Bypass Regulator setup
05-14-2008, 12:57 PM
#1
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 1,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bypass Regulator setup Is is possible to setup a 6 port ( 5 feed, 1 return) bypass regulator to have the main fuel line feed into the regulator (-10) then from the regulator to the return (-10) and to the 4 (-8's) fuel rails with plugs on one end and maintain a constant pressure?
05-14-2008, 04:08 PM
#2
FormerVendor
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lake in the Hills, IL
Posts: 5,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You want the regulator after the rails run your feed to the rails out of the rails to the reg. and return from the bottom of reg back to the tank.
Nate
Nate
05-14-2008, 06:28 PM
#3
9 Second Club
It would be do-able, but definately not ideal.
Im using 4 fuel rails. I made a manifold to feed all 4 rails from a single 1/2" input, so that the secondary fuel rails are a full flow bypass style, going through the rails, then back to the regulator.
The primary rails are dead ends though. Those injectors operate all the time. So whilst it still isnt ideal, it was a lot easier in terms of plumbing.
If you only wanted one inlet, and outlet, you could make up a 4 port inlet manifold ( 5 including feed or exit ), and do the same at the exit of the fuel rails, taking one pipe back to the reg.
Im using 4 fuel rails. I made a manifold to feed all 4 rails from a single 1/2" input, so that the secondary fuel rails are a full flow bypass style, going through the rails, then back to the regulator.
The primary rails are dead ends though. Those injectors operate all the time. So whilst it still isnt ideal, it was a lot easier in terms of plumbing.
If you only wanted one inlet, and outlet, you could make up a 4 port inlet manifold ( 5 including feed or exit ), and do the same at the exit of the fuel rails, taking one pipe back to the reg.
05-15-2008, 10:43 AM
#4
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 1,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thats how i was originally intending to set it up, but the guy who helped me spec it out said to make it a "dead-head" setup he swears it will be more consistent and keep fuel temps down.
05-15-2008, 10:55 AM
#5
9 Second Club
True, fuel may not be circulating through hot rails, and back to the tank. But fuel will be sitting in those hot rails before it gets injected for much longer.
To see which is better, you would need to monitor fuel temperatures, at the rails themselves.
With fuel circulating through the rails, and back to my tank, so far Ive seen a highest temperature of about 100degF as measured at my fuel manifold before the rails.
No idea what the temperature of the primary rails would be though. If I had a 3/8" NPT NTC temp sensor, I could quite easily screw it into the end of one, and log temps there, instead of the manifold.
05-15-2008, 10:59 AM
#6
FormerVendor
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lake in the Hills, IL
Posts: 5,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is an old school carb style setup where the pressure does not play a roll in tuning. There is no way you can regulate consistent pressure at the inj. if you are letting the reg bleed off way before it even gets to them. Path of least resistance.
Nate
Nate
05-15-2008, 11:05 AM
#7
9 Second Club
Doesnt really matter where the reg is placed. Pressure will remain the same.
Placing it in front of the rails, is no different than placing it in-tank, as lots of modern cars seem to do now.
But in generally, any performance engine will have fuel flowing thru the rails, then into the regulator, unless there is a very good reason for doing otherwise.
Placing it in front of the rails, is no different than placing it in-tank, as lots of modern cars seem to do now.
But in generally, any performance engine will have fuel flowing thru the rails, then into the regulator, unless there is a very good reason for doing otherwise.
