Long gearing... Is it just me, or...? - Page 5 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

Evening all, Now, I can hear the ‘shoulda left it’ klaxon blaring already, but I’ve done 600 miles in my GT4 now, and I would really like someone to explain what the ‘the manual’s gearing is too long’ actually means, logically. I get that the red line in second is at 86mph, which is unusually high, etc etc, but as long as you’re not in first, if you think the gear you’re in is too long... don’t you have the option of a downshift? I also get that the torque curve of the manual is very different from the PDK’s, but if that’s the complaint, talking about long gearing doesn’t really describe your problem, does it? Enlighten me, thankyouplease... TH

86mph in 2nd gear is ridiculous when the speed limit is only 70,. How often do you find yourself coming off a roundabout onto a dual carriage way/motorway where you only get to pull 2nd gear then what change to 6th?? Having much shorter gears would at least give you the opportunity to use 3rd/4th. Not everyone enjoys waiting for long gears and find it more fun using more gears. One of the most fun cars I've driven has a close ratio 6speed box ,54mph in 2nd at 8600rpm so on track between 40-120 is mostly all 3rd/4th/5th.i rarely need to change down the 2nd which used to cost me time/speed previously with the standard final drive. Best mod on one of my cars that comes with a 3.3final drive and theoretical top speed of 170mph was fit a 3.9fd to bring speed down to 147mph , it's feels like the car has gained 50+hp

Is yet another nonsense bandwagon for lazy journalists to jump on. Just like anyone who drives a Porsche but only goes under 70...

A gearbox is a torque multiplier, it converts the high speed, low torque output of the engine crankshaft(s) into low speed, high torque at the prop shaft, final drive shafts and wheels. If the gearing has long ratios this results in the engine speed translating to a greater range of vehicle speed in each gear, slowing acceleration. But the main reason this is undesirable in a sports car, is you don’t have to change gear as often, so on a section of typical British B road, only one gear might be necessary and it’s like driving around in an automatic. You also don’t get to appreciate the ferocious acceleration and aural intensity typical at the top end of the rev range, where you spend most of the time in a race car, for instance.

thr32 said: I would really like someone to explain what the ‘the manual’s gearing is too long’ actually means, logically. It means there's a bandwagon for fools to jump on. The car's got 6 gears - if you don't like the gear you're in just change to one of the others, it's not difficult. My personal favourites are the people who complain about gear ratios in the 7-speed PDK automatic. Virtually every car on sale today is capable of being driven from standstill to well over all the speed limits in one gear - the Porsche is no exception. To say they're all like automatics is plum daft. Yes, it feels as thought here's a bit of a step from 1st to 2nd but then many drivers will be skipping intermediate gears in normal driving. And seriously, who changes down to 1st unless they're stationary?

MiseryStreak said: You also don’t get to appreciate the ferocious acceleration and aural intensity typical at the top end of the rev range, where you spend most of the time in a race car, for instance. This better explains what I was getting at, on typical British A an B roads i love engines that have a good top end an when the mood suits firing through 2 gears is more fun than watching the rev counter creeping along in 100rpm steps or as you say being able to leave the car in 1 gear to cover all.

Speed in 1st 4 years (man) 45 80, 110, and 150... To give you an idea what performance is sacrificed... if my Cay 2.7 had gearing in these 1st 4 years lowered by 15%, its performance would be very near that of the 3.4S... both from standing start and in-gear. Frankly, this would suit me... long gears like this don't make much sense on the road.

I find the longer gearing less of an issue in the PDK, purely because 1st gear is easily accessible when braking into a bend. The ease of changing gears in the PDK also means you can more often dip into 3rd (unless you do all of your road driving above 6k rpm). In a manual box where 2nd goes over 80mph you're kinda stuck with 1 gear in the real world of british B roads.

Sounds like a 10 pc final drive reduction is in order!

jayxx83 said: Sounds like a 10 pc final drive reduction is in order! It’s not quite that easy. On a decent fast bit of road, say the ring, or Spa the gearing isn’t bad and the closely stacked intermediate gears are right on the money. It’s in more “normal” driving that the high lower gears are a bit of a pain and the car does suffer. The PDK has the same torque curve but lower intermediate gears and one extra ratio. Looking forwards to getting mine in May. I don’t like the gearing on the road in the manual.

jayxx83 said: Sounds like a 10 pc final drive reduction is in order! Sort of... Vmax is in 5th, perfectly worked out, and 6th gives 25mph per 1k, which is a reasonable compromise. I'd leave these gears alone...

The problem with longer gearing is interactivity, lack thereof, assuming, that is, you want the interactivity. With shorter gearing, you are changing gear more often to reach a given range of speeds. Simple, objective fact. Whether this is a good or bad thing is another matter, of course, and is subjective. If you are happy changing gear less often, the longer gearing is fine. If not, it's not fine. If someone has chosen the manual option specifically to ensure a certain kind of interactivity, it's not a terribly huge leap of deductive reasoning to grasp why the long gearing might be a bit disappointing / an impediment to enjoyment and engagement. It's also one of those things where it's easy to drive the car and think, 'this isn't so bad, what's the problem', given the cars in question tend to be bloody good for the most part. When in fact were you given the opportunity to try shorter gearing it might be a penny-drop moment of realisation as it becomes obvious just how much more engaging and vivid the experience is zapping up and down the 'box rather than being largely stuck in one or at best two gears most of the time down a good B road.

diffstar said: I think there is some truth to this comment to be honesty with you. Not saying the gearing isn’t long, but I don’t think it detracts too much from the experience. Emperors clothes syndrome here, the journos and YouTubers just what the last guy said for fear of looking odd. Not a real world review or owner. Probably true that many or even most of the comments about the gearing are essentially just people jumping on the bandwagon / trying to look discerning and well informed. But that doesn't mean the point they're all parroting isn't right. Popular opinions are certainly at least as often wrong as right. In this case, personally think the sheeple view has got it right for once. The gearing is a pity. Doesn't ruin the car, but it would be lots more fun with shorter ratios 1-4.

Schmed said: Is yet another nonsense bandwagon for lazy journalists to jump on. Just like anyone who drives a Porsche but only goes under 70... I think there is some truth to this comment to be honesty with you. Not saying the gearing isn’t long, but I don’t think it detracts too much from the experience. Emperors clothes syndrome here, the journos and YouTubers just say what the last guy said for fear of looking odd. Not a real world review or owner. Edited by diffstar on Monday 15th March 06:46

I haven’t got my Spyder yet, so purely me watching other people’s opinions on YouTube, but doesn’t the longer gearing mean you can use 1st as a driving gear? i’ve never had a car where i’d change down to 1st at 15mph for example, you’d just sit in 2nd normally, so is that possibly a nice thing to be able to do?

Yep, use 1st as a driving gear The problem with wishing for lower gearing is that you're wishing for less traction, which is fine if you're smoking tyres on Top Gear but no so good if you want fast lap times or confidence on the road...

The gearing is long if you think you have live at 6000RPM+ ON THE ROAD the whole time..... which of course you don't. You do need some range in the gearing even on a tight and twisty back road and as has been said you have the option to use all 6 gears - including 1st!. I can't comprehend this notion, that you have to be able to redline in every gear in order to have fun or say that the car has proper ratios? Porsche need to balance a lot of things... and 8/10 their judgement is totally correct and works for pretty much all of the people that actually own and drive the cars. Edited by TDT on Monday 15th March 09:03

MG Ant said: Frankly, this would suit me... long gears like this don't make much sense on the road. They don't - but they make perfect sense on a fast-flowing track. I drive a 987S, which is also geared very long for the UK roads, but is geared perfectly for track driving. Also remember that the UK has quite low speed limits - in countries such as Germany with higher / no speed limits the gearing also works well.

Drive a 718 GT4 and 981 Spyder. I’m perfectly happy with the gearing on both. Learn to change up or down at the right times and it’s mighty fun, even on the roads Have to agree with Twinfan and TDT here.

