Kirban vs. Hurst
Thread Starter
Team Owner
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 22,025
Likes: 192
From: At the beach in little Rhody
Kirban vs. Hurst
I had the fortune to try a Kirban shifter the other night and was very impressed with it. The shift effort did not appear to be any greater then my stock unit. Has anyone tried both the Kirban and the Hurst that can comment on shift effort between the two? Also, for those Kirban owners, I have read that the ball on the bottom of the shifter is smaller then stock and that the plastic piece doesn't fit correctly. Is this true?
Drifting
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,272
Likes: 0
From: Gaithersburg MD
Cruise-In II Veteran
Cruise-In III Veteran
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (vettenuts)
Had the Kirban in my 2000 Coupe and liked it a lot. Much more positive than the stock shifter. Still missed 3rd gear occassionaly.
Now I have the Hurst in the Z06 and like it also. Shift to 3rd is a no-brainer with the Hurst.
The Kirban is NOT adjustable.
The Hurst is adjustable 20 ways from Sunday. They give you three sets of springs to mix and match. Plus, there are adjustment screws, too.
Either shifter is a huge improvement over stock.
Now I have the Hurst in the Z06 and like it also. Shift to 3rd is a no-brainer with the Hurst.
The Kirban is NOT adjustable.
The Hurst is adjustable 20 ways from Sunday. They give you three sets of springs to mix and match. Plus, there are adjustment screws, too.
Either shifter is a huge improvement over stock.
Drifting
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
From: Wildwood MO
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (vettenuts)
You really can't compare the shift effort between the two because the Kirban doesn't allow you to adjust the spring tension. As Steve said, with the Hurst you can adjust the tension until it is just right for you. I don't even think about missing a shift with the Hurst. Don't know about the lower ball diameter, I haven't heard anything about it.
Safety Car
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6
From: North Royalton, OH
St. Jude Donor '06-'07
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (Z06_2002)
Yup - bottom cap fits just fine - just like the stock shifter. Sorry I can't give you a comparison between the two you're looking at! Love the Kirban, though :yesnod:
Burning Brakes
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
From: The Nether Region IL
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (MTWallet)
Is there anything from preventing the Kirban's springs from being adjusted or replaced? I've been told you can just take the top plate off to get at the screws which makes replacing the springs a possibility. So really, the Kirban is (or maybe) adjustable....its just not easy to adjust. :seeya
Melting Slicks
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 2,285
Likes: 7
From: Mokena Illinois
Safety Car
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 2
From: Plano TX
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (vettenuts)
....Also, for those Kirban owners, I have read that the ball on the bottom of the shifter is smaller then stock and that the plastic piece doesn't fit correctly. Is this true?
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
Melting Slicks
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 420
From: Ponte Vedra Beach FL
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (TooManyIDs)
I have the Kirban and have driven the Hurst recently. Both are excellent. The Hurst "might" have less shift effort, but we're splitting hairs here. It's certainly a good product.
I've been stroking the Kirban for 2 years with zero problems, and I still love it. When my 2003 Z comes in, I'll swap it into the new car. The "ball" problem (whatever you've heard) is simply not true.
I've been stroking the Kirban for 2 years with zero problems, and I still love it. When my 2003 Z comes in, I'll swap it into the new car. The "ball" problem (whatever you've heard) is simply not true.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
From: Orland Park Illinois
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (vettenuts)
I have had the Kirban for about a year, and its awesome!! The ball on the bottom is the same as stock you will not have any problems. I also made a shorter stick about a inch shorter. NO PROBLEMS great product.
Team Owner
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 26,714
Likes: 344
From: Houston, TX
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (Bluvette1)
I have a Ripper, and have driven a friends Kirban on two different cars. I'm inclined to say the Kirban is a little easier, but not QUITE as short throws. But I really think there is more variation from car-to-car than there is between the shifters. I've driven cars with Rippers that shift very easy, and others that are much stiffer.
They all seem to get easier after the cars has 5000 miles or more on them. I chose the Ripper because it just looks a little more "beefy" in construction. But I don't think any of them is bad. Also, the shift **** can make a very noticable difference on the short throw *****.
They all seem to get easier after the cars has 5000 miles or more on them. I chose the Ripper because it just looks a little more "beefy" in construction. But I don't think any of them is bad. Also, the shift **** can make a very noticable difference on the short throw *****.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 420
From: Ponte Vedra Beach FL
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (jschindler)
jschindler---Good observations.
I think that most of the "throw vs. effort" issues have to do with fulcrum point percentages that are designed into the three shifters, based upon all of the many posts on this subject. A silly millimeter of difference would change the throw and the effort a good deal. Add to that different "above the fulcrum" lever lengths and the many **** variations available AND tunnel linkage/tranny variations, and it makes it tough to pick one over the other.
It would be interesting to know exact fulcrum point percentages (i.e., the amount of leverage available) for each one. Then, you could easily choose "effort vs. throw" for any given car.
But the bottom line is, compared to the stock POS, you can't go wrong with any of them. But it might be good to consider that Hurst has had plenty of time to fine tune what Ripper started some time ago, AND they're a shifter company with a legacy reputation to protect. So I have to think that they've done their homework and come up with a good product.
I think that most of the "throw vs. effort" issues have to do with fulcrum point percentages that are designed into the three shifters, based upon all of the many posts on this subject. A silly millimeter of difference would change the throw and the effort a good deal. Add to that different "above the fulcrum" lever lengths and the many **** variations available AND tunnel linkage/tranny variations, and it makes it tough to pick one over the other.
It would be interesting to know exact fulcrum point percentages (i.e., the amount of leverage available) for each one. Then, you could easily choose "effort vs. throw" for any given car.
But the bottom line is, compared to the stock POS, you can't go wrong with any of them. But it might be good to consider that Hurst has had plenty of time to fine tune what Ripper started some time ago, AND they're a shifter company with a legacy reputation to protect. So I have to think that they've done their homework and come up with a good product.
Pro
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Re: Kirban vs. Hurst (tracy)
I don't have data on the Kirban, but would like to. Here it is for the Hurst and B&M-
The Hurst raises the fulcrum by 0.6" and lowers handle height by 0.875". This produces a 42% reduction over stock.
The B&M raises the fulcrum 0.8" and lowers handle height by 0.75", producing a 48% throw reduction.
These are the true measurements, which I'm sure most will observe are not the advertised reduction values. Hurst will soon change their labelling to 40% (it was actually less in the original prototype and the label wasn't changed). B&M is quite notorious for misquoting throw reduction on various models. Of course vendors sometimes misquote those numbers, adding to the confusion.
As mentioned above, the side-to-side spring tension is another consideration. And of course there are also differences in quality and housing construction. Shorter throws are not necessarily better as effort inversely increases with throw reduction, and the shift motion becomes more notchy.
[Modified by zrchris, 2:42 PM 5/31/2002]
The Hurst raises the fulcrum by 0.6" and lowers handle height by 0.875". This produces a 42% reduction over stock.
The B&M raises the fulcrum 0.8" and lowers handle height by 0.75", producing a 48% throw reduction.
These are the true measurements, which I'm sure most will observe are not the advertised reduction values. Hurst will soon change their labelling to 40% (it was actually less in the original prototype and the label wasn't changed). B&M is quite notorious for misquoting throw reduction on various models. Of course vendors sometimes misquote those numbers, adding to the confusion.
As mentioned above, the side-to-side spring tension is another consideration. And of course there are also differences in quality and housing construction. Shorter throws are not necessarily better as effort inversely increases with throw reduction, and the shift motion becomes more notchy.
[Modified by zrchris, 2:42 PM 5/31/2002]
