For normal driving I just shift between 3-4,000. There is no doubt that for max acceleration you shift fast and hard at the redline to the next gear. The boxster power band(which varies only slightly if you have a base or S) is between the TQ peak of 4,500 and the hp peak of 6,200 rpm. The boxster acceleration drops off slightly from 6,200 to 7,200 rpm because there is less hp and TQ up there. However, you still receive the fastest times by shifting at redline because that keeps the car in the best part of the power band when you shift. The vario-cam sees the biggest switch at around 5,200ish rpm. That when you really start to move and you hear a noticable sound difference at WOT(wide open throttle).

For what it's worth, C&D (Jan. 2000) has the
 

'01 S gears at redline (7200) at:

1st: 38 mph
2nd: 66 mph
3rd: 96 mph
4th: 119 mph
5th: 143 mph
6th: 160 mph (6650 RPM)

Great point donv re engine speed at deceleration. Had never thought about it. (When I learned to drive a stick (in 1985, in a 1979 Corolla) i was taught to use the engine to slow the car, on account of not wanting to "wear out" the brakes. Boy did I get an earful when tried to pass that advice on at some point. What is the justification for using engine braking, if any?

Engine braking is useful if you have no brakes or weak ones. Other than in that situation there's likely little use for it. In the old days there were cars that had stronger engines than brakes - and it may be that today's Big Rigs still fall into this category based on those "No Jake Brake" signs you see in rural areas.

Theoretically you could do a good job of matching the right gear and engine speed when downshifting in a modern car such that brake use is minimal and engine braking would fill the void. In a world of long slow off ramps or other gradual deceleration situations this could be great. In an unpredictable/fast deceleration world then the downshifting to engine brake becomes more difficult or harsh such that clutch wear starts to factor in more (or as mentioned before, over-revving and engine wear), not to mention the possibility of unbalancing the car by overloading the drive wheels' friction patch.

For me, bottom line is if I have to choose between a clutch job and a brake job, it is always going to be the brakes - so I minimize engine braking's use to long slow gradual hills etc.

BTW - nice color choice on that 2001!

Hi,

Forget Engine Braking... it's a matter of economics. Engine Braking leads to premature Clutch Failure - $ 1,000+. Brake Pads replacement - $300... Get It ??

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

In the 987 with the 5 speed, 6500 rpms will get you:

1st @ 33 mph
2nd @ 63 mph
3rd @ 93 mph

SD987, I assume these stats are for the standard 987 Boxster. Does anyone know what they are for the Boxster S?

For the 987S

1st @ 39 mph
2nd @ 70 mph
3rd @ 101 mph
4th @ 125 mph
5th @ 145 mph
6th @ 160 mph

Because my 987 (Non S) has the 6sp owuld this be the same for me?

Hi,

Yes it would. There is only 1 6-speed Transmission, the G86.20. It has the following Gear ratios:

• 1st Gear - 3.82
  
  2nd Gear - 2.20
  
  3rd Gear - 1.52
  
  4th Gear - 1.22
  
  5th Gear - 1.02
  
  6th Gear - 0.89
  
  Final Drive Ratio - 3.44

Hope this helps...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

Do you guys seriously go driving from stop-light to stop-light hitting 4k in every gear? If so you must get like 15mpgs. If I'm not mistaken, something like 80% of peak torque is delivered at 2k rpms (at least in the S), so why overdo it? I can understand if you are on open roads and stuff, but in city driving, why!!

In first and second I shift at 4K and above. The shifts are much smoother and the car accelerates beautifully. I still get 24+ MPG. :cheers: