Diff. cooler pump

[kthomas]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 23 2006, 04:13 PM
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.
AB

[snapback]71702[/snapback]

How does a diff cooler add performance? It adds longevity, which reduces long term cost. Remember, we are RACING these cars, and many stock parts are not designed to last forever under these conditions. Nobody is forced to use one. I agree that it would be "rules creep", but this would have saved me money long term had it been legal. Wouldn't have changed my position on the grid or the podium either.

I don't think all creep is bad. I would allow this one, and a tranny cooler. Maybe with a 20lb weight penalty or something, whatever. Not all creep is a bad thing.

Limiting lap time by having people burn up parts- many of which are only found in junkyards, sounds like a cheesy way to regulate "performance". IMHO.

[turboICE]

If a modification was such as to justify a mod only weight penalty I definitely would not want to get into those mods as being permitted that does sound like Prod. I don't think diff or trans coolers would justify them.

Trans cooler I think would be only longevity based. But there are definitely diffs that would improve locking performance if they were allowed to be cooled. I don't know that the imrpovement could be seen in any lap times given wheel and DOT tire limitations though. I would see this as primarly increasing the longevity of diffs, which are not inexpensive, and any performance benefit would be insignificant in terms of lap times.

[Eagle7]

Originally posted by bldn10@Jan 23 2006, 12:07 PM
Marty and Matt, are you guys just messin' w/ us?

Affirmative.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by kthomas@Jan 23 2006, 12:12 PM
How does a diff cooler add performance? It adds longevity, which reduces long term cost.

[snapback]71722[/snapback]

Clutch-pack designs loose effectiveness as they get hot. As will anything, keeping temp constant is an advantage. Just like nitrogen filled shocks...

AB

[rsportvolvo]

Originally posted by Gary L@Jan 23 2006, 10:06 AM
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.

[snapback]71656[/snapback]

Gary,

I am builidng my car to the 1976-1981 line item. There are some nuances that I've uncovered that should make the car competitive. Don't worry, it is all in print from Volvo.

I am also planning on writing a letter about the 2780# weight. The ITCS lists the exhaust valve diameter as 37mm when it is in fact only 35mm for the B21/23/230 SOHC engines. There are some other incorrect pieces of information that I am going to correct, with Volvo technical literature to back it up. Nothing is for sure, but reducing the 240's weight to that of the 140 would be equitable, considering that they are bascially the same car behind the firewall, save some refinements and the fact that the 140 has an SLA front suspenion and the 240 has a strut. The SLA is far superior to the strut.


To all,

There seems to be a trend with SCCA, both at the club level and the Pro level and I have some experience with both. The SCCA isn't what it used to be, and never was. Some things need to change and some things don't. Modifications for the sake of having a reliable car is not an outlandish proposal. Shot-peening connecting rods is one of those things. It doesn't give anyone an edge, and depending on which cleaning method your local machine shop uses, you may get your part shot peened regardless. (for the record my connecting rods will be shot peened, protest away!). Adding and oil cooler to the engine is legal so you can keep your engine alive, why not the same solution for drivetrain pieces? Maybe my car needs it, maybe it doesn't. I am building an IT because it is affordable. Blowing up parts just because is ridiculous! And purchasing new parts is costly, if they're even available.

One thing I find strange is the blank check live axled cars get in the ITCS and no one complains about that. I can legally remove my 5-link and put in a race-spec 3-link and smell like a rose in tech. Also, IRS cars can slot suspension mounting points to adjust alignment, isn't suspension geometry part of the suspension's alignment? These are areas that introduce performance enhancing modifications, not adding a pump and a cooler to increase the life of a differential. But maybe I'm off base here.

Thanks to all for the feedback.

[kthomas]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 23 2006, 05:50 PM
Clutch-pack designs loose effectiveness as they get hot. As will anything, keeping temp constant is an advantage. Just like nitrogen filled shocks...

