SHANE Posted July 14, 2002 Share Posted July 14, 2002 well i have the same pump but a paxton reg. -6 right off the rail will be fine. i ran -10 feed and -6 return. let me know what you think of the pump. my brother in-law and i bought them at the same time. we would like nothing more than to smash the things over someones head there is NO excuse for the amount of noise the piece of **** makes!!! even when running straight pipe i can hear the damn thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 14, 2002 Share Posted July 14, 2002 Hah, I was afraid of that. Luckily pumps aren't all that expensive. I got these real cheap, I was thinking this monster would be real noisy.. I might end up swapping it for a walbro 255lph hp or accel pump. Is it possible to put sound deadening material to insulate it without trapping heat? I suppose a 1100hp pump aughta make a little noise. I don't mind moderate noise but if its really annoying I might swap. My friends t-rex in his z28 is pretty loud, but inaudible when he slams WOT through flowmasters and 2 12" subs kicking in the back When cruising, I asked him why the heck his pump made so much damn noise, he asked what I meant, then he said "oh.. yeah, I guess I'm used to it by now." So.. painful for passengers, we just have to get used to it. I just sent in my order to summit.. 260 bucks worth of stuff! -980mak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 Hey all, Here's the situation, I just got a paxton 1100 hp fuel pump ( !), w/ matching filter, and a kenne bell adjustable fpr. I already have my fuel rail made w/ 460cc injectors, tapped 3/8" for AN fittings. Now the paxton pump and filter have -10 flares on them, and the instructions specify NOT to use any lines under 1/2" (limits me to -10), now on the return line, I'm obviously gonna have to run smaller lines, not because its return but because of the kenne bell fpr. It has what I THINK -6 (flare ID 9/32", OD ~1/2", size of tightening nut for AN wrench is 13/16", perhaps somebody can verify this for me) So is it okay for me to run -6 right out of the other side of the fuel rail, or will that mess up the pressure/flow/volume? Obviously fuel has hit the 6 injectors at correct pressure but not yet the fpr. I wouldn't think twice if it were -8 AN, but -6 is considerably smaller than -10. The flare on the fpr can actually fit inside the that of the pump. Then should I run -6 the rest of the return line? Or my other option is using AN reducers before/after the regulator only. Somebody plese help me out. Thanks -980mak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottie-GNZ Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 Unless you are planning to make the kind of HP the pump is supposedly rated for, -10 feed is totally unnecessary. FYI, I am running -8 feed and the original 240Z feed as my return. I do a -6 off the FRP and connect it to the Datsun feed with a tube nut, then -6 again into the fuel cell. Best buy on the market for a in-line pump is probably the Walbro GS392 rated at 225lph. I am in the 430-440rwhp range and do not plan on changing it if I add more HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHANE Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 scottie, i know what you mean but, why not go -10 since the pump has it? my thinking was 1. you can never overkill a fuel system on a turbo car. 2. i will never have to upgrade the system later if i make changes to the motor. anyway that was my thought process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottie-GNZ Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 Not saying not to use it, just saying if you plan on making up to 550+hp, it is not required. the instructions specify NOT to use any lines under 1/2" (limits me to -10), To clear up any confusion, -10 = 5/8" and -8 = 1/2". Also noted you said the fuel rail is tapped for 3/8" (-6), so you need to address that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHANE Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 huh, aeroquip and earls show -8 as 7/16 and -10 at 9/16. what gives Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottie-GNZ Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 You are correct for questioning this as it is somewhat confusing. I hope I can help clarify it a little. -AN (Army/Navy) is a standard developed to match metal tubing. The numbers are 16ths of an inch which is why it is commonly equated to 3/8, 1/2, 5/8, etc. Rubber hosing was designed to fit snugly over a metal hose, IOW, a 3/8 rubber hose will fit snugly over a 3/8 metal line. That means a 3/8 rubber hose and metal line are not the same size The sizes Aeroquip is referring to are the id of the AN hoses. The confusion lies in what you are comparing that to. If it is being compared to a metal line, which just about what all cars are built with, then the sizes are equivalent. If it is being compared to a rubber hose, then...... Since just about all cars came with metal lines, I think it is correct to use the AN equivalent. Crap, I probably just made it worse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHANE Posted July 15, 2002 Share Posted July 15, 2002 nope not worse. i understand it now, and actually it seems to make very good sense. just something that would not normally register upstairs(if you know what i mean) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.