Diff. cooler pump

R

rsportvolvo

New member
I am looking into using a differential cooler for my ITB Volvo 240. Diff. coolers are not in the ITCS, unless I completely missed a line in the drivetrain section. The Volvo Factory 240 Turbo's of the '80's used a Facet fuel pump and I'm not sure which flow rate to get.

Facet (square) solid state: 4-6 psi max, 15 gpm @ 3 psi, 32 gph, * AN-6 fitting size
Facet "Sliver" top (cylnder): 4-5 psi max, 23 gpm @ 2 psi, 36 gph
Facet "Blue" top (cylinder): 6.5-7.5 psi max, 35 gpm @ 2 psi, 45 gph

I am basically drawing suction from the drain plug (thru the cooler) and discharging through the filler in the diff cover. I plan on using -8 or -6 hose with an inline filter.

I'm not worried about weigh as my car has to weigh 2780# and it is going to be way under that without ballast. Not to mention this weight is low in the car.

Any recommendations?
 
My initial response would be, "It's illegal".

Diff coolers are not addressed. If it doesn't say you can, you can't. Volvo Turbos are not on the same spec line, so you can't update / backdate using their parts.

If you figure a way around that, there are a few bits I'd like to incorporate from the factory Supercharged MR2 on my ITA car - like the supercharger! :D (Although, ironically enough, the "optional gearset" allowed in the MR2 is the S/C set - and it's totally useless for an IT car!)
 
Originally posted by ITANorm@Jan 22 2006, 01:21 AM
My initial response would be, "It's illegal".

Diff coolers are not addressed.  If it doesn't say you can, you can't.  Volvo Turbos are not on the same spec line, so you can't update / backdate using their parts.

If you figure a way around that, there are a few bits I'd like to incorporate from the factory Supercharged MR2 on my ITA car - like the supercharger! :D (Although, ironically enough, the "optional gearset" allowed in the MR2 is the S/C set - and it's totally useless for an IT car!)
[snapback]71554[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Illegal or not, I'll take it up with SCCA since it is not mentioned. I just wanted to know if this issue had been dealt with before.

The Facet pumps are aftermarket pieces used for aircraft and race cars. It was the same brand pump used on the Volvo 240 Turbo's for the diff. coolers. Nothing to do with line items, ITCS, etc. Volvo Turbo's are not in the ITCS.

Maybe I'm thinking about this too much and I should just pick a pump and use it.
 
"Any final drive ratio is permitted provided it fits the stock
differential/transaxle housing without modification to the
housing."

Seems like that's your answer - you're fine as long as it stays entirely within the unmodified housing. Does that work for you?
 
Originally posted by rsportvolvo@Jan 21 2006, 08:41 PM
Illegal or not, I'll take it up with SCCA since it is not mentioned.  I just wanted to know if this issue had been dealt with before.

The Facet pumps are aftermarket pieces used for aircraft and race cars.  It was the same brand pump used on the Volvo 240 Turbo's for the diff. coolers.  Nothing to do with line items, ITCS, etc.  Volvo Turbo's are not in the ITCS.

Maybe I'm thinking about this too much and I should just pick a pump and use it.
[snapback]71556[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

I seem to remember Catman writing the CRB years ago for what I would assume would have been installation in a 240Z at the time. The response in Fastrack was the standard "inconsistent with class philosophy".

I don't think its legal under the IIDSYCTYC, but I could be wrong. I say write the letter.
 
It currently is illegal, and should stay that way I suppose. Also should be unneeded if you will use an excellent synthetic, like Redline.
 
Originally posted by rsportvolvo@Jan 21 2006, 08:41 PM
... Maybe I'm thinking about this too much and I should just pick a pump and use it.
Click to expand...
No question - not legal, so it would be a bad idea to do this.

K
 
Not legal at all, but the answer is not need to move a lot of fluid as it needs time in the cooler to cool, I would shoot for the middle unit.
 
Originally posted by rsportvolvo@Jan 21 2006, 08:41 PM
Illegal or not, I'll take it up with SCCA since it is not mentioned.  I just wanted to know if this issue had been dealt with before.


[snapback]71556[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Why would you build something that was illegal? The rules DO say that it isn't legal.

"D. AUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS
The following modifications are authorized on all Improved Touring
Category cars. Modifications shall not be made unless authorized
herein. No permitted component/modification shall additionally perform
a prohibited function."

There is no allowance for a diff cooler in IT, therefor it is illegal. If you have something like this on your car - and you are fast, people are going to wonder about EVERY other aspect of your program - and your effort to be a legal racer. It's sooo not worth it.

AB
 
On top of that, i really doubt that its necessary at all! Are the diffs THAT weak that they can't take the modest IT hp bump?

Worse, it invites that guy Murphy into the game! Here's something thats really not needed, AND it adds unreliability to the equation. A great way to pump the diff fluid on the track AND burn up gears that would have been just fine.

leave well enough alone.

JMHO, of course!
 
If the final drive system requires cooler oil than can be provided by the amount in the housing, why can't a cooler be considered part of the "final drive"? No modifications to the housing have been made. It does say ANY final drive.

I know this is a stretch, which is why I am asking, but I am curious to see the rebuttal this would get if actually brought up.
 
Originally posted by lateapex911@Jan 23 2006, 01:31 AM
On top of that, i really doubt that its necessary at all! Are the diffs THAT weak that they can't take the modest IT hp bump?
[snapback]71615[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

The differential is a Dana 30 and can easily handle the IT power ouput. Plate style limited slips can create a lot of heat. I am thinking about solutions before the problem arises. I've already seen Volvo /Dana 30's blow at the track and heat was a factor.

