Wanted to address some things about your Fuel System/Fuel Distribution
04-07-2007 | 09:23 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Wanted to address some things about your Fuel System/Fuel Distribution
As most of you guys know, I'm constantly on this forum and I see alot of what people are doing, the outcomes, the progress, the success and the failures. I as well see the habits and the constant repetition of outcomes.
There are 2 main things I wanted to address in a proper manner.
First thing, I have talked to many of my css.net friends and other members privately possibly about this concept of running a return fuel system.
Questions for you: You ever notice that the people who do blow their engines, for sakes of running too lean or if just combustion chamber temperatures were just plain too high from lack of aftercooling upgrades and cylinder #4 is the one to take the cake? Typically it's a blown ringland or some other catastrophic engine failure but the thing is, it always seems to be cylinder #4.
Here is my theory and explaination...
Your cars have a return-less fuel system. To explain to the people who don't understand...on a returnless fuel system, your fuel pump is constantly changing the fuel pressure within the fuel lines, then fuel rail and to your fuel injectors. Naturally, the more fuel that needs to be supplied, your fuel pump will send more fuel by raising the fuel pressure. After being sent to the fuel rail, there is really no "wasted" fuel to be returned to the fuel tank like a return fuel system.
Lets for arguement sakes say that at wide open throttle, your fuel pump is going to send 50 PSI of fuel pressure towards your fuel rail.
To also explain, fuel injectors are not only rated at how much fuel they can flow (either per minute or hour) but they are also rated at fuel pressure (example: 440 CC @ 50 PSI fuel pressure).
Now, the fuel lines come from the driver side, across the fuel rail and enter the fuel rail from the passenger side so cylinder #1 is the closest to the fuel entering the fuel rail.
What my theory is is that cylinder #4 is not getting a equal amount of fuel as the other 3 cylinders are. Like said, say if at wide open throttle, fuel injector #1 & #2 are getting 50 PSI of fuel pressure to the fuel injectors but fuel injector #3 is getting 45 PSI of fuel pressure and now fuel injector #4 is getting 40. Right there shows that cylinder & injector #4 is the ultimately deprived injector and what will coincidentally happen is that the cylinder is going to get deprived of fuel, that 440 CC is now much less in flow ratings, which means less fuel, which means there is going to be less fuel being sprayed into the cylinder and there could be a possible lean condition.
If you're new to fuel systems, I'm trying my best to explain. What I'm basically saying is that Cylinder & Injector #4 is on the short end of the stick because it's the farthest cylinder from the entrance of fuel on the fuel rail.
There are a couple downsides and trends that are happening because of this...
The trend that is happening on here is that everyone is oversizing fuel injectors. If you have a SS/SC, you're running VERY large injectors for 2 reasons: 1. Low efficiency/High Heat being created because of the roots supercharger & 2. Uneven fuel pressure with all cylinders. You are basically oversizing injectors to try and make sure all cylinders are getting enough fuel but they will never be balanced with fuel pressure.
The downside to this from a tuning point of view is that when are you tuning with a wideband, you are reading your OVERALL air to fuel ratio by reading the amount of fuel in the exhaust coming from all 4 cylinders, not individually. Basically, if cylinder # 1 & 2 are at 12.1 a/f, cylinder #3 might be 12.5 and cylinder # 4 might be in the 13.x. You will never really know what your true a/f ratio is for each cylinder.
Like we all know, all we need is 1 cylinder to detonate and it's time for a rebuild.
All above is of course made up #s and theory but this is somewhat based on reality. I've hung out on SRTForums and talked to SRT owners who also have a return-less fuel system and guess what they do when they are trying to achieve a very high amount of power? They convert to a return fuel system! Some might not fully understand why you would convert and how it would be different...I'll explain!
With a return fuel system, your fuel pump is running at a constant fuel pressure. Fuel travels through the fuel lines and into the fuel rail. Now with a return fuel system, the fuel rail pressure is being maintained by the fuel pressure regulator NOT the fuel pump. With the fuel pressure regulator on the end of the fuel rail, it can "regulate" according to manifold pressure how much it should restrict the fuel returning (increase fuel rail pressure) or unrestrict (decrease fuel rail pressure). With this said also, it will make sure that inside the whole fuel rail all 4 injectors will get virtually the EQUAL amount of fuel pressure and fuel to the injectors so they can spray the right amount equally.