TDT said: The gearing is long if you think you have live at 6000RPM+ ON THE ROAD the whole time..... which of course you don't. Edited by TDT on Monday 15th March 09:03 This ^^^^^^

4th gear is too long! So why not use 3rd? Errrm... 3rd gear is too long! So why not use 2nd? Errrm... IIRC my car would peak at something like 50 mph flat out in first gear. It will pull happily, if not swiftly, from 25 mph in 6th. And Mr Porsche has generously fitted another four gears in between. Check this link for a couple of minutes from about 8 minutes in, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33SC1IHld9Q

I don't mind the long gearing on our manual 981 2.7. SWMBO drives it like an auto, pretty much leaving it in 3rd - good for 15-85mph real world driving I suppose though it would go beyond that - and the lack of torque when accidentally flooring it out of a wet roundabout or doing something wayward would be less likely to cause an issue if in that tall gear. It needs driving above 4k occasionally by me to give it a proper run. She just pootles between 2-4k in 3rd and 4th and would prefer an auto by nature. There's emissions, fuel economy and top end as a benefit to longer gearing perhaps, but the strange thing is that 6th isn't an overdrive or anything and it's arguably the relationship of the ratios rather than the final drive itself that are a bit strange. Like Porsche were chasing a 0-60 time with a tall first and second, but 6th was made to pull Vmax rather than be super economical. So doing the final drive mod may still have frustrations. It suits the 2.7 perhaps, because you're not on it the whole time and when you do stretch it to 7.5k there's a nice long drawn out yowl through a longish gear. On track you'd simply bemoan the lack of torque out of corners unless using 2nd all the time.

I agree with the 6000rpm on the road sentiment (in fact I mentioned it in my previous comment), but if the car hits 86mph at 8000rpm then 6000rpm arrives 4.5mph over NSL. So if you want to use 3rd gear often you're probably shifting before 5000rpm?

Gearing changes the character of the car: Shorter gearing means more shifts, stronger pull from low revs and faster revving towards the limiter. Longer gearing means less shifts, weaker pull from low revs and more time for the engine to reach top revs.

Dr S said: Gearing changes the character of the car: Shorter gearing means more shifts, stronger pull from low revs and faster revving towards the limiter. Longer gearing means less shifts, weaker pull from low revs and more time for the engine to reach top revs. This is true - but it comes at a cost... as i was saying before. Fuel economy will suffer - which bothers people, bad for Porsche Emissions will be higher - which bothers people, bad for Porsche Car will be too loud even in regular driving down the Kings Road or KnightBridge - which bothers people Longer distance will be unbearable - which bothers people It would be too hardcore for many people, Bad for Porsche If you change one thing.... but everything else remains constant... yep - you are changing the balance of performance and potential addressable market and you change the duality of the car... and it is the entry level car. BTW I'm not saying that the gearing is perfect for all use cases either - At the end of the day... people should stop crying about it... if you don't like it - don't buy one OR get your £6-8k out - hand it to your local specialist and they'll sort it out for you. And guess how many people have done that in the UK.... Its that or Porsche should have done it - and charged everyone more for the car... The GT4 is ALL about the chassis... in both 718 and 981 the drivetrain a serviceable good enough component that does the job reliably. Edited by TDT on Monday 15th March 13:43

400SE Dave said: TDT said: The gearing is long if you think you have live at 6000RPM+ ON THE ROAD the whole time..... which of course you don't. Edited by TDT on Monday 15th March 09:03 This ^^^^^^ If you want to short shift in the manner implied, a high revving NA engine built to do 8,000rpm is a poor choice. You want a modern turbo lump. You will be much happier. There's a great deal of rationalisation going on, little of which makes any sense.

F6C said: 400SE Dave said: TDT said: The gearing is long if you think you have live at 6000RPM+ ON THE ROAD the whole time..... which of course you don't. This ^^^^^^ If you want to short shift in the manner implied, a high revving NA engine built to do 8,000rpm is a poor choice. You want a modern turbo lump. You will be much happier. There's a great deal of rationalisation going on, little of which makes any sense. I'm not sure what you mean or if you were addressing my point(agreeing/disagreeing)... But ultimately - people continuously complaining - but then doing nothing about it when actual solutions exist... makes no sense. As you've said it doesn't ruin the car, most people are just regurgitating what they've heard and it would never have entered their thoughts, ... yes, it could be shorter, and therefore 'more fun on the road'... but there's a trade off... Porsche would have considered those and made the choice they did. Options exist to 'fix it'.. which give rise to the same trade-offs - and few people but their money where their mouth is, so just live with it and get on. It's the entry level GT car that is approved for track use. If you want to drive around in the UK on the road with your hair on fire - shifting up and down the box all the time... most cars these days are too fast. So UK limits (speed and road size/capacity) are the problem. To drive like that you need something smaller, lighter and less powerful if you don't want to end up in prison or hurting someone else or more likely just yourself. Edited by TDT on Monday 15th March 14:03

TDT said: I'm not sure what you mean or if you were addressing my point(agreeing/disagreeing)... But ultimately - people continuously complaining - but then doing nothing about it when actual solutions exist... makes no sense. As you've said it doesn't ruin the car, most people are just regurgitating what they've heard and it would never have entered their thoughts, ... yes, it could be shorter, and therefore 'more fun on the road'... but there's a trade off... Porsche would have considered those and made the choice they did. Options exist to 'fix it'.. which give rise to the same trade-offs - and few people but their money where their mouth is, so just live with it and get on. It's the entry level GT car that is approved for track use. If you want to drive around in the UK on the road with your hair on fire - shifting up and down the box all the time... most cars these days are too fast. So UK limits (speed and road size/capacity) are the problem. To drive like that you need something smaller, lighter and less powerful if you don't want to end up in prison or hurting someone else or more likely just yourself. Not setting out to offend, but again would have to reluctantly say these rather seem like rationalisations rather than serious points. It's a very significant step with a brand new car of this value to crack open the gearbox and change the ratios. It's perfectly legitimate and coherent to take issue with the gearing without wanting to modify the gearbox. Implying as you have that being unwilling to open up the box to change the ratios in any way undermines a view that the gearing would be better were it shorter smacks a little of point scoring rather than trying to actually discuss the issues at hand. And again, just because some people may well be just repeating what they've heard doesn't mean there isn't substance to what they've heard. It's totally irrelevant to the actual issue at hand - what impact is the gearing having? Approved for track use? Really? How so? The GT4 has approval for track use that, say, a standard 718 does not have? What form does this take? As far as I know, this is not true, but happy to be corrected. In a more general sense, the GT4 is more or less 1,500kg with carpets, electric windows, infotainment, sound deadening, the works. It is not in any way a stripped out track special. It's a road car first and foremost. The 'hair on fire' thing likewise comes across as rather defensive but not really making a great deal of sense as far as I can see. With shorter gearing, it would be possible to shift more frequently without going any faster than your alternative suggestion of short shifting. In both cases you shift more often. But with shorter gearing, you'll be able to do that while using more of the rev range that the NA engine was designed to deliver. We agree that the gearing doesn't ruin the car. But there's been little to nothing coherent that anyone has posted here undermines the assertion that the gearing is too long. It's largely incoherent / irrelevant rationalisations. This isn't about absolute rights and wrong, not claiming that. If you like the gearing, that's an entirely legitimate point of view. The problem is that the attempts to dismiss the idea that it might be too long seem to be largely defensiveness combined with a lack of understanding of what it is some people object to about the gearing. Personally, I think that most people saying the gearing is fine would find they significantly preferred the car were it available with shorter ratios 1-5, with each gear progressively shortened a bit less so that 5th was only a little shorter than it currently is (and 6th carried over with no changes for cruising) but the key gears 2-4 shortened enough to really notice a difference. Can't prove that obviously. But am also pretty sure the gearing isn't as it is because Porsche thinks it gives the best driving experience. Think emissions and costs play a significant role. Anyway, look, for anyone who likes the gearing great. The main point is that there is good reason to think it's too long. It's not just some nonsense somebody made up and has gained traction for no reason. It genuinely detracts from the experience for some drivers. If that's not you, it's a win, so there's no need to be cross!

“GT4 has sound deadening “ - are you sure?

MannyLon said: “GT4 has sound deadening “ - are you sure? 100 percent certain. What are you sure of, given you're asking the question? You seem to be implying it has none, which is a very silly idea. It has lots of sound deadening / proofing / insulation material. It would be virtually undriveable / unsaleable as a road car with no sound deadening. A GT3 RS has sound deadening. All Porsche road cars have sound deadening. Here's a thread about removing it from a 991 GT3 RS: https://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3-gt3rs-gt2rs-an... Anyway, odd thing to have decided to pick out from the whole post!

