I should have been more specific when I mentioned the k3500 as well. Went ahead when I had a chance at work and verified it on some of my dealer ordering systems. Don’t know where you might have tried looking it up but it’s used on the gas engines on the dual tanks as an auxiliary pump. To my knowledge the only difference in pumps between diesel and gas would be the quality of internal components. Since diesel usually has an injection pump with 10k plus psi where gas motors are a lot less psi. And just the difference in lubricant properties.
Because all I saw was a guy pose a question, a bunch of respected folks here take time out of their day to ask a pertinent question to make sure the OP was solving his real problem, which was then met by a sour at***ude. Years ago on the HAMB you'd get flamed for such a thing. And FWIW, I have plenty of constructive information to offer. But why bother if it's only going to be met with s***?
Mr. 69 sir, you may be correct I can’t say for certain that my system will be the best for the job but here’s my thinking. If a put a 10 PSI pump underneath the tank (at the drain plug ( I know I will have to filter it before the pump). 10 PSI gas goes to the pressure regulator where it is reduced to approx 2.5 PSI. At this point (after the regulator) I can run a return line with minimal flow, the check valve in the (Stromberg 97) carb can control the 2.5 PSI so even a little dribble of fuel back to the tank via a return line would have no impact on the check valve in fact just the opposite I think. Will my plan work? I’m smart enough to say that I can’t be certain, however I won’t know until I try it. If the return line proves to be of no value I can either close the valve or eliminate it altogether. Why do I want a 10 PSI pump? Because I want more than 2-3 PSI in the line to hopefully reduce the chance of vapor lock. My return line may be of no value but I know for a fact that the higher pressure in the line from the pump definitely helps reduce vapor lock. This whole system is something a bit outside the usual “Hot Rod” kind of thing, this is very specifically a system to allow a “Hot Rod”( to operate reliably at 12,000’ al***ude. Mr. New York, interesting that you only read the first page but yet managed to scroll right past the 2nd and 3rd pages so that you could add your comments at the bottom of the 3rd page. I appreciate your comments however since I apologized not once but twice I think that your comments are of no value. Go Kraken!!!
Just my idea of thinking. But I wouldn’t want a feed at the lowest point of the tank (the drain plug). Kinda the reason every manufacturer got away from it and pulls fuel from the top. Don’t know the set up, but even with the filter whether you replace the filter more or the pump. Bottom of the tank is just going to pull more contaminants and cause more restriction. Which in turn is a filter or in the end a pump replacement. Would like to see the set up, maybe I’m just reading this wrong.
^^^^^@ johnlewis & op Add stem about 2 inch tall to fitting , so debris and settlement will fall p*** opening Even make long screen filter 10-12 inch or longer , Like dry sump fitting / filter
Ha , I have said many times , I feel sorry if some one gets something I worked on , built , parts I made . When Im gone .. I have only sold one of my Hot Rods , I wonder if the guy ever went to take things apart , Looking @ scratching head wondring what I did .. I did custom ***embly and fabrication many things hidden set screws hidden dowel pens, I have cut water pumps down , .1000 here .1000 there , reverser rotation Short propeller shafts ect . Look stock but modification not seen by eye , un less start measuring with dial no calipers , mic . Just weird things out side thinking to make it work ,,or what I want .. Not close to show cars . I do not really sell any thing , I have what few toys had from when little kid , Only lived one place .
You know it’s the funniest things you don’t think about. The stem idea I didn’t think about is the same ford used in their transmissions to drain and refill in the explorers and sports trac, that I’ve dealt with and forgot about. End of the day good idea for the fuel system. The transmission idea ****s and is a pain in the *** to top off properly. But yeah there is plenty of stuff I never plan of getting rid of that I do. I dread getting back into and I feel worse for the person that ends up with it lol.
A Model A fuel tank (the original tank in the cowl) has the fuel outlet on the bottom and there is nothing that can be done differently (coming out of the top of the tank would have it coming out in front of the windshield). Starting out with a fresh clean tank it is really not a problem with the outlet on the bottom. I use a clear filter so I can see anything that gets in there.
That’s what I was curious about. I have a 30, and have been looking at a 32 ch***is. But I was planning on a rear mounted tank. The context helps a lot. If I missed that in the initial post, is my fault.
@ 28 RPU I ran my 30 for awhile gravity Fed sbc With stock sbc , But wants I did engine over like 175 hp @JohnLewis I added a 32 tank made my own kit from rear frame rails that where cut off 32 frame that was bobbed Last engine was 427 sbc with 1,100 cfm's of carbs
I don't mention it much because its off topic, I've got a engine I'm doing. But my understanding the 32 frame is wider, I like the rail layout over laps with the body, no fender. I've got to change the rear floor pan anyway, add the tank.
