home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-03-2019, 06:52 AM   #1
Vol242vo
Keep it clean...
 
Vol242vo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spokane, WA
Default G80 rear differential - 1041 marking

What models and years did they come on? Im looking to swap the entire carrier assembly into my existing rear axle...

Research has shown 92-96 960s and 940s N/A and Turbo models?

Is this accurate? Any other options for this swap?
__________________
Derek
1980 242
Recaro LX Bs - 16" ARE 398s - 25/25 Sway Bars - Bilstein HDs - SuperPro Poly/STS Derlin Bushings - MSD - R Sport Wheel - 'Skinny' Bumpers'

-Project Thread-


Follow on IG: @vol242vo
Vol242vo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2019, 09:56 AM   #2
poulrais
Board Member
 
poulrais's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Quebec, CAN
Default

I snatched one in a 1991 940 GLE (16V)
__________________


1990, Volvo 740 16v +T
1991, Volvo 745T 16V - crushed
build thread: http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=249553
poulrais is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2019, 10:08 AM   #3
11BC2
Board Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cool, CA.
Default

My son’s 1991 745t has one.
11BC2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2019, 06:01 PM   #4
2manyturbos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monroe, OR USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vol242vo View Post
What models and years did they come on? Im looking to swap the entire carrier assembly into my existing rear axle...

Research has shown 92-96 960s and 940s N/A and Turbo models?

Is this accurate? Any other options for this swap?
Not quite accurate. US market 7/9 Turbo models are equipped with the G-80 from 1991-95. 960s are equipped with G-80s from 1992-1996. US market NA 940s are equipped with G80s from 1993-1995. I have seen several NA 940s that had the G80 earlier than 1993, however, that is because it was ordered as an option. This applies to cars that were destined for the US market when built. European market cars did not get the G80 as standard equipment according to both Volvo and many of our European board members.
2manyturbos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2019, 06:36 PM   #5
Vol242vo
Keep it clean...
 
Vol242vo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spokane, WA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2manyturbos View Post
Not quite accurate. US market 7/9 Turbo models are equipped with the G-80 from 1991-95. 960s are equipped with G-80s from 1992-1996. US market NA 940s are equipped with G80s from 1993-1995. I have seen several NA 940s that had the G80 earlier than 1993, however, that is because it was ordered as an option. This applies to cars that were destined for the US market when built. European market cars did not get the G80 as standard equipment according to both Volvo and many of our European board members.
This is exactly what Im was looking for, thank you.
Vol242vo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2019, 07:10 PM   #6
Dicktater
Cretin
 
Dicktater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nunya
Default

And if your gonna do it get a 4:10 gear set out of a late model NA 940!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbo Joe View Post
**** off loser. I will **** you up. I back up the **** I talk. I don't back down because I am not wrong. You want some? Bring it mother****er.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliMeatWagon View Post
I hope your treehouse gets cancer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbo Joe View Post
I buy a few when foodstamps get here because I have an investment strategy.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by volvo740b234/531 View Post
I smoke my weed and dream of an awesome life
Feedback >http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=197700
Dicktater is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2019, 09:15 PM   #7
Wren
Porkchop Sandwiches
 
Wren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Athens, GA
Default

I've never seen a 940 that didn't have a 1041.
Wren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2019, 10:38 PM   #8
sbabbs
Board Member
 
sbabbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rushing Lane, Scappoose, OR
Default

The white tag is located on the drivers side back of the rear axle housing. Lots of times it's covered in goop and you gotta scrape the goop to read the tag. IF it has 1041 on it has the g80. IF it has 1041K on it, 960's, it is even a better stronger g80..
__________________
1988 245 White slicktop M47 Wagon! 93 b230f. LH 2.4 STS flat flywheel.
1990 745 B230FT Getrag JohnV flywheel 240mm clutch 13c A-cam 3.54 G80 548K
1991 740SE B230FT NPR Strut braces IPD bar A cam 550cc EV14's. 3.73 G80 M90 to put in.
1995 940 White racing wagoon. 13c m90 to put in
sbabbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2019, 10:46 PM   #9
2manyturbos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monroe, OR USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wren View Post
I've never seen a 940 that didn't have a 1041.
If someone bought a 7-9 in Sweden under the Tourist/Diplomat program the car is not usually built to the same specs as the US models. I had a 1994 940 Turbo sedan in the 850 purple color. It had the Tourist?Diplomat decal on the rear window. Steel wheels with 850 hubcaps on it, no sunroof. Cloth interior. No power seat. It didn't even have a power antenna switch. I never checked it for a G80. It was a plain Jane.
2manyturbos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 04:07 AM   #10
GSWAGON
my other ride is a exmark
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbabbs View Post
IF it has 1041 on it has the g80. IF it has 1041K on it, 960's, it is even a better stronger g80..
never knew that, what is the difference?
__________________
87 765 GS Wagon LT4/T56 13.1@111
90 740 Turbo M46
90 780 Bertone Turbo
99 SL500 AMG Sport
08 Corvette JSB LS3 6 speed
08 Escalade AWD- wifes daily
15 Ram CCSB Hemi 4wd

