side-shifter v. tailshifter, crow doesn't taste so good... Options

[lapuwali]

I take back everything I ever said about how a well-set-up tailshifter is "just as good" as a side-shifter. The side-shifter in my car now after my driveline swap is WAY better than the perfectly set up tailshifter I pulled out, and the firewall bushing isn't even installed (it popped out, need to try again). If it got better still after replacing that bushing, it will be Honda quality. (IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/html/emoticons/wub.gif)

Anyone still using a tailshifter should ignore all of my previous advice and get a side-shifter ASAP. I'm amazed at the difference between this gearbox and the side-shifter in my old '73.

[ArtechnikA]

QUOTE (mikey @ Aug 25 2005, 02:14 AM)

I didn't know the 6 tranny itself was different from the 4 - other than the ratios, of course.

Mike mis-spoke just a little. there are teeny detail differences with the transmissions. what i believe he meant to say is that the *linkage* is completely different.

i've never found any fault with my /6's shifting except when the bushings were totally shot. i did once have an issue upshifting from 2nd that wound up in 5th instead of 3rd but that was in a HARD right hand turn at a tight airport DE event. i think stiffer transmission mounts (such as WEVO's "semi-solid") would have fixed that.

probably i should have no opinion since i've never driven a sideshift, but when all the shifts are crisp, positive, and direct, i don't ask for much more. i base most of my comparison on my current daily driver -- 911 -- in which there is *no* linkage. the shift rod goes directly into the tailcone with an aircraft Apex joint shaft coupler. there's no slop.

the Rennshifter did improve the feel, but i think that's more a commentary on the state of the 35 year old original shifter...