24Chromium

Am I missing something? Is there supposed to be a 3rd track included here? Spa maybe?

GrantG

I agree - I guess I wasn't very clear. I'd like a 7 spd version of the G50 without a shift pattern remapping requirement. Remember that the G50 was originally a 5spd in 1987 and became a 6spd in 1995. Time to add a 7th and move the ratios closer together. I find the gap between 2nd and 3rd gears too wide and both ratios too tall for tight tracks.

911rox

One point to keep in mind regarding the outgoing manual gearbox is that it was racing derived and allowed people to change gear ratios as required to suit their needs. I suppose that the biggest problem is that most don't hold onto their cars long enough to re-gear them. Lets face it, very few of us need to be capable of doing 310kmh so existing boxes were easily capable of being re-geared to suit local tracks... Even as a six speed if not 7 speed, it would be the manual box I'd want in a GT car...

GrantG

I hear you, but regearing is very expensive and involves compromises. With a Close ratio 7spd, I think we'd be set at any track with very few compromises and still have a reasonably relaxed highway gearing (if 200mph happens at 8,250 in 7th, then 100mph at 4,125 is pretty relaxed). Slower corners will not cause the car to bog down and up shifts to 3rd will result in higher revs and much better pulling.

luffe

As a car novice, could someone please explain (in layman terms) what gear ratios are, and why you want them "short"?

Thanks...

Bill_C4S

There's only one "track" in that list..and its a public road (Nordschliefe)..

the other two are great driving, public roads...the closer of which is still some 3hrs from my front doorstep: the EVO magazine test triangle in Wales.

My comment goes to whether you could get to these locations in a BAC Mono without a support car....and whilst "doable" to some...not my cup of tea!

I'd prefer to have a roof over my head for a 3hr+ drive...literally.

Hope that clarifies.

Macca

I dont understand all this upset over damn seats. Just go and buy some Recaro Pole Position for gods sake ($800 each in nomex), some seat sliders and side mounts, an hour to put them in 80lb weight saving and go racing. Porsche charge far too much for their non FIA bucket seats in any case IMHO. I dont understand why we waste so much bandwidth on this silly subject. No market is getting bucket seats. Ok USA cannot buy folding bucket (heavy with side bags and not true racing shell) but you are buying teh car 15%+ cheaper than any other country in teh world and you get PCM+Navi included in teh spec so maybe use some of the money saved to order Gt3 with standard seats and buy 2 x Recaro PP + hardware for $2000 and fit drive and enjoy....

Just saying....

aussie jimmy

yeah, no need to get too emotional!

aussie jimmy

long gear ratios in gearbox give higher speeds in each gear, and higher top speed.
short gear ratios gives a lower top speed, but more accelerative punch in the gears. track guys want short gears as 'most' tracks will usually only have straights long enough to allow 150mph max.
race teams change gear ratios depending on which track they go to, whether the track is slower with tight corners, or fast, flowing track.
an enthusiast will not find it practical to change ratios often, but can do so if they are emotionally inclined.

Nizer

Further to Jimmy's explanation, longer gears (widely spaced) result in larger RPM drops between gears while shorter (closely spaced) gears produce smaller RPM drops. This matters because high performance, naturally aspirated engines tend to have relatively narrow powerbands biased to the upper RPM range. Think of an engine's powerband as the RPM range between which peak torque and peak horsepower are produced. At the extreme end, a naturally aspirated race engine will have a very narrow powerband occuring near redline.

In general (though not everywhere) fastest lap times are produced by keeping the engine in the powerband as much as possible. Closely spaced gearsets facilitate this with the offset of either reduced ultimate top speed, longish first gears (because it's only require for starts at most tracks), or some combination of the two.

luffe

Ok great, thanks. That helped more than reading the wiki page!

GrantG

Pete - I almost always agree with you, but I have to be stubborn on this one

Particularly, with the 9k redline, closer ratios will be an even more important upgrade (higher redline will offset the frequency of shifting from the closer gears).

Also, remember that most people's GT3 drivetrains are pushing 1,000 pounds more than yours and gearing is key there.

Also, we don't want the manual version to give away too much performance to the PDK version or the manual option will have a poor adoption rate and won't survive for long.

Slowekistan

Weren't the PDK-S gear ratios already analyzed on these same pages a few days ago? As far as I remember except for the 6th and 7th all the "useful" gears are pretty much the same.

GrantG

If someone has made a comparison graph with rev-drops and speeds in gears, I'd like to see that. If not, I could make one...

I'd be surprised if Porsche didn't take the opportunity to make wholesale improvements of the ratios (combining 1-7, new redline, R&P, and the new larger tires that I think have a larger overall diameter now).

If not, it gives an opportunity make a real improvement with the manual.

MaxLTV

It compared speeds at redline, which is not the best way to do it - comparing speed at peak HP revs or building a full-blown rev drop-off graph could be more insightful (unless shifting at readline is always optimal for this engine/gearbox combo)