Converting over isn't as difficult especially being that the ECOTECs share alot in common. You could easily take the fuel rail off a J-body with a ECOTEC (2.2 L61) as a starter because it also has the opening for the Fuel Pressure Regulator and comes with a fuel pressure regulator. You can also put a inline fuel pump (great idea by Halfcent) on the sending side of the fuel system right after the fuel pump in the fuel tank. From there, you would just need to run a line from the regulator to the fuel tank and WALAH! You have a return fuel system.
The great thing about this is that your computer wouldn't know the difference. The inline fuel pump would help increase the fuel pressure and your computer doesn't control actual fuel pressure, your manifold pressure is what decides how much is sent back and not sent back. Good thing about using the J-Body L61 parts is that they have require the same fuel pressure for the fuel injectors as all the ECOTECs fuel injectors
This is the first thing I wanted to address.
Other trend that I think is kind of disturbing is the use of 5th injectors...
I understand this is a form of fuel management for all different makes and model cars BUT the real issue isn't necessarily where it's being sprayed from but how well fuel will be distributed.
What people have to understand is that ECOTECs have Multi Port Fuel Injection Systems...not Carbs and not Tuned Port Injection. You have what they call "Dry Manifolds". Basically means that your manifold was designed to flow in air, not by design of distribution of fuel.
The problem that can end up happening is that you are compressing air (example: Turbo setups) and increasing the Volumetric Efficiency of the engine and increasing the air molecules seen inside the combustion chamber but as you're sending fuel into the manifold, fuel can go in whatever direction it feels...not in a evenly basis. You are basically spraying and hoping that fuel makes it to ALL 4 cylinders equaly and hoping for a even fuel distribution. You have to remember that ALL 4 cylinders need a good fuel distribution...not 1, not 3, but ALL 4 cylinders need to have fuel being distributed to them to make sure that are capable of having a ignition strong enough and a ignition controlled enough to where it won't result in a ignition that isn't controlled and can cause knocking (detonation).
What I'm saying in simple terms is that doing this setup, you are making playing russian roulette...fuel is the gun and detonation is the bullet. You're making your situation become a huge guessing game.
Increasing the size of the extra injector decreases the possibility of detonation and possibility that all cylinders are POSSIBLY getting a decent amount of fuel intake BUT also understand that the design of the ECOTEC manifolds, fuel being sprayed through them could also lead to fuel puddling which is basically fuel getting backed up into the manifold. Fuel puddling can lead to wasted fuel that isn't being distributed properly and can also lead to a backfire in the manifold from the excess heat of the engine and/or manifold causing the fuel that is puddling to ignite.
Another negative of extra fuel injection systems is this:
With your fuel injectors, they are opening and closing on a time basis. When your piston is at Top Dead Center and starts moving to Bottom Dead Center during the intake stroke, your intake valves open so fuel can be sprayed into the combustion chamber. When it reaches Bottom Dead Center, the valves begin to close and the piston comes up for the compression cycle and the intake valves remain closed throughout the power and exhaust cycle until the intake cycle starts to occur again.
With a 5th injection (or extra injectors setup in general) they are opened on a constant basis. They DO NOT close according to what engine stroke you're in. What happens to that fuel being sprayed? Well with a wet manifold, this a possibility of either: 1. Fuel Puddling or 2. Coking of fuel the intake valves in the long run.
So this is basically what I'm trying to lay out to everyone who haven't though of this possibility but I see it alot and it makes me think about possibly having better running vehicles. I see these cars with alot of potential but there are just way too many blown up engine threads or constant fuel problem threads on forums, so I thought I'd bring it to the publics attention.
Remember, these are just my theories of what is going on and just basic car logic behind it. Take it for what it's worth.
There are 2 main things I wanted to address in a proper manner.
First thing, I have talked to many of my css.net friends and other members privately possibly about this concept of running a return fuel system.