F6C said: 100 percent certain. What are you sure of, given you're asking the question? You seem to be implying it has none, which is a very silly idea. It has lots of sound deadening / proofing / insulation material. It would be virtually undriveable / unsaleable as a road car with no sound deadening. A GT3 RS has sound deadening. All Porsche road cars have sound deadening. Here's a thread about removing it from a 991 GT3 RS: https://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3-gt3rs-gt2rs-an... Anyway, odd thing to have decided to pick out from the whole post! Okay, if you say so.

MannyLon said: Okay, if you say so. It's got nothing to do with what I say. The cars either do or don't have sound deadening. Do you have a point to make / something to actually say? Peculiar posts! Could be wrong, but it seems like you didn't like my posts, couldn't think of anything coherent to respond with, tried to find some error to nit pick / score debating points, and chose sound deadening under the misapprehension that a GT4 has no sound deadening...? Edited by F6C on Monday 15th March 16:00

This thread has an almost familiar quality. Almost as if a well known contributor has returned after a brief hiatus. Mentioning no names... Lol.

F6C said: Not setting out to offend, but again would have to reluctantly say these rather seem like rationalisations rather than serious points. No offence taken... its a debate. F6C said: It's a very significant step with a brand new car of this value to crack open the gearbox and change the ratios. It's perfectly legitimate and coherent to take issue with the gearing without wanting to modify the gearbox. Implying as you have that being unwilling to open up the box to change the ratios in any way undermines a view that the gearing would be better were it shorter smacks a little of point scoring rather than trying to actually discuss the issues at hand. And again, just because some people may well be just repeating what they've heard doesn't mean there isn't substance to what they've heard. It's totally irrelevant to the actual issue at hand - what impact is the gearing having? I'm not saying that that argument is invalid... I have said that yes - the car could be 'more fun' with shorter gearing - but it comes at a cost. Ref buying a car and then cracking open the box... as this issue as been talked about so much... it's a silly person, that knows the car has tall gearing, then buys the car anyway, and then starts to complain about it?! Notwithstanding that people can choose to have an experience and try for themselves, but that's eyes wide open... you've been told. If an owner doesn't want 'to fix' it - entirely up to them. F6C said: Approved for track use? Really? How so? The GT4 has approval for track use that, say, a standard 718 does not have? What form does this take? As far as I know, this is not true, but happy to be corrected. In a more general sense, the GT4 is more or less 1,500kg with carpets, electric windows, infotainment, sound deadening, the works. It is not in any way a stripped out track special. It's a road car first and foremost. Have a look at what Porsche means when they apply the GT moniker to a car - as in GT4 , GT3, GT2. It means road car, that Porsche have approved for use on track... GT cars have extra stuff built into make them more durable and provide repeatable performance on track. So there's extra braking, extra cooling as a basis... and then you get other things like aero and safety equipment options which are NOT available on series production car. F6C said: The 'hair on fire' thing likewise comes across as rather defensive but not really making a great deal of sense as far as I can see. With shorter gearing, it would be possible to shift more frequently without going any faster than your alternative suggestion of short shifting. In both cases you shift more often. But with shorter gearing, you'll be able to do that while using more of the rev range that the NA engine was designed to deliver. If the complaint is that people want to use more revs at the same road speed - the point about 'hair on fire' is that you'll be driving around at higher revs making a LOAD of engine noise... everyone including yourself THINKS you're going faster than you might actually be...this is in the context of regular driving around town... Of course then when you get to your driving route then I think the shorter gearing would make the cars snappier and more urgent - thats undeniable, and these are fun cars after all. The cars are too powerful and UK limits too low... and this is a worldwide product - where in some places things are different. Why do you think the GR Yaris is such a hit.... a major part is that you can use so much of the performance... combination of size & weight, power output, power delivery inc gearing. F6C said: We agree that the gearing doesn't ruin the car. But there's been little to nothing coherent that anyone has posted here undermines the assertion that the gearing is too long. It's largely incoherent / irrelevant rationalisations. Incoherent and irrelevant... now who's being dismissive... F6C said: This isn't about absolute rights and wrong, not claiming that. If you like the gearing, that's an entirely legitimate point of view. The problem is that the attempts to dismiss the idea that it might be too long seem to be largely defensiveness combined with a lack of understanding of what it is some people object to about the gearing. Point is its been done to death, like PDK vs Manual - I'm not a denier - but i am a realist, and actually when you get out and drive the thing in the proper environments, then its not ruining the drive for most, and its a just an easy line to trot out, when really most people haven't ever been near the limit of the car. F6C said: Personally, I think that most people saying the gearing is fine would find they significantly preferred the car were it available with shorter ratios 1-5, with each gear progressively shortened a bit less so that 5th was only a little shorter than it currently is (and 6th carried over with no changes for cruising) but the key gears 2-4 shortened enough to really notice a difference. Can't prove that obviously. But am also pretty sure the gearing isn't as it is because Porsche thinks it gives the best driving experience. Think emissions and costs play a significant role. Anyway, look, for anyone who likes the gearing great. The main point is that there is good reason to think it's too long. It's not just some nonsense somebody made up and has gained traction for no reason. It genuinely detracts from the experience for some drivers. If that's not you, it's a win, so there's no need to be cross! Yep - I said that already, and I do think people should go out and spend the money, get it done and tell us all how good it is... if there are any pitfalls, and then soon everyone would do it - and everyone would be happy. Please explain to me why people are NOT doing it?.. Edited by TDT on Monday 15th March 16:32

Schmed said: This thread has an almost familiar quality. Almost as if a well known contributor has returned after a brief hiatus. Mentioning no names... Lol. It's not.

F6C said: It's got nothing to do with what I say. The cars either do or don't have sound deadening. Do you have a point to make / something to actually say? Peculiar posts! Could be wrong, but it seems like you didn't like my posts, couldn't think of anything coherent to respond with, tried to find some error to nit pick / score debating points, and chose sound deadening under the misapprehension that a GT4 has no sound deadening...? Edited by F6C on Monday 15th March 16:00 Get real.

Porsche, apparently had to do the long gearing to get over the emission standards. So it was a trade off, supply a manual gearbox but it has to have long gears. I bought a GT4, drove it for 2000 miles, I will tell you what the problem is. On track it is painful waiting for the engine to pull up to the redline. Driving in general, you just feel like you are in the wrong gear all the time! I sold it after six months and lost 10K, which hurt, especially after the Porsche dealer went on as if they where doing me a big favour supplying me a GT car, then they did not want it back. So I bought a 991.2 manual GTS, as that is going to be the last Porsche with a manual gearbox that has the correct ratio's, unless you get a GT3 of course.

Purple Man said: Porsche, apparently had to do the long gearing to get over the emission standards. So it was a trade off, supply a manual gearbox but it has to have long gears. I bought a GT4, drove it for 2000 miles, I will tell you what the problem is. On track it is painful waiting for the engine to pull up to the redline. Driving in general, you just feel like you are in the wrong gear all the time! I sold it after six months and lost 10K, which hurt, especially after the Porsche dealer went on as if they where doing me a big favour supplying me a GT car, then they did not want it back. So I bought a 991.2 manual GTS, as that is going to be the last Porsche with a manual gearbox that has the correct ratio's, unless you get a GT3 of course. Maybe you should have got the gearing sorted instead?

Pretty long on my 987.1.S - 2nd gear equated to 3rd in my Golf R. That said I don’t feel the need to keep it in 2nd and 3rd on B roads like many advocate, I still feel it’s got enough grunt in higher gears to respond to power on through the bends. I am a firm believer in ‘revving it out’ when it’s nicely warmed up and safe opportunity to do so (plus I like the noise it makes!).

Does an upgraded fly wheel not help with acceleration?

Purple Man said: Porsche, apparently had to do the long gearing to get over the emission standards. So it was a trade off, supply a manual gearbox but it has to have long gears. Although that doesn't explain the people^ who complain about gears in the 7-speed PDK being too long. ^ Sorry, I should have said, "PH driving gods".

