On short shifters...

I was reading through the PCA site and came across some posts on short-shifters. As I have been considering upgrading to the OEM short shifter in my 2000 911, I was pretty surprised by the following comments: The idea of a short shifter is to sacrifice precision for speed. They make for shorter throws, closer spaced, easier to get the wrong gear, but look how much faster you can do it. Instead of being 20% easier to shift, they take 20% MORE effort, not less. You have less leverage because of the shorter lever. Now in your DE event, we have another variable to contend with. The engine and gearbox are mounted in rubber mounts to the body. When you are cornering, everything moves to the outside of the corner, and rotates with body lean, and rotates a different way with engine torque. Other than that the location of the gearbox is fine. This is why the first thing Porsche does when they convert a street model to a race version is eliminate the rubber mounts and devise solid metal to metal mounts. The GT3RS version of your chassis has a solid metal tubular structure to nail down the front the of gearbox. I hate to say it, but I think you might be happier with the stock shifter. What do you guys make os this? Since I main just drive hard on country roads, should I forego the short-shifter modification? Or, apropos the above, will it not impace me since I am not stressing the engine in races? Makes you go hmmm....

I have the factory short shifter. It works great. It works fine on the track and around auto-x cones. I have never made a shifting error with it. It does require more effort...but unless you are injured it should not be a factor.

I too have it...more effort = more involved...you really feel your shifting. Doesn't feel like Jell-O anymnore.

Go for it, it's a must have for me.

I do agree with that statement, however I will never drive my Porsche with out a short shifer, i know its in gear when i shift, unlike the stock one

One of my 3 more favorite mods to the car and love it on the track! Never had a problem.

I agree- it feels much better with the short shifter. Definitely worth it.

Gotta have it! Had one on my 986S and didn't enjoy my Targa until i had another installed on that. Will probably have to learn how to install them myself if I keep changing cars: process costs best part of $800 here in the UK. No wishy-washy, no flim-flam, just firm, quick & precise gear changing: love it

I have to agree with that statement. everybody keeps complaining about the notchiness and effort of the short shifter... personally I absolutely love the factory shifter... never had a problem with it and definitely don't think it needs an upgrade... you should drive a car that has it and decide on whether you like it... I understand that the "under the car" shift kit is less notchy than the in-car kit...

I would advise against the under-the-car short shifter. I considered both the in-car (B&M) and under-the-car (B&M and RUF) SSKs. I talked to a couple of mechanics and they told me that they have worked on several cars (996's and BMW 3-Series's) with messed up synchros that had under-the-car SSKs. Now it may just be a coincidence that the cars with the bad synchros also had an under-the-car SSK installed but then again I have never heard of this problem on cars with the in-car SSK so I figured better safe than sorry. As far as the B&M in-car SSK is concerned -- I can't imagine ever going back to the stock shifter. The stock throw now feels really long and "mushy". With the stock shifter, I had problems when aggressively heel-and-toeing from third to second -- the shifter would sometimes pop out of second or would not engage all the way causing a little grinding (ouch!) Yes the B&M SSK requires more effort (not a lot more, mind you) but when you engage it you know it is engaged and won't pop out. It's great.

I think any kit will put more stress on your gearbox and synchros.... interesting observation about the "under" kits vs. in-car kits....

Get it dude, all the cool kids have it.

hm .... guess I'm the lone dissenter on this one. I have the B&K and while I like it well enough, my stock shifter was pretty sharp and I really liked it. The biggest change I noticed was the increased effort and I'm not really sure it made my shifting any faster. At the track, with my stock shifter I never missed .... while with the ssk, well, we can call it driver error but it was driver error with the ssk. Nothing major, just didn't go into 3rd when accelerating out of a corner It's nice in some aspects, more feedback during the shift and I like being connected to the car. In others; the effort, notchiness, - maybe not so much. The ssk is sharper but I think that it's enough of a change from stock that you might want to see if you can find a local Rennlister who would let you sample their ssk.

I do not have any notchiness, no extra force required just a much better shift. I totally disagree with the PCA statement. IMO the SSK should be stock! I would never go back!

I have the B&M SS put it in myself. I love it.

I just recently had the OEM SSK installed and have really grown to love it. My initial reservations on the increased effort has dissapated with familiarity. I can't honestly say that I'm quicker with my shifts. I would test drive one with first before purchase.