Fuel line sizing.
07-13-2010, 04:52 PM
#1
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Va Beach
Posts: 7,329
Total Cats: 12
Fuel line sizing.
Split from Savington's build thread.
https://www.miataturbo.net/media-53/absurdflow-tse-time-attack-miata-v-2010-upgrades-42276/
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
https://www.miataturbo.net/media-53/absurdflow-tse-time-attack-miata-v-2010-upgrades-42276/
Originally Posted by Savington
Finally found the time last night to fab up my fuel system. The rail is an AF piece, .500" ID, twin -6AN feeds and a single -6AN return. Fit and finish is flawless, obviously.
Injectors remain the same, ID1000s, the best money can buy. E85 compatible, unlike RC. Max rated pressure of 130psi, and they recommend 90psi for the best spray pattern, unlike RC (RC says 65-70psi max.) They will also idle at stoich due to the incredibly low, stable minimum times (0.8ms IIRC), unlike RC. These will literally idle better than an RC750 and probably even better than an RC550, despite being a SATURATED 1000cc injector.
Not taking any chances with fuel lines going soft, so the lines are Aeroquip -6AN PTFE, teflon internals rated for constant use with methanol/ethanol. It uses steel PTFE-specific fittings as well. Not cheap at nearly $12/ft, but the fuel lines are not a place you want to be skimping.
FPR is a Fuelabs piece, which is so nice we're going to start selling them. It's a one-in one-out, so no bottom port to block off like the Aeromotive A1000 unit. It's adjustable from 25-90psi, A1000 maxes out at 70psi base pressure. It also uses standard -6AN union fittings, not the retarded expensive ORB fittings. It's physically tiny as well, as you can see, which means it can get tucked back into the depths of the engine bay if you want. Fully E85 compatible, of course.
All that's left now is to reinstall the intake manifold, set base pressure, and fire it back up. My replacement tranny goes in this weekend, and hopefully I'll hit the dyno next week for some more oomph.
Sorry for the shitty pics, I promise I'll have some good ones this weekend. The car will be on display at MiataFest in Irvine on Saturday.
Injectors remain the same, ID1000s, the best money can buy. E85 compatible, unlike RC. Max rated pressure of 130psi, and they recommend 90psi for the best spray pattern, unlike RC (RC says 65-70psi max.) They will also idle at stoich due to the incredibly low, stable minimum times (0.8ms IIRC), unlike RC. These will literally idle better than an RC750 and probably even better than an RC550, despite being a SATURATED 1000cc injector.
Not taking any chances with fuel lines going soft, so the lines are Aeroquip -6AN PTFE, teflon internals rated for constant use with methanol/ethanol. It uses steel PTFE-specific fittings as well. Not cheap at nearly $12/ft, but the fuel lines are not a place you want to be skimping.
FPR is a Fuelabs piece, which is so nice we're going to start selling them. It's a one-in one-out, so no bottom port to block off like the Aeromotive A1000 unit. It's adjustable from 25-90psi, A1000 maxes out at 70psi base pressure. It also uses standard -6AN union fittings, not the retarded expensive ORB fittings. It's physically tiny as well, as you can see, which means it can get tucked back into the depths of the engine bay if you want. Fully E85 compatible, of course.
All that's left now is to reinstall the intake manifold, set base pressure, and fire it back up. My replacement tranny goes in this weekend, and hopefully I'll hit the dyno next week for some more oomph.
Sorry for the shitty pics, I promise I'll have some good ones this weekend. The car will be on display at MiataFest in Irvine on Saturday.
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Last edited by levnubhin; 07-19-2010 at 03:52 PM.
Reply
0
0
07-14-2010, 07:04 PM
#4
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,847
Total Cats: 27
FWIW I am using the stock feed line and the stock return line on my 1994 LS1 Miata. I am flowing enough fuel for a guesstimated 350 BHP with good AFRs, verified with a WB02 sensor. I have an adjustable regulator holding it at whatever the LS1 rail pressure is, I think 53 psi IIRC. It works fine.
Reply
0
0
07-14-2010, 11:21 PM
#5
FWIW I am using the stock feed line and the stock return line on my 1994 LS1 Miata. I am flowing enough fuel for a guesstimated 350 BHP with good AFRs, verified with a WB02 sensor. I have an adjustable regulator holding it at whatever the LS1 rail pressure is, I think 53 psi IIRC. It works fine.
Reply
0
0
07-15-2010, 12:20 AM
#8
My comment about needing more flow was meant to be as compared to the 350HP engine, which if it's running on straight gas needs less fuel flow than the same 350HP engine on E85.
Reply
0
0
07-16-2010, 03:09 AM
#9
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 87
Total Cats: -9
This is something we do on race cars regularly. The reason is that if you run the same size lines in/out then any flow restriction in the return line can act as an uncontrolled fuel pressure regulator. A larger return line gives you some overhead for "stuff" happening (like rocks/curbs/etc hitting the return line and restricting it).
My comment about needing more flow was meant to be as compared to the 350HP engine, which if it's running on straight gas needs less fuel flow than the same 350HP engine on E85.