F6C said: Not setting out to offend, but again would have to reluctantly say these rather seem like rationalisations rather than serious points. It's a very significant step with a brand new car of this value to crack open the gearbox and change the ratios. It's perfectly legitimate and coherent to take issue with the gearing without wanting to modify the gearbox. Implying as you have that being unwilling to open up the box to change the ratios in any way undermines a view that the gearing would be better were it shorter smacks a little of point scoring rather than trying to actually discuss the issues at hand. And again, just because some people may well be just repeating what they've heard doesn't mean there isn't substance to what they've heard. It's totally irrelevant to the actual issue at hand - what impact is the gearing having? Approved for track use? Really? How so? The GT4 has approval for track use that, say, a standard 718 does not have? What form does this take? As far as I know, this is not true, but happy to be corrected. In a more general sense, the GT4 is more or less 1,500kg with carpets, electric windows, infotainment, sound deadening, the works. It is not in any way a stripped out track special. It's a road car first and foremost. The 'hair on fire' thing likewise comes across as rather defensive but not really making a great deal of sense as far as I can see. With shorter gearing, it would be possible to shift more frequently without going any faster than your alternative suggestion of short shifting. In both cases you shift more often. But with shorter gearing, you'll be able to do that while using more of the rev range that the NA engine was designed to deliver. We agree that the gearing doesn't ruin the car. But there's been little to nothing coherent that anyone has posted here undermines the assertion that the gearing is too long. It's largely incoherent / irrelevant rationalisations. This isn't about absolute rights and wrong, not claiming that. If you like the gearing, that's an entirely legitimate point of view. The problem is that the attempts to dismiss the idea that it might be too long seem to be largely defensiveness combined with a lack of understanding of what it is some people object to about the gearing. Personally, I think that most people saying the gearing is fine would find they significantly preferred the car were it available with shorter ratios 1-5, with each gear progressively shortened a bit less so that 5th was only a little shorter than it currently is (and 6th carried over with no changes for cruising) but the key gears 2-4 shortened enough to really notice a difference. Can't prove that obviously. But am also pretty sure the gearing isn't as it is because Porsche thinks it gives the best driving experience. Think emissions and costs play a significant role. Anyway, look, for anyone who likes the gearing great. The main point is that there is good reason to think it's too long. It's not just some nonsense somebody made up and has gained traction for no reason. It genuinely detracts from the experience for some drivers. If that's not you, it's a win, so there's no need to be cross! Absolutely spot on every bit of this! I’m not 100% sure but I think the GT3 with an extra 100 horses has shorter gearing than the GT4, if that’s true then it can only be emissions, to handicap the performance in comparison to the GT3, or both. I’ve waited ages for the PDK to become available as it’s a little bit better and feels more natural flipping into first for hairpins due to the lack of torque in 2nd. If the gearing was shorter I’d have bought the manual. All personal choice great to have at least two options.

Race engines are ‘lifed’ because they spend all of their time at the top end of their rev ranges and are generally more robust that road engines. For context a good race engine will require a rebuild after 50 hours. It isn’t practical for a road engine to work in the same Rev ranges. If you want 380-400+ Bhp road cars do operate in the optimum power zones you will need very deep pockets and presumably no one else to share to public highway with. You can’t have it all ways. If you want to extract the performance of these cars, do it on the track where you can happily spend all day bouncing off your rev limiter - not on the road

Purple Man said: I bought a GT4, drove it for 2000 miles, I will tell you what the problem is. On track it is painful waiting for the engine to pull up to the redline. Driving in general, you just feel like you are in the wrong gear all the time! The problem with the 981 GT4 isn't the gearing it's the detuned engine that doesn't want to pull to the redline IMHO...

One of the few reasons I don't enjoy the long gearing is because it forces me to use the gearbox in an unnatural way. As suggested, using 'one gear lower' means you have to shift diagonally across the box between 3rd and 2nd more often than you normally would. Luckily it's a very nice shift, but on a flowing b-road it's easier and more enjoyable (to me) to shift directly up and down between 3rd and 4th to work the engine properly (whilst keeping the speeds reasonable), then have 2nd gear in reserve for tighter corners. Shifting down into 1st gear at 20mph, whilst possible and fairly smooth with rev match on, just feels wrong. I'm well and truly on the 'the gears are too long' bandwagon. This summer I'll decide whether to modify the gearbox or get rid of the car.

Twinfan said: Purple Man said: I bought a GT4, drove it for 2000 miles, I will tell you what the problem is. On track it is painful waiting for the engine to pull up to the redline. Driving in general, you just feel like you are in the wrong gear all the time! The problem with the 981 GT4 isn't the gearing it's the detuned engine that doesn't want to pull to the redline IMHO... That’s true. The small intake in the 981 means that the power delivery stops early. Put a big mama intake on and she sings.... But that can’t be the whole issue... The 718 4.0 has a dual resonance flap intake... and the same ‘complaint’ is levied.... I’d like to suggest, as a Steve Rance does Steve Rance said: If you want 380-400+ Bhp road cars do operate in the optimum power zones you will need very deep pockets and presumably no one else to share to public highway with. You can’t have it all ways. If you want to extract the performance of these cars, do it on the track where you can happily spend all day bouncing off your rev limiter - not on the road The limit is the operating environment....

Steve Rance said: Race engines are ‘lifed’ because they spend all of their time at the top end of their rev ranges and are generally more robust that road engines. For context a good race engine will require a rebuild after 50 hours. It isn’t practical for a road engine to work in the same Rev ranges. If you want 380-400+ Bhp road cars do operate in the optimum power zones you will need very deep pockets and presumably no one else to share to public highway with. You can’t have it all ways. If you want to extract the performance of these cars, do it on the track where you can happily spend all day bouncing off your rev limiter - not on the road Even on a track, the gearing is too long because it hurts acceleration. The gears are fine on the Nurburgring or wide GP tracks, but are too long for most short tracks such as Knockhill. On the road, shorter gears would allow me to interact with the gearbox more often whilst taking into consideration the local speed limits. I can't see any disadvantage to having shorter gears in this type of car.

IMO 964 with 5-speed gearbox is perfection on our roads. Roughly 6000rpm in 2nd gear at 60mph, intake howl and engine whine 'on cam' as you attack a bumpy b-road. Hit rev limit at 6700rpm and into 3rd and still just around speed limit I recall. GT4 is indeed geared too long for our roads if you like to stay relatively safe and enjoy reving an NA car out. But same can be said of 997 GT3 both gens (with 997.2 GT3 RS as exception), so nothing new there...

Swapping gears between 2nd and third and to keep in the sweet spot on the 996 where you are hitting the rev limit at roughly 65mph is just a joy, it is the reason to go manual. Is there not a cheaper diff option? Does Quaife not offer something with a slightly higher ratio?

Autoquest Motorsparts in the states seem to offer a solution, a 4.6 final drive for just over £2k. It is worth having a watch of the manual M3 CSL video just posted on Harry's Garage yesterday, the have gone foe shorter gearing and he goes on about how much this adds to the occasion.

Twinfan said: Purple Man said: I bought a GT4, drove it for 2000 miles, I will tell you what the problem is. On track it is painful waiting for the engine to pull up to the redline. Driving in general, you just feel like you are in the wrong gear all the time! The problem with the 981 GT4 isn't the gearing it's the detuned engine that doesn't want to pull to the redline IMHO... Stock 981 GT4 there is little point hanging on to the revs presumably due to power and torque drop off which seems greater than with the higher revving 718 GT4 which altogether seems snappier despite having the same torque higher power but similar ptw as the 981. Similar in many ways to the 991.1 GT3 v 991.2 there is a notable difference in power and torque drop off in the 991.1 past peak up to the 9k redline.

aka_kerrly said: 86mph in 2nd gear is ridiculous when the speed limit is only 70,. How often do you find yourself coming off a roundabout onto a dual carriage way/motorway where you only get to pull 2nd gear then what change to 6th?? Having much shorter gears would at least give you the opportunity to use 3rd/4th. Not everyone enjoys waiting for long gears and find it more fun using more gears. One of the most fun cars I've driven has a close ratio 6speed box ,54mph in 2nd at 8600rpm so on track between 40-120 is mostly all 3rd/4th/5th.i rarely need to change down the 2nd which used to cost me time/speed previously with the standard final drive. Best mod on one of my cars that comes with a 3.3final drive and theoretical top speed of 170mph was fit a 3.9fd to bring speed down to 147mph , it's feels like the car has gained 50+hp Metcalfe says the same here about the diff change on a CSL manual conversion - skip to 9:50 for it:

gizlaroc said: Autoquest Motorsparts in the states seem to offer a solution, a 4.6 final drive for just over £2k. It is worth having a watch of the manual M3 CSL video just posted on Harry's Garage yesterday, the have gone foe shorter gearing and he goes on about how much this adds to the occasion. $2600 for parts... then it’s the labour.... The effort for changing our CW&P is almost the same as for a full re-gear as the full box has to be stripped down to change CW&P anyway. A few people have done CW&P and enjoyed it, but none tend to post. Interesting note...in the Autoquest blurb... all the GT4 (981) have also had power upgrades.... so the benefits documented are not down to just the gearing change alone. That Manual CSL video is pretty cool, again...aftermarket solution.

