[A61]

Anyone else installed Rogue SSK on their E90? I just place an order for Rogue SSK but now I'm debating if I should replace the original shift knob or by for the M type knob which is shorter than stock. What do you all think?

[JO3]

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

Any short shifter will cause premature syncro wear. The added pressure wears out the syncros a little earlier then the original shifter.

I disagree. With a longer throw, you can actually apply more force to your synchromesh with less force from your hand. (Think lever arm in physics)

With a short throw, you are losing leverage, so you need to apply more force from your hand to apply the same amount of force on the synchros as the stock shifter. And because of this extra arm strength required by short shifters, you'd have to be really ham-fisted to push the short shifter hard enough to wear them any more than a stock shifter would.

[Ryan.M]

Originally Posted by kanishkl

Pics please - we're all waiting

:WERD:

[ALPINE6SPD]

Originally Posted by JO3

I disagree. With a longer throw, you can actually apply more force to your synchromesh with less force from your hand. (Think lever arm in physics)

With a short throw, you are losing leverage, so you need to apply more force from your hand to apply the same amount of force on the synchros as the stock shifter. And because of this extra arm strength required by short shifters, you'd have to be really ham-fisted to push the short shifter hard enough to wear them any more than a stock shifter would.

ok if thats what you believe then I am not going to say anymore.

[HRC]

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

ok if thats what you believe then I am not going to say anymore.

Danny

[larryn]

Originally Posted by JO3

I disagree. With a longer throw, you can actually apply more force to your synchromesh with less force from your hand. (Think lever arm in physics)

With a short throw, you are losing leverage, so you need to apply more force from your hand to apply the same amount of force on the synchros as the stock shifter. And because of this extra arm strength required by short shifters, you'd have to be really ham-fisted to push the short shifter hard enough to wear them any more than a stock shifter would.

It totally depends on the fulcrum point of the lever. If the shifter was a bit longer on the bottom of the ball/pivot (the same amount as the upper portion was shortened), there would be no difference in effort. You are also not taking into account the materials used, like if there was a delrin ballcup used, you're further reducing effort.

So, you would only be correct, if the stock shifter were shortened by cutting off the top of the armature, and it was made of the identical material as the stock shifter.

Really though.. how much effort is there to shift between gears. Unless you're having issues lifting that 33rd twinky to your mouth for breakfast, you should be able to manage that tricky 2nd to 3rd without blowing out a tricep.

[BeeEmDubU]

pics??!!!???

[elbert]

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

Any short shifter will cause premature syncro wear. The added pressure wears out the syncros a little earlier then the original shifter.

Care to elaborate? I don't think the shifter has much to do with the synchros at all.

[shimshimhada]

What is he going to post pics of? His shifter knob that looks the same? lawl

I guess you could post pics of install, if you took any.

[larryn]

Originally Posted by shimshimhada

What is he going to post pics of? His shifter knob that looks the same? lawl

I guess you could post pics of install, if you took any.

Bitch clip pics, and pics of you swearing after 90 minutes of trying to undo it, or ban!

[shimshimhada]

Originally Posted by lni

Bitch clip pics, and pics of you swearing after 90 minutes of trying to undo it, or ban!

[ALPINE6SPD]

Originally Posted by elbert

Care to elaborate? I don't think the shifter has much to do with the synchros at all.

The shifter is shorter and takes more effort to put into gear which cause pre mature synco wear. Is there anyone else here that wants to back me up on this? The added effort puts more of a strain on the syncros. Its not worth arguing over because you will never believe me.

[shimshimhada]

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

The shifter is shorter and takes more effort to put into gear which cause pre mature synco wear. Is there anyone else here that wants to back me up on this? The added effort puts more of a strain on the syncros. Its not worth arguing over because you will never believe me.

Just double clutch like you should.

[ALPINE6SPD]

Originally Posted by shimshimhada

Just double clutch like you should.

you must have replied this 1000 times to many posts.

[shimshimhada]

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

you must have replied this 1000 times to many posts.

It was appropriate for in response to that post, hence no bellyroll after it.

[elbert]

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

The shifter is shorter and takes more effort to put into gear which cause pre mature synco wear. Is there anyone else here that wants to back me up on this? The added effort puts more of a strain on the syncros. Its not worth arguing over because you will never believe me.

I won't believe you because you're wrong. If you were to say you are more likely to bend a shift fork, I'd consider it as a possibility.

shimshimhada is absolutely correct, the only way to save/prevent synchro wear is to double clutch and rev match. Conversely, a great way to mess up sychros is to blow a WOT clutchless upshift.

