Here we go again!

[V8 Vum]

I am in a quandary! Spent the last week trying to devise a pulley system to be able to hoist the back clip out of the way since it takes 2/3 people to remove it, and I am billy-no-mates where I live, in the Chelt/Worc area.
Done it now with pulleys from the roof trusses (God I hope they hold OK...could be very expensive otherwise!) and yanked the whole clip to the roof…..

So to the next phase….

Since I have had a fair amount of time off the project, its very hard to get going again, especially as this bit there is no build manual (LS7 install) as such. In addition I want to make sure I don’t screw up by putting stuff in place that later I find in the wrong place…..

SO....

Suppose the next bit is to trial-fit the tanks, then trial-fit the engine….then work out where all the bits go…

Ref the tanks...I have two pumps (or will have when the second one arrives)...and I want to find a way of being able to equalise the fuel and levels between the two. Has anyone done this successfully without having to mod the tanks? Anyone got a dia for running the best routes?

cheers

Keith

[GTRCLIVE]

-12 balance line between both tanks the bets way and most relieable. Plenty of people have done it at that stage. You can buy the fittings and just have them welded now (Before you have put any fuel in them). Do it now becuase later once there used nobody will want to weldup used tanks....Fittings 5quid each welding 20 maybe. You will be able to fill up from any side and both tanks will be level in seconds. Just put the fittings where the original front -6 versions are, as low as possable but not to hit the chassis rail... and leave alone the fittings that have the drop tube in them... you won't regret it...

[pilbeam_mp62]

There seem to be a few schools of thought on the size of the fuel pipes from the tanks. This thread from September quotes Richard at the factory basically saying the -6 fittings are fine for the LS7 set-up, and the bigger diameter fitting can cause "fuel surge" problems...

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

I am probably going with the LS7 motor, but in view of that thread I think I will leave the fittings alone, and just accept the fact that the tanks are not linked in a way that will allow rapid fill-up from either side...

Regards
Kelvin

[V8 Vum]

pilbeam_mp62 said:

There seem to be a few schools of thought on the size of the fuel pipes from the tanks. This thread from September quotes Richard at the factory basically saying the -6 fittings are fine for the LS7 set-up, and the bigger diameter fitting can cause "fuel surge" problems...

Kelvin

With th -12 mod then......Fuel surge Clive? Any problems....?????

Keith

[GTRCLIVE]

Never had that one..... never herd of that one.. and don't get me started on the fuel line size issue.....

Put it this way if I designed a fuel system running all fuel pumps out side the tanks I would have a minimum of -8 suction.... but then again I would always use intank pumps, and always have the pumps nearer the back rather than the front...( because you realy need fuel under braking Ha....not ) rant over...

[pilbeam_mp62]

Just to clarify my post above - I was only quoting something from the other thread - I am certainly not knowledgeable enough to know myself - and this prompts me to mention another thing thast I have been thinking about..

For someone like me, who is going to struggle with certain parts of the build, due to inexperience, it seems to be a bit "dangerous" to stray from the factory recommendations on anything because of the fear of lack of "support" when I will need it.

Of course, I know that there are many very knowledgeable people on here who are all very willing to assist (and I am very appreciative of that) but I suppose if I stick as close as possible to the factory suggestions, then they can be my last "port of call" if I have a problem.

Am I making sense ? Perhaps others have a view on this...are there any other relatively inexperienced builders out there who feel like this ? (perhaps I am the only one who does !!)

Regards
Kelvin

[LuckyP]

pilbeam_mp62 said:

Just to clarify my post above - I was only quoting something from the other thread - I am certainly not knowledgeable enough to know myself - and this prompts me to mention another thing thast I have been thinking about..

For someone like me, who is going to struggle with certain parts of the build, due to inexperience, it seems to be a bit "dangerous" to stray from the factory recommendations on anything because of the fear of lack of "support" when I will need it.

Of course, I know that there are many very knowledgeable people on here who are all very willing to assist (and I am very appreciative of that) but I suppose if I stick as close as possible to the factory suggestions, then they can be my last "port of call" if I have a problem.