What a load of pretentious guff. The engine is beautifully on-song from 5k+. Tom Kristensen wannabes pretending they redline everywhere on the road seem quite well represented on this forum. It’s a compromise to have a manual within the constraints of our ridiculous emissions regulations. I’m glad they didn’t just present us with the alternative. Edited by Royal Jelly on Tuesday 16th March 04:31

n12maser said: IMO 964 with 5-speed gearbox is perfection on our roads. Roughly 6000rpm in 2nd gear at 60mph, intake howl and engine whine 'on cam' as you attack a bumpy b-road. Hit rev limit at 6700rpm and into 3rd and still just around speed limit I recall. GT4 is indeed geared too long for our roads if you like to stay relatively safe and enjoy reving an NA car out. But same can be said of 997 GT3 both gens (with 997.2 GT3 RS as exception), so nothing new there... You can't compare an old 250bhp car with a new 420bhp car. I think the GT4 would be sideways everywhere with the 964 gearbox ratios, it just wouldn't be useable.

Fine, I'll compare the gearing with the 911R then - same story - look at speeds at 7000rpm

Modern Porsches I currently own or have owned, I'v done about quarter of a million miles in these cars, road and track: 997.2 c2s, 996 gt3 rs , 997.1 gt3rs. 997.2gt3rs, 2011 Boxster S, 2015 Boxster spyder, 2015 c2 gts pdk, 2016 c2 gts pdk, carrera T, 718 cayman GTS turbo, 718 Boxster GTS 4.0, 718 GT4. All manual unless stated. The gearing very rarely feels wrong enough to be inconvenient, I find the best way to embrace the long gearing is to drive faster. If you want to be swapping cogs at high revs yet at the same time remaining at or close to the posted speed limits then you ve bought the wrong cars. If your ability to rinse your porsche through a few gears is restricted by the traffic or roads in your local area, then again you ve bought the wrong car. All these Porsche sports cars with 350 - 500 bhp will pull more than 180 mph and so have to have the ratios spread out to achieve those high speeds. Porsche makes fantastic sports cars that work absolutley brilliantly at the speeds at which they are capable; the trade off is that at lower effort and lower speeds 3rd or 4th gear may feel unresponsive whilst 2nd gear might feel a little loud and lairy. If your environment , attitude or driving style dictates mainly busy and populated roads and /or a desire to drive mainly between 40 and 80 mph , then a modern Porsche sports car is the wrong car. So the whole car is wrong for you, not the cars' gearing. If you are able and willing to regularly rev your car out through a few gears without pissing off other road users , locals, neighbours and without being a danger to anyone, then Porsche sports cars are fantastic and the gearing is perfect for the performance provided. As for track days, there is a world of difference between lapping Spa and lapping Knockhill and one car will not feel right on both. If you do all your track days on Knockhill or Anglesey then a 997.1 GT3RS is geared wrong and so is the wrong car. However if you go to Silverstone more often then it's the right car. This is why race teams change gearing to suit the circuit of the day. Your GT4 isn't going to suit them all and that isn't the fault of the gearing, the car or Porsche.

^ (Doffs cap...)

Royal Jelly said: What a load of pretentious guff. The engine is beautifully on-song from 5k+. Tom Kristensen wannabes pretending they redline everywhere on the road seem quite well represented on this forum. Bit of a strange thing to say? Yeah it is on song at 5000rpm, like most Porsches (and many other highly tuned cars) it starts to come alive from around 4000rpm, and you have that sweet spot between 4000 and 7000rpm where the car feels incredible, and it is a total joy keeping it in that sweet spot where it feels so light on its feet. But surely for a road car doing that between 50-60 mph, rather than 63-74mph, so you get the chance to use 3rd and having some interaction with the gearbox to give a sense of reward is hardly pretentious guff? There is reason why the 991R, GT3 and RS gets that gearing. I completely get why Porsche have had to do it, and agree that at least they are still offering a manual version.

Agree with above. Having driven one, I found it way too long as sapped the enjoyment/interaction out of the car when it didn't need to. However, all GT3's are too quick for the road IMV. Maybe old fashioned, but give me an air-cooled any day.

gizlaroc said: you have that sweet spot between 4000 and 7000rpm where the car feels incredible In which gear changes are you suggesting the engine needs to leave that sweet spot? It looks to me as though 7000 rpm in 1st is the same speed as 4000 rpm in 2nd.

boringbeige said: Modern Porsches I currently own or have owned, I'v done about quarter of a million miles in these cars, road and track: 997.2 c2s, 996 gt3 rs , 997.1 gt3rs. 997.2gt3rs, 2011 Boxster S, 2015 Boxster spyder, 2015 c2 gts pdk, 2016 c2 gts pdk, carrera T, 718 cayman GTS turbo, 718 Boxster GTS 4.0, 718 GT4. All manual unless stated. The gearing very rarely feels wrong enough to be inconvenient, I find the best way to embrace the long gearing is to drive faster. If you want to be swapping cogs at high revs yet at the same time remaining at or close to the posted speed limits then you ve bought the wrong cars. If your ability to rinse your porsche through a few gears is restricted by the traffic or roads in your local area, then again you ve bought the wrong car. All these Porsche sports cars with 350 - 500 bhp will pull more than 180 mph and so have to have the ratios spread out to achieve those high speeds. Porsche makes fantastic sports cars that work absolutley brilliantly at the speeds at which they are capable; the trade off is that at lower effort and lower speeds 3rd or 4th gear may feel unresponsive whilst 2nd gear might feel a little loud and lairy. If your environment , attitude or driving style dictates mainly busy and populated roads and /or a desire to drive mainly between 40 and 80 mph , then a modern Porsche sports car is the wrong car. So the whole car is wrong for you, not the cars' gearing. If you are able and willing to regularly rev your car out through a few gears without pissing off other road users , locals, neighbours and without being a danger to anyone, then Porsche sports cars are fantastic and the gearing is perfect for the performance provided. As for track days, there is a world of difference between lapping Spa and lapping Knockhill and one car will not feel right on both. If you do all your track days on Knockhill or Anglesey then a 997.1 GT3RS is geared wrong and so is the wrong car. However if you go to Silverstone more often then it's the right car. This is why race teams change gearing to suit the circuit of the day. Your GT4 isn't going to suit them all and that isn't the fault of the gearing, the car or Porsche. I completely agree. Just a shame that Porsche thought that the public roads are more like Spa and less like Knockhill when they specified the gearing.