Questions for you: You ever notice that the people who do blow their engines, for sakes of running too lean or if just combustion chamber temperatures were just plain too high from lack of aftercooling upgrades and cylinder #4 is the one to take the cake? Typically it's a blown ringland or some other catastrophic engine failure but the thing is, it always seems to be cylinder #4.
Here is my theory and explaination...
Your cars have a return-less fuel system. To explain to the people who don't understand...on a returnless fuel system, your fuel pump is constantly changing the fuel pressure within the fuel lines, then fuel rail and to your fuel injectors. Naturally, the more fuel that needs to be supplied, your fuel pump will send more fuel by raising the fuel pressure. After being sent to the fuel rail, there is really no "wasted" fuel to be returned to the fuel tank like a return fuel system.
Lets for arguement sakes say that at wide open throttle, your fuel pump is going to send 50 PSI of fuel pressure towards your fuel rail.
To also explain, fuel injectors are not only rated at how much fuel they can flow (either per minute or hour) but they are also rated at fuel pressure (example: 440 CC @ 50 PSI fuel pressure).
Now, the fuel lines come from the driver side, across the fuel rail and enter the fuel rail from the passenger side so cylinder #1 is the closest to the fuel entering the fuel rail.
What my theory is is that cylinder #4 is not getting a equal amount of fuel as the other 3 cylinders are. Like said, say if at wide open throttle, fuel injector #1 & #2 are getting 50 PSI of fuel pressure to the fuel injectors but fuel injector #3 is getting 45 PSI of fuel pressure and now fuel injector #4 is getting 40. Right there shows that cylinder & injector #4 is the ultimately deprived injector and what will coincidentally happen is that the cylinder is going to get deprived of fuel, that 440 CC is now much less in flow ratings, which means less fuel, which means there is going to be less fuel being sprayed into the cylinder and there could be a possible lean condition.
If you're new to fuel systems, I'm trying my best to explain. What I'm basically saying is that Cylinder & Injector #4 is on the short end of the stick because it's the farthest cylinder from the entrance of fuel on the fuel rail.
There are a couple downsides and trends that are happening because of this...
The trend that is happening on here is that everyone is oversizing fuel injectors. If you have a SS/SC, you're running VERY large injectors for 2 reasons: 1. Low efficiency/High Heat being created because of the roots supercharger & 2. Uneven fuel pressure with all cylinders. You are basically oversizing injectors to try and make sure all cylinders are getting enough fuel but they will never be balanced with fuel pressure.
The downside to this from a tuning point of view is that when are you tuning with a wideband, you are reading your OVERALL air to fuel ratio by reading the amount of fuel in the exhaust coming from all 4 cylinders, not individually. Basically, if cylinder # 1 & 2 are at 12.1 a/f, cylinder #3 might be 12.5 and cylinder # 4 might be in the 13.x. You will never really know what your true a/f ratio is for each cylinder.
Like we all know, all we need is 1 cylinder to detonate and it's time for a rebuild.
All above is of course made up #s and theory but this is somewhat based on reality. I've hung out on SRTForums and talked to SRT owners who also have a return-less fuel system and guess what they do when they are trying to achieve a very high amount of power? They convert to a return fuel system! Some might not fully understand why you would convert and how it would be different...I'll explain!
With a return fuel system, your fuel pump is running at a constant fuel pressure. Fuel travels through the fuel lines and into the fuel rail. Now with a return fuel system, the fuel rail pressure is being maintained by the fuel pressure regulator NOT the fuel pump. With the fuel pressure regulator on the end of the fuel rail, it can "regulate" according to manifold pressure how much it should restrict the fuel returning (increase fuel rail pressure) or unrestrict (decrease fuel rail pressure). With this said also, it will make sure that inside the whole fuel rail all 4 injectors will get virtually the EQUAL amount of fuel pressure and fuel to the injectors so they can spray the right amount equally.
Converting over isn't as difficult especially being that the ECOTECs share alot in common. You could easily take the fuel rail off a J-body with a ECOTEC (2.2 L61) as a starter because it also has the opening for the Fuel Pressure Regulator and comes with a fuel pressure regulator. You can also put a inline fuel pump (great idea by Halfcent) on the sending side of the fuel system right after the fuel pump in the fuel tank. From there, you would just need to run a line from the regulator to the fuel tank and WALAH! You have a return fuel system.
