Fuel Filter Connection Question - Wix 33100
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel Filter Connection Question - Wix 33100
In doing the LS1 swap in my S10 pickup, I got rid of the original 4.3 fuel filter in favor of the 2.2L flex fuel S10 filter (wix 33100) with the built in regulator, which is similar to the Corvette filter (wix 33737).
From what I have researched, 2.2L flex S10's were weird and had 5/16" feed lines and 3/8" return lines, which would lead me to believe that the center connection on the 33100 would be the feed and the offset would be the return (which is the opposite of the 33737 filter, from what I've seen) However, I have also read conflicting information that says the opposite. If only the damn filter was labeled.
I'm trying to prevent running the fuel backwards through the regulator and ruining it. Also, if I have starting issues, I'd like to know that the filter is connected correctly.
Is there anyone using this exact filter, Wix 33100, that can tell me definitely which connection is the feed from the tank and which is the return?
Thanks you guys.
From what I have researched, 2.2L flex S10's were weird and had 5/16" feed lines and 3/8" return lines, which would lead me to believe that the center connection on the 33100 would be the feed and the offset would be the return (which is the opposite of the 33737 filter, from what I've seen) However, I have also read conflicting information that says the opposite. If only the damn filter was labeled.
I'm trying to prevent running the fuel backwards through the regulator and ruining it. Also, if I have starting issues, I'd like to know that the filter is connected correctly.
Is there anyone using this exact filter, Wix 33100, that can tell me definitely which connection is the feed from the tank and which is the return?
Thanks you guys.
Last edited by cwd240z; 03-21-2014 at 02:34 PM. Reason: updated photo
#3
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#5
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 33100 filter is a little cheaper and guys have used it on LS S10 swaps with no problems. I've asked at least 2 guys who have used it and have gotten 2 different answers. Obviously, someone is wrong. If I still had my other S10 with it, I'd go outside, disconnect the 2 lines, turn it on and see which one spits fuel out.
Another reason I went with the 33100 filter is it has quick disconnect fittings on all 3 ports, eliminating the need for an additional fitting.
Another reason I went with the 33100 filter is it has quick disconnect fittings on all 3 ports, eliminating the need for an additional fitting.
#6
Teching In
iTrader: (2)
the 5/16 on the side with the 3/8 is where the line from the fuel pump comes in, then out the other 5/16 to the engine. the 3/8 is a return. just went through this on a swap. I also used the 2.2 flex fuel module assembly in the tank. so I know that this combo works. I would ASSUME that with any other pump in the tank that this would work, but I know for sure it worked on my s10 swap.
#7
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 5/16 on the side with the 3/8 is where the line from the fuel pump comes in, then out the other 5/16 to the engine. the 3/8 is a return. just went through this on a swap. I also used the 2.2 flex fuel module assembly in the tank. so I know that this combo works. I would ASSUME that with any other pump in the tank that this would work, but I know for sure it worked on my s10 swap.
Just to clarify, the connection that goes to the engine is 3/8" on this filter, not 5/16".
Trending Topics
#9
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was just clarifying that the fitting on the side of the filter with just one fitting, is 3/8". I've connected a 3/8" fitting to it. You can also tell by looking at the picture it is larger than the 5/16" connection on the other end. I updated the picture to show it labeled.
I appreciate your help man.
#10
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
I guess it might work as you have been told or read. Though I would question it capacity since it was used on a 2.2L as well as what fuel pressure is it rated at..
What is the return pressure rated at ?..Is the filter element rated to filter to the same Micron ? and at what pressure and flow rate ? This being that you are using something that was designed to work with 2.2L spec's and not going to a 5.3L that requires 58psi ?
Let us know what you find out.. if anything else new..if anything, I would swap it out more.
What is the return pressure rated at ?..Is the filter element rated to filter to the same Micron ? and at what pressure and flow rate ? This being that you are using something that was designed to work with 2.2L spec's and not going to a 5.3L that requires 58psi ?
