iateyourcat

I've seen a few different posts on adding two solenoids to decrease the odds of failure but, I don't understand how this can help on the fuel side. If you add another solenoid, aren't you increasing your chances that one will stick closed? I can understand adding a nitrous solenoid because you want to avoid a nitrous solenoid staying open.

Sound right?

LS1[CHEVY]

Sounds right to me .. I Have 2 inline solenoids but im on a dry kit.

[ December 12, 2001: Message edited by: LS1[CHEVY] ]</p>

Colonel

Which is one of the main reasons I like a dry kit best.

akw408

[quote]Originally posted by iateyourcat:
<strong>I've seen a few different posts on adding two solenoids to decrease the odds of failure but, I don't understand how this can help on the fuel side. If you add another solenoid, aren't you increasing your chances that one will stick closed? I can understand adding a nitrous solenoid because you want to avoid a nitrous solenoid staying open.

Sound right?</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is something I've thought of myself. I haven't done this, but I thought about using 2 relays and 2 FPSS, one that controls the fuel solenoid and 1 N2O solenoid and the other relay controls the final N2O solenoid. Basically, you use a FPSS at the input to the fuel solenoid and one at the output. The FPSS at the input of the fuel solenoid performs your usual function, controls your fuel solenoid and first N2O solenoid. The FPSS at the output will control the final N2O solenoid. This way, if the fuel solenoid was stuck shut, you don't have to worry about it.

I guess this idea could be expanded to use 2 fuel solenoids inline, it would actually make it even safer.

Anyone think this would work?