My comment about needing more flow was meant to be as compared to the 350HP engine, which if it's running on straight gas needs less fuel flow than the same 350HP engine on E85.
Any car running E85 requires more fuel. This is common knowledge. You can compensate for flow with more pressure which is where the injectors have better atomization.
Use the stock return line. It's stronger than any replacement and it's already installed.
Reply
0
0
07-16-2010, 11:39 AM
#10
A larger return line doesn't give you anything but a thinner wallet. If you want to prove otherwise, I'm all ears. If the pressure was so easy to control through size (or restriction) of a return fuel line, we could all simply run a smaller or larger size to set our fuel pressure and that's not the case. Sorry, I don't buy it.
Reply
0
0
07-16-2010, 05:08 PM
#11
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 87
Total Cats: -9
I thought your focus was the return line, not the FPR? We all know how they work, and it has nothing to do with running either a larger or a smaller return line. Way to point out the obvious. Again.
Like I said, if you want to prove the usefulness of a larger return, I'm all ears, but telling me you run them on race cars isn't going to cut it. Being a **** doesn't help either.
My bad on the return line. I didn't know he already replaced it.
Like I said, if you want to prove the usefulness of a larger return, I'm all ears, but telling me you run them on race cars isn't going to cut it. Being a **** doesn't help either.
My bad on the return line. I didn't know he already replaced it.
Reply
0
0
07-16-2010, 06:37 PM
#12
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
I dont want to point out the obvious... but...
So if changing the size of the return line doesn't affect fuel pressure at all, why is it there? Changing the size to zero or nearly zero (say .0001 inch diameter) is still changing the size, right? How much fuel pressure would you run with a .0001" fuel return?
It's pretty clear that you made up the part where anyone is trying to "control" the fuel pressure through return size. They're trying to PREVENT it from controlling fuel pressure. If the resistance of flow through the fuel return line is higher than the FPR, it's going to affect the pressure in the rail.
You want some proof?
Blow as hard as you can through your mouth with your mouth wide open and measure the pressure in your mouth.
Now blow as hard as you can with your mouth ALMOST entirely closed except for a tiny hole and measure the pressure in your mouth.
which is higher?
large orifice or small orifice?
A larger return line doesn't give you anything but a thinner wallet. If you want to prove otherwise, I'm all ears. If the pressure was so easy to control through size (or restriction) of a return fuel line, we could all simply run a smaller or larger size to set our fuel pressure and that's not the case. Sorry, I don't buy it.
It's pretty clear that you made up the part where anyone is trying to "control" the fuel pressure through return size. They're trying to PREVENT it from controlling fuel pressure. If the resistance of flow through the fuel return line is higher than the FPR, it's going to affect the pressure in the rail.
You want some proof?
Blow as hard as you can through your mouth with your mouth wide open and measure the pressure in your mouth.
Now blow as hard as you can with your mouth ALMOST entirely closed except for a tiny hole and measure the pressure in your mouth.
which is higher?
large orifice or small orifice?
Reply
0
0
07-16-2010, 10:38 PM
#15
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Outside of the Loop-ATL
Posts: 761
Total Cats: 1
Now, I don't know at what point the stock miata hard fuel lines become an issues, but so far no one has had that issue yet.
Reply
0
0
07-16-2010, 11:55 PM
#16
But you missing the most basic part. The only reason to run a larger return is if your fuel pump, pushes more fuel per min then your motor is using AND you having issues getting the correct fuel pressure.
Now, I don't know at what point the stock miata hard fuel lines become an issues, but so far no one has had that issue yet.
Now, I don't know at what point the stock miata hard fuel lines become an issues, but so far no one has had that issue yet.
For MOST applications I completely agree that anything other than the stock hard lines is unnecessary.
Reply
0
0
07-18-2010, 07:05 PM
#18
LMAO
I can't believe there's this much arguing and slap fighting over a fuel return line.
Lots of things Sav does on his car are to see if they make an improvement. He's testing lots of **** for his own knowledge and is kind enough to share some of that info with us.
Are some things he does unnecessary or not needed? Absolutely (imo). But without trying/testing **** we wouldn't learn anything new or evolve our methods.
His dyno plots, videos and feedback will be the determining factor.
I can't believe there's this much arguing and slap fighting over a fuel return line.
Lots of things Sav does on his car are to see if they make an improvement. He's testing lots of **** for his own knowledge and is kind enough to share some of that info with us.
Are some things he does unnecessary or not needed? Absolutely (imo). But without trying/testing **** we wouldn't learn anything new or evolve our methods.
His dyno plots, videos and feedback will be the determining factor.
Reply
0
0
07-18-2010, 07:26 PM
#19
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Outside of the Loop-ATL
Posts: 761
Total Cats: 1
Go re-read the first part of post #149... there ARE reasons to do it other than what you describe in the particular case of a race car, which is what we're talking about. The OP has a race car in the 400whp neighborhood, running on E85... not a 200WHP street car running on pump gas.
For MOST applications I completely agree that anything other than the stock hard lines is unnecessary.
For MOST applications I completely agree that anything other than the stock hard lines is unnecessary.
Reply
0
0
