short shifter ?
01-31-2006, 05:03 PM
#47
Intermediate
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warranty would most likely be up to the dealer, but Porsche does have an OEM part number for the B&M short shift prior to them coming out with theirs on 996 cars, so it may be covered.
I would like to make another observation that more 993 to older race cars favored the B&M and the 996 cup cars still race on the same B&M SSK you can buy on ebay for $119. It is a perfected sytem under race conditions that may not be for everyone. Also if the porsche guys would make a shift *** with a longer leather boot I would probably buy it as an everyday driver. I had the oppertunity to race a 996 with an Long B&M SSK and it worked marvelous until I realized there was no way to fit it in a stock boot. Remember the purpose it to get the hands back on the wheel as quick as possible so you dont run long and into the dirt.
I would like to know if anyone has info on the 997 GT3 cup car, photos of that beast show what looks to be an EVO or B&M Long with a exposed shaft and carbon fiber shift ****. The promo shots of the cup car have the odd looking sequetial.
I would like to make another observation that more 993 to older race cars favored the B&M and the 996 cup cars still race on the same B&M SSK you can buy on ebay for $119. It is a perfected sytem under race conditions that may not be for everyone. Also if the porsche guys would make a shift *** with a longer leather boot I would probably buy it as an everyday driver. I had the oppertunity to race a 996 with an Long B&M SSK and it worked marvelous until I realized there was no way to fit it in a stock boot. Remember the purpose it to get the hands back on the wheel as quick as possible so you dont run long and into the dirt.
I would like to know if anyone has info on the 997 GT3 cup car, photos of that beast show what looks to be an EVO or B&M Long with a exposed shaft and carbon fiber shift ****. The promo shots of the cup car have the odd looking sequetial.
01-31-2006, 05:34 PM
#48
Drifting
As with most things in life, there are always trade-offs. So what is the trade-off with a SSK? I have driven cars with SSKs, and I like the short throw and did not notice any negatives about it. But, there must be some reason Porsche doesn't just put the SSk in as standard equipment, unless it is truly just for extra profit for them.
By the way, I currently drive a 2004 M3, but toying with the idea of a 997S. I haven't owned a 911 in 17 years, and I know they have changed alot since I had my old 87 Turbo. Talk about a crappy shifter, that car had one. The M3 has no factory SSk option available.
By the way, I currently drive a 2004 M3, but toying with the idea of a 997S. I haven't owned a 911 in 17 years, and I know they have changed alot since I had my old 87 Turbo. Talk about a crappy shifter, that car had one. The M3 has no factory SSk option available.
01-31-2006, 05:39 PM
#49
Banned
Some drivers may be small and frail and might find frequent shifting during stop-and-go traffic tiring, yet don't want a tiptronic. 
Best thing to do is test drive both and compare for yourself.
Best thing to do is test drive both and compare for yourself.
01-31-2006, 05:53 PM
#50
Drifting
Originally Posted by OCBen
Some drivers may be small and frail and might find frequent shifting during stop-and-go traffic tiring, yet don't want a tiptronic.
Best thing to do is test drive both and compare for yourself.
Best thing to do is test drive both and compare for yourself.
You're going to have to shift in stop and go traffic whether you have the standard shifter or the SSK.
01-31-2006, 06:17 PM
#51
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tcetta
I would go with B&M. My 2 cents below.
I put in a B&M after I broke the standard shifter at an autocross event. The ball joint plastic crapped out (a typical failure point) and i replaced that as well with the EVO model. (I would remember to mark the adjustment with nail polish not just a marker that can rub off with your hand and silicone grease)
I can state that the install is only burdensome when you have to break off the old busings (no real good way to do it). everything else is a cake walk. Note that the B&M should be retightend after a few weeks or in very cold climates. What I would like to see from porsche is a metal bearings on their short shift. The throw is about the same as the B&M but there is just a more solid feel with metal on metal.
I put in a B&M after I broke the standard shifter at an autocross event. The ball joint plastic crapped out (a typical failure point) and i replaced that as well with the EVO model. (I would remember to mark the adjustment with nail polish not just a marker that can rub off with your hand and silicone grease)
I can state that the install is only burdensome when you have to break off the old busings (no real good way to do it). everything else is a cake walk. Note that the B&M should be retightend after a few weeks or in very cold climates. What I would like to see from porsche is a metal bearings on their short shift. The throw is about the same as the B&M but there is just a more solid feel with metal on metal.
where is the B&M shifter "metal to metal" ?
The B&M connects to the same locations as the factory stick for both forward and reverse.
And the EVO forward gear cable link is also plastic lined at the lever connection .
Only the outer shell is metal .
So unless they use better plastic than the factory , I don't see the difference.
01-31-2006, 06:44 PM
#52
Banned
Originally Posted by GSIRM3
You're going to have to shift in stop and go traffic whether you have the standard shifter or the SSK.
More effort means tired little arms after a drive. Some people may just not want to have to exert more effort than they need to either. So that would be one reason why Porsche doesn't make the short shifter standard equipment.
01-31-2006, 06:48 PM
#53
Drifting
OK Ben, makes sense to me. I guess since I am not "small and frail" as you mentioned in a previous post as a reason some might not want a SSK, I just did not notice the extra effort required in the cars I drove with a SSK.
01-31-2006, 07:51 PM
#55
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by OCBen
More effort means tired little arms after a drive. Some people may just not want to have to exert more effort than they need to either. So that would be one reason why Porsche doesn't make the short shifter standard equipment.
