986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners - View Single Post

Lux · 08-01-2004, 03:29 PM

Another S in S has some issues.

He keeps bringing up subjective comments like "not shifting smoothly" and somehow equating it to "not being the correct ratio for the S". But then again notice these guys will also claim that the clutch is so heavy in the S. LOL!

I've posted countless facts refuting his nonsense on PPBB. But he will continue bashing the S. If it's not the tranny then it's the S not being any quicker than the Base model.

Here's the FACTS once AGAIN:

Boxster S Ratio:
13.1408
7.568
5.2288
4.1968
3.5088
2.8896

2.7L Base Ratio:
12.46
7.5472
5.0908
3.8804
2.9904

1st gear: S is shorter. Shorter is better for a car with low torque. Gee, if anything the base is geared too high.
Advantage: S

2nd gear: S and Base are same. Again, with the Base having significantly less torque, the gearing is better in the S.
Advantage: S

3rd gear: S is slightly shorter. Again, with the Base having lower torque it should be the one with the shorter gear.
Advantage: S (see a theme here?)

4th gear: OMG. A HUGE difference. The S' 4th gear is significantly shorter than the Base model's 4th gear. Matter of fact, the S' 5th gear is almost equivalent to the Base's 4th. With the Base already lacking in torque, I can't even begin to imagine how wrong this is.
Advantage: S (by a large margin)

5th gear: The base model has already gone into "overdrive" gearing due to its too tall 4th gear whereas the S is at 1:1 ratio.
Advantage: S

6th gear: This one's easy...Advantage S!

So using Another S in S' logic, the 6 speed is designed for the 911 which has more hp/torque. So basically he's saying that shorter gears is the way to go. Yet the Base models gears are taller than the S with the Base having less torque. That's solid ground you're standing on.

Way to OWN yourself. Care to refute these numbers? I didn't think so.

ps. You have to be the thread starter to actually claim someone hijacking your thread.

08-01-2004, 03:29 PM	#10
Lux Registered User Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 401	Another S in S has some issues. He keeps bringing up subjective comments like "not shifting smoothly" and somehow equating it to "not being the correct ratio for the S". But then again notice these guys will also claim that the clutch is so heavy in the S. LOL! I've posted countless facts refuting his nonsense on PPBB. But he will continue bashing the S. If it's not the tranny then it's the S not being any quicker than the Base model. Here's the FACTS once AGAIN: Boxster S Ratio: 13.1408 7.568 5.2288 4.1968 3.5088 2.8896 2.7L Base Ratio: 12.46 7.5472 5.0908 3.8804 2.9904 1st gear: S is shorter. Shorter is better for a car with low torque. Gee, if anything the base is geared too high. Advantage: S 2nd gear: S and Base are same. Again, with the Base having significantly less torque, the gearing is better in the S. Advantage: S 3rd gear: S is slightly shorter. Again, with the Base having lower torque it should be the one with the shorter gear. Advantage: S (see a theme here?) 4th gear: OMG. A HUGE difference. The S' 4th gear is significantly shorter than the Base model's 4th gear. Matter of fact, the S' 5th gear is almost equivalent to the Base's 4th. With the Base already lacking in torque, I can't even begin to imagine how wrong this is. Advantage: S (by a large margin) 5th gear: The base model has already gone into "overdrive" gearing due to its too tall 4th gear whereas the S is at 1:1 ratio. Advantage: S 6th gear: This one's easy...Advantage S! So using Another S in S' logic, the 6 speed is designed for the 911 which has more hp/torque. So basically he's saying that shorter gears is the way to go. Yet the Base models gears are taller than the S with the Base having less torque. That's solid ground you're standing on. Way to OWN yourself. Care to refute these numbers? I didn't think so. ps. You have to be the thread starter to actually claim someone hijacking your thread. __________________ http://img106.exs.cx/img106/9969/sig129zs.jpg Last edited by Lux; 08-01-2004 at 03:33 PM.