AB

[snapback]71731[/snapback]

You're polishing turds to a high lustre. So we should outlaw nitrogen filled shocks? Keeping driver's cool is an advantage, should we outlaw cool suits? Buy a Quaiffe, set your clutch diff up for optimum effectiveness at whatever the operating temp ends up being; there's lots of ways to get your "performance" back. This is a WAY bigger longevity thing than it is a performance thing. We solved our problems eventually: chemically, procedurally, preparationally, etc. but only after burning up some diffs and puking a lot of fluid on the tarmac (actually we only have this problem at one track). All of which could have been avoided with a diff cooler. Performance was never an issue. In the end I'm at the performance level I want to operate at, and always was. I just take my diffs apart more often, spend lots of money replacing fluids and additives, stock a lot of bearings and clutch plates, and do a lot of needless labor. I could be there cheaper with a diff cooler.

Now I'm pretty sure SCCA will plead the ole " rules fit the intentions as written" on this one and diff coolers will remain illegal. But IMHO it shouldn't be.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by kthomas@Jan 23 2006, 02:08 PM
You're polishing turds to a high lustre. So we should outlaw nitrogen filled shocks? Keeping driver's cool is an advantage, should we outlaw cool suits? Buy a Quaiffe, set your clutch diff up for optimum effectiveness at whatever the operating temp ends up being; there's lots of ways to get your "performance" back. This is a WAY bigger longevity thing than it is a performance thing. We solved our problems eventually: chemically, procedurally, preparationally, etc. but only after burning up some diffs and puking a lot of fluid on the tarmac (actually we only have this problem at one track). All of which could have been avoided with a diff cooler. Performance was never an issue. In the end I'm at the performance level I want to operate at, and always was. I just take my diffs apart more often, spend lots of money replacing fluids and additives, stock a lot of bearings and clutch plates, and do a lot of needless labor. I could be there cheaper with a diff cooler.

Now I'm pretty sure SCCA will plead the ole " rules fit the intentions as written" on this one and diff coolers will remain illegal. But IMHO it shouldn't be.

[snapback]71758[/snapback]

It was just an example of how it affects performance - you asked for it! Cooler diff fluid IS a performance enhancement. Should allow the internals of our engines to be coated with all the latest stuff in the name of cooling, performance and longevity? Same argument, SAME CREEP.

AB

[dj10]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 23 2006, 10:18 AM
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

[snapback]71685[/snapback]

"Costs go up for everyone".
Hmmm is that like allowing the use of Motec's? This adds absoutely no performance just like short shifters. Make the stuff that has no performance values legal

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by dj10@Jan 23 2006, 03:07 PM
"Costs go up for everyone".
Hmmm is that like allowing the use of Motec's? This adds absoutely no performance just like short shifters. Make the stuff that has no performance values legal

[snapback]71764[/snapback]

We can't look backward to look forward. You can only learn from mistakes and go from there.

I submit again that if there is no advantage, people woudn't ask for it. If your car don't 'go away' at the end of the race, would you consider that a performance improvment?

AB

[kthomas]

Let's retroactively abolish new tires. They are a performance advantage that lots of people can't afford and they go off at the end of a race! :119:

I'm just funnin' with you now, Andy, we're going to have to disagree on this one.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by kthomas@Jan 23 2006, 04:40 PM
Let's retroactively abolish new tires. They are a performance advantage that lots of people can't afford and they go off at the end of a race! :119:

I'm just funnin' with you now, Andy, we're going to have to disagree on this one.

[snapback]71773[/snapback]

No problem!

AB

[MMiskoe]

Am I messing w/ you. Well yes & no. I was more trying go fishing for curiosity sake. I'm "polishing turds to a high luster." (I like that phrase, can I use it?)

No where does it say you can change the tire pressures you run, however, you can run any tire so its interperted that you can run any pressure.

There are lots of things like that in IT - where does it say you can adjust front toe settings? Perhaps I've missed something, but I don't see it. Camber changes aren't specifically allowed, it just gives a method of adjustment, presumably to return the camber settings to stock after changing springs & lowering the car?

