Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: Dave Hall]
#2318136
06/08/17 05:00 PM
06/08/17 05:00 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,011 Sac, CA
mopowers
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,011
Sac, CA
|
I don't remember how much pressure that fuel pump makes but I would want the fuel regulator in line in front of the carb. and the second fuel filter to be 10 microns mounted between the regulator and carb. ![twocents twocents](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/twocents.gif) I have used one of the Mallory 140 pumps with the regulator that Mallory sold with it and it was marginal on a smaller 440 bracket motor under 600 HP Maybe a better, bigger pump is needed now instead of finding out later it isn't good enough Thanks for the input Cab. Since I have the pump already, I'll probably give it a try and, if it's inadequate, I'll sell it and swap to a bigger pump. Thanks again. If you're running 1/2" why would you put that piece of 3/8" between the filter and the pump? Are you referring to the piece of -8 to supply the pump? Should I step that up to -10? The regulator needs to be in front of the carb and -6 is fine to the carb. -6 would also be fine for the return. That system will be fine for the street but a 10 sec. car will probably zero the gauge going down the track.
Thanks for the input. So, placing the regulator in front of the carb would be better. I've always thought after the carb is best since it keeps fresh (cooler) fuel feeding the carburetor, especially in a street car. When at the track, does it not regulate pressure as well in that configuration? Thanks again.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318139
06/08/17 05:09 PM
06/08/17 05:09 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,094 central texas
krautrock
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,094
central texas
|
looks like the way you have it drawn, the regulator will only regulate pressure in the return line, carb will see full pump pressure...
EDIT: oh nvm, did some quick reading, seems the pressure is constant in the whole fuel system no matter where the regulator is.
Last edited by krautrock; 06/08/17 05:55 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318141
06/08/17 05:15 PM
06/08/17 05:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,540 Milwaukee WI
TRENDZ
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,540
Milwaukee WI
|
That drawing should work perfectly. Sizes and placement of the regulator are fine assuming using the correct regulator. Much more flow to the carb with this set up. You would possibly be better off with -10 between the filter and pump.
Last edited by TRENDZ; 06/08/17 05:17 PM.
"use it 'till it breaks, replace as needed"
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318156
06/08/17 05:59 PM
06/08/17 05:59 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,923 S.E. Michigan
ZIPPY
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,923
S.E. Michigan
|
I don't think that's going to work, you're going to have full fuel pump pressure at the carburetor that way. The regulator needs to be moved.
Rich H.
Esse Quam Videri
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318169
06/08/17 06:29 PM
06/08/17 06:29 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,978 Hilltown Pa
1967dartgt
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,978
Hilltown Pa
|
Looks good to me, I would use #10 between filter and pump. I ran a very similar set up for many years, went 9.60s with it in a 3400 lb car. People don't understand that it is designed to keep 7 lbs of pressure in front of regulator.(or whatever you set it to) It won't see high pressure like they think. It was the most steady pressure system I ever had on my car.
Brett Miller W9 cnc'd heads STR Chassis fabraction
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: 1967dartgt]
#2318172
06/08/17 06:38 PM
06/08/17 06:38 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,415 Marion, South Carolina [><]
an8sec70cuda
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,415
Marion, South Carolina [><]
|
Looks good to me, I would use #10 between filter and pump. I ran a very similar set up for many years, went 9.60s with it in a 3400 lb car. People don't understand that it is designed to keep 7 lbs of pressure in front of regulator.(or whatever you set it to) It won't see high pressure like they think. It was the most steady pressure system I ever had on my car. ![iagree iagree](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/iagree.gif)
CHIP '70 hemicuda, 575" Hemi, 727, Dana 60 '69 road runner, 440-6, 18 spline 4 speed, Dana 60 '71 Demon, 340, low gear 904, 8.75 '73 Chrysler New Yorker, 440, 727, 8.75 '90 Chevy 454SS Silverado, 476" BBC, TH400, 14 bolt '06 GMC 2500HD LBZ Duramax
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318175
06/08/17 07:06 PM
06/08/17 07:06 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,885 Pattison Texas
CSK
master
|
master
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,885
Pattison Texas
|
you have the regulator in the correct place for a return system !!!
I have & do run this set up like your picture.
Last edited by csk; 06/08/17 07:06 PM.