Life is short, so live it! You are only old when your dreams are replaced by regrets.
GSWAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 09:54 AM   #11
Uncleknucklez
bruspeed
 
Uncleknucklez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicktater View Post
And if your gonna do it get a 4:10 gear set out of a late model NA 940!
First gear sucks with 4.10 gears. I have 3.90 in my car, and a T5 trans, First is pretty much worthless. I was thinking the other day that I should find a 3.73 rear end to slap in there and see if it is better.

Modded G80 works great in my car so far...
__________________
1980 242 Turbo
2004 V70R

Uncleknucklez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 12:22 PM   #12
VB242
F*ck 12
 
VB242's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: In my 15x20 Corona cell
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncleknucklez View Post
First gear sucks with 4.10 gears. I have 3.90 in my car, and a T5 trans, First is pretty much worthless. I was thinking the other day that I should find a 3.73 rear end to slap in there and see if it is better.

Modded G80 works great in my car so far...
You can get larger diameter wheels and or tires which will effectively change your final gearing.
__________________
"i will destroy all of you!"
-Sheldon Plankton

Booty Scooty
https://youtu.be/i4oAOZ8nbq4
VB242 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 12:29 PM   #13
Stiggy Pop
Board Member
 
Stiggy Pop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Granville, MA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncleknucklez View Post
First gear sucks with 4.10 gears. I have 3.90 in my car, and a T5 trans, First is pretty much worthless. I was thinking the other day that I should find a 3.73 rear end to slap in there and see if it is better.

Modded G80 works great in my car so far...
That's because of your first gear ratio. 3.91 rear with a 2.95 first t5 box is the ticket.
__________________
'79 242
943 pickup
Stiggy Pop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 02:03 PM   #14
blkaplan
50 shades of beige
 
blkaplan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Default

Yea. A 3.35 first T5 is better matched with a 3.73 rear. The 2.95 works better with a 4.10.

3.91 can go either way, seems like taller tires would be your friend.
__________________
www.BEIGEPOWER.com
Kaplhenke Racing Facebook
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkKratoz View Post
The only safe bet is Ben.
blkaplan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 02:27 PM   #15
Kjets On a Plane
Board Member
 
Kjets On a Plane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oregone
Default

2.95 1st M400/M410/M40/M41/T5 w/4.10s & a 4cylinder is pretty good all around for a driver/budget somewhat quicker street car with stock diameter tires.

Volvo cars got heavier, engines produced broader torque curves at lower RPMs, & emissions laws got tighter. Garbage truck transmission ratios being implemented not long thereafter...

2.95 T5 w/ .72 OD is about the best compromise of the used OE USA market T5s ( hooped out mullet-missile GM T5s with that desirable combo in T5-WC with any viability are becoming scarcer used vs. buying all new /recombining with used & new w/later mustang V6 trans with 2.95 1st/cluster gear setup, but needing an input shaft swap/retainer and .63? 5th gear swap at minimum, basically).

Only other volvo 4 cylinder RWD app friendly ratio combo worth having ( with the 2.95 1st gear) is .80 OD/5th Cosworth for 'closest factory ratio combo.' The rest are usually anything from mild let-down to crushing disappointment in most cases, with less torque handling capability.

4.10 works well in stock(ish) 4cylinder turbo cars with an AW7x auto.

The small hole G80 1041K might in theory be stronger, but the other failure part(s) are no different & still break first/without much difference in observable failure rate/pattern in practice FWIW having freshened up/repaired 50+ of those silly things by now.
If you keep breaking them, time for something else, you're splitting hairs / it's a tarp/vicious circle at that point.
__________________
How PSI a stock can support?
Always Be Crushing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnMc View Post
If you send me $20$14.99, I'll send you a how-to explaining how to make $20$14.99 from people on the internet.