The great thing about this is that your computer wouldn't know the difference. The inline fuel pump would help increase the fuel pressure and your computer doesn't control actual fuel pressure, your manifold pressure is what decides how much is sent back and not sent back. Good thing about using the J-Body L61 parts is that they have require the same fuel pressure for the fuel injectors as all the ECOTECs fuel injectors
This is the first thing I wanted to address.
Other trend that I think is kind of disturbing is the use of 5th injectors...
I understand this is a form of fuel management for all different makes and model cars BUT the real issue isn't necessarily where it's being sprayed from but how well fuel will be distributed.
What people have to understand is that ECOTECs have Multi Port Fuel Injection Systems...not Carbs and not Tuned Port Injection. You have what they call "Dry Manifolds". Basically means that your manifold was designed to flow in air, not by design of distribution of fuel.
The problem that can end up happening is that you are compressing air (example: Turbo setups) and increasing the Volumetric Efficiency of the engine and increasing the air molecules seen inside the combustion chamber but as you're sending fuel into the manifold, fuel can go in whatever direction it feels...not in a evenly basis. You are basically spraying and hoping that fuel makes it to ALL 4 cylinders equaly and hoping for a even fuel distribution. You have to remember that ALL 4 cylinders need a good fuel distribution...not 1, not 3, but ALL 4 cylinders need to have fuel being distributed to them to make sure that are capable of having a ignition strong enough and a ignition controlled enough to where it won't result in a ignition that isn't controlled and can cause knocking (detonation).
What I'm saying in simple terms is that doing this setup, you are making playing russian roulette...fuel is the gun and detonation is the bullet. You're making your situation become a huge guessing game.
Increasing the size of the extra injector decreases the possibility of detonation and possibility that all cylinders are POSSIBLY getting a decent amount of fuel intake BUT also understand that the design of the ECOTEC manifolds, fuel being sprayed through them could also lead to fuel puddling which is basically fuel getting backed up into the manifold. Fuel puddling can lead to wasted fuel that isn't being distributed properly and can also lead to a backfire in the manifold from the excess heat of the engine and/or manifold causing the fuel that is puddling to ignite.
Another negative of extra fuel injection systems is this:
With your fuel injectors, they are opening and closing on a time basis. When your piston is at Top Dead Center and starts moving to Bottom Dead Center during the intake stroke, your intake valves open so fuel can be sprayed into the combustion chamber. When it reaches Bottom Dead Center, the valves begin to close and the piston comes up for the compression cycle and the intake valves remain closed throughout the power and exhaust cycle until the intake cycle starts to occur again.
With a 5th injection (or extra injectors setup in general) they are opened on a constant basis. They DO NOT close according to what engine stroke you're in. What happens to that fuel being sprayed? Well with a wet manifold, this a possibility of either: 1. Fuel Puddling or 2. Coking of fuel the intake valves in the long run.
So this is basically what I'm trying to lay out to everyone who haven't though of this possibility but I see it alot and it makes me think about possibly having better running vehicles. I see these cars with alot of potential but there are just way too many blown up engine threads or constant fuel problem threads on forums, so I thought I'd bring it to the publics attention.
Remember, these are just my theories of what is going on and just basic car logic behind it. Take it for what it's worth.
04-07-2007 | 09:35 AM
#2
Member
Joined: 09-16-06
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
From: worcester county
damn! thats very thought out. very nice write-up and explaining yourself so people will understand. you pretty much saying that if our cars had a return-type fuel system they would be happier and more reliable with power aders. ie: smaller pulleys.
04-07-2007 | 10:25 AM
#3
Senior Member
Joined: 01-02-05
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, MB
Subscribed, and thank you for the post Adam. The basics as put down by you sound fairly straightforward, but I would love to see someone do this and put together a how-to before I try it myself...
04-07-2007 | 10:33 AM
#5
Has anyone looked at the pricing on doin the extra pump, rail with regulator and return line?? Just wondering, If I end up going with a whipple or something it would be a great upgrade.
Also, what about a LARGER rail, or one with a central inlet?? Something to help better balance the pressure distribution.