Am I making sense ? Perhaps others have a view on this...are there any other relatively inexperienced builders out there who feel like this ? (perhaps I am the only one who does !!)

Regards
Kelvin

Kelvin, I totally agree with your reasoning. I did exactly that, under the front and rear clip and only changed things in the cabin where I wanted to add my touch.

Since then I've deviated from factory spec on a number of items and not all have been to my liking.

Stick with Factory and mod later of you NEED to.

Pete

[pilbeam_mp62]

LuckyP said:

pilbeam_mp62 said:

Just to clarify my post above - I was only quoting something from the other thread - I am certainly not knowledgeable enough to know myself - and this prompts me to mention another thing thast I have been thinking about..

For someone like me, who is going to struggle with certain parts of the build, due to inexperience, it seems to be a bit "dangerous" to stray from the factory recommendations on anything because of the fear of lack of "support" when I will need it.

Of course, I know that there are many very knowledgeable people on here who are all very willing to assist (and I am very appreciative of that) but I suppose if I stick as close as possible to the factory suggestions, then they can be my last "port of call" if I have a problem.

Am I making sense ? Perhaps others have a view on this...are there any other relatively inexperienced builders out there who feel like this ? (perhaps I am the only one who does !!)

Regards
Kelvin

Kelvin, I totally agree with your reasoning. I did exactly that, under the front and rear clip and only changed things in the cabin where I wanted to add my touch.

Since then I've deviated from factory spec on a number of items and not all have been to my liking.

Stick with Factory and mod later of you NEED to.

Pete

Peter,

Thanks for that reply - that is making me feel better, and like you, I intend to fit my own idea of a good dash-layout and maybe carpet - not decided that yet. I appreciate your input.

Regards
Kelvin

[Graham-P]

I have linked my tanks with -12 down by the -6 fittings and I do not suffer from fuel surge, plus I did not go with the Carter pumps (how much!!) or the tank change over switch. I run a Holley pump sucking from both tanks into the carb. It means I can fill up from either side (albeit slowly), the tanks balance themselves out, another switch gone from the dashboard and I only have one pump to worry about (not that I do or have anyway), just keeping it simple.
Oh and it works. . . . . .
This is for a Gen III engine, if you're going LSx route then you need to talk to other LS owners and find out what systems they are running, Jeff is your best starting point there.

[andygtt]

nothing wrong with sticking with the factory setup, but equally there is nothing wrong with putting a -12 link in as long as you spec the fuel system properly. My car never had any fuelling issues in nearly 20k and 5 years with plenty of track use and I fitted a -12.

I'd personnally would not run a 500bhp from a single -6 line.

[pilbeam_mp62]

This may be relevant to the discussion...

GTR-TT said:

ROWDYRENAULT said:

Yo Fred: A good sized crossover connected to the very bottom of each tank, mine is 1.25 inchs avoids the problem of filling the tanks or getting the fuel tanks uneven. I then draw from both tanks at the same time through a Y to one filter, then on to one pump, out of the pump to a Y that feeds both fuel rails. Then out of the two rails to the fuel regulator then one return line back to one of the tanks. Total 1 pump 1 filter 1 regulator 2 Ys. Just a thought. Lee

I have the same configuration (but I "Y" the return to both tanks) but I have problems with fuel starvation when acceleration out of long turns if the tankt are less then 2/3 full.

Regards
Kelvin

[ROWDYRENAULT]

Guys: Not to be reduntant, but I use a 1.125 cross over line made of aluminum tube connected on both sides by a very short gates hose to a welded bung. No surges, no trouble filling from either side at a normal rate. tube is well connected to the firewall with adel clamps its not going anywhere soon. Fuel system is -6 one pump mounted lower than the tanks by about an inch, sucks through a Y from both tanks to a Y that feeds both fuel rails. Pressure regulator feed by both rails at the end, single drain line back to one tank. This is on a 525 hp ls1 all is good. On the dyno we had this system in place only feeding out of one tank fuel pressure never moved once period. The math says that -6 line will feed a lot more horse then we are talking about here. I agree with trying to stay as close as possible to the factories plan but this area seemed to be open for a little thought. Lee