Last edited by Kjets On a Plane; 02-06-2019 at 10:55 PM..
Kjets On a Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 03:40 PM   #16
Stiggy Pop
Board Member
 
Stiggy Pop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Granville, MA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjets On a Plane View Post
(2.95 1st gear) or .80 OD cosworth for 'closest factory ratio combo.'
I've got a 2.95 1st, .80 5th box with a 3.91 rear and I really couldn't love it anymore. It's a great spread for 'road race' type of driving. The fifth wouldn't be as great for guys who commute with their cars or sit on the highway for extended periods of time.
Stiggy Pop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 04:12 PM   #17
Uncleknucklez
bruspeed
 
Uncleknucklez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default

My box is a 3.35 1st, .68 5th unit, With the 3.91, and decently small tire (24" diameter) means first gear is over in a flash, and 70 MPH is right about 2800 RPM.

My thinking is to go with a 3.73 instead of the 3.91 in order to have more dig in first AND second gear, while bringing cruising RPM from 2800 to 2600 or lower. Modern traffic moves fast, especially here in CA when the middle and slow lanes rip at 65-70 mph.
Uncleknucklez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 04:43 PM   #18
Kjets On a Plane
Board Member
 
Kjets On a Plane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oregone
Default

Copy pasted from an old e-mail, TL;DR, HTH and all that:

T5s input shaft/5th gear swap with garden variety gear pullers/various orielly/harbor fright tools is straight forward enough & well documented with those having infinite aftermarket, internet documentation & support.

T5 turd polishing from the myraid of T5 applications can rapidly become cost-ineffective, however.

Challenging to shop / choose wisely amongst often beat up used transmissions driven in a (likely) thrashed mullet missile (Camaro/Firebird/Mustang, typically). All other known applications in the USA have ratios about as terrible as an M46/47 / are about as weak and often a lot more beat/used up with more power and/or heavier car and/or abusive/neglegent previous owner than even the OE volvo trans; cheap, but not necessarily inexpensive. Eclipsing new T5 price, good used condition WC 2.95-.72 price with (more) persistent search(ing) and/or some other stronger trans all together is easy enough while trying to improve undesirable T5s, ending with poor/costly (TB budget sliding scale) results is easy enough, however. BTDT once, but not twice, mercifully.

North America (Canada?) never received the WC 2.95-.80 Cosworth imported en masse, but the parts are available new & used nonetheless, of the inexpensive choices.

The "next closest OE ratio spread" (2.95-.72) WC T5 (USA market) was only offered in some IROC V8 Camaro/Firebird 1988-1992. Some factory production volume, but the vast majority were:

(new production stats/drivetrain offerings)
-Non-World-Class before 1988ish (very few parts compatible between NWC & WC, but NWC and WC isn't necessarily of great significance for raw torque handling/abuse tolerance capability by itself, but for any upgrades it's of significance & greatly limiting/rapidly cost-ineffective...you're pretty trapped with an inferior parts bin to recombine with if you get a 1983-1987 NWC even in 2.95-.72, but acquisition price is accordingly (usually fairly pathetically) lower (these days).
-V6/terrible ratios
-Automatic
.63 OD/5th w/V8 to meet avg. C.A.F.E fuel econ NOX regulations is standard in most, even if you're lucky enough to get the V8 2.95 1st. Good/great for fuel econ/emissions in the light-weight fairly aerodynamic Camaro application with all torque and no power at 1500RPM, but basically worthless for anything but cruising in the flat at 80-85+mph in ideal conditions in most other applications.
-Only offered in the most expensive (that avg. joe didn't/couldn't buy) &/or most customized specially ordered models / rarely sold as floor models (most of those were stripper pathetic V6 loss-leader fodder and/or loaded with an auto-box/all the toys).

(25-30+ years later...):
-Often driven hard/long since wrecked
-Very nearly every S10 V8 conversion guy and/or other Ford / Chevy guy goes to the junkyard/auction at 6am/crack of dawn all the time to pull them/ canabilize for parts or complete. Competing with those guys isn't easy as many will take/use just about anything viable/usable whether they're replacing what they broke or upgrading.
-Engine torque near/at torque rating of trans when new.