Also, what about a LARGER rail, or one with a central inlet?? Something to help better balance the pressure distribution.
04-07-2007 | 12:46 PM
#10
I'm old school
Joined: 02-16-05
Posts: 6,905
Likes: 3
From: Nashville
I got to thinking about this after we talked, and I believe the theory of the pressure bleeding off at the end of the rail isn't right.
First, the fuel line actually enters the rail on the driver side. So that's #4 right at the front. Second, the rail itself acts as a fuel pressure manifold. It's large diameter compared to the diameter of the line that feeds it, acts as an accumulator, maintaining a constant pressure at all locations within the rail. You can tap it at any location (#1 or #4) and the pressure drop within the rail will be constant. Thats why there is a "rail" instead of the injectors being just connected directly to the fuel line.
The schrader valve on our stock rails is right next to the fuel line inlet. A pressure gauge attached at this point would show the pressure delieved from the pump. I believe if you could place another gauge at the end of the rail, it would should the exact same pressure.
Converting our systems hardware wise to a return type system would be really easy. You can actually use that schrader valve as the location for your FPR and then just run the line back to the tank. Its changing the ECM program to work with it that would be a BEOTCH!
First, the fuel line actually enters the rail on the driver side. So that's #4 right at the front. Second, the rail itself acts as a fuel pressure manifold. It's large diameter compared to the diameter of the line that feeds it, acts as an accumulator, maintaining a constant pressure at all locations within the rail. You can tap it at any location (#1 or #4) and the pressure drop within the rail will be constant. Thats why there is a "rail" instead of the injectors being just connected directly to the fuel line.
The schrader valve on our stock rails is right next to the fuel line inlet. A pressure gauge attached at this point would show the pressure delieved from the pump. I believe if you could place another gauge at the end of the rail, it would should the exact same pressure.
Converting our systems hardware wise to a return type system would be really easy. You can actually use that schrader valve as the location for your FPR and then just run the line back to the tank. Its changing the ECM program to work with it that would be a BEOTCH!
04-07-2007 | 12:59 PM
#12
awesome right up , i thought it was just a poorly designed fuel rail cuasing all the #4's to go. so now we need to get a supporting vendor working on this, cause most guys buy things in kit form so its easy to bolt on.......like me
04-07-2007 | 01:47 PM
#15
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
I got to thinking about this after we talked, and I believe the theory of the pressure bleeding off at the end of the rail isn't right.
First, the fuel line actually enters the rail on the driver side. So that's #4 right at the front. Second, the rail itself acts as a fuel pressure manifold. It's large diameter compared to the diameter of the line that feeds it, acts as an accumulator, maintaining a constant pressure at all locations within the rail. You can tap it at any location (#1 or #4) and the pressure drop within the rail will be constant. Thats why there is a "rail" instead of the injectors being just connected directly to the fuel line.
The schrader valve on our stock rails is right next to the fuel line inlet. A pressure gauge attached at this point would show the pressure delieved from the pump. I believe if you could place another gauge at the end of the rail, it would should the exact same pressure.
Converting our systems hardware wise to a return type system would be really easy. You can actually use that schrader valve as the location for your FPR and then just run the line back to the tank. Its changing the ECM program to work with it that would be a BEOTCH!
First, the fuel line actually enters the rail on the driver side. So that's #4 right at the front. Second, the rail itself acts as a fuel pressure manifold. It's large diameter compared to the diameter of the line that feeds it, acts as an accumulator, maintaining a constant pressure at all locations within the rail. You can tap it at any location (#1 or #4) and the pressure drop within the rail will be constant. Thats why there is a "rail" instead of the injectors being just connected directly to the fuel line.
The schrader valve on our stock rails is right next to the fuel line inlet. A pressure gauge attached at this point would show the pressure delieved from the pump. I believe if you could place another gauge at the end of the rail, it would should the exact same pressure.
Converting our systems hardware wise to a return type system would be really easy. You can actually use that schrader valve as the location for your FPR and then just run the line back to the tank. Its changing the ECM program to work with it that would be a BEOTCH!
Also, is it possible that by time fuel reaches the fuel rail that it has a pressure drop in the lines especially from it changing pressures constantly?
