Torque Loading

1
Andrew has it right. 
 
It is not so much the absolute amount of torque but how it is applied that is important.  As Andrew points out, there are SVX (and Vortex) engines running in a lot of T3's that don't destroy the gearbox.  Note that Andrew says that he doesn't burn rubber, and this is what it comes down to.  What will kill a gearbox is shock loads in the drive line, like dumping the clutch at high RPM or applying snap throttle openings, particularly in the lower gears.  Sensible increases in throttle, as opposed to snap opening, will allow the use of higher than standard torque without damage.
 
Les
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:46 PM
Subject: [Syncro_T3_Australia] Re: Oiler anyone?

Ken it would be great to have concrete figures on this. On paper, it seems that the diesel
engine mentioned may well have too much torque for a Syncro tranny, but then many said
that they wouldn't handle the Subaru 6 cylinder 3.3 litre SVX, nor even the 4 cylinder 2.5.

We all know that there are many Syncros around now running those engines, and I have
not heard of extraordinary numbers of transmission failures from the related forum
listees.

There was info from the US on the bloke who first(?) put a WRX engine in to his 2WD
manual transmissioned bus. He stripped 3rd gear pretty quickly but did say the
transmission had seen plenty of use already so wasn't surprised. Was anybody? LOL.

The ONLY fact I know for certain, is that my bus has had 2 years and an estimated 15000
miles on the SOHC EJ25 and (touch wood) the transmission is fine thus far. It is worth
noting that the transmission received all new bearings (but not the SA oiling plates) at
130000 miles, 30k before the engine transplant. Also. I don't burn rubber, but I do give
the bus some wellie across soft sand. Regularly.

On another note, I recently discussed the diesel Subaru with the fellow who supplied me
with my with my bellhousing ( www.rjes.com ) who says that the 2006 and later engines
have computers that are much harder to trick when not part of the original vehicle. He
says this issue will only become more difficult in the future. Having said that, he will be
waiting at the roadside for the first Subie diese to be available through a vehicle write off!

Watch this space me thinks...... ...

Andy.

2
Thank you Andy and Les, these are great posts you've both made and
somewhat reassuring. As you say, you don't burn rubber, hence all things
being equal, you are giving the syncro every chance of achieving
considerable longevity at the least cost.

The motor, it's something I will consider at some future time, I guess
whenever the motor shows an unacceptable level of power loss. I don't
thrash mine either, preferring to go easy on the mechanicals wherever
possible. Such a mindset seems to me to be in stark contrast with posts
I read on the US syncro website where I get the impression they give
their syncros a fair old hammering, often with dire consequences. Maybe
it's due to them having less holidays than us, so they have to do a lot
more in less time.

Regrettably, for our syncros, their demise could be forced on us soon
enough anyway ... the price/availability of petrol.

Cheers. Ken

--- In Syncro_T3_Australia@yahoogroups.com, "Les Harris"
<leslieharris@...> wrote:
>
> Andrew has it right.
>
> It is not so much the absolute amount of torque but how it is applied
that is important. As Andrew points out, there are SVX (and Vortex)
engines running in a lot of T3's that don't destroy the gearbox. Note
that Andrew says that he doesn't burn rubber, and this is what it comes
down to. What will kill a gearbox is shock loads in the drive line, like
dumping the clutch at high RPM or applying snap throttle openings,
particularly in the lower gears. Sensible increases in throttle, as
opposed to snap opening, will allow the use of higher than standard
torque without damage.
>
> Les
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: raredownunder
> To: Syncro_T3_Australia@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:46 PM
> Subject: [Syncro_T3_Australia] Re: Oiler anyone?
>
>
> Ken it would be great to have concrete figures on this. On paper, it
seems that the diesel
> engine mentioned may well have too much torque for a Syncro tranny,
but then many said
> that they wouldn't handle the Subaru 6 cylinder 3.3 litre SVX, nor
even the 4 cylinder 2.5.
>
> We all know that there are many Syncros around now running those
engines, and I have
> not heard of extraordinary numbers of transmission failures from the
related forum
> listees.
>
> There was info from the US on the bloke who first(?) put a WRX engine
in to his 2WD
> manual transmissioned bus. He stripped 3rd gear pretty quickly but did
say the
> transmission had seen plenty of use already so wasn't surprised. Was
anybody? LOL.
>
> The ONLY fact I know for certain, is that my bus has had 2 years and
an estimated 15000
> miles on the SOHC EJ25 and (touch wood) the transmission is fine thus
far. It is worth
> noting that the transmission received all new bearings (but not the SA
oiling plates) at
> 130000 miles, 30k before the engine transplant. Also. I don't burn
rubber, but I do give
> the bus some wellie across soft sand. Regularly.
>
> On another note, I recently discussed the diesel Subaru with the
fellow who supplied me
> with my with my bellhousing ( www.rjes.com ) who says that the 2006
and later engines
> have computers that are much harder to trick when not part of the
original vehicle. He
> says this issue will only become more difficult in the future. Having
said that, he will be
> waiting at the roadside for the first Subie diese to be available
through a vehicle write off!
>
> Watch this space me thinks.........
>
> Andy.
>