Examining production numbers, and/or drawing a matrix of just those basic new drivetrain options & calculating the baseline probability/knowing nothing else, lottery odds already aren't great. Add more factors / 25-30 years it's difficult to interpret the odds as 'improving.'

Using later (1994+ body style) V6 Mustang donors and remaking 2.95-.72 ratio spread with some/all new used parts is often effective, at this point.

With all the costs of transmission/drivetrain adaptation to the redblock 4cylinder (T5 or otherwise) (~$1k+ observed repeatedly...no doubt a heroic story is brewing / can be found with a captivating plot outline w/ analogous storyline "something something something barn find adapter plate for .02/ stored in a hyperbaric chamber in NOS condition, suitable clutch that works perfect for all uses and/or all the (minor enough/kludgery) fab work done for free/.17/hr"), why settle for lousy ratios/overall strength?

Band-aiding a mis-match rear axle ratio in that's special tool/labor intensive/technical if setting pinion depth (likely the average costs-conscious TBer obtains a common 3.73 rear axle complete/"known good" many times, in fairness ) with the 3.3 1st T5 seems completely backwards.

1031/1041 R&P aren't likely to have any strength issues (even with slightly smaller 4.10 pinions, the axles &/or diff carrier always breaks first it seems/that isn't nearly as much of a problem piece of strength as the transmission/other differential parts. 2.95 T5 parts bin "best of OE" is less likely to break behind a 4-cylinder with 4.10 gears than weaker 3.31 T5 with 3.73s that's being crashed around/beat on with greater rev-drop between gear changes to be competitive and/or 'fun' in most "real world" conditions.

3.3 first w/.68 5th is FoMoCo frugal T5 parts bin recombining so they could (logically/understandably) meet (incoming) C.A.F.E fuel economy & NOX as well as obscure granny 1st gear steep hill (towing iirc?) laws of the day with their 302 foxbodies as a cost-effective compromise with the size of tires/car they had. Is that relevant to most of us budget hacksters 25 years later?

Stock (diameter) 205-55-16 summer tires with the 2.95-.72 spread w/4.10s is quite painless/livable (of known TB-approved inexpensive 5-speed choices.) The SOHC motor can pull it in vacuum/lean burn cruise in 5th/OD (even with a (slight/minimal) load/trailer/roof rack load/~4-6kft interstate "high plateau" elevations/ hot thin air/less-than-ideal conditions) returning acceptable economy/NVH at the speeds possible/plausible with these cars (65mph/ less many times, whatever the drivetrain.)

Rev drop from 6K shifts ~1500RPM even with mild turbo cam(s) with easily street-able clutch. Boost drop 'tolerable' (subjective) with the closing of the throttle/inevitable power-flow-interrupt compromise of a manual transmission.

~29mpg + or - 2 frequently observed at cruise in many conditions (75-85+mph, beverly hillbilly roof rack (and its probable bulky contents), very long/steep hills/6K+Ft elevation, hot days and/or all of the above, no). Noise not discernibly worse than the dated boxy car with a bunch of glass/rear eco-chamber in the wind, (often factory) misaligned body panels/dried out seals/sound deadening/interior plastic/tractor vibrating 4cylinder ever is. Failure rate of the trans was uncommon(ish) with only 2.1-2.5L 4cylinder power/3000lbs/205 summer tires on the street or some track/auto-x/towing "mixed use" without constant abuse.

Fairly effective? recombining the used Volvo parts bin to use a 4.10 1041 gear set w/ Alloy diff cover w/ OE filter & magnet (Alloy cover conducts heat away more effectively, but can/will crack instead of dent unlike stamped steel cover if fed a rock diet...
...longevity/driving predictability *may* be impacted...
Slightly modded "almost always locked" G80 (many limitations notwithstanding/not exactly "driver/performance oriented" and/or strong (less predictable than welded or clutch LSD, but doesn't eat your tires/suspension/break axles either), more traction than open, & (probably all-importantly) TB-priced) coupled with various "best of" the OE T5 bits.

FWIW:
-Closest USA-market junkyard- able ratio spread T5.72OD x 4.10=2.952
-M46/47/Cosworth T5.80OD x 3.54=2.832 (OE on 700T stick shift cars) Pretty good all around street driver compromise with 205-55-16 OE tires.
-"".80OD x 3.73 = 2.984 (OE 240T) (a little spun out, especially with OE 195-60-15 turbo size tires, but "responsive" (tolerable?) with a 7.5:1 compression B21FT that was marketed as a "driver's car" in the day (80s Turbo cars typically got horrible test drive magazine reviews in the day new and manufacturers knew it).
-"".80 OD x 3.31= 2.648 (N/A 8V 2.3L fuel econ/late emissions era USA cars)...faints in the sight of hills...terrible/requires boost (in boosted SOHC redblock apps) negating any/all performance & economy benefits at all but ideal unloaded 85-100+mph in the flat.



