Heat Shields
06-21-2007, 10:00 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 1,042
There's got to be people that have removed those shields here. I know the cat converter ones rattle a lot and people remove those heat shields, so I bet there are some gas tank shield removers here too.
06-22-2007, 06:46 AM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 61
I took mine off. My concern was actually vapor lock. But the fuel lines, run on the other side of the car and do not pass under the heat shields. After taking them off the car got a bit quieter. Less rattles.
06-22-2007, 09:38 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 4,950
06-22-2007, 11:13 AM
#9
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,677
The major performance problem with warm fuel it that it is more likely to vaporize in the fuel pump suction line. Hot fuel reduces cooling of the fuel pump. Hot fuel produces more fuel vapor, overloading the EVAP system..... its a pretty long list.
I would not recommend removing the heat shields for the fuel tank. Rattles can be solved, and there is no significant weight savings.
I would not recommend removing the heat shields for the fuel tank. Rattles can be solved, and there is no significant weight savings.
06-22-2007, 12:13 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Friendswood, TX, USA
Posts: 3,769
I don't recommend removing it.
But I also don't think it serves any useful function. For over 100 years cars have been driven around without this sheild. As late as 84, which has the tank in the exact same location, there was NO shield.
But I also don't think it serves any useful function. For over 100 years cars have been driven around without this sheild. As late as 84, which has the tank in the exact same location, there was NO shield.
06-22-2007, 12:21 PM
#11
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 61
The major performance problem with warm fuel it that it is more likely to vaporize in the fuel pump suction line. Hot fuel reduces cooling of the fuel pump. Hot fuel produces more fuel vapor, overloading the EVAP system..... its a pretty long list.
I would not recommend removing the heat shields for the fuel tank. Rattles can be solved, and there is no significant weight savings.
I would not recommend removing the heat shields for the fuel tank. Rattles can be solved, and there is no significant weight savings.
06-23-2007, 08:25 AM
#12
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,677
I'm also not sure what the fact that cars 100 years ago did not have a heat shield is too relevant to a 4th Gen F-Body. Why assume you're smarter than the GM engineers. I seriously doubt they would have thrown extra parts at a car that is didn't need. 4th Gens make more power.... exhaust may be hotter, slightly larger intermediate pipe may be closer to the tank, past problems may hve been identified, fuel pumps may be more sensitive to heat, fuel composition and volatility has changed, emissions requirements have changed........... yada yada yada.
06-25-2007, 10:05 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Friendswood, TX, USA
Posts: 3,769
You're confusing me.... you asked about the heat shields for the muffler, now you're talking about the "lines that go along the drivers side". My response addressed the fuel tank heat shield. Since our fuel pumps are internal to the tank, vaporizaton problems on the suction side of the pump, due to net positive suction head requirements, are internal fuel tank issues.
I'm also not sure what the fact that cars 100 years ago did not have a heat shield is too relevant to a 4th Gen F-Body. Why assume you're smarter than the GM engineers. I seriously doubt they would have thrown extra parts at a car that is didn't need. 4th Gens make more power.... exhaust may be hotter, slightly larger intermediate pipe may be closer to the tank, past problems may hve been identified, fuel pumps may be more sensitive to heat, fuel composition and volatility has changed, emissions requirements have changed........... yada yada yada.
I'm also not sure what the fact that cars 100 years ago did not have a heat shield is too relevant to a 4th Gen F-Body. Why assume you're smarter than the GM engineers. I seriously doubt they would have thrown extra parts at a car that is didn't need. 4th Gens make more power.... exhaust may be hotter, slightly larger intermediate pipe may be closer to the tank, past problems may hve been identified, fuel pumps may be more sensitive to heat, fuel composition and volatility has changed, emissions requirements have changed........... yada yada yada.
06-25-2007, 10:31 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 203
I was under my car and took the bolts out of the sheild, saw how close it was to the gas tank and put it back up. I agree with injuneer, it wouldnt be there for no reason, it doesnt cost you any weight, and the rattles can be solved by putting some foam weathering strip inbetween the sheild and the body. Imo, i wouldnt feel good having my fuel tank be that close to hot exhaust, your asking for problems. spark plug wires are alot diffrent then fuel tanks..
06-25-2007, 12:27 PM
#15
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,677
All manufacture add parts to protect themselve from litigation. Often they have limited functionality. GM and Ford have been taking flack for years about fuel tank safety. And I never said it served NO function. GM has been putting heat shields around the spark plugs for over 40yrs. and for the same 40yrs. hot rodders have been removing them, with no appearent problems. Could be to protect against that 1 in 100,000th failure?