02-01-2006, 12:44 PM
#56
Intermediate
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rolf Stumberger
tcetta ,
where is the B&M shifter "metal to metal" ?
The B&M connects to the same locations as the factory stick for both forward and reverse.
And the EVO forward gear cable link is also plastic lined at the lever connection .
Only the outer shell is metal .
So unless they use better plastic than the factory , I don't see the difference.
where is the B&M shifter "metal to metal" ?
The B&M connects to the same locations as the factory stick for both forward and reverse.
And the EVO forward gear cable link is also plastic lined at the lever connection .
Only the outer shell is metal .
So unless they use better plastic than the factory , I don't see the difference.
To get more technical. The bushing the EVO uses to seat the ball joint is, "IN MY SOLE Opinion", a more solid plastic. The Porsche part is either a white or black plastic and has a viewable flex with veins in it to allow flex. When reseated to the ball joint has a claw function where the ends of the claw retain the ball. The EVO part has a black DuPont Delrin resin “a/k/a plastic” that is solid with a retention pocket and looks to be machined and not molded. It also has to be hammered to have the ball joint properly seated. I was very concerned that it took such effort to seat it, but after some soft blows with a sand mallet it would not seat, So I slammed it good, out of frustration and in it went, and the movement is much more restricted that adds a lot of "stiction" to the shifting, which also adds to effort and possibly a solid feel to the shifting.
I know there was thought put into this part, and probably not just overkill. All I am stating that with any SSK used in conjunction with the factory cable link this problem can occur. The shorter leverage shifter allows the force, which we all know is increased, to increase and increased at both ends and can lead to failure. I am all for “don’t fix if it ain’t broken”, but with the SSK kit being very popular, I would be replacing the shift linkage which is “known” to be a weak link from within this forum. It will save you time later on. BTW the EVO price is way too high for this simple fix, but I don’t have a CNC machine yet in my garage.
02-01-2006, 03:25 PM
#57
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tcetta
Metal to metal was referring to the billet bushing the B&M shifter seats to the Porsche housing. The Porsche short shift that I examined still uses the plastic bushing with a poly sleeve and lubricant.
To get more technical. The bushing the EVO uses to seat the ball joint is, "IN MY SOLE Opinion", a more solid plastic. The Porsche part is either a white or black plastic and has a viewable flex with veins in it to allow flex. When reseated to the ball joint has a claw function where the ends of the claw retain the ball. The EVO part has a black DuPont Delrin resin “a/k/a plastic” that is solid with a retention pocket and looks to be machined and not molded. It also has to be hammered to have the ball joint properly seated. I was very concerned that it took such effort to seat it, but after some soft blows with a sand mallet it would not seat, So I slammed it good, out of frustration and in it went, and the movement is much more restricted that adds a lot of "stiction" to the shifting, which also adds to effort and possibly a solid feel to the shifting.
I know there was thought put into this part, and probably not just overkill. All I am stating that with any SSK used in conjunction with the factory cable link this problem can occur. The shorter leverage shifter allows the force, which we all know is increased, to increase and increased at both ends and can lead to failure. I am all for “don’t fix if it ain’t broken”, but with the SSK kit being very popular, I would be replacing the shift linkage which is “known” to be a weak link from within this forum. It will save you time later on. BTW the EVO price is way too high for this simple fix, but I don’t have a CNC machine yet in my garage.
To get more technical. The bushing the EVO uses to seat the ball joint is, "IN MY SOLE Opinion", a more solid plastic. The Porsche part is either a white or black plastic and has a viewable flex with veins in it to allow flex. When reseated to the ball joint has a claw function where the ends of the claw retain the ball. The EVO part has a black DuPont Delrin resin “a/k/a plastic” that is solid with a retention pocket and looks to be machined and not molded. It also has to be hammered to have the ball joint properly seated. I was very concerned that it took such effort to seat it, but after some soft blows with a sand mallet it would not seat, So I slammed it good, out of frustration and in it went, and the movement is much more restricted that adds a lot of "stiction" to the shifting, which also adds to effort and possibly a solid feel to the shifting.
I know there was thought put into this part, and probably not just overkill. All I am stating that with any SSK used in conjunction with the factory cable link this problem can occur. The shorter leverage shifter allows the force, which we all know is increased, to increase and increased at both ends and can lead to failure. I am all for “don’t fix if it ain’t broken”, but with the SSK kit being very popular, I would be replacing the shift linkage which is “known” to be a weak link from within this forum. It will save you time later on. BTW the EVO price is way too high for this simple fix, but I don’t have a CNC machine yet in my garage.
Thank you for the clarification .
I will post if /when the factory plastic needs replacing .
I also looked at the EVO link. I did not like the way the cable is attached to it .
The cable has a permanently attached fitting at the end, which mates with a matching fitting
on the factory link . This union then is covered by a sleeve, which is held in place with a spring .
There is just no way this connection can ever slip .
The EVO link on the other hand is attached to the cable with only an Allen head set screw . Far more likely to come loose .
And since both the B&M and factory shifter are "press" fit into the link , the only difference is in the plastic material being used .
My feeling is that since this is such a cheap piece , if Porsche had consistent problems with it , they would have replaced it by now. This shifter has been around for a while by now.
Perhaps one of the secrets to the " silky smoothness " of the factory shifter is the fact that the billet bushing IS plastic rather than metal ( which will require constant lubrication ?)
And the only way to do that it is to take the whole console out .
But, I guess only time will tell.
Thanks again for your input .
