![]() |
Re: Progress since last year
I made over 700awhp on twin walbros intank thru a 1/2" line.
|
Re: Progress since last year
^oh well swifty is gonna make way more than that.
|
Re: Progress since last year
Not only power, but fuel type has to also be factored in. 700hp on E85 requires quite a bit more fuel then 700hp on C16.
I also vote in tank dual 255's. It's just cheap and easy. That's what I'm running, still on stock wiring, still on stock lines with the exception of the line from the fuel filter to the fuel rail, and the fuel rail to the AFPR (both are short sections of -6 Pushlock). And it was apparently enough for me to make the power I made on E85 (well more like E70 probably). |
Re: Progress since last year
^how true.
I agree. I wish I would of done it too. But hopefully i run out of fuel at about 450ish and then I will stop with my car. |
Re: Progress since last year
Im not aaron..nor did I ever say I was, so shut it.
I also did the twin 310's because they are roughly 20 bucks cheaper per pump. Another thing to consider when you don't have the most money in the world to build a car. -A. Swift |
Re: Progress since last year
Quote:
|
Re: Progress since last year
Quote:
|
Re: Progress since last year
Quote:
|
Re: Progress since last year
Thank you! Back to the fuel pumps. I still need to design a good flowing distribution block for twin pumps. Any ideas???
|
Re: Progress since last year
I used a cheap little 3/8" barbed T-fitting from Ace Hardware, ha :)
Pretty sure Old Man Hill uses the same. Ideal flow wise, maybe not, but I'd say we've definately proven that it works. This isn't mine, but is basically exactly what mine looks like. http://dsmlink.com/forums/attachment...0&d=1205607153 |
Re: Progress since last year
Dont use a t-fitting; use a y-block.
Here is a quote from kiggly on the topic: "scaling for multiple pumps is extremely dependent on the fitting that merges the pump flows. A long time ago I was running a "T" fitting and two pumps in parallel barely flowed more than a single with this restriction." |
Re: Progress since last year
A "Y" fitting would probably have better flow than the "T" fitting, if you can find one. I believe Swifty used a NOS "Y" fitting outside the sending unit on his car.
^^ Same time post, doh! |
Re: Progress since last year
|
Re: Progress since last year
I'll throw a mid list up once I'm not on my iPhone. Or if I get bored a work.
|
Re: Progress since last year
Quote:
I ask because I am running two 255's, in parrallel, with a "T" fitting, on E85, airflow right around 60lb/min, still on stock wiring, and haven't ran out of pump. I have a pretty solid 11.2 AFR until redline. If it really barely flowed more then a single pump, I would imagine I would have ran outta pump awhile ago considering I'm running E85, and also have not rewired them with thicker gauge wiring. |
Re: Progress since last year
I was doing more research on T vs Y and found evidence about T not working the best compared to Y.
I will post back if I can find, but if i remember right it was a 3am read so i probably didn't save it. |
Re: Progress since last year
I'm pretty sure I'll be running a Y fitting for the second pump if I go that route.
|
Re: Progress since last year
If you do dual in tank pumps, are you going to put a spacer in between the 2 pumps? I talked to someone that said they had the 2 pumps right next to each other and they were actually fighting each other a bit so a 1/4" aluminum spacer was added between the 2 and it fixed the problem. Something to think about.
|
Re: Progress since last year
Thanks for the heads up on that Kerry!!
|
Re: Progress since last year
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:31 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.