Yes 32 frame under A's wider little before cowl back to rear ,follows out side body line , Pic I showed stock A frame , I made Mounting point's off stock rear A crossmember , then welded 32 frame horn's to , the A in pic had stock Subrails & stock floor pan in rear with stock seat's front & rear . This is a 32 frame for A's In green is modifications needed if you do not want to cut your existing sub rails
I get where you're coming from- the return line is a fine idea. The carb will handle the 2.5psi (***uming you get a regulator that goes to that low-I'm no expert on that availability). The only issue I see is the restriction you want to put in the return line. I'm not a fuel system expert by any means, but I'm pretty sure that a core tenet is that the return needs a free, easy escape back to the tank. (like I said before, some pumps have an internal byp***/other that allows them to dead head where no return is needed). If the restriction is successful in slowing fuel being returned to tank, where will that fuel (pressure) go? Backed up against the regulator output where it can cause issues with the carb output side of the regulator is my guess. I believe the main result of a restricted return line is pressure creep at the carb inlet. Many people want the return to come back into the top of the tank (whether that's for ease of using a factory tank sender plate or want to fight pushing fuel against a full tank, I dont know). I have a 1500hp capable fuel pump and manufacturer says to plumb the return to the top of the tank to make sure that returned fuel has No Problem getting backed up against the regulated fuel and affecting what's going to the carburetor. As I'm only using it for a street project at less than 600hp, and not competing with it, it's fine to pump into the tank a bit lower and avoid aeration while cruising. I think your plan is solid to use a return style regulator and prevent vapor lock, I'd just leave out the restriction in the return line to allow the regulator to do it's job cleanly. Keep us posted. Good luck with the build -rick
Scruffy, surprisingly, at least for me unless you are working hard the al***ude is no big deal although some people get headaches. Fury, there has been a lot of talk about a restriction in the return line I will try and address it best I can. (1) This is an experiment, it may not work but I think that it’s worth a try. (2) The whole point of using a needle valve in the return line is that I can test to find where the best flow is set and if it ends up being wide open then that’s the end of the story, I will remove it. (3) I was hoping to use a return line regulator but the ones I found were too expensive for this experiment. (4) I cannot possibly see how, if I run the return line from the CARB side of the pressure regulator that the pressure would be increased to the carb. In fact the opposite is true. If the return line is on the carb side of the regulator, and the regulator is set to 2.5 PSI, how could that increase pressure to the carb? It simply can’t, if anything it would reduce the pressure at the carb. That’s the whole point of using a needle valve on the carb side of the regulator, wide open would end up with 0 PSI at the carb. (5) if at all possible I will plumb the return line to the top of the tank but i honestly feel that it really does not matter where it goes as long as it’s on the tank side of the fuel pump. I’m open to ideas and suggestions but it would be most helpful if you completely read this entire post so that we need to keep re hashing the same idea. This is an experiment, I cannot emphasize that enough. I’m sure that every one of you has attempted at least one experiment on your hot rod that was a fail. I understand the potential failure of this experiment (that’s one reason that I am trying to keep the cost down. If it works but better components are needed then at that time I can invest more).
They have not been legal to put on new vehicles for probably 60 years that know of. Fuel tanks "now" have to draw fuel from the top above the fuel level in the tank to p*** most safety inspections unless they are oem design on the original ch***is. Simply if you have a fuel line fail with the tank outlet on the bottom or on the bottom of the side like a lot of older rigs did have the fuel runs out on the lower side or bottom of the tank including stock Model A tanks. As far as a fuel pump I have run those little Puralator box fuel pumps on two Cadillacs that had 350R Olds engines in them after one was converted to run a carb and one had that engine swapped into it after the 76 Seville got wrecked. My wife drove both cars 50 + and then 75+ miles a day every work day to work for a total of about ten years and each pump lasted at least 50K. They have doubled in price in the last 20 years since I ran one but one just doesn't need more than that on an engine that doesn't draw a lot of fuel to begin with and that one kept up with a 4 barrel on the 350 in a hot as hell engine compartment just fine. It might be time to drop the ******** of because the car is somewhat of a hot rod you have to have a hot rod fuel pump to keep up with a 4 cylinder with a small carb on it. Plus respect those who first answered and positively needed more info on what you were trying to do instead if getting your *****s in a knot because they asked the same viable quiestion right in order. Good solid explainations of what you are attempting to do get good solid answers.
It's true that high elevation lowers the boiling point of the fuel and can contribute to vapor lock, but that is a problem separate and apart from an issue of fuel starvation. The reality is that vapor lock is caused by heat, but low fuel pressure in conjunction with heat can increase the likelihood of vapor lock. I'm not sure why the suggestion of simply running a phenolic spacer to insulate the carb from the hot intake hasn't been made, or to ask whether fuel lines are routed in close proximity to anything hot. There's nothing here to suggest the supply of fuel is insufficient, the problem is that the supply of fuel is vapor locking. A stock Model A didn't even have a fuel pump. And cramming fuel past pockets of boiled fuel seems like a band aid solution to just not having the fuel boil in the first place. Sure it might work, but it also might not be necessary.