Maybe you need to read up on how manual trannies work:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/transmission.htm

[JO3]

Originally Posted by lni

It totally depends on the fulcrum point of the lever. If the shifter was a bit longer on the bottom of the ball/pivot (the same amount as the upper portion was shortened), there would be no difference in effort. You are also not taking into account the materials used, like if there was a delrin ballcup used, you're further reducing effort.

So, you would only be correct, if the stock shifter were shortened by cutting off the top of the armature, and it was made of the identical material as the stock shifter.

Really though.. how much effort is there to shift between gears. Unless you're having issues lifting that 33rd twinky to your mouth for breakfast, you should be able to manage that tricky 2nd to 3rd without blowing out a tricep.

You're right, I was over-generalizing, because I didn't want to get into a physics discussion here. Typically with short shifters, the top portion of the shifter is shortened, with out moving the fulcrum. Some short shift manufacturers such as B&M do move the fulcrum. In general, shift effort is increased with a short shifter. (<-- another generalization, based on historical experience)

BUT, on the original point about synchro wear, the amount of force it takes to put the transmission in gear (where the shifter connects to the transmission) is a constant in this equation. Changing the dimmensions of the shifter only effects what the driver percieves the force to be. And again, refering to my generalization above, with an increased shift effort, the driver would have to push on the stick very hard in order to cause any damage to the synchros beyond normal wear and tear.

Originally Posted by ALPINE6SPD

The shifter is shorter and takes more effort to put into gear which cause pre mature synco wear. Is there anyone else here that wants to back me up on this? The added effort puts more of a strain on the syncros. Its not worth arguing over because you will never believe me.

Like I said above, it only feels like it is more effort from the driver's point of view. The force being applied to the transmission is consistent to the stock shifter. In fact, I would argue that having more shift effort is better for your transmission, because it gives you better sensitivity to what your transmission is doing, whether the collar and gear are synchronized, whether the dog teeth are meshing, etc.

[larryn]

Originally Posted by JO3

You're right, I was over-generalizing, because I didn't want to get into a physics discussion here. Typically with short shifters, the top portion of the shifter is shortened, with out moving the fulcrum. Some short shift manufacturers such as B&M do move the fulcrum. In general, shift effort is increased with a short shifter. (<-- another generalization, based on historical experience)

BUT, on the original point about synchro wear, the amount of force it takes to put the transmission in gear (where the shifter connects to the transmission) is a constant in this equation. Changing the dimmensions of the shifter only effects what the driver percieves the force to be. And again, refering to my generalization above, with an increased shift effort, the driver would have to push on the stick very hard in order to cause any damage to the synchros beyond normal wear and tear.

A fast shift is a fast shift, no matter the size of the of the handle you're using to make it. There is no extra effort used at the point of the synchro, since the resistance at the parts you are talking about has not changed. You even mentioned it's a constant. So, I'm not sure how you're thinking there is increased wear. If you are a ham-fister, you're not changing your ways because of a shorter actuator stick.

Installing an aftermarket shifter does not turn your linkage into a 2 handed -slam-it-in-there- affair. It simply reduces the throw of what's happening above the fulcrum.

I personally know many people with e30's and e36's with aftermarket shifters in them, and have never heard of premature synchro wear attributed to that shifter. A few of these guys installed the short shifters well over 10 years ago.

[JO3]

I'm not saying there is increased wear. read it again.

Hint: (post #24)

Originally Posted by JO3

I disagree...

[larryn]

Originally Posted by JO3

I'm not saying there is increased wear. read it again.

Hint: (post #24)

My bad then. Sorry! I confused your post with ALPINE6SPD. There was a lot of misinformation in this thread regarding a valuable modifcation.

[MIKEYMIKE]

What are synchros? lol, jk

I don't know from personal experience about synchro's prematuring early...however....everyone i've spoken to about this mod mentioned some type of premature wear

[NFS]

Originally Posted by shimshimhada

Just double clutch like you should.

Don't start all that again I couldn't care less about preserving my syncros for generations to come.

What is it about you lot - do you worship synchros or something - is this some sort of syncromesh cult?

F*ck the tyres, s*d the clutch and b*gg*r the engine - but got forbid that anyone so much as uses a synchro

I am going to USE them as they are designed - if they break I'll get them fixed under warranty - I don't care about syncro's - there I said it - I just don't.

As for short shifters - surely the point is that they require LESS effort to engage the gears because of the reduced travel or the lever (plus they are really nice to use) - I doubt very (very) much that they are going to damage the synchros.

(ps - I am only joking - if you really LOVE your syncros feel free to double de-clutch - or if you like - why not TREBLE declutch - surely that'd be better?)