Last edited by Kjets On a Plane; 02-06-2019 at 11:23 PM..
Kjets On a Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2019, 06:52 PM   #19
11BC2
Board Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cool, CA.
Default

^^^** Awesomely put!
11BC2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2019, 01:28 AM   #20
sbabbs
Board Member
 
sbabbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rushing Lane, Scappoose, OR
Default




1041K left 1041 sheet right



Inside super duper 1041K


1041 suckage, those are the axle ends your looking at...

Pics worth a couple words.

I know the K has a solid metal tube in the middle of it and less hole of nothingness in the case. Ya volvo put whimpyier rear in 960.. ha.

Yes get 1041k 3.31 ratio out of 960 wagons before 95 should have solid rear I think. Grab ring and pinion and better 1041k G80 and put in your 240... What I do is take whole rear end and just bolt that in my 740. I used to run welded rear, broke a bunch of axles. Since I put in 960 rear never broke another axle.

I'd put a ford top loader in before I'd even think about using a T5.. Until then getrag 265 and m90 suits me. T5 fits in a 240, I like High powered 740's.. I gots m47 in my 240 yo.

Last edited by sbabbs; 02-07-2019 at 01:49 AM..
sbabbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2019, 11:13 AM   #21
Pillow
Sleazebag 7-9 Owner
 
Pillow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: NoVA
Default

x2 Sbabbs info.

My USA model 92 960 came with a G80 and 3.31 gears. (I cannot remember "K" or not)
__________________
2010 Porsche Cayenne S - My ride - 99k stock
2010 Cadillac Escalade ESV - Wifeys ride - 205k stock
2007 Audi A4 3.2 M6 - daughters ride - 166k stock
2006 Volvo XC70 Wagon - sons ride - 175k stock
1992 Volvo 965 - "Savage Wagon" w LS 5.3 LM7 + LS7 cam + GM T5 swap in progress.
1979 Porsche 911SC - stock
1971 Chevy C-10 w 5.3 LS (LS2 cam) & GM T5 trans
1948 Spartan Mansion travel trailer - aluminum greatness
Pillow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2019, 03:09 PM   #22
poulrais
Board Member
 
poulrais's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Quebec, CAN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillow View Post
x2 Sbabbs info.

My USA model 92 960 came with a G80 and 3.31 gears. (I cannot remember "K" or not)
That's nice! I'm swapping the entire IRS from my 1992 960 under ma 740 that is getting a T6 motor and CD009 tranny. I was planning to install this 3.31 gear I bought a while ago to better the CD009 gearing but I this wont be necessary if I have the right final gear in the 960's diff.
poulrais is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2019, 03:26 PM   #23
Pillow
Sleazebag 7-9 Owner
 
Pillow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: NoVA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by poulrais View Post
That's nice! I'm swapping the entire IRS from my 1992 960 under ma 740 that is getting a T6 motor and CD009 tranny. I was planning to install this 3.31 gear I bought a while ago to better the CD009 gearing but I this wont be necessary if I have the right final gear in the 960's diff.
Lurking on your build as well. Great project and I wanna see that roll hard!
Pillow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2019, 05:22 PM   #24
poulrais
Board Member
 
poulrais's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Quebec, CAN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillow View Post
Lurking on your build as well. Great project and I wanna see that roll hard!
The project is at a crawling pace these days cause I'm helping another TBricker from Ontario with his 740 drifting machine build... B230ft + 16V built/forged motor + CD009.

I should get on my project full time by mid March. Can't wait to update the build thread with meaningful infos!
poulrais is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2020, 03:48 PM   #25
Vol242vo
Keep it clean...
 
Vol242vo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spokane, WA
Default



Bumping this thread as there is finally a 1992 960 at a local junkyard. I’m unable to see the marking on the differential without dropping the crossmember or gas tank. For those that have pulled a G 80 out of a 960 what’s the easiest method? And although this tag doesn’t show the 1041 marking would that actually be on the axle itself rather than his crossmember?
Vol242vo is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.