Updated Fuel Pump
04-01-2011, 12:40 PM
#21
True but that is hard to prove and always an after-the-fact realization. Contamination is generally something that gets worse as the vehicle ages and accumulates in the tank.
The majority of the time the customer will come back to Racetronix and Walbro expecting warranty while at the same time not accepting the fact that there was junk in their tank b/c they could not see it by peering through a small hole. These pumps and filter socks are sent back loaded with debris.
As a distributor, it is our responsibility to advise the consumer on the recommended installation methods in order to maximize performance and reduce the chance of failure. These procedures are taught in automotive tech courses and reiterated by all major car manufacturers. To dismiss these procedures as being misguided and irrelevant is foolhardy.
If a customer chooses to take a short cut by using the trap-door method and not cleaning out their tank, they should fully understand the risk they are taking and be willing to absorb the costs associated with pump failure.
Removing the tank is not as hard as many people tend to think. Many forum members have done this at home with jack-stands without complaining.
On a couple occasions there have been fires caused by the trap-door method. Old rusted senders and dried-out gaskets allow fuel vapors to seep out around the top of the tank. Cutting into the metal floor above the tank can create sparks, which can ignite these vapors. There is also the risk of cutting into the fuel lines and wires above the tank.
If by posting this information, we can save one customer the grief of a failed pump it is worth the dissension here.
The majority of the time the customer will come back to Racetronix and Walbro expecting warranty while at the same time not accepting the fact that there was junk in their tank b/c they could not see it by peering through a small hole. These pumps and filter socks are sent back loaded with debris.
As a distributor, it is our responsibility to advise the consumer on the recommended installation methods in order to maximize performance and reduce the chance of failure. These procedures are taught in automotive tech courses and reiterated by all major car manufacturers. To dismiss these procedures as being misguided and irrelevant is foolhardy.
If a customer chooses to take a short cut by using the trap-door method and not cleaning out their tank, they should fully understand the risk they are taking and be willing to absorb the costs associated with pump failure.
Removing the tank is not as hard as many people tend to think. Many forum members have done this at home with jack-stands without complaining.
On a couple occasions there have been fires caused by the trap-door method. Old rusted senders and dried-out gaskets allow fuel vapors to seep out around the top of the tank. Cutting into the metal floor above the tank can create sparks, which can ignite these vapors. There is also the risk of cutting into the fuel lines and wires above the tank.
If by posting this information, we can save one customer the grief of a failed pump it is worth the dissension here.
What is actually taught in automotive tech courses and by manufacturers is to find the root cause of failures before replacing parts. If a fuel pump has failed, the technician working on the vehicle needs to find the root cause of that failure. If it happens to be fuel contamination, then the fuel tank needs to be removed from the vehicle and properly cleaned. Up until that point, removing the tank from the vehicle provides no advantage in diagnostics or proper repair. In fact, it adds what may be excessive unnecessary time and cost to the repair.
It is the responsibility of the person working on the car to determine the extent of the needed repairs, not set themselves or the vehicle on fire and fix the vehicle in the most thorough and expedient fashion available. What you are advocating (blindly removing, washing and disposing of remaining gasoline on every pump replacement) is not proper technician procedure, even though I am sure it would reduce your warranty claims. GM did not advocate this procedure in any way during the 15 years I was employed and trained by them.
04-01-2011, 04:54 PM
#22
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Pinellas Park Florida
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just because you spend all your time inside on the computer posting, Does not me thats what i do, and does not make me a noob either.Maybe you should be outside dropping your tank and learning hw to do it quick, and learning what size bolt is where.Im not even going to number the amount of cars i have built by hand or owned becuase it does not matter.
You cut a hole into your floor instead of doing it the correct way and dropping the tank, i would think you were the nood or lazy for not doing it the correct way.Just because you read a write up online about someone else cutting up there floor, and everyone else doing it does not make it the new way to do it, its the wrong and lazy way.But hey some do it the correct way and othere dont. I dont think the vendor should have said idiot, but the only other word that comes to my mind is lazy.
You cut a hole into your floor instead of doing it the correct way and dropping the tank, i would think you were the nood or lazy for not doing it the correct way.Just because you read a write up online about someone else cutting up there floor, and everyone else doing it does not make it the new way to do it, its the wrong and lazy way.But hey some do it the correct way and othere dont. I dont think the vendor should have said idiot, but the only other word that comes to my mind is lazy.