1968 Charger COLD A/C Hilborn EFI 512ci 9.7 compression, Stealth heads, 4.10 gear A518 ODtrans 4100lb,10.93 full street car trim 2020 T/A 392 Stock 11.79 @ 114.5
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318187
06/08/17 07:34 PM
06/08/17 07:34 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 525 Can , Nova Scotia , Cape Breto...
caper
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 525
Can , Nova Scotia , Cape Breto...
|
With the way you have it drawn in the pic is the way you should do it, just change the short line between the filter and fuel pump, make it bigger. The pressure is going to be the same from the regulator back to the pump.
New best 10.18 , 1.40 60 ft 496 Scott Brown built, street driven 3600 lbs,654 hp , 653 ft tq
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318190
06/08/17 07:37 PM
06/08/17 07:37 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
The system looks fine... the #8 before the pump I might change to a #10... make sure the filter will flow the amount needed.. other than those little things your fine.. on the section of #8 I just like to have the first restriction at/or near the carb... as for the pump.. rule of thumb is .5 pounds per HP and your safe ![wave wave](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/wave.gif)
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: Dave Hall]
#2318205
06/08/17 08:35 PM
06/08/17 08:35 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,190 Plymouth, MI
Blusmbl
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,190
Plymouth, MI
|
If you're running 1/2" why would you put that piece of 3/8" between the filter and the pump? The regulator needs to be in front of the carb and -6 is fine to the carb. -6 would also be fine for the return. That system will be fine for the street but a 10 sec. car will probably zero the gauge going down the track. I thought -8 was the AN equivalent to 1/2" OD tube. Wouldn't hurt to go bigger it is probably fine.
'18 Ford Raptor, random motorcycles, 1968 Plymouth Fury III - 11.37 @ 118
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: Blusmbl]
#2318216
06/08/17 08:57 PM
06/08/17 08:57 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
If you're running 1/2" why would you put that piece of 3/8" between the filter and the pump? The regulator needs to be in front of the carb and -6 is fine to the carb. -6 would also be fine for the return. That system will be fine for the street but a 10 sec. car will probably zero the gauge going down the track. I thought -8 was the AN equivalent to 1/2" OD tube. Wouldn't hurt to go bigger it is probably fine. #8 is equal to 1/2"... 3/8" is a #6 ![wave wave](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/wave.gif)
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: an8sec70cuda]
#2318257
06/08/17 10:27 PM
06/08/17 10:27 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,247 Mt. Vernon, Ohio
dartman366
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,247
Mt. Vernon, Ohio
|
Looks good to me, I would use #10 between filter and pump. I ran a very similar set up for many years, went 9.60s with it in a 3400 lb car. People don't understand that it is designed to keep 7 lbs of pressure in front of regulator.(or whatever you set it to) It won't see high pressure like they think. It was the most steady pressure system I ever had on my car. absolutly agree, I switched to that system several years ago and has worked flawless every since, just change that smaller line between the filter and pump and you will be golden. ![up up](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/thumbs_up.gif)
Light travels faster than the speed of sound,,,this is why some people seem bright untill you hear them speak.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318394
06/09/17 10:48 AM
06/09/17 10:48 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312 Cincinnati, Ohio
Challenger 1
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312
Cincinnati, Ohio
|
I'm beginning to piece together the fuel system for my street/strip 66 Dart. It'll eventually have a 600-650hp stroked big block.
After thinking about it some, the pump and filter would be near the fuel cell on the frame rail, running to the carb via 1/2" aluminum hard line, then to a bypass regulator and finally returning to the cell via another 1/2" aluminum hard line.
Would this fuel system be adequate? I already have many of the pieces. Is there anything you would change (parts, or hose/line sizing)?