Just noticed this and would like to add that - yes rear wheel torque is proportional to the inverse of the overall gear ratio (so the lower the gearing the higher the rear wheel torque) and it is torque that accelerates a mass - however I don't think anyone has mentioned that if you increase the peak revs it also increases the rev drop to the next higher gear in the same proportion that you increased the peak revs - so needs a wider power band to then accelerate as fast through a longer rev drop (or closer ratio gears). Yet most modifications that raise peak revs also shorten the power band (the opposite of what you really need). So with road going sports cars being geared for top speeds very few will ever reach (and even on our short circuits top speeds over 130mph are rare) so it can be a better alternative to try and spread the power band lower down the rev scale rather than increase the peak revs just to brag about more BHP (especially if you have a Lokasil bore engine that might need a rebuild one day anyway). Increasing the capacity does just exactly that because there is more time to fill the cylinders at lower revs and typically an increase in capacity can create a proportionally bigger increase in mid range torque (better BMEP and higher volumetric efficiency) than the increase in capacity does at the top end (although that also increases just not by as much). So an increase in capacity of say 8% can often increase torque in the mid range by nearer 15%, broaden the power band and still achieve an increase in peak BHP by around the increase in capacity of 8% (I will try and post some graphs of the differences in some of our capacity conversions to show what I mean). With more power and torque and a wider torque spread the gearing feels more like it has been lowered because you get more response throughout the rev range and whatever gear you are in and usually greater MPG as well. Our 9a1 Gen 2 4.0 litre PDK is really fast and we are now developing a 4.2 litre version - and the additional torque works brilliantly with a PDK gearbox. Baz Edited by hartech on Tuesday 16th March 14:56

This can often be appreciated more when viewed using a rear wheel torque comparison graph. We have a full report on the capacity conversions available from [email removed] Baz

Some brilliant insight there Baz... as you say performance tuning to optimise the power band and delivery can really make a huge difference to the perceived and measurable impact of gearing and therefore performance. Would be good to see more info on your development programmes.

All well and good at making you faster, but the gearing haters don't want the car any faster. They seem to want it slower so they can change gear more?

Twinfan said: All well and good at making you faster, but the gearing haters don't want the car any faster. They seem to want it slower so they can change gear more? Buy a lorry or a bus? Plenty of shifting available.

TDT said: Twinfan said: All well and good at making you faster, but the gearing haters don't want the car any faster. They seem to want it slower so they can change gear more? Buy a lorry or a bus? Plenty of shifting available. Buy an old car seems to the obvious answer IMHO...

I have owned many performance cars the most recent being 718 base pdk prior the Spyder MT. The only reason I had to redline in ALL my other cars was because I was reaching the limit of what they could offer. I did not relate that to enjoyment of any description . Done 1300 miles so far. Since 1000 miles I have only been able to rev between 4k~7k without being too dangerous, most of the time 4k~5k was more than adequate to have the required torgue on public roads at high speed. I personally thinks changing gear more often takes away some of the joy of this suspension & possibly dangerous for the non professional like myself in some situations. I was tailgated by Tesla on the mountain Sunday before last, successfully left him eat dust after a couple of acute bends, 2nd gear all the way. If I had to change gear like Colin McRae, probably end up off the cliff. Thats just me.

Twinfan said: All well and good at making you faster, but the gearing haters don't want the car any faster. They seem to want it slower so they can change gear more? To counter that, I didn’t buy a gt4 because it’s the fastest car on the road. There are much faster cars with automatic gearboxes if going really fast and not changing gear is your thing.

Maybe Porsche made the long gearing for the Autobahns and red line chasers .Regardless you can always short shift if not happy and safe .

It would be interesting to know how much shorter the gearing would be if Porsche were able to do what they wanted and ignore any considerations of emissions tests. Referring to the interesting table on the third page - comparing the speeds at 7000rpm for 997.2 RS to the GT4, there are 11/15/17mph differences in 2/3/4 gears. I wonder what that shorter gearing would equate to in extra power terms. Basically, if the GT4's gearing was more like the 911R or the 997.2 RS I don't think anyone would be complaining...

Bubbledragon said: I have owned many performance cars the most recent being 718 base pdk prior the Spyder MT. The only reason I had to redline in ALL my other cars was because I was reaching the limit of what they could offer. I did not relate that to enjoyment of any description . Done 1300 miles so far. Since 1000 miles I have only been able to rev between 4k~7k without being too dangerous, most of the time 4k~5k was more than adequate to have the required torgue on public roads at high speed. I personally thinks changing gear more often takes away some of the joy of this suspension & possibly dangerous for the non professional like myself in some situations. I was tailgated by Tesla on the mountain Sunday before last, successfully left him eat dust after a couple of acute bends, 2nd gear all the way. If I had to change gear like Colin McRae, probably end up off the cliff. Thats just me. Indeed, but surely a PDK would be a better gearbox under these driving conditions? It seems to me, with my limited knowledge of these cars, that Porsche have given folks what they’ve been clamouring for in a manual gearbox that in normal driving conditions performs like an automatic, especially on the heavily policed UK public roads. If one can rev out the car in 1st, 2nd and then have to short shift through the rest of the remaining ratios, what is the point exactly when a PDK can do that and a whole lot more besides? On track I can see the argument for manual gearbox’s, but in the real world it seems that nostalgia for manual shifting is overriding common sense, especially for these long geared GT cars.

maz8062 said: Indeed, but surely a PDK would be a better gearbox under these driving conditions? It seems to me, with my limited knowledge of these cars, that Porsche have given folks what they’ve been clamouring for in a manual gearbox that in normal driving conditions performs like an automatic, especially on the heavily policed UK public roads. If one can rev out the car in 1st, 2nd and then have to short shift through the rest of the remaining ratios, what is the point exactly when a PDK can do that and a whole lot more besides? On track I can see the argument for manual gearbox’s, but in the real world it seems that nostalgia for manual shifting is overriding common sense, especially for these long geared GT cars. You can't even rev it out in 2nd (84mph) on the public road. I think that says it all.

Oz83 said: You can't even rev it out in 2nd (84mph) on the public road. I think that says it all. Or any other GT car, or any Porsche if that’s your argument?

Lets simplify it. You can get a GT4 for well below list price. The GT4 is a top car apart from the long gearing, so it's obvious the long gearing is a big negative. It is the same in the new manual 992, that also now has long gearing. It would be interesting if someone could post the top speed for each gear in the new manual 992?? Because if it anything like the GT4 speeds I might have to become a PDK fan!

Purple Man said: The GT4 is a top car apart from the long gearing, so it's obvious the long gearing is a big negative. It is the same in the new manual 992, that also now has long gearing. It would be interesting if someone could post the top speed for each gear in the new manual 992?? Because if it anything like the GT4 speeds I might have to become a PDK fan! You say the 992 has long gearing yet you don't know its top speed in each gear.

But all 992 are turbo, which complicates the argument! Imagine not such an issue when the turbo is giving you added excitement lower down the rev range.

Turbo and excitement rarely used in the same sentence lol.

Purple Man said: Lets simplify it. You can get a GT4 for well below list price. The GT4 is a top car apart from the long gearing, so it's obvious the long gearing is a big negative. It is the same in the new manual 992, that also now has long gearing. It would be interesting if someone could post the top speed for each gear in the new manual 992?? Because if it anything like the GT4 speeds I might have to become a PDK fan! Please show me the GT4s dealers that are giving away at well below list?

MannyLon said: Purple Man said: Lets simplify it. You can get a GT4 for well below list price. The GT4 is a top car apart from the long gearing, so it's obvious the long gearing is a big negative. It is the same in the new manual 992, that also now has long gearing. It would be interesting if someone could post the top speed for each gear in the new manual 992?? Because if it anything like the GT4 speeds I might have to become a PDK fan! Please show me the GT4s dealers that are giving away at well below list? Don't worry there aren't any its the usual internet folklore....rather like the gearing issues posted by those who have never even sat in one never mind driven one. They read Auto Express and regurgitate on here.

Porsche Centre Nottingham, they are actually saying in their advert "big saving on list price". 2020 car, similar spec to the one I had, so that is a 98K car I would estimate. And that is a good specification with all the right things on it! Most of the cars advertised are below list price and there will be a deal to do on the advertised price. 992 long gearing, when EVO magazine tested the manual 992, that was the main negative point, the 992 now, unfortunately suffers from long gearing in the manual guise. But Evo failed to say what the in gear speeds are, so I do not know what they are compared with the old 991.2 in gear speeds or the GT4. But it does not sound good, for the manual.

This one has been mentioned here on PH and is also below list by around £3-4k I think? https://finder.porsche.com/gb/en_GB/718-Cayman-GT4...

Twinfan said: This one has been mentioned here on PH and is also below list by around £3-4k I think? https://finder.porsche.com/gb/en_GB/718-Cayman-GT4... Good spec

Over 4k miles and over 12 months old.

Seems most are hovering around list? Good time to buy, before summer.

av185 said: Over 4k miles and over 12 months old. You're making your own rules up now The quote was: "Lets simplify it. You can get a GT4 for well below list price."

