So who prefers the 915 'box? Or is it just me...

So who prefers the 915 'box? Or is it just me...

Author
Discussion

browngt3

Original Poster:

1,409 posts

210 months

Wednesday 17th October 2018
quotequote all
I want to see how many fans of the much maligned 915 gearbox are out there! Not suggesting one is better than the other - G50 that is - just a bit of fun. Personally I love the 915 in my 3.2 Carrera. Very tactile and vintage in feel and completely different to my other cars. It forces you to really concentrate on driving the car and hence is more satisfying imo.

Here's a great vid from Lee Sibley of Total 911 where he drives an early 3.2 Carrera equipped with a nice 915.

https://youtu.be/oaIUqTcDZ8M

Enjoy and let's hear your opinions!

medieval

1,499 posts

210 months

Wednesday 17th October 2018
quotequote all
I have to confess , I was never happy with mine in the SC we had - very vintage in feel and behind the times for the technology of the age I felt but purely a personal feeling only.

By contrast , the box in the 924S of similar vintage is a joy...

RSVP911

8,192 posts

132 months

Wednesday 17th October 2018
quotequote all
I’ve had cars with both - a 1989 3.2 Carrera with the G50 and a 1973 2.7 RS (ish) with the 915 box & that lovely 2.7 MFI engine. FWIW, I liked both, but I think I preferred the 915 box for the reasons you mention - just felt more special and novel. As you say no right or wrong with this - truth is I loved both cars smile

SRT Hellcat

7,017 posts

216 months

Wednesday 17th October 2018
quotequote all
Nothing wrong with a well sorted 915 gearbox. What lets them down are knackered synchros / dog teeth. Worn clutch, worn bushes, badly adjusted. They are from memory 10kg lighter than the G50 gearbox and there are less frictional losses so more bhp to the rear wheels.

lowndes

807 posts

213 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
’89 G50 awful; whatever box it was in 964RS, as bad; 996 turbo better; 996.2 GT3 not bad; 997 turbo reasonable; 980 pretty good; 997.2 GT3 getting worse again; 991.2 PDK perfect. Note, some of those are rather distant memories while others are current. beer

RSVP911

8,192 posts

132 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
lowndes said:
’89 G50 awful; whatever box it was in 964RS, as bad; 996 turbo better; 996.2 GT3 not bad; 997 turbo reasonable; 980 pretty good; 997.2 GT3 getting worse again; 991.2 PDK perfect. Note, some of those are rather distant memories while others are current. beer
The 89 G50 wasn’t awful , was it ?

I loved whizzing around in my GR 3.2 Carerra : good honest little car that smile



Edited by RSVP911 on Thursday 18th October 08:43

Taffy66

5,964 posts

101 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
lowndes said:
’89 G50 awful; whatever box it was in 964RS, as bad; 996 turbo better; 996.2 GT3 not bad; 997 turbo reasonable; 980 pretty good; 997.2 GT3 getting worse again; 991.2 PDK perfect. Note, some of those are rather distant memories while others are current. beer
That's a great straight to the point informative post..Now all you have to do is drive the 991.2 GT3 Manual to settle that argument once and for all.
I also think my 991.2GT3's PDK is pretty perfect however i do think the flappy paddles are too short..For that reason i think i'll get a set of JCR's extended billeted aluminium in anodised red..

lowndes

807 posts

213 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
RSVP911 said:
The 89 G50 wasn’t awful , was it ?

I loved whizzing around in my GR 3.2 Carerra : good honest little car that smile


Edited by RSVP911 on Thursday 18th October 08:43
In fairness my 3.2 was a recent nostalgic return to a car at a time when neither the owner not the car itself were in the first flush of youth. Heavy steering, wooden brakes, agricultural suspension and vague gear shift were not what I had remembered from 30 years ago. Pretty little thing when sat on the driveway but I realised quite quickly we had both aged and not necessarily in a good way. On the plus side it freed up garage space for the 997.2 GT3 to which I have now added 30k highly enjoyable miles (despite the box laugh )

RSVP911

8,192 posts

132 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
lowndes said:
RSVP911 said:
The 89 G50 wasn’t awful , was it ?

I loved whizzing around in my GR 3.2 Carerra : good honest little car that smile


Edited by RSVP911 on Thursday 18th October 08:43
In fairness my 3.2 was a recent nostalgic return to a car at a time when neither the owner not the car itself were in the first flush of youth. Heavy steering, wooden brakes, agricultural suspension and vague gear shift were not what I had remembered from 30 years ago. Pretty little thing when sat on the driveway but I realised quite quickly we had both aged and not necessarily in a good way. On the plus side it freed up garage space for the 997.2 GT3 to which I have now added 30k highly enjoyable miles (despite the box laugh )
Great post and fair enough - I have to agree about the weight of the steering when moving super slowly - I completely forgot what no PAS felt like, plus the way it misted up at the first sniff of any moisture, oh and the fact the lights made no difference what so ever - loved that car ! smile

Edited by RSVP911 on Thursday 18th October 10:51

browngt3

Original Poster:

1,409 posts

210 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
Ah, the joys of an air cooled!

I agree the steering is heavy at parking speeds but on the move it's another highlight. Just the right weight and lovely feedback. After driving a modern car the steering is a revelation.

