plenty of fuel now :)
Yes, for the system to work, both injector sets must be the same size. Im using the shorty style 60lb's as primarys, and the regular 60lb as secondarys.
Obviously this wouldnt suit everyone, but it makes for a very simple, effective high flowing fuel system, as opposed to having 2 seperate maps for each injector set. Although that would allow the use of any size primaries and secondaries.
I just figured that using the shortys might have helped with clearance when fitting 4 rails. No other reason for using them.
Im using the DTA S80 Pro
www.dtafast.co.uk
Obviously this wouldnt suit everyone, but it makes for a very simple, effective high flowing fuel system, as opposed to having 2 seperate maps for each injector set. Although that would allow the use of any size primaries and secondaries.
I just figured that using the shortys might have helped with clearance when fitting 4 rails. No other reason for using them.
Im using the DTA S80 Pro
www.dtafast.co.uk
It would be interesting to plumb the second set with methanol. And for longevity's sake, some way to drain & purge the meth side with gasoline easily.
What didn't you like about the RC 73's? That's what I have too but haven't pushed them as hard as you yet.
Jim
What didn't you like about the RC 73's? That's what I have too but haven't pushed them as hard as you yet.
Jim
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
I was using the 60lbs, before switching to the 73's. The car idled better, started from cold better...but aside from that, I guess not much odds.
Strange thing is, that there was also very little difference in tuning required between the 2 either.. So it would appear the 73's really dont flow much more than the 60lbs ( I was using 66psi on both )
So if there are some downsides, and they dont appear to flow any better than 60lbs...not really much point in them being there.
You maybe cant compare my setup to others though, as I am not running full sequential fuel injection. Only group fire. So this will have a negative effect on low load running too.
Strange thing is, that there was also very little difference in tuning required between the 2 either.. So it would appear the 73's really dont flow much more than the 60lbs ( I was using 66psi on both )
So if there are some downsides, and they dont appear to flow any better than 60lbs...not really much point in them being there.
You maybe cant compare my setup to others though, as I am not running full sequential fuel injection. Only group fire. So this will have a negative effect on low load running too.
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Not on the car yet, but getting closer.
Still a few niggles to sort before I can refit the engine into the car, and plumb these up.
Then I made a 4 port manifold to feed the rails. Yes my welding is crap, but I dont care
. It doesnt appear to leak ( plumbed for temp testing at the minute. )
I also added a temp sensor...just out of curiosity.
Still a few niggles to sort before I can refit the engine into the car, and plumb these up.
Then I made a 4 port manifold to feed the rails. Yes my welding is crap, but I dont care
. It doesnt appear to leak ( plumbed for temp testing at the minute. )I also added a temp sensor...just out of curiosity.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
TECH Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 374
Likes: 1
Looks sweet, but I think I might be confused or seeing something wrong…
It looks like you have the lower rails plumbed deadheaded (I’m assuming that both back connections are just going to be plumbed to ports that are ahead of the regulator), but I can’t figure out what is going on with the upper rails, it looks like you have 3 connections on them, one on the back of each one, one on the front of the driver’s side one and then even a crossover across the front? What’s going on there? Why are you plumbing both rails differently?
If you are deadheading the lower rails I’m wondering if there is some point where that doesn’t work well? I’ve been debating deadheading the fuel rails like that on a single plane conversion for a turbocharged setup that I’m working on but I’ve been wondering if there is some point where I won’t get even fuel distribution?
It looks like you have the lower rails plumbed deadheaded (I’m assuming that both back connections are just going to be plumbed to ports that are ahead of the regulator), but I can’t figure out what is going on with the upper rails, it looks like you have 3 connections on them, one on the back of each one, one on the front of the driver’s side one and then even a crossover across the front? What’s going on there? Why are you plumbing both rails differently?
If you are deadheading the lower rails I’m wondering if there is some point where that doesn’t work well? I’ve been debating deadheading the fuel rails like that on a single plane conversion for a turbocharged setup that I’m working on but I’ve been wondering if there is some point where I won’t get even fuel distribution?
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Im doing it this way, simply to neaten things up, and reduce hoses. IMO, to run 4 feeds, and 4 returns, which while it would be nice, seems pointless, and would be messy. ( its messy enough in there lol )
The lower primary injectors, which fire all the time, I have decided to run into a dead end. Each rail will have its own -6 feed from my DIY manifold. As these have fuel flowing all the time, I dont see it as a problem.
The upper rails, which supply the secondary injectors, so a lot of the time wont be doing anything, will have a full parallel flow, so there is never any fuel sitting in them doing nothing.
Again, a -6 feed to each rail from the manifold.
I am simply tee-ing the exit of these secondary rails together, to save hose runs. I ran my old setup like this. A single -6 line back to the reg is more than ample anyway IMO.
Many seem to think that a stock non-return system is good for say 600+, give or take. That is a single feed, dead end into a pair of rails.
So a pair of dead ends with independant feeds will do no harm. Many setups Ive seen, people link the 2 rails in series, and dead end one, with the reg tee-d off before the rails. Which IMO, is not a good way to plumb it, but it seems to work for them.
The lower primary injectors, which fire all the time, I have decided to run into a dead end. Each rail will have its own -6 feed from my DIY manifold. As these have fuel flowing all the time, I dont see it as a problem.
The upper rails, which supply the secondary injectors, so a lot of the time wont be doing anything, will have a full parallel flow, so there is never any fuel sitting in them doing nothing.
Again, a -6 feed to each rail from the manifold.
I am simply tee-ing the exit of these secondary rails together, to save hose runs. I ran my old setup like this. A single -6 line back to the reg is more than ample anyway IMO.
Many seem to think that a stock non-return system is good for say 600+, give or take. That is a single feed, dead end into a pair of rails.
So a pair of dead ends with independant feeds will do no harm. Many setups Ive seen, people link the 2 rails in series, and dead end one, with the reg tee-d off before the rails. Which IMO, is not a good way to plumb it, but it seems to work for them.
