tcsracing1

anybody know how user friendly a sequential shift on street gt3 would be?

the newer cups have it...... is it too much for a car used for both street and track? is it track only?

anybody know the characteristics?

positives? negitives?

amondc

I think it would be way to much for street use. It shifts best under full throttle and that would be hard to do on the street. You really can't baby them or they won't shift properly.

tcsracing1

cool, thanks for the tip.....

i have seen a hewland in action on the street and it wasnt too bad....

i wasnt sure on the set up on a porsche...

thanks for the tip

iLLM3

Is this going into you're AWD GT2?

DanH

The 997 unit wouldn't be driveable on the street! Its brutal changing it when not high up the rev range.

Oakley Design do a sequential mechnism which bolts onto your current box. Having driven the car for a day I do really like it, but can't really justify the expense.

Mr. C4

German Porsche tuner Cartronic has had a sequential mechanism for years that bolts on to 996 and 997 but at EUR 4000................

Ciao,

J.

tcsracing1

actually i was looking at the Oakley Design unit

96 993

How is a car sequential gearbox different from a motorcycle gearbox? I have ridden bikes for years and I love the way they shift. The Ducati is a dream.

LA964RS

What did they quote you for the Oakley? The write up in I think PPGT was very favorable.

tcsracing1

i got the price for the oakley CF cage and CF wheels. but i figured id ask you guys about the shifter first before i consider something like that.

db_gt3

Do not buy the carbon fiber rollcage. That company has ZERO racing fabrication experience, more importantly no destructive testing has been performed on that product. They have no way to quantify the safety margin of thier plastic cage. There are so many reasons why you would not want a carbon rollcage I do not have time to list them. Suffice to say I have designed composite racecar structures (safety cell/tub and body/aero components) as well as aerospace composite primary structures. Racecars have rigorous destructive testing performed to ensure the structures integrity under deflection and impact (crash testing). Aerostructures have unbelieveably expensive and complex non-destuctive testing requirements for ensuring the structural integrity of composites. TUV or DOT approval for aftermarket is nothing more than bolting a product on a car and driving around with it for a given ammount of time.

Any company who claims to be pioneering such a novel product should be telling you who fabricates it and how they do so, what materials are used, what cures are performed, and most importantly what testing/qualifications are perfomed for quality. The F1 roll hoops are no more than an aero component covering a metal bar. see, metal, that's what you want protecting your head.

iLLM3

Something tells me from this posters previous threads and responses that he does not care one bit about these issue's, their quality or reputation as it's not going to be put to it's original proper use!

But who am I to judge

Rob in VA

My GT2 has it and I LOVE it long time!

JMeager

Oh my god, 4WD GT2's now carbon cages. So, let's look at world rally cars that hit trees all the time. What do they have? Steel. Track cars, what do they have? Steel.

Have you ever seen what happens when a carbon / fibreglass rod snaps? It doesn't bend, it snaps and then the spiky shards are what will impale your body..... Nice....

I would hate to be an owner in that company as when that cage has it's first usage, the lawyers will be on their way..........

DanH

I didn't even ask. Having met Jon and driven the Oakley development car I wanted the Intrax suspension that was raved about in that review. Problem was it hadn't been developed on a 996, so the only option was to make my car the first. All I can say now is that I have no regrets - the suspension is epic. The car is better on the road, and brilliant on track. It corners flat, takes curbs without unsettling and simply seems to have better traction and balance. I'm not a great wet weather specialist, but with this setup on the same tyres as some of my friends who are quicker in the dry, I was leaving them for dead. We are all regulars who have had setups put on the car, and one was on KWs and I was on the same tyres each time (toyos first time, MPSCs second). Now if I'd been driving like I felt I was being brave it might just be I lacked common sense, but I wasn't driving brave!

When I was at Spa 2 months ago, Henk the founder of Intrax finalised the setup work and he took my car out. He can certainly pedal and it was good to see him work. He basically slid the car around the whole track to feel how it responded beyond the limit on about every type of corner.

So anyway the setup is now complete. I'm just waiting for some modified ARB mounts to go on the rear dampers as the current ones don't protrude enough and have the ARB droplinks at a bit of an angle which won't help their longetivity. Are they better than motons 4 ways? No idea, half the problem is finding someone who can set the rates+valving+damper curve to what you want. I wanted a car that still worked on the road, not just a cup car setup. I've got that and its still 100x better on track.

Anyway before I got distracted, the reason I am familiar with the box is that Jon lent me the Oakley GT3 whilst he took my car off to get the dampers fitted. Was very skeptical about the box, but actually came away really liking it. It works better than you expect.

On the cage front - I'm a bit skeptical too. Will wait and see how that plays out. I think Jon mentioned it was getting FIA certified. If that happens I'd feel safer, but not really compelled to tear out my perfectly good OEM cage! The issue I've always seen raised is how it would cope with secondary impacts. F1 cars have carbon safety cells do they not? They seem to hold up!