fuel pressure loss at acceleration
fuel pressure loss at acceleration I have seen figures that show that you should expect about 5-7 psi loss at the engine under acceleration when your engine is regulated from the rear of the car. That takes into effect the loss from CF of the line used, and the pump having to offset somewhere in the neighborhood of 1g of forward acceleration 
. I planned on using stainless lines to offset some of those losses, but with more investigation, have learned that if I put the regulator (Aeromotive 13101) on the firewall, I can negate all those acceleration caused losses.
I guess my question would be in a 3500 Lb Chevelle, with about 500 RWHP, F-body T56 and 3.90 gears.... Will a Walbro GSS340 (in tank), at 65psi (at the pump) and regulated on the firewall at 58psi, have enough ***** to feed the motor under acceleration while using braided rubber hoses with smooth transition AN fittings and no crazy bends?
??????????
Tom Ringlein
. I planned on using stainless lines to offset some of those losses, but with more investigation, have learned that if I put the regulator (Aeromotive 13101) on the firewall, I can negate all those acceleration caused losses. I guess my question would be in a 3500 Lb Chevelle, with about 500 RWHP, F-body T56 and 3.90 gears.... Will a Walbro GSS340 (in tank), at 65psi (at the pump) and regulated on the firewall at 58psi, have enough ***** to feed the motor under acceleration while using braided rubber hoses with smooth transition AN fittings and no crazy bends?
??????????
Tom Ringlein
I would think so...I use a Fuelab regulator up front on my Camaro, and the stock pump is enough to feed the engine at WOT (about 350-360-ish RWHP) with only a 2 psi loss in pressure (I run it at 58 psi at the rails). That is with most of the lines being the 3/8" stock, hard feed line with a 5/16" return.
I have seen figures that show that you should expect about 5-7 psi loss at the engine under acceleration when your engine is regulated from the rear of the car. That takes into effect the loss from CF of the line used, and the pump having to offset somewhere in the neighborhood of 1g of forward acceleration . I planned on using stainless lines to offset some of those losses, but with more investigation, have learned that if I put the regulator (Aeromotive 13101) on the firewall, I can negate all those acceleration caused losses.
I guess my question would be in a 3500 Lb Chevelle, with about 500 RWHP, F-body T56 and 3.90 gears.... Will a Walbro GSS340 (in tank), at 65psi (at the pump) and regulated on the firewall at 58psi, have enough ***** to feed the motor under acceleration while using braided rubber hoses with smooth transition AN fittings and no crazy bends?
??????????
Tom Ringlein
. I planned on using stainless lines to offset some of those losses, but with more investigation, have learned that if I put the regulator (Aeromotive 13101) on the firewall, I can negate all those acceleration caused losses. I guess my question would be in a 3500 Lb Chevelle, with about 500 RWHP, F-body T56 and 3.90 gears.... Will a Walbro GSS340 (in tank), at 65psi (at the pump) and regulated on the firewall at 58psi, have enough ***** to feed the motor under acceleration while using braided rubber hoses with smooth transition AN fittings and no crazy bends?
??????????
Tom Ringlein
