Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> sideshifter vs. tailshifter?
dhopkins
post Nov 4 2006, 02:28 PM
Post #1


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 50
Joined: 7-July 04
From: Rydal, Pa
Member No.: 2,315



somebody recently advised me to avoid any car that is a tailshifter. I have never driven a tailshifter. Is there a big difference b/t a tailshifter and a sideshifter? Or is it just another an urban myth?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies(1 - 7)
Andyrew
post Nov 4 2006, 02:50 PM
Post #2


Spooling.... Please wait
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,376
Joined: 20-January 03
From: Riverbank, Ca
Member No.: 172
Region Association: Northern California



post this in the main forum. IE the Garage.

This forum is for all non 914 content.

btw, the only difference is the shift linkage. Its a fairly noticable difference. and a good upgrade if you have a tailshift. But I wouldnt avoid a tailshifter car.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GeorgeRud
post Nov 5 2006, 01:03 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,725
Joined: 27-July 05
From: Chicagoland
Member No.: 4,482
Region Association: Upper MidWest



At this age, any good car should be considered. The side shifter cars are definately easier to shift correctly however. Any car can be converted to a side shifter though.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
So.Cal.914
post Nov 5 2006, 01:08 AM
Post #4


"...And it has a front trunk too."
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 6,588
Joined: 15-February 04
From: Low Desert, CA./ Hills of N.J.
Member No.: 1,658
Region Association: None



QUOTE(GeorgeRud @ Nov 4 2006, 11:03 PM) *

At this age, any good car should be considered. The side shifter cars are definately easier to shift correctly however. Any car can be converted to a side shifter though.


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) I've been driving a tailshifter sence 1982 no need to be leary of it.

Like they said above it can be converted.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dmenche914
post Nov 5 2006, 01:11 AM
Post #5


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,212
Joined: 27-February 03
From: California
Member No.: 366



Have owned both, currenlty one of each. I frankly don't know what all the hype is ont he side shift. yeah there is some slight improvement.

The main thing on either unit is to replace the plastic shifter bushings that teh shift linkage rides in. Do that and either shifters work very nice. The stock plastic bushings if not alrady fixed, are 30+ years old,a dn likely out of round and very sloppy. The replacement is easy.

The more important thing to avoid on a 914 by far is rust. Rust can hide in several key places, the worst is under the battery area. This weakens the structure of the car, and can cause suspension collapse. beware of patch reapirs that look "good' but have not adressed underlaying strctural rust damage.

The 914 was never galvenized, and had very thin body metal. The location of the battery allows sulfuric acid to be washed down into a well (under the FI brain) that can eat intot eh rockers,a nd suspension mount point. also be ware of rust if you buy a leter car that has the rubber sound pad ont he engine side of the fire wall.

Good luck in your search
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gint
post Nov 5 2006, 09:55 AM
Post #6


Mike Ginter
***************

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,075
Joined: 26-December 02
From: Denver CO.
Member No.: 20
Region Association: Rocky Mountains



The nicest, smoothest, best shifting 914 I've ever owned was a 72 tail shifter.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
scotty b
post Nov 5 2006, 10:06 AM
Post #7


rust free you say ?
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 16,375
Joined: 7-January 05
From: richmond, Va.
Member No.: 3,419
Region Association: None



QUOTE(dmenche914 @ Nov 4 2006, 11:11 PM) *



The 914 was never galvenized, and had very thin body metal.


Actually pre-rusting, the 914 does NOT have thin metal. It is every bit as stout as any other car back then and more so than most if not all modern cars.18 gauge structural and 20 gauge body panels is nothing to be leary of.Most Am cars since the mid to late fifties are the same. Biggest difference is the Germans included free rust prohibitors in each car sold!

Oh and the spelling wizard says galvenized should be spelled galv[color=#FF0000]anized (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dmenche914
post Nov 5 2006, 11:48 PM
Post #8


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,212
Joined: 27-February 03
From: California
Member No.: 366



i had heard that the 914 had the thinnest metal of any production Porsche at the time. Maybe, maybe not??? anyone confirm this??? sures seems to be thinner (pre-rust) than that on my 356.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd May 2024 - 02:46 PM