Back to the gearbox. I think this is also the point. It's an event after your everyday modern. Probably most can't be bothered with the limitations. But, put the effort in and it certainly rewards.

browngt3

Original Poster:

1,409 posts

210 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
SRT Hellcat said:
Nothing wrong with a well sorted 915 gearbox. What lets them down are knackered synchros / dog teeth. Worn clutch, worn bushes, badly adjusted. They are from memory 10kg lighter than the G50 gearbox and there are less frictional losses so more bhp to the rear wheels.
I think this is most people's experience and why they don't like them. Goes for the whole car really. Big difference between a well sorted 911 and a knackered old dog.

browngt3

Original Poster:

1,409 posts

210 months

Thursday 18th October 2018
quotequote all
lowndes said:
’89 G50 awful; whatever box it was in 964RS, as bad; 996 turbo better; 996.2 GT3 not bad; 997 turbo reasonable; 980 pretty good; 997.2 GT3 getting worse again; 991.2 PDK perfect. Note, some of those are rather distant memories while others are current. beer
Wasn't the 964RS box a development of the G50? Same as 993. I thought the 996.2 GT3 had a cracking gearbox. Again it was a derivative of the GT1 race cars and rewarded clean positive changes. Like the 915, best when hot.

And what more can I say about the 991.2 GT3 manual? Just blissful smile

Gio G

2,945 posts

208 months

Monday 22nd October 2018
quotequote all
I have never driven a G50, so cannot compare, however the 915 in Mrs G's car requires my full attention when driving. I honestly think cars of this vintage really require your full respect and patience while driving. Essentially makes you appreciate the modern stuff, however the older stuff rewards you more.

G

BertBert

18,953 posts

210 months

Tuesday 23rd October 2018
quotequote all
I've driven the trio, all newly refreshed so working properly, 901, 915 and g50. I enjoyed driving all of them, but they get surer, quicker work less throw, the newer they are. So on that basis g50 is best.

But as I said all good. But you have to drive good examples to tell. The knackered 915 I had was the burst vilest thing ever!

Bert

86wasagoodyear

381 posts

95 months

Tuesday 23rd October 2018
quotequote all
+1 for the 915.

I tried both 915 & G50 when looking around, and for me it became a dealbreaker when looking for a 3.2... ...it HAD to have the 915 box for the tactility & interest.

Not for everyone, each to their own. Even a good 915 needs to warm up and demands concentration, but the rewards are there if you're interested enough to treat it well.

blackmamba

821 posts

235 months

Friday 26th October 2018
quotequote all
I’ve had both and they were both good to use. My 915 has a shorter throw and if I had to pick one, that would be it - more fun and snappier when we’ll set up.

ChrisW.

6,210 posts

254 months

Saturday 27th October 2018
quotequote all
I own a '73 2.4 S ... the first year of the 915 ... and a 1988 3.2 one of the first of the G50 ...

The 915 is a leisurely change with a lightweight feel ... but they are very susceptible to set-up and I have driven cars that required far more "focus" on the gear change than was desirable in the big scheme of things ...

By comparison the G50 has a bomb proof feel which, whilst a little heavier, is a much more confident device particularly in a quickly driven 964 or 993RS ...

The G50 is also massively over specified ... I believe as standard it was good for 550 ft lbs ... the 915 was fragile by comparison, and the earlier 901 had a dog leg change which in my 924 Carrera GTS was a concentration to avoid slotting reverse on the change from 1st ... even if 2nd to 3rd was a very fast change ...

I do like the G50 ... for me it was /is a big step forward.



minimalist

1,488 posts

204 months

Monday 29th October 2018
quotequote all
I loved the G50 and all derivatives I tried. I only drove a few 915s so probably unfair to judge too harshly on that basis but for me the G50 was a huge leap forward, comparable with the change from tiptronic to PDK.

The 4 speed I tried in a friend's '59 356 was lovely though. I expected it to be a dog leg so was surprised it wasn't. Next year I'm hoping to buy an older 911 (again) so will be budgeting for a gearbox refurb. driving

If I remember correctly, G50s are a common gearbox for Ultimas so can handle lots of torque.

MontyC

538 posts

167 months

Tuesday 27th November 2018
quotequote all
I'm actually going to see a reasonably priced 911 with the 915 box at the weekend there is no noise when changing gear, grinding ect but when going from 1st to 2nd sometime you have to try and get it into gear the owner informs me what would be the most likely reason for this?

Geneve

3,857 posts

218 months

Tuesday 27th November 2018
quotequote all
ChrisW. said:
I own a '73 2.4 S ... the first year of the 915 ... and a 1988 3.2 one of the first of the G50 ...
The 915 is a leisurely change with a lightweight feel ... but they are very susceptible to set-up and I have driven cars that required far more "focus" on the gear change than was desirable in the big scheme of things ...
By comparison the G50 has a bomb proof feel which, whilst a little heavier, is a much more confident device particularly in a quickly driven 964 or 993RS ...
The G50 is also massively over specified ... I believe as standard it was good for 550 ft lbs ... the 915 was fragile by comparison, and the earlier 901 had a dog leg change which in my 924 Carrera GTS was a concentration to avoid slotting reverse on the change from 1st ... even if 2nd to 3rd was a very fast change ...
I do like the G50 ... for me it was /is a big step forward.
Agree completely, having used both extensively.

The 915 is actually easier to use in a lhd 911. Some people think they can improve it with a 'short-shift', but never liked that, as it wasn't designed for fast shifts.

Especially love the 3.2 Carreras with the G50 box - one of my favourite '911 eras'.