Last edited by NJHK; 04-07-2007 at 01:47 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
-- added thread to faves.
04-07-2007 | 01:54 PM
#17
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Has anyone looked at the pricing on doin the extra pump, rail with regulator and return line?? Just wondering, If I end up going with a whipple or something it would be a great upgrade.
Also, what about a LARGER rail, or one with a central inlet?? Something to help better balance the pressure distribution.
Also, what about a LARGER rail, or one with a central inlet?? Something to help better balance the pressure distribution.
The used J-body parts, you can go to any junkyard and find from some 02+ ECOTEC equipped Cavalier or Sunfire. It already has the rail and fpr with it.
The only other issue I can think of (which I can't think of right now cause I'm tired...) is which side the j-body cars have fuel enter the fuel rail.
Anyone have any comments as far as the Extra Injectors?
Last edited by NJHK; 04-07-2007 at 01:54 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
04-07-2007 | 02:43 PM
#18
at any rate though, someone should make a manifold more like this
......./ . . . . \
...../ . . . . . . \
.../ . . ./|\. . . .\
./ . /| . ||| . |\ . \
| . ||| . |||. ||| . |
opposed to
....______________
.../__ __ __ ______
./ /// /// /// /
| ||| ||| ||| |
(those were suprisingly hard to make...lol)
Last edited by HunterKiller89; 04-07-2007 at 04:23 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
04-07-2007 | 03:26 PM
#19
I'm old school
Joined: 02-16-05
Posts: 6,905
Likes: 3
From: Nashville
Your picture there is an LSJ. I can't remember what that fuel line does under the injector rail. On the L61, the line is attached to the driver side.
I just happen to be driving an HHR rental right now. Here is the fuel line and rail on the 2007 L61's:
I just happen to be driving an HHR rental right now. Here is the fuel line and rail on the 2007 L61's:
Last edited by Halfcent; 04-07-2007 at 04:46 PM.
04-07-2007 | 08:56 PM
#22
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
From what I remember messing with J-bodies, there aren't any larger aftermarket rails.
Like said, you can use the J-bodies stock fuel rail that has the opening for the fuel pressure regulator and it will fit fine.
Like said, you can use the J-bodies stock fuel rail that has the opening for the fuel pressure regulator and it will fit fine.
04-09-2007 | 08:17 AM
#24
New Member
Joined: 11-16-05
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
From: Sunrise, Florida
Please someone here call ZZP and talk to Zoomer (I just don't have the time myself-work FTL). His company has done a lot of research on fueling and fuel rail designs for the 3800s. He may be of some help here, plus he is a vendor and might be able to work on a solution (if any is needed) with you. I am not sure that this is a problem due to the location of the fuel line coming into the rail. However, he has done some notable research along these lines with the 3800 and fuel starvation on the "last injector in the rail" scenerio.
04-09-2007 | 08:53 AM
#25
Senior Member
Joined: 11-11-05
Posts: 9,438
Likes: 0
From: Oceanside, Ca
I found these...not from this forum.
Just some food for thought..
Originally Posted by WopOnTour
For anybody interested in converting their LSJ back to an older style "return type" fuel system with external (boost compensating) fuel pressure regulator I seen one on eBay today currently at 29.99 (includes 4 useless 2.2 injectors- but you might be able to sell them to a 2.2 buddy)
This particular rail (2003-05 J-body) has big time internal volume with standard quick-couple fitting on the pressure line and a threaded fitting on the regulator.It would take a bit of screwing around as you would need to run a return line back to the tank- but it's do-able
(Refer to the GM build book for more info)
removed
WOT
This particular rail (2003-05 J-body) has big time internal volume with standard quick-couple fitting on the pressure line and a threaded fitting on the regulator.It would take a bit of screwing around as you would need to run a return line back to the tank- but it's do-able
(Refer to the GM build book for more info)
removed
WOT
Originally Posted by WopOnTour
Well I was thinking we should be able to connect the return line to the tank return at the filter, then change the filter to a 2 spout design. then All you would need is to run a nylon return line back to the filter, and connect a vacuum/boost line to the regulator.