Let us know what you find out.. if anything else new..if anything, I would swap it out more.
#11
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been documented on an S10 forum that the 2.2L flex filter works well with LS1 V8 swaps and has the correct pressure. One member has run an unmodified 2.2L flex fuel system with an LS engine swap up to 400hp. My stock LS1 should be fine with it.
I guess it might work as you have been told or read. Though I would question it capacity since it was used on a 2.2L as well as what fuel pressure is it rated at..
What is the return pressure rated at ?..Is the filter element rated to filter to the same Micron ? and at what pressure and flow rate ? This being that you are using something that was designed to work with 2.2L spec's and not going to a 5.3L that requires 58psi ?
Let us know what you find out.. if anything else new..if anything, I would swap it out more.
What is the return pressure rated at ?..Is the filter element rated to filter to the same Micron ? and at what pressure and flow rate ? This being that you are using something that was designed to work with 2.2L spec's and not going to a 5.3L that requires 58psi ?
Let us know what you find out.. if anything else new..if anything, I would swap it out more.
#13
"Though I would question it capacity"
Me too. Especially when you up the horsepower. The Corvette filter can be had for under $40. I would not fool around at that price and go for the Vette filter.
Edit: The factory may have intentionally made the filter that way so it could not accidently be swapped onto another application such as the Corvette.
Me too. Especially when you up the horsepower. The Corvette filter can be had for under $40. I would not fool around at that price and go for the Vette filter.
Edit: The factory may have intentionally made the filter that way so it could not accidently be swapped onto another application such as the Corvette.
#14
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (4)
I'm sorry, but I still don't get it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be a dick, but on Amazon, (just did a quick Google search) the fuel filters are about the same price. Actually, the Vette one is a couple of bucks cheaper? I would use a filter GM designed to work with a performance based V8 rather than a 4 cylinder.
#15
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
+1 on ls1nova71... it is what I was thinking.. if GM spec'd out a filter or had the same spec's.. they would have used it, but I am sure they research everything and spec'd out the GF822/WIX33737..
Not that the WIX33100 would not work, but most likely at a reduction in capacity or Services Life.
Just my thinking and having to go with what the GM Engineer have come up with on Requirements and spec's... But everyone is free to use what they want and save a few dollars here and there.. but the only plus on this subject would be the fitting on the output side having a barbed tube for the port.
I wonder if anyone has cut open both of these and compared elements and bypass spring/valve.?
BC
Not that the WIX33100 would not work, but most likely at a reduction in capacity or Services Life.
Just my thinking and having to go with what the GM Engineer have come up with on Requirements and spec's... But everyone is free to use what they want and save a few dollars here and there.. but the only plus on this subject would be the fitting on the output side having a barbed tube for the port.
I wonder if anyone has cut open both of these and compared elements and bypass spring/valve.?
BC
#18
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DFW....TX
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry, but I still don't get it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be a dick, but on Amazon, (just did a quick Google search) the fuel filters are about the same price. Actually, the Vette one is a couple of bucks cheaper? I would use a filter GM designed to work with a performance based V8 rather than a 4 cylinder.
Amazon.com: Wix 33737 Complete In-Line Fuel Filter, Pack of 1: Automotive
Amazon.com: Wix 33100 Complete In-Line Fuel Filter, Pack of 1: Automotive
Amazon.com: Wix 33737 Complete In-Line Fuel Filter, Pack of 1: Automotive
Amazon.com: Wix 33100 Complete In-Line Fuel Filter, Pack of 1: Automotive
I had more consistent pressure with the vette filter compared to the 2.2L but both were in acceptable range to function properly. I however do not remember how they hooked up as it was several years I go I messed with those.
Just a thought. Hook it up with the feed from the tank and run hoses off of both ends into bottles. Have someone tap the key on and see which line provides fuel. This is what I did to confirm the proper way to install the filter/regulator.
#19
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, for the sake of concluding a thread, I did get the truck running last weekend with the 5/16" being the supply from tank and 3/8" the return.