928...Did you know???
03-23-2006, 03:03 PM
#271
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Wally, wasn't there a reverse lock out then? There is no way I could get my GTS to do that! (not that I would want to unless I was a stunt driver! 
)
)
03-23-2006, 03:08 PM
#273
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Site Sponsor
Just the usual strong spring - which was overpowered by a combination of adrenaline and carelessness...
Going from a somewhat illegal speed in 5th to 2nd doesn't leave a lot of time for consideration.
Going from a somewhat illegal speed in 5th to 2nd doesn't leave a lot of time for consideration.
03-23-2006, 03:21 PM
#274
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Durban, South Africa
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sweanders
Did you know that if you put the manual gearstick forward from first gear it will go straight into second gear. It is impossible to shift from first to reverse.
03-23-2006, 03:23 PM
#276
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Did you know that if you put the manual gearstick forward from first gear it will go straight into second gear. It is impossible to shift from first to reverse.
However, I understand what Wally is saying now and I have never tried to shift into R from 5th...you KNOW that I now have to see if this can be done though
(I think I will try at 10mph and lock my left leg into position!)
03-23-2006, 04:01 PM
#279
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Reverse lock came in '82 MY. Many times spring in transmission cover is dead meaning lock sometimes work and others don't debending on ones luck. Sure sign of it not working full time is about inch long piece of flat spring steel in drain plug magnet. I believe it also works only in 1st to 2nd gear changes, not in downshifting from any other gear.
03-23-2006, 04:15 PM
#280
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Normy
-I was told that an early block such as a 4.7 or 4.5 cannot be reliably bored much beyond 100 mm's because [apparently] the earlier engine blocks had quite a bit more variation in the location of the cylinder barrels. It was like Porsche [or their block supplier] payed less attention to the position of the sand blocks that blocked the molten aluminum and allowed the barrels to form on the earlier engines. When they took the cylinders to 100 mm in 1986, they realized that they were producing a larger number of "bum" blocks, since the cylinders are actually bored out and lapped after the casting cools, and their solution was to build in much more precision in their casting methods so that the bores were far more likely to be in the right place
N!
Although this is an interesting possibility I highly doubt that back in the 70's Porsche or the foundries hired didn't have better control over their casting process. Most engine block designs would have the cores (sand blocks) set in a print that would easily prevent this from occurring. A decent foundry would be able to better standard tolerances to prevent this from occurring. If they couldn't control this I would hate to think what else might be wrong with the blocks.
Even with a standard sand casting tolerance of +/- 0.30 there should be no reason why the casting would be suspect. I would assume the problem is based in the drawing supplied by Porsche that the casting was manufactured too.
03-23-2006, 04:22 PM
#281
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
4.5 and 4.7L blocks have smaller cylinder tower outside diameter strictly by design. They can normally be bored to 100mm but not much more. Even though there are variations between blocks early ones are not feasable candidates for any where near 104mm piston sizes.
03-23-2006, 05:23 PM
#283
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Did you know that the overall height of the 928 was 51.70 inches from 1978 to 1986 and then 50.47" from 1986.5 to 1995??? That's 1.23" LOWER!!!
It is because of the upgraded suspension.
However! Ground clearance in 1978 was 4.72" and in 1995 4.53"...go figure!!! Porsche must have tucked up all those "hangy down" parts around the rear X member and the front carrier section.
LOL
I just think this is funny because what other car owner would have stats like this?
It is because of the upgraded suspension.
However! Ground clearance in 1978 was 4.72" and in 1995 4.53"...go figure!!! Porsche must have tucked up all those "hangy down" parts around the rear X member and the front carrier section.
LOL
I just think this is funny because what other car owner would have stats like this?
03-31-2006, 07:20 PM
#284
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Did you know that a V6 engine was considered for the 928 in production stages...Man!, if that were the case, would any of us even be here????