Thanks! My ![twocents twocents](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/twocents.gif) I would use a 100 micron strainer in the outlet fitting in your fuel cell and do away with the 100 micron housing because you want a smooth flow of gas to the pump. A filter housing on the inlet side of the pump is not a good idea because it interrupts smooth gas flow to the pump and can cause cavatation. If you do use it keep it away from the pump so the gas has time to smooth out before getting to the pump. It really is a bad idea, a separate pre filter. Just more places for the fuel to heat up and weighs more too. Use at least all #10 to the pump with #12 being better on the suction side. Minimize any restrictions(smooth fittings and try not to use 90s. Or at least tube 90s) on the inlet side and the fuel pump must be lower than the fuel cell. Can't suck up hill or even level can cause cavatation. Pressure regulator is in the right place and you only need #6 coming out of the pump. It is a disadvantage to have it oversize because it makes the pump work harder pushing it forward under hard acceleration. It weighs more and then there is slower fuel flow which allows it to heat up more. This is one kind of 100 micron discharge fitting for your fuel cell, way better than a external filter and housing. Less to heat up like I said. LINK A fuel pump in the fuel cell is the best way to go.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: A39Coronet]
#2318404
06/09/17 11:18 AM
06/09/17 11:18 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312 Cincinnati, Ohio
Challenger 1
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312
Cincinnati, Ohio
|
I favor fuel systems that don't run a return from the regulator all the way back down the length of the car. My Magnafuel pump has the return right at the pump, and no return from the engine compartment. I'm not a fan of running two lengths of hose that distance; waste of money on line, and just another thing that could leak/dry rot/get hit and send you home early. Obviously depends on what parts you already have in your possession. By returning fuel right in front of the pump you run the risk of introducing bubbles and turbulence into the inlet of the fuel pump and can cause cavatation during hot weather. Steel line should be used front to back and not hose.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: Challenger 1]
#2318412
06/09/17 11:38 AM
06/09/17 11:38 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
I'll use a return system any day.. when I was testing hot fuel in Cali.(Death Valley and Baker grade) I seen fuel temps in the low 300* range.. that fuel at the injectors was sitting there boiling.. it took a fair amount of time to get that hot fuel out of there.. with a return it would be out of there in short order...I dont mind paying more for a good system.. even if it weighs more ![wave wave](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/wave.gif)
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318417
06/09/17 11:45 AM
06/09/17 11:45 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Thanks for all the input guys. I appreciate it. The main reason for the -8 line between the filter and pump was just for packaging purposes. -8 seems to bend a lot easier and the fittings are smaller, so I could pump the pump and filter closer together. Plus, since the threads on both the pump and filter are pretty small (3/8 npt), I didn't realize the -8 would causes much of a restriction. I'll go with -10 though as you folks suggested and separate the filter and pump a little more to make it doable.
Thanks again. Make sure you use idolators on that pump.. it really helps with the noise ![wave wave](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/wave.gif)
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: MR_P_BODY]
#2318423
06/09/17 12:03 PM
06/09/17 12:03 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,011 Sac, CA
mopowers
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,011
Sac, CA
|
Thanks for all the input guys. I appreciate it. The main reason for the -8 line between the filter and pump was just for packaging purposes. -8 seems to bend a lot easier and the fittings are smaller, so I could pump the pump and filter closer together. Plus, since the threads on both the pump and filter are pretty small (3/8 npt), I didn't realize the -8 would causes much of a restriction. I'll go with -10 though as you folks suggested and separate the filter and pump a little more to make it doable.
Thanks again. Make sure you use idolators on that pump.. it really helps with the noise I am for sure. Thanks.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: MR_P_BODY]
#2318430
06/09/17 12:25 PM
06/09/17 12:25 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,115 Usa
A39Coronet
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,115
Usa
|
