Porsche's much anticipated F1 style transmission may prove to be far more expensive an option that many anticipate. Conventional wisdom has it that the PDK/DSG will replace the current Tiptronic automatic, but I believe this is a subject of debate within Porsche, and along with technical issues, represents another reason why Porsche has dragged it's collective feet on the debut of this transmission. Let's ask the following questions: 1) How much of a premium would a potential GT3/GT3RS/Turbo buyer pay for a clutchless transmission?; 2) Will Porsche offer this race inspired transmission to its upper end clientelle for the same price as a conventional Tiptronic?; 3) How many "upper end" buyers want PDK/DSG vs. a "pure" manual transmission?; 4) Will Porsche drop the Tiptronic and offer PDK/DSG in the Cayenne?; 5) If Porsche can get $6-7K for PDK/DSG in the GT3 will they turn around and offer it to Cayman buyers for $3-4K?; 6) What is the financial (i.e. profit/loss) downside of offering three different transmissions? The argument within Porsche then becomes how to market this transmission once it's technically ready for prime time. The Cayman with PDK/DSG may in fact be a long way off.

A much higher price for the PDK gearbox in the flagship cars can be rationalized because the torque capacity must be higher, and then to offset the weight that capacity involves, a magnesium casing can be used. There are other ways to invent ways to make a 2:1 price differential seem unobscene but there's an example. I've long expected PDK on 987's to be about +$4500. And PAG will not simultaneously offer slushbox and PDK gearboxes for the same model, you can pretty much take that to the bank. As for cutover, who knows. I find all four key scenarios -- (1) simultaneous across all flat six cars (2) first in dry sump flagship cars (currently TT and GT2, since GT3 is done for now) then in split crankcase cars, (3) first in flagships, then in 997's, then in 987's, or (4) first in all 997's split crankcase or not, then in the 987's -- to be plausible. I think (2) is the most likely, for mechanical and logistical reasons (that I might spell out if I were inclined to bore the readership further...).