. From this day forth be valiant and continue in thy search. Be it known to all, there is a small clan who band together with single purpose and share their wisdom and knowledge of M-491 steeds and on occasion reveal the whereabouts of these mythical beasts.

Ye are welcome to join our noble clan, whos wise and knowing warriors will aid in thy valiant search. As ye well know, young master, mythical steeds such as these are rare and at times very difficult to capture... But take heart, be of good cheer and tarry not, others are on the hunt as well...

Start thy quest here:

Clan of the M-491 Carrera

We will look to the northern boarders for your messenger and gladly offer our allegiance in thy noble quest.

All kidding aside, we'll be glad to help any way we can. Drop on by.
Cheers!

Edward

uli953 and Anthony,

Thanks for the input. I remember (vaguely!) many many years ago when I got to drive my friend's SC with some regularity, it seemed fine to me. But admittedly, I was so jazzed about driving a 911, I could care less what the gearbox felt like...that, and I had no G50 for a basis of comparison. When it comes time for me to pull the trigger, I guess I'll drive a bunch of both and weigh it up then.

Thanks for your input, gents!

Edward

Christian K

I only have brief experience with the G-50 in the 3.2-models, but now have covered some 3000 kms with my 'new' 1990 C2. I think uli953 came pretty close to what I also think. I'd say the G-50 is a more driver friendly gearbox, but the 915 has some other advantages mentioned earlier. If I was going to get another 3.2, I would go for one with a 915 as I don't think the G-50 is worth the premium. Prefferably an 84 or 85 as they for some reason is a bit lighter than the 86. My major concern would however be the overall condition of the car and how well it drives.

cheers

1990 C2
ex. 1984 Carrera