Purple Man said: Porsche Centre Nottingham, they are actually saying in their advert "big saving on list price". 2020 car, similar spec to the one I had, so that is a 98K car I would estimate. And that is a good specification with all the right things on it! Most of the cars advertised are below list price and there will be a deal to do on the advertised price. 992 long gearing, when EVO magazine tested the manual 992, that was the main negative point, the 992 now, unfortunately suffers from long gearing in the manual guise. But Evo failed to say what the in gear speeds are, so I do not know what they are compared with the old 991.2 in gear speeds or the GT4. But it does not sound good, for the manual. The only one at Nottingham is this 1st run 2019 18 month old car with marmite spec. Even this is still over list ££ as are all the OPC GT4s with lowish mileage. It is the older higher mileage/iffy spec ones that are slightly under list retail which is understandable.

It's on Autotrader at £89'991 a 2020 car with 4K miles. That's just one example of many.

av185 said: Don't worry there aren't any its the usual internet folklore....rather like the gearing issues posted by those who have never even sat in one never mind driven one. They read Auto Express and regurgitate on here. I have. It's too long. I didn't buy one as for me, it was as this was a major issue however understand that for some it isn't. You have one of these too ?...the 'pumping' suggests so

Too many muppets just regurgitating lazy journalist comments and jumping on a nonsense bandwagon imo. Even if you think there is substance to it, the Harry's Garage GTS review mentions clearly that it's a non-issue -- due to the plentiful available torque.

rockin said: gizlaroc said: you have that sweet spot between 4000 and 7000rpm where the car feels incredible In which gear changes are you suggesting the engine needs to leave that sweet spot? It looks to me as though 7000 rpm in 1st is the same speed as 4000 rpm in 2nd. I'm not suggesting that at all. Im simply saying I understand why some might want shorter gearing, it's such a joy to swap cogs on these, having to do so around the 65mph mark might be a little more involving for a car most will have bought as a toy for the road. I don't care as I can't afford either, but I don't get why people who find the gearing too long get sneered at?

maz8062 said: You’re probably be right - for the autobahn that is, but for the roads in the UK, back roads with speed limits of 60 mph, it doesn’t make sense driving a car when barley a 1/3rd of its potential is on tap on public roads. Obviously it’s a different story on track, but if an owner doesn’t track the car the ownership proposition is akin to the purchase of a luxury good, like a Rolex, Hermes bag etc. . If you want to "always stick to the limits" you may as well buy a Dacia... The rest of us may (ahem) like go faster on track / the autobahn to exploit the true capability of the car. Never on a public road in the UK, of course ...

Maybe we should summarise. Some people are happy with the gearing and some are not. There, now let’s move on.

Purple Man said: It's on Autotrader at £89'991 a 2020 car with 4K miles. That's just one example of many. Highest mileage UK 2020 GT4 explains the price even at £15k over basic list new.

braddo said: It would be interesting to know how much shorter the gearing would be if Porsche were able to do what they wanted and ignore any considerations of emissions tests. Referring to the interesting table on the third page - comparing the speeds at 7000rpm for 997.2 RS to the GT4, there are 11/15/17mph differences in 2/3/4 gears. I wonder what that shorter gearing would equate to in extra power terms. Basically, if the GT4's gearing was more like the 911R or the 997.2 RS I don't think anyone would be complaining... I agree ... but it also makes the 991.2 GT3 PDK a very interesting car ... 'Also interesting to see the 996.1 gearing ... though a safety first 7800rpm max ... The 911R is very interesting !

Oz83 said: You can't even rev it out in 2nd (84mph) on the public road. I think that says it all. Yes you can, quite easily and perfectly legal.

ChrisW. said: braddo said: It would be interesting to know how much shorter the gearing would be if Porsche were able to do what they wanted and ignore any considerations of emissions tests. Referring to the interesting table on the third page - comparing the speeds at 7000rpm for 997.2 RS to the GT4, there are 11/15/17mph differences in 2/3/4 gears. I wonder what that shorter gearing would equate to in extra power terms. Basically, if the GT4's gearing was more like the 911R or the 997.2 RS I don't think anyone would be complaining... I agree ... but it also makes the 991.2 GT3 PDK a very interesting car ... 'Also interesting to see the 996.1 gearing ... though a safety first 7800rpm max ... The 911R is very interesting ! They have gone with even shorter gearing on the GT4 Clubsport, and redline is limited to 7600rpm as well. Something like 84mph in 2nd on the GT4 manual, 77mph on the PDK and 71mph on the GT4 CS. That will make it 'feel' pretty manic.

Lexington59 said: Too many muppets just regurgitating lazy journalist comments and jumping on a nonsense bandwagon imo. Even if you think there is substance to it, the Harry's Garage GTS review mentions clearly that it's a non-issue -- due to the plentiful available torque. You’re probably right - for the autobahn that is, but for the roads in the UK, back roads with speed limits of 60 mph, it doesn’t make sense driving a car when barley a 1/3rd of its potential is on tap on public roads. Obviously it’s a different story on track, but if an owner doesn’t track the car the ownership proposition is akin to the purchase of a luxury good, like a Rolex, Hermes bag etc. Further, Porsche have this all sussed out. Sell high revving cars to folk not able to exploit there potential but ensure servicing costs are commensurate with a car capable of the top speed advertised, and insist on time dependant servicing rather than mileage dependant and they’re quids in. For now, this model works. Edited by maz8062 on Wednesday 17th March 22:54

n12maser said: IMO 964 with 5-speed gearbox is perfection on our roads. Roughly 6000rpm in 2nd gear at 60mph, intake howl and engine whine 'on cam' as you attack a bumpy b-road. Hit rev limit at 6700rpm and into 3rd and still just around speed limit I recall. GT4 is indeed geared too long for our roads if you like to stay relatively safe and enjoy reving an NA car out. But same can be said of 997 GT3 both gens (with 997.2 GT3 RS as exception), so nothing new there... 6000rpm in a 718 GT4/Spyder/ GTS4.0 is only 64mph. So the gearing in your 964 isn’t really any different. Ok the modern engine will rev higher, but is still producing 350hp at 6000, which is enough power and certainly at lot more than your 964.

I wonder how many people here who say it is a nonsense have ever swapped the rear diffs on a car to shorten/lengthen the gearing and felt just how much it changes the overall feel of car? I must admit it was only when I tried a mates M3, who used to race it, with different rear diffs and ratios that I got just how much it changed things. I am not saying that less gears and too short is always best either, you can then get into a situation where you change up and you are too low and out of the sweet spot, you are out of the power band. Just saying jumping into the same car with a different rear diff and therefore longer/shorter gearing can make a huge difference to overall feel.

Wonder what that Harry's Garage CSL diff conversion did to the MPG / CO2 ... ?

Many years ago I had a BMW E30 M3 Sport Evolution which was basically a track car. Full cage, Motec ecu, Shrick cams etc. etc. was dyne'ed at 275 bhp as had engine work etc. The last thing I did was change the rear diff from the standard 3.14:1 to a 3.65:1 and the result was fantastic on track but utterly terrible on road. The mpg was abysmal and sitting at motorway speeds the thing was revving its off. I did look into the CW&P conversion that RPM do but it's just too expensive for how little I use my 981 GT4 especially for track work. The conversion is not needed for normal road driving. Edited by Andy OH on Thursday 18th March 13:16

Maybe we need to just bite the bullet on changing into 1st at 25 mph for maximum oomph ? The 911R had lower mid ratios and a 200mph 6th gear. Modifying the final drive to sit on the motorway at 4000 rpm doesn't sound very appealing ....

gizlaroc said: I wonder how many people here who say it is a nonsense have ever swapped the rear diffs on a car to shorten/lengthen the gearing and felt just how much it changes the overall feel of car? I must admit it was only when I tried a mates M3, who used to race it, with different rear diffs and ratios that I got just how much it changed things. I am not saying that less gears and too short is always best either, you can then get into a situation where you change up and you are too low and out of the sweet spot, you are out of the power band. Just saying jumping into the same car with a different rear diff and therefore longer/shorter gearing can make a huge difference to overall feel. I fully agree. I have a number of times (plus long ratio top gears etc) and it most certainly isnt a nonsense. I had a 981 spyder and the bottom line is it has the wrong FD for a drivers car but the right one for emissions. The armchair warriors on here really have no idea, short shift it, torque bla bla they are all compromises. If I buy a GTS and I may then I will change the FD (with no long ratio 6th a terrible mod) as thats all it needs to achieve greatness.

kilarney said: I had a 981 spyder and the bottom line is it has the wrong FD for a drivers car the track but the right one for the road. FTFY

Lexington59 said: kilarney said: I had a 981 spyder and the bottom line is it has the wrong FD for a drivers car the track but the right one for the road. FTFY Do you really think that if emissions weren't a big factor, and Porsche could choose their preferred gearing, that the 981 Sypder's would be unchanged because they're so right for the road?

