Potomac-Greg

I can't tell looking at the numbers if it's that radical (e.g. 4th gear 1.034 in the turbo versus 1.071 in the n/a).

I've got a transmission problem, and the chance to get a 951 transmission cheap.

spoolinturbo

if its cheap go for it, supposedly stronger...i would get it for that reason alone.

schwank

Since the ratio is longer it will hurt your acceleration. Might not be great for the track.

You should be able to find a NA trans for not too much money.

It wasn't the clutch though???

V2Rocket

the gears are taller and the diff is much taller, so overall youd be losing a good bit of acceleration.

however im stoked to be able to do over 40/70/100 in 1/2/3 once i swap the turbo box into my car

jtsporsche

lol, while all those losers are wasting time shifting...

Lemming

I put one in the Frankencar and hated it for track use, way to tall. The S2 is perfect, well it will be as soon as I install the short 5th.

jtsporsche

even with a 968 engine?
how much more power does a stock turbo have over a 968? kinda OT, just curious

Lemming

Bout the same I think.

jstand22

unless it's a 3.0 16valve n/a I wouldn't do it....I have one in my S and it really took a blow acceleration-wise, I imagine it would be worse with an 8v.

Potomac-Greg

Thx. I'll pass on the turbo trans. I have other options.

V2Rocket

968 is rated 236hp, turbo is 217

jstand22

Actually torque will have a larger impact on whether or not the engine will struggle with the 951 ratios. Torque is at its most basic definition the measure of the engine's ability to twist the crank, so when the car is in gear it's gotta twist the crank, and transmission/diff. etc.

So in a a turbo that makes 243ft-lbs the tranny is fine, and a 968 engine would handle it nicely too (225ft-lbs), an S2 (207ft-lbs?) would suffer a little, and as I said before an S (170ft-lbs) or regular 8v n/a (150ft-lbs?) will take a blow and feel like a dog.

My S still has a nice kick in the high end, but around 3,500-4,200 it's now a sled because of the 951 rations and the fact that the car makes poop for torque.

Legoland951

I had a 86 turbo tranny in my 85.5 street car. For street driving, I couldn't tell one from the other and this was my daily driver for 2 years. It got me incredible ACTUAL gas mileage with 17 inch wheels and 275/40/17 tires. The n/a cars are slow already and gearing makes it negligeably slower in my opinion. If you are not tracking it, do it especially if the price is right. I would do it in a heartbeat again. As for acceleration, my honda odyssey minivan can blow away the 944 with 7 passenger in it so I would not care all that much about split second street acceleration performance..

Seriously, the n/a felt no slower than my stock 951 under 3k rpm as the turbo is gutless due to lack of torque at lower rpm range. If you don't want the turbo tranny and its really cheap, I will be more than glad to trade you a perfect 85.5 or 87 n/a tranny for it.