I favor fuel systems that don't run a return from the regulator all the way back down the length of the car. My Magnafuel pump has the return right at the pump, and no return from the engine compartment. I'm not a fan of running two lengths of hose that distance; waste of money on line, and just another thing that could leak/dry rot/get hit and send you home early. Obviously depends on what parts you already have in your possession. By returning fuel right in front of the pump you run the risk of introducing bubbles and turbulence into the inlet of the fuel pump and can cause cavatation during hot weather. Steel line should be used front to back and not hose. It returns it right after the pump into the tank (should have specified). With the return on the opposite end of the tank, and the feeds coming out of the bottom, no chance of aeration or turbulence other than normal occurrence with the car moving. I'll use a return system any day.. when I was testing hot fuel in Cali.(Death Valley and Baker grade) I seen fuel temps in the low 300* range.. that fuel at the injectors was sitting there boiling.. it took a fair amount of time to get that hot fuel out of there.. with a return it would be out of there in short order...I dont mind paying more for a good system.. even if it weighs more In PA, and pretty much anywhere outside of the hottest place on Earth, I never have to worry about 300 degree fuel temps. Theres also a safety aspect of not running two full lengths of fuel line. I understand theres more than one way down a racetrack, I'm just saying why I favor this style. Theres a reason bigger Aeromotive and Magnafuel race pumps utilize this feature.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: A39Coronet]
#2318442
06/09/17 12:44 PM
06/09/17 12:44 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Your correct.. there is more than 1 way to do these things and people can do what ever way they wish ![wave wave](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/wave.gif)
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: A39Coronet]
#2318452
06/09/17 01:13 PM
06/09/17 01:13 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318 State of confusion
Thumperdart
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
|
I favor fuel systems that don't run a return from the regulator all the way back down the length of the car. My Magnafuel pump has the return right at the pump, and no return from the engine compartment. I'm not a fan of running two lengths of hose that distance; waste of money on line, and just another thing that could leak/dry rot/get hit and send you home early. Obviously depends on what parts you already have in your possession. By returning fuel right in front of the pump you run the risk of introducing bubbles and turbulence into the inlet of the fuel pump and can cause cavatation during hot weather. Steel line should be used front to back and not hose. It returns it right after the pump into the tank (should have specified). With the return on the opposite end of the tank, and the feeds coming out of the bottom, no chance of aeration or turbulence other than normal occurrence with the car moving. I'll use a return system any day.. when I was testing hot fuel in Cali.(Death Valley and Baker grade) I seen fuel temps in the low 300* range.. that fuel at the injectors was sitting there boiling.. it took a fair amount of time to get that hot fuel out of there.. with a return it would be out of there in short order...I dont mind paying more for a good system.. even if it weighs more In PA, and pretty much anywhere outside of the hottest place on Earth, I never have to worry about 300 degree fuel temps. Theres also a safety aspect of not running two full lengths of fuel line. I understand theres more than one way down a racetrack, I'm just saying why I favor this style. Theres a reason bigger Aeromotive and Magnafuel race pumps utilize this feature. This is how I ran mine..........300 Magnafuel returned directly after the pump into the cell w/a 100 micron pre-filter before and nothing after but may end up w/a 40 after........... ![thumbs thumbs](/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/custom/thumbs.gif) #10 to the regulator and 8's into the carb..........
Last edited by Thumperdart; 06/09/17 01:14 PM.
72 Dart 470 n/a BB stroker street car `THUMPER`...Check me out on FB Dominic Thumper for videos and lots of carb pics......760-900-3895.....
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2318527
06/09/17 03:47 PM
06/09/17 03:47 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,923 S.E. Michigan
ZIPPY
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,923
S.E. Michigan
|
Glad I stopped back by, thanks for the lesson, and guess I have some reading to do on this topic.
I have a Mallory Comp 250 pump with a Comp 500 filter + return regulator, and truthfuly probably didn't put all that much thought into it, I just followed the manufacturer's instruction sheet and did it the way they told me to. I really like the return system, and always thought the Gerotor pump was a more robust design than the vane type. Whenever somebody says they've got a Mallory pump on a street car my ears perk up.
Last edited by ZIPPY; 06/09/17 03:48 PM. Reason: because I can't really type
Rich H.
Esse Quam Videri
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: Clanton]
#2319524
06/11/17 07:21 PM
06/11/17 07:21 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,011 Sac, CA
mopowers
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,011
Sac, CA
|
Did you think about getting a 250 pump at all?You can test the flow with a ball valve after the regulator into a can and check your psi,flow[just a fyi] I did consider a 250 pump. At the time, Mallory recommended their 140 for the goals I had at the time (600hp stroked big block). If it comes up short, I'll step up to the 250.
|
|
|
Re: Is this fuel system adequate?
[Re: mopowers]
#2319547
06/11/17 09:00 PM
06/11/17 09:00 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312 Cincinnati, Ohio
Challenger 1
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312
Cincinnati, Ohio
|
Did you think about getting a 250 pump at all?You can test the flow with a ball valve after the regulator into a can and check your psi,flow[just a fyi] I did consider a 250 pump. At the time, Mallory recommended their 140 for the goals I had at the time (600hp stroked big block). If it comes up short, I'll step up to the 250. It won't be properly plumbed, the 140 is plenty.
|
|
|
|
|