I have already apologized twice and I think that’s enough. I never, ever said that I needed a hot rod fuel pump, never. I have said many times since I started this post that this is all about vapor lock at 12,000’ (anybody that has not operated a carbuerated motor above 10’000’ is just not going to grasp the vapor lock problem. A stock Model A with it’s 4.5:1compression ratio will not even operate at that al***ude). I believe that my only mention of Hot Rod was because this is a Hot Rod forum and I want to stay within those parameters. That said, this is a Model A motor that has been modified to the point of having 110 HP (on a dyno) (stock is 40 HP). It is most definitely a hot rod but I never said that I needed a hot rod fuel pump for it. 110 HP does not demand much fuel. And I know that. I have said nothing about fuel starvation either, ever. Mr. 57, I am aware of all those cures for vapor lock. While it is true that a Model A does not use a pump but you put a downdraft on it the elevation of the carb is such that gravity feed will only work if the tank is 2/3 full of fuel and 3 gallons of fuel won’t provide much range. Again, nothing has been said by me about fuel starvation, that is not the issue. The fuel outlet at the bottom of the tank is not ideal but there is no practical option. I am not going to install a new tank under the body, there is no real need for that. I am fully aware that if there is a leak in the fuel line it will drain out the whole tank and ruin your day. That is why a Model A has a valve at he bottom of the tank and most all Model A owners that I know of, myself included turn off the valve any time the engine is not running. After a bit it becomes automatic (it is easier to forget to open the valve on start up which leads to the embarr***ment of running out of fuel).
I'm sorry if I missed it-I didn't realize you were attempting a return line without using a return style regulator. My bad. -rick
Any one What size is the Thread Hole in , I am ***uming 28 A gas tank ? I have a few thoughts , but Need to Know hole size... I am also thinking Out side box here Do not know ,I have not worked on a Hight Al***ude engine / Carb fueling , I am around 140 feet ... I would be willing to Experiment I am thinking using this fuel pump would work ... Gravity Fed & Without a return Its all aluminum 1/2 thick 2x2
The Facet fuel pump is worth consideration, mostly because the label states that it is made in the USA. If it is still made in the USA then it is worth the asking price. If it now an import then it’s probably worth about a third of the asking price. I like the cylindrical one because of the 6-8 PSI (I do not need the volume, put I do want that pressure) but the asking price is pretty high. I’ll have to think about that and verify where it’s made.
I have, but have not yet installed (I’ll do it when doing this plumbing project) an electric solenoid valve which is made specifically for the gravity feed fuel line which shuts the fuel line off when the ignition is off so no memory (of which I have less every year) is required for that task. It’s a pretty slick set up really.
I'll second the facet pumps, been running one for 5+ years on a Case garden tractor, hot, dusty, vibrating, doesn't skip a beat. I ran a small return line to the tank just so it wouldn't dead head and the carb has been happy as a clam. I think the needle valve in the return line is a slick idea and like you said if it ends up being wide open, so be it. I will be running one on the coupe if I ever get there. They are very quiet as well, you'll hear it when you flip the key on but that's it, not when the engine is running.
Or... you might consider pressurizing your tank with a small cheap air compressor set at 2-2.5 psi. It might take a little calculation and thought on how to deal with a full tank of gas vs almost empty....but there was some reason and thought that went into the old timers (and OEM manufacturers) using hand pumps for pressuring the gas tanks...
I'm down to trying to find ANY electric pump that'll last more than a few months. I love the idea of the Carter rotary vane pump. It's a real pump, not just a ********, and amazingly inexpensive. I ran one for a long time, 6 or so years. It died one day so I put in another but that one lasted less than a year. For jollies I tried a Holley plastic ******** which lasted only a few months too. Then tried an Edelbrock plastic ******** with the same luck. i am running another Holley and fingers crossed, been going over a year but then I haven't driven the car more than a few miles in that year. I ground the sealing flange off the Carter just to see what happened to the rotary motor. I found that the motor was designed to run full of gasoline, no seal between the motor can and pump housing. The motor looked brand new but the commutator had developed a scale coating that is obviously an electrical insulator. I sanded off the coating and the motor now runs like a champ! I found a V-clamp that pulls the case and pump head back together. That with the thick rubber gasket that Carter uses, I now have a srepairable pump that should last forever? I recommend that Carter modify their design to make their pump repairable by attaching the motor can differently to the pump. But then they wouldn't sell as many pumps?
Never said 'pretty' V-clamp! Bolt needs to be that long to allow the clamp to open far enuf. Doesn't matter when pump is under the car. I haven't tried it in service yet but pump runs again and clamp seems to seal it.
I didn't read the complete discussion. But I will offer a suggestion , for what its worth, I bot a '79 Mazda PU because I had a renter that sold them. Aren't Ford courier the same ? It had an inline rotary fuel pump, so simple, try a salvage yard, it is small, quiet, and I think it has one 12 wire . and grounds to the frame..
Sounds like you know your system well, based on your unique system/environment, a generic question is meaningless. Stating the obvious.
The Jalopy Journal
