![]() |
A fuel tank drain spout so it doesnt make a mess?
|
Originally Posted by LetsGetThisDone
(Post 11963991)
A fuel tank drain spout so it doesnt make a mess?
|
Ya I'm not looking forward to that either. Has anyone pumped it out or do we have a screen in our necks?
|
Originally Posted by Balrok
(Post 11963997)
Ya I'm not looking forward to that either. Has anyone pumped it out or do we have a screen in our necks?
boostedfilms mentioned that 'some' have a check valve at the neck. anyway you wouldnt be able to pump out the other side |
Originally Posted by Dallas J
(Post 11963904)
You divided instead of multiplying or something,
CP8350 Relative bias shift = 1 - (2480/2919 * 325/320) = 13.7% (rearward shift) XRZ4R = 13.1%. So sure, I guess thats less than the essex kit. On paper, that should be more than the stock ABS will be happy with, though maybe its happier with rear bias. Its still a bit of a mystery what it will freak out with. I use the Aero6 kit with 320mm rotors having an 11% rear shift for AutoX with the idea that I'll swap to X rotors for track for a net zero shift. I use an estimate for the "effective radius" number that RSMike mentioned: Rotor radius minus one half of the brake pad width. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.evo...cfcc2914c2.png The OEM Evo brake pads are relatively wide at 61-62mm depending on the drawings you look at. This makes the effective radius = 320mm / 2 - 62mm / 2 = 129mm. Most aftermarket calipers use narrower pads, so the effective radius is slightly larger. It's not a huge difference, but it explains why your calculations didn't match mine. And no, I didn't "divide instead of multiply or something" :lol: |
Originally Posted by RSMike
(Post 11963920)
Wilwood XRZ4R.
Pretty expensive for what they are, you'd be better to use an AP Racing 4POT or 6POT. The AP CP9660 is an awesome caliper for 356mm to 380mm rotors, but it's significantly more expensive. They have a few calipers in between, but they're not cheap. The Wilwood stuff can be had at a decent discount through distributors. I should probably bite the bullet and get the big CP9660 kit, though. |
Originally Posted by Balrok
(Post 11963997)
Ya I'm not looking forward to that either. Has anyone pumped it out or do we have a screen in our necks?
|
I'm working on a Ti 295 pump (535lph) with PWM controller install. Of course the easy way to get the fuel flow I want would be to do a double pumper but what fun is there in doing something the easy way.
|
Has anyone ran one of these:
https://jdcustomsusa.com/products/fr...yABEgLvHfD_BwE wondering if you can run a shorty belt from the PS pump to crank to alt without the water pump pulley. That or shave the blades off of the stock water pump housing to retain the pulley but the FF solution would be a lot cleaner. |
What water pump do you plan on running? I believe BMW electric pumps are supposed to be the one to go for.
11-51-7-586-925 is the part number of said pump btw. |
Originally Posted by griceiv
(Post 11964046)
I'm working on a Ti 295 pump (535lph) with PWM controller install. Of course the easy way to get the fuel flow I want would be to do a double pumper but what fun is there in doing something the easy way.
|
Originally Posted by TimC909
(Post 11964049)
What water pump do you plan on running? I believe BMW electric pumps are supposed to be the one to go for.
11-51-7-586-925 is the part number of said pump btw. |
Originally Posted by griceiv
(Post 11964046)
I'm working on a Ti 295 pump (535lph) with PWM controller install. Of course the easy way to get the fuel flow I want would be to do a double pumper but what fun is there in doing something the easy way.
|
Originally Posted by Construct
(Post 11964053)
Now this sounds interesting. Which PWM controller are you using?
|
Originally Posted by griceiv
I'm using one of the land rover/ford fuel pump control modules (7H42 style). They're cheap on ebay (~$50) and I can control it with the AEM infinity ecu. Spent a long time reading through the awesome threads mrfred has on here about his fuel pump DIY's and I thought I'd try to do something similar. It seemed like the biggest unresolved issue was modulating the fuel flow at low load to prevent over running the return flow and the two stage voltage control (stock) wasn't cutting it so PWM here we come. my stretch goal is to not modify the return line/regulator/jet pump diameter and see if I can just control the fuel supply to not over run the pressure regulator.
That being said, 1650's tune out completely fine with a walbro 450 or 525 on hi/lo voltage wiring, stock regulator, and stock siphon drilled to 9/64", with no issues getting fuel from the other side of the tank. (Source- my car and idk how many others I've done) Larger injectors idle better at 55-60psi base pressure anyways, it seems to smooth out the non-linear short pulse width region. Every 2000/2150 car we do with a real fuel system, we set base pressure to 58psi. This also allows the 2000cc injectors to support over 1000hp if we have enough pump. I end up doing the same base pressure with 1650's, they tune out better. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:30 PM. |
© 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands