Forced Induction Supercharger/Turbocharger

Fuel Question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 10, 2003 | 11:45 AM
  #1  
RealQuick's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
Fuel Question

I am installing my S trim (6-7psi) with an alcohol injection kit. I have Accel 48lb/hr injectors. I have a Walbro in tank pump sitting in a box. My question is can I install an inline pump instead and keep the stocker in the tank, or does that defeat the purpose. Cqan I use a 255lph inline to support 450-500rwhp?
Old Dec 11, 2003 | 08:16 AM
  #2  
RealQuick's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
I need some opinions guys...trying to get my parts together for the install. Anyone using one pump (intank and inline), anyone using two pumps, etc. What kind of power levels were you guys running with your pump setups?
Old Dec 11, 2003 | 10:56 AM
  #3  
IDOXLR8's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 2,784
From: Rochester Hills, MI
I would highly recommend ditching the stock intank pump and installing a Walbro 255lph intank pump. I would also look into a Racetronix hot wire kit or a Kenne Belle boost a pump.
Old Dec 11, 2003 | 11:04 AM
  #4  
RealQuick's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
Originally posted by IDOXLR8
I would highly recommend ditching the stock intank pump and installing a Walbro 255lph intank pump. I would also look into a Racetronix hot wire kit or a Kenne Belle boost a pump.
I have the walbro intank, but you think I need an inline as well? I should match them too right? Like 255 intank and 255 inline? Thanks for responding.
Old Dec 11, 2003 | 11:11 AM
  #5  
94SLUG's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 856
From: Denver
Put the walbro in. I just cut the sheet metal to the tank, I can replace fuel pump faster than plugs now. No point in shorting fuel.
Old Dec 11, 2003 | 11:16 PM
  #6  
97WS6SCharged's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,784
From: Jacksonville
Do the Walbro, the external booster pumps are loud and annoying.
Old Dec 12, 2003 | 03:28 AM
  #7  
LT1RX7's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 342
a tuner I know that owns a mustang dyno says the Vortec T-Rex inline booster pump added to a stock intank pump will be good for over 500rwhp. The only time when the booster pump will not work with the stock intank is if the lines on the stock pump are not big enough resulting in poor fuel flow. Other than that he says it should be a pretty solid system for under 500rwhp. They aren't that loud either. The T-Rex pump is however $200 so you might be better off just getting a single huge pump
Old Dec 12, 2003 | 05:33 AM
  #8  
rskrause's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 10,745
From: Buffalo, New York
Originally posted by IDOXLR8
I would highly recommend ditching the stock intank pump and installing a Walbro 255lph intank pump. I would also look into a Racetronix hot wire kit or a Kenne Belle boost a pump.
Listen to this man. I supported 733rwhp with a 255lph in-tank, BaP, stock lines/rails/and regulator. Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Rich Krause
Old Dec 12, 2003 | 07:00 AM
  #9  
RealQuick's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
OK, so I should be good if I use a 255lph intank and thats it. I''ll see how it performs on the dyno, and if I am running lean up top, then I'll do an inline as well. Thanks guys for all the input.
Old Dec 12, 2003 | 08:45 AM
  #10  
IDOXLR8's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 2,784
From: Rochester Hills, MI
Originally posted by RealQuick
OK, so I should be good if I use a 255lph intank and thats it. I''ll see how it performs on the dyno, and if I am running lean up top, then I'll do an inline as well. Thanks guys for all the input.

I am pretty sure you will not need an inline pump. The 255lph will be more than adequate for your setup. For example, I am running twin 255lph (with slight modifications)intank pumps and am pushing over 700 rwhp without any issues. Unless your car really needs it there is no need to overdue it on fuel. Is this a stock bottom end motor?
Old Dec 12, 2003 | 09:44 AM
  #11  
RealQuick's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
Originally posted by IDOXLR8
Is this a stock bottom end motor?
Yes it is. I am at 383rwhp on motor, and should see 450-480rwhp with 6-7psi, so my hp levels arent huge. I just wanted to make sure I dont need to spend the extra cash right now. i will intsall the Walbro intanker I have.
Old Dec 13, 2003 | 05:49 AM
  #12  
97WS6SCharged's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,784
From: Jacksonville
You'll be spending lots of extra cash pretty soon. Bwa ha ha ha ha.
Old Dec 13, 2003 | 06:11 AM
  #13  
rskrause's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 10,745
From: Buffalo, New York
Originally posted by 97WS6SCharged
You'll be spending lots of extra cash pretty soon. Bwa ha ha ha ha.
Really!

Once the ball starts rolling downhill and gaining momentum, it's very hard to stop. I started with a blower and a cat back on an otherwise stock car. Great combo! Now, it's much easier to list what is stock than what's been modified on my car. It's still a lot of fun. But it's apart more than it's together. I am tempted to buy a stock F-body to drive just for fun!

Rich Krause
Old Dec 15, 2003 | 06:20 AM
  #14  
RealQuick's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
Originally posted by 97WS6SCharged
You'll be spending lots of extra cash pretty soon. Bwa ha ha ha ha.
I hope your not referring to a new bottom end . I should be ok for a little while. I have been modding this car for the last 2 years from heads/cam to gears to bolt-ons to a new clutch. Most people would be happy with 383rwhp on motor, but not me. I remember when I had a CAI/catback/free mods and I hoped to run high 13's. I ran 13.9 @ 100mph. Then I got full exhaust and 3.73's and said "I'll be happy when i run a low 13", I then ran 13.3 @ 105.8mph. Then I did heads/cam and said I'd be happy with a mid to low 12, but without traction I ran 12.5 @ 114mph running pig rich. Now I want to run mid to low 11's on dr's with 6psi. We'll see if its possible.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Deadbolt24
LS1 Based Engine Tech
1
Jan 19, 2015 01:29 PM
nophix
Fuel and Ignition
3
Nov 30, 2014 10:26 PM
chevroletfreak
LT1 Based Engine Tech
202
Jul 4, 2005 05:00 PM
guionM
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
9
Aug 29, 2002 01:48 PM
dansam
Midwest
8
Jul 20, 2002 01:10 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:32 AM.