No where does it say you can change Diff oil type, but it does say you can change diff gears & lockup methods. So is it also implied that you can change the fluid to match what is required by the clutch pack style diff you upgraded to? If you can change tire pressures by changing tires, then you can change oil type to match the diff system.

What was asked here was if an oil cooler can be fitted. If the diff system requires cool oil, and the only way to acheive that is w/ an oil cooler, the cooler can be installed w/o mods to the case, where's the problem? The only change is the drain & vent plugs which fall under hardware.

Perhaps I'm wrong about the items I've quoted above. I've been wrong before (that one time I thought I was mistaken). If I am wrong I'm interested to see where I went astray.

Matt

[Bill Miller]

David,



Write your letter, but keep in mind, unless you actually spend the money, and do it through a 13.9, a response stating that they are legal, is nothing more than someone's opinion, and won't necessarily stand up to a protest. You want something that you can take to the tech shed, a 13.9 is the way to go.

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by MMiskoe@Jan 23 2006, 08:40 PM
......., the cooler can be installed w/o mods to the case, where's the problem? The only change is the drain & vent plugs which fall under hardware........
Matt

[snapback]71798[/snapback]

Calling a hydraulic fitting "hardware", aka a vent cap (or drain plug) is like calling a turbo an exhaust manifold.

A plug, errrrr...plugs, a hose transports...not close functionwise!

[MMiskoe]

Sorry Jake, what I meant by the 'hardware' comment was that the only item in the case that has been changed is the plug for the drain & fill points. Those plugs are hardware which is free. Otherwise there are no changes to the diff casing which is clearly stated must remain un-altered.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 23 2006, 09:13 AM
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

[snapback]71702[/snapback]

Funny that Touring gets brought up here...Touring only allows the stock gear ratio but does allow on a line item with proven need the use of a diff cooler.

[turboICE]

He was replying to my comment that diff and trans coolers are permitted by line in Touring and whether or not a future T4 car with it on their Touring line would lose it when they came over to IT. Apparently they would.

I guess I just expected items permitted in a more restricted modification class would work down to a higher modification class - may not have been valid but an expectation none the less.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by turboICE@Jan 23 2006, 09:16 PM
He was replying to my comment that diff and trans coolers are permitted by line in Touring and whether or not a future T4 car with it on their Touring line would lose it when they came over to IT. Apparently they would.

I guess I just expected items permitted in a more restricted modification class would work down to a higher modification class - may not have been valid but an expectation none the less.

[snapback]71830[/snapback]

See Ed that's where you get confused....Touring is a different class and nothing more. Production allows alternate compression but if I brought my EP 240sx back to IT would you care that it had 12:1 compression or should I follow the rules set for a IT (a different class)

[turboICE]

Well that would be going from a less restricted modified class to a more restricted modfication class - I don't see where anything I said suggested that.

The confusion comes from the progression of modfication level T/SS > IT > Prod > GT as communicated many times by veterans here.

If there is no relation between classes of competition and their levels of modification for preparation then no rule change risks creeping towards production as there is no relationship between IT modification level and production modification level, each ruleset is determined independently of each other.

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by turboICE@Jan 23 2006, 09:48 PM
Well that would be going from a less restricted modified class to a more restricted modfication class - I don't see where anything I said suggested that.

The confusion comes from the progression of modfication level T/SS > IT > Prod > GT as communicated many times by veterans here.

If there is no relation between classes of competition and their levels of modification for preparation then no rule change risks creeping towards production as there is no relationship between IT modification level and production modification level, each ruleset is determined independently of each other.

[snapback]71833[/snapback]

Ahhhh Now I see where you are lost....That progression does not exist and never has. By the time your 240sx goes SS,IT,Prod,GT....there is nothing left of SS..The concept is good but not very real. I figured it out a long time ago. Work with the rules for the class you are in and don't even read the other set unless you are ready to move there because you will pull your hair out trying to figure it out. It's funny that I have been building racing engines for a lot of years and I still have to get the book out for each catagory including SS just to be sure.