The returnless system is really a PITA
Last summer we spent a LOT of time and money adding the Kenne Bell fuel pump amplifers to a couple of "sprayed" street/strip cars. So this year we are just going to convert them back to a "regulated" design. I already have a couple of fuel rails, but I seen that one and thought I would share. the BEST rail would be out of 2002 J-body with the ECOTEC because it has a threaded inlet that would directly connect to the LSJ fitting, then the return comes off the top of the rail about 1/2 way down. Here's a pic- if you see one of these for cheap SNAP IT UP!
The returnless system is really a PITA
Last summer we spent a LOT of time and money adding the Kenne Bell fuel pump amplifers to a couple of "sprayed" street/strip cars. So this year we are just going to convert them back to a "regulated" design. I already have a couple of fuel rails, but I seen that one and thought I would share. the BEST rail would be out of 2002 J-body with the ECOTEC because it has a threaded inlet that would directly connect to the LSJ fitting, then the return comes off the top of the rail about 1/2 way down. Here's a pic- if you see one of these for cheap SNAP IT UP!
Originally Posted by WopOnTour
LS1?? No L61! (The NA 2.2 Ecotec- exact same spacing) Like I said you would need to run a 5/16 or 3/8" return line back to the tank somehow, AND of course remove the regulator in the fuel tank unit. The advantage of this it would allow a an increase in fuel pressure based on boost and facilitate the use of an FMU. The LSJ loses a lot of low end drivability with huge injectors (hense the reason so many tuners are looking at additional injectors and "port fuelers" to provide the much needed enrichment at the top end.
Traditionally this was done through pump pressure and an FMU but the returnless system makes that impossible. So we are going to convert a couple of cars back to the traditional regulation.(as per the GM build book) we even thought of maybe running a vac/boost line all the way back to the tank and to the tank mounted regulator- but running a line like that is a bit risky as in the event of a backfire... well you can imagine.
Just screwin around is all. Most people couldnt be bothered with this sort of modification, cuz it's a ton of work and may still not get the desired results- but I thought I would share.
Wop
Traditionally this was done through pump pressure and an FMU but the returnless system makes that impossible. So we are going to convert a couple of cars back to the traditional regulation.(as per the GM build book) we even thought of maybe running a vac/boost line all the way back to the tank and to the tank mounted regulator- but running a line like that is a bit risky as in the event of a backfire... well you can imagine.
Just screwin around is all. Most people couldnt be bothered with this sort of modification, cuz it's a ton of work and may still not get the desired results- but I thought I would share.
Wop
Originally Posted by WopOnTour
OK I screwed the pooch on this eBay rail a bit
It is designed for the LONG MultecII injector
It wont work with the stock LSJ injectors, or the stage kit injectors
(but it WOULD work with the MultecII 42 lb injectors from GMPP and other sources)
It's easy to make a rail work with LONGER injectors using spacers, but it's hard to go to a shorter injector.
The rail you want if you plan to do this conversion is shown in the pic above
2002 Cavalier or Sunfire for sure maybe other applications in that year and prior.
OR aftermarket fuel rails like the Golden Eagle (others?)
WOT
It is designed for the LONG MultecII injector
It wont work with the stock LSJ injectors, or the stage kit injectors
(but it WOULD work with the MultecII 42 lb injectors from GMPP and other sources)
It's easy to make a rail work with LONGER injectors using spacers, but it's hard to go to a shorter injector.
The rail you want if you plan to do this conversion is shown in the pic above
2002 Cavalier or Sunfire for sure maybe other applications in that year and prior.
OR aftermarket fuel rails like the Golden Eagle (others?)
WOT
Originally Posted by WopOnTour
Essentially it's an electrical amplifier that increases the voltage being applied to the fuel pump. More voltage will result in more current (amperage) and therefore more pump output.
http://www.kennebell.net/accessories...boostapump.htm
http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/ge...Focus_kens.pdf
MSD and Magnussen sell one as well
Wop
http://www.kennebell.net/accessories...boostapump.htm
http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/ge...Focus_kens.pdf
MSD and Magnussen sell one as well
Wop
Just some food for thought..
Last edited by Doc; 10-09-2007 at 07:21 AM.