Lexington59 said: FTFY Like I said Armchair. I currently have a 987.2 like you it seems. Doesnt have the affliction.You had a late spyder or GT4 same as me ?

braddo said: Do you really think that if emissions weren't a big factor, and Porsche could choose their preferred gearing, that the 981 Sypder's would be unchanged because they're so right for the road? Strange that Porsche is the only manufacturer forced by regulations to fit this allegedly "wrong" gearing and yet remains the world's most successful sports car builder. Must be the cup-holders, or the badge, or something.

rockin said: braddo said: Do you really think that if emissions weren't a big factor, and Porsche could choose their preferred gearing, that the 981 Sypder's would be unchanged because they're so right for the road? Strange that Porsche is the only manufacturer forced by regulations to fit this allegedly "wrong" gearing and yet remains the world's most successful sports car builder. Must be the cup-holders, or the badge, or something. It wasn't emissions based. Frank-Steffen Walliser said when asked if the long gearing was emission based..... "The gearbox we have, don't get me wrong, it's an old one, an existing one and changing the gear was just technically not possible as we were running out of space on the shafts, if we need an adjustment there,” he explained. "We would have loved to have seen that, [the gearing] a little bit shorter, but technically there was no way. We have an answer, which will come later this year and that's very nice then." Obviously the answer was PDK arriving.

gizlaroc said: It wasn't emissions based. Frank-Steffen Walliser said when asked if the long gearing was emission based..... "The gearbox we have, don't get me wrong, it's an old one, an existing one and changing the gear was just technically not possible as we were running out of space on the shafts, if we need an adjustment there,” he explained. "We would have loved to have seen that, [the gearing] a little bit shorter, but technically there was no way. We have an answer, which will come later this year and that's very nice then." Obviously the answer was PDK arriving. Sounds like he is referring to the ability to drop different gearsets in. It's not related to why the 'old existing' box (used across the entire Cay/Box range presumably) already had overly long ratios.

I have no idea mate. It was an interview discussing the GT4 and why they chose such long gearing.

rockin said: Strange that Porsche is the only manufacturer forced by regulations to fit this allegedly "wrong" gearing and yet remains the world's most successful sports car builder. Must be the cup-holders, or the badge, or something. I thought it was common knowledge that manual cars have noticeably longer gearing these days compared to 20-30 years ago, which has happened because manufacturers realised they do better on the emissions tests. (This doesn't apply so much to GT3s over the years though; it looks like they kept the ratios pretty much unchanged from 996.1 until the 997.2 RS). Why are you so sensitive to some valid criticism about the gearing? For what it's worth, I have a GT3 with similarly long gearing. It's doesn't ruin the car, but it's a valid criticism for people to have and I'm quite sure I would prefer the short gearing from the 997.2 RS, and I'm quite sure a GT4 would be more enjoyable with those ratios too.

gizlaroc said: I wonder how many people here who say it is a nonsense have ever swapped the rear diffs on a car to shorten/lengthen the gearing and felt just how much it changes the overall feel of car? I must admit it was only when I tried a mates M3, who used to race it, with different rear diffs and ratios that I got just how much it changed things. I am not saying that less gears and too short is always best either, you can then get into a situation where you change up and you are too low and out of the sweet spot, you are out of the power band. Just saying jumping into the same car with a different rear diff and therefore longer/shorter gearing can make a huge difference to overall feel. Guilty as charged. I swapped an S2000 final drive from 4:1 to 4:77 - the car was like a rabid animal, but the downsides were 4K revs at 70mph and fuel consumption dropped. Top speed was lower apparently (I never tried it) but the car totally different from stock. If you look at the peak torque and power numbers for the 718 GT4 - peak torque runs from 5k to 6.8k and peak power is at 7k revs. Thus the sweet spot of this engine is actually between 5 & 7 k, the rest is just noise for the sake of it. I imagine the car feels proper fast in that sweet spot, it’s just not clear how this translates into real world speed.

gizlaroc said: It wasn't emissions based. Frank-Steffen Walliser said when asked if the long gearing was emission based..... "The gearbox we have, don't get me wrong, it's an old one, an existing one and changing the gear was just technically not possible as we were running out of space on the shafts, if we need an adjustment there,” he explained. "We would have loved to have seen that, [the gearing] a little bit shorter, but technically there was no way. We have an answer, which will come later this year and that's very nice then." Obviously the answer was PDK arriving. RPM must be genius then as they do a short FD for this transaxle. If not emissions its probably parts bin as the unit comes from the Audi ? PDK isnt much shorter. 981 85mph second gear, PDK 80mph second, 987.2 74mph second. Accept PDK is a step in the right direction.

maz8062 said: Guilty as charged. I swapped an S2000 final drive from 4:1 to 4:77 - the car was like a rabid animal, but the downsides were 4K revs at 70mph and fuel consumption dropped. Top speed was lower apparently (I never tried it) but the car totally different from stock. If you look at the peak torque and power numbers for the 718 GT4 - peak torque runs from 5k to 6.8k and peak power is at 7k revs. Thus the sweet spot of this engine is actually between 5 & 7 k, the rest is just noise for the sake of it . I imagine the car feels proper fast in that sweet spot, it’s just not clear how this translates into real world speed. Not quite true - for example you'll still be accelerating harder in 2nd up to the redline compared to changing up earlier to 3rd (981 GT4 less certain because its power actually decreases markedly towards the redline).

braddo said: I have a GT3 You'll have to do better than that. You claim other cars are geared similarly to the Porsches but where's your evidence to back it up? Where are the threads about other sports cars where a few self-appointed driving gods consistently proclaim "the gearing is too long"?

rockin said: You'll have to do better than that. You claim other cars are geared similarly to the Porsches but where's your evidence to back it up? Where are the threads about other sports cars where a few self-appointed driving gods consistently proclaim "the gearing is too long"? Why are you so sensitive to some valid criticism about the gearing? Has a girl told you the ratio of your gear is a bit short?

Wollemi said: n12maser said: IMO 964 with 5-speed gearbox is perfection on our roads. Roughly 6000rpm in 2nd gear at 60mph, intake howl and engine whine 'on cam' as you attack a bumpy b-road. Hit rev limit at 6700rpm and into 3rd and still just around speed limit I recall. GT4 is indeed geared too long for our roads if you like to stay relatively safe and enjoy reving an NA car out. But same can be said of 997 GT3 both gens (with 997.2 GT3 RS as exception), so nothing new there... 6000rpm in a 718 GT4/Spyder/ GTS4.0 is only 64mph. So the gearing in your 964 isn’t really any different. Ok the modern engine will rev higher, but is still producing 350hp at 6000, which is enough power and certainly at lot more than your 964. I have a 981 Spyder and a 964C2 coupe. Yes, the red lines are different but the reality is the 964 gearing feels better and it's more fun on the road without doing silly speeds. Also, for example with the manual 991 GT3s and 911R they have a higher red line and still don't get to the speeds the 981 can in 2nd gear. The 997.2 GT3 also felt long geared to me, lovely as it is. The 981 Spyder (appreciate the above comments refer to the 718, but it's the same gear ratios) is a brilliant car but it'd be better with shorter gearing. Ferrari get it right with their high revving engines and low gearing - for example the 812 super fast is short-geared, so while it's a car that's too fast for the road, you get to enjoy the engine a bit still. There's no excuse really. The 991 Speedster appeals to me as it should have higher redline and slightly lower gearing and would be a good spyder replacement perhaps.