As far as this modification being legal, I will take that up with SCCA. This forum is a good source of information, but our interpretaions on the ITCS are just that. A letter from SCCA removes all doubt. I'm sure many remember the forged piston and "any bushing material" debates. I don't want to argue about it or put my car in the "cheater's" arena. I'll write the letter and post the response.

Thanks to all for the input.
 
Originally posted by rsportvolvo@Jan 23 2006, 06:31 AM
I'm sure many remember the forged piston and "any bushing material" debates.  I don't want to argue about it or put my car in the "cheater's" arena.  I'll write the letter and post the response.
[snapback]71652[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

David - With all due respect, the forged piston and bushing material debates had some basis with which to start a discussion... they are at least mentioned in the ITCS. Diff coolers are not mentioned in the ITCS. Therefore, by definition (if it doesn't say "yes", it means "no"), they are not allowed.

If I were you and just had to write a letter to SCCA, I'd be writing to ask whether the Volvo 240's were reviewed during the recent ITAC realignment process. Which 240 of the 3 listed are you preparing? There is at least one of those 3 (the 1975 2.0 liter) that would clearly not be competitive at the listed weight of 2780 pounds, IMHO. My understanding of how the ITAC process went down was that if no one was currently campaigning a specific model, that model was not reviewed for proper classification weight.
 
Originally posted by kthomas@Jan 22 2006, 06:39 PM
Not legal, and for no good reason.
[snapback]71605[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


This is the most honest and intelligent statement I've seen. :)
 
Originally posted by dj10@Jan 23 2006, 09:31 AM
This is the most honest and intelligent statement I've seen. :)
[snapback]71677[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Really? Why?

This would be a CLASSIC case of rules creep. No need for the modification allowance, yet it adds some performance and longevity. If we used those two factors alone for what the rules read, then you would have hundreds of more allowances. Costs go up for everyone.

AB
 
Originally posted by rsportvolvo@Jan 23 2006, 01:31 AM

As far as this modification being legal, I will take that up with SCCA.  This forum is a good source of information, but our interpretaions on the ITCS are just that.  A letter from SCCA removes all doubt.
[snapback]71652[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

I think you should hash it out here a little before you waste your ink. What rule are you citing that makes you think it is legal?

I have a feeling that if you substituted 'supercharger' in your response where you write 'diff cooler', it would make the same amount of sense but lets give it a go.

AB
 
I gotta ask is desiring the same things that are allowed by line in Touring to be generally available in IT now rules creep towards Production? Say there is a future T4 car that was allowed a line item diff cooler in Touring are we going to take it away from them when they move to Improved Touring? Or are we going to commit the cardinal IT sin of maintaining as an IT line spec?

How do costs go up for everybody - if there is no benefit to using a modification is everybody forced to use it? It would seem that in the end analysis it only affects those that use it - and they would make the decision if it was going to be worthwhile to do or not.

This is similar to other areas I have issue with in the IT ruleset (mostly lack of permitted mods). Going back to the what makes IT IT and Prod Prod thread what about IT makes this an unreasonable mod to permit?

I think there are a lot of things that have the potential to help costs and longevity that are excluded by "rules creep" excuses. Especially something that can be as clearly isolated to avoid unintended consequences as air cooling friction fluids.
 
Marty and Matt, are you guys just messin' w/ us? The rule says that "Any final drive ratio" may be used. All that is talking about is gears - nothing else. Period, end of story.

And, Russell, I'm troubled by your thought process as it relates to the ITCS. As others have said, there is zero support for your contention [it doesn't even rise to the level of an argument] that a diff. cooler is legal. Based on your "reasoning" I wouldn't be surprised to hear that you have all kinds of illegal stuff on your car. I'm sorry to be so harsh but attitudes towards the Rules like yours have to be stamped out every chance we get. :bash_1_:
 
Originally posted by turboICE@Jan 23 2006, 10:42 AM
I gotta ask is desiring the same things that are allowed by line in Touring to be generally available in IT now rules creep towards Production?  Say there is a future T4 car that was allowed a line item diff cooler in Touring are we going to take it away from them when they move to Improved Touring? Or are we going to commit the cardinal IT sin of maintaining as an IT line spec?

How do costs go up for everybody - if there is no benefit to using a modification is everybody forced to use it?  It would seem that in the end analysis it only affects those that use it - and they would make the decision if it was going to be worthwhile to do or not.

This is similar to other areas I have issue with in the IT ruleset (mostly lack of permitted mods). Going back to the what makes IT IT and Prod Prod thread what about IT makes this an unreasonable mod to permit?

I think there are a lot of things that have the potential to help costs and longevity that are excluded by "rules creep" excuses.  Especially something that can be as clearly isolated to avoid unintended consequences as air cooling friction fluids.
[snapback]71690[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
Touring and Improved Touring are different animals. There are spec line allowances in Touring that are used to equalize cars. That is not done (with ULTRA-RARE exception) in IT. Most of the items that are allowed on the spec lines of T, are allowed in the general rules of IT. I would have no problem voting for something allowed on a spec line in T to be disallowed on the IT version if it didn't fit the ITCS.

A diff cooler DOES add performance and longevity. Certain diff designs need to maintain a certain temp to operate at peak performance. Heck - lets allow the coating of all the internal engine parts - SAME THING! CREEP.

Bottom line? If it doesn't add performance (and that haas a broad definition), why do it? If it doesn't, why allow it? You have to draw the line somewhere or else you have 4 identical classes in terms of basic prep (T, IT, P, GT) with just engine allowances as your difference.

If you want to do more stuff, go to production as a LP car. It's a legitimate option.

AB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top