Fuel systems with an OEM style bucket

[SheepDog]

(if they're using the return side flow for the siphon

I dont think it could, considering that in stage 1 form it is a deadhead returnless setup.

I have the Radium hat with a remote pressure regulator and return line. It just dumps the fuel right back on top of the pumps into the bucket. Their stage 3 kit can be setup to run returnless, but with a remote/external pressure regulator. It still uses a relay setup though. Can the factory wiring support the draw and heat of 2 - TI274's?

Sponsored

 

[SheepDog]

I was curious about this, so I sent an email to Radium. Here is their response.

"The hanger uses the pressurized side of the fuel system to operate the jet pump siphon for the saddle tanks. The regulator on the hanger replaces the internal regulator that exists inside of your stock fuel pump hanger. You can set the regulator above the max psi the car commands and use the fpcm to control the pump pressure just like the stock system does. The regulator will exist to control the overall maximum pressure and to set the minimum duty cycle at idle.

Your limiting factor will be the amperage handling capability of the stock pump control module. The pumps you'd be installing will draw more amperage and could potentially over-run the fpcm. That would take some research to find out how far you could stretch the use of the controller."

 

[engineermike]

Fwiw I’m pushing around 35 amps through a single stock fpdm.

 

[SheepDog]

Fwiw I’m pushing around 35 amps through a single stock fpdm.

Wouldn't 2 pumps draw more than that?

 

[bankyf]

I was curious about this, so I sent an email to Radium. Here is their response.

"The hanger uses the pressurized side of the fuel system to operate the jet pump siphon for the saddle tanks. The regulator on the hanger replaces the internal regulator that exists inside of your stock fuel pump hanger. You can set the regulator above the max psi the car commands and use the fpcm to control the pump pressure just like the stock system does. The regulator will exist to control the overall maximum pressure and to set the minimum duty cycle at idle.

Your limiting factor will be the amperage handling capability of the stock pump control module. The pumps you'd be installing will draw more amperage and could potentially over-run the fpcm. That would take some research to find out how far you could stretch the use of the controller."

impressive response from Radium. Last email I sent was about their fuel rails and asking about why their fuel rail plumbing kit didn’t include a crossover, if they recommended adding one, and at what power level. The answer I received was “it’s personal preference”.

 

[SheepDog]

impressive response from Radium. Last email I sent was about their fuel rails and asking about why their fuel rail plumbing kit didn’t include a crossover, if they recommended adding one, and at what power level. The answer I received was “it’s personal preference”.

Yeah whoever is responding to my recent questions (fuel filters, stud size on the hat etc.) has been prompt and quite detailed

 

[engineermike]

Wouldn't 2 pumps draw more than that?

Not necessarily. A stock pump at 13 volts only pulls about 13 amps so two of them in parallel would only be 26 amps. Eventually I may install a gt500 bucket and run both pumps off of one fpdm.

 

[Midwestracer]

That was my thought I posted it then deleted it last night wanted to do more research is the bucket better then the gt350 bucket is the question also if I run it with the regulator full tilt and the the PCM control it but would it keep the bucket from running dry and keep my fuel cooler

I was curious about this, so I sent an email to Radium. Here is their response.

"The hanger uses the pressurized side of the fuel system to operate the jet pump siphon for the saddle tanks. The regulator on the hanger replaces the internal regulator that exists inside of your stock fuel pump hanger. You can set the regulator above the max psi the car commands and use the fpcm to control the pump pressure just like the stock system does. The regulator will exist to control the overall maximum pressure and to set the minimum duty cycle at idle.

Your limiting factor will be the amperage handling capability of the stock pump control module. The pumps you'd be installing will draw more amperage and could potentially over-run the fpcm. That would take some research to find out how far you could stretch the use of the controller."

This is my idea exactly my only thought is will I still be worried about running the bucket dry but I'm thinking it will work cause the return should keep it full say I wanna push 1000hp on e85

 

[Angrey]

I was curious about this, so I sent an email to Radium. Here is their response.

"The hanger uses the pressurized side of the fuel system to operate the jet pump siphon for the saddle tanks. The regulator on the hanger replaces the internal regulator that exists inside of your stock fuel pump hanger. You can set the regulator above the max psi the car commands and use the fpcm to control the pump pressure just like the stock system does. The regulator will exist to control the overall maximum pressure and to set the minimum duty cycle at idle.

Your limiting factor will be the amperage handling capability of the stock pump control module. The pumps you'd be installing will draw more amperage and could potentially over-run the fpcm. That would take some research to find out how far you could stretch the use of the controller."

Still doesn't address boost ramp. In order to maintain a desired net pressure, it's indexed via the vacuum line.

So they're using the primary side to power the siphon.

I'm just curious on the return style setup how you get an accurate boost pressure that far away.

Of course just about anything can be smoothed out in the tune.

With a "traditional" return style setup with the regulator forward, the when you mash and you make 16 psi of boost, the regulator delivers base pressure + 16 so you get a nice 55 psi + boost pressure of near constant pressure at the port.

 

[Angrey]

That was my thought I posted it then deleted it last night wanted to do more research is the bucket better then the gt350 bucket is the question also if I run it with the regulator full tilt and the the PCM control it but would it keep the bucket from running dry and keep my fuel cooler



This is my idea exactly my only thought is will I still be worried about running the bucket dry but I'm thinking it will work cause the return should keep it full say I wanna push 1000hp on e85

You can't rely on the return to keep the bucket full because it's a net wash. For every drop that gets pushed back through the return, it has to get pumped forward first.

So in essence, the pump has to draw the amount of fuel necessary to feed the motor + whatever it sends back in return. If the car lurches and there's no surrounding fuel filling up the bucket, the pumps will need to take up the fuel needs + return flow to send forward.

Or put another way, in order to return 100 g/min, the pump has to draw an additional 100 gal/min to send forward (then return). It's a net wash, and not contributive to the supply for the motor.

 

[Angrey]

You can't rely on the return to keep the bucket full because it's a net wash. For every drop that gets pushed back through the return, it has to get pumped forward first.

So in essence, the pump has to draw the amount of fuel necessary to feed the motor + whatever it sends back in return. If the car lurches and there's no surrounding fuel filling up the bucket, the pumps will need to take up the fuel needs + return flow to send forward.

Or put another way, in order to return 100 g/min, the pump has to draw an additional 100 gal/min to send forward (then return). It's a net wash, and not contributive to the supply for the motor.

In fairness, it might help A LITTLE in that when you mash on the pedal and the motor starts to drink more, the injector pulse widens and more fuel is sent their way at the regulator, less is sent back in return.

If the bucket were closed and unable to get fuel from the surrounding tank, you might create a momentary supply in the bucket as the return line feed drops while the motor is under load. But the bucket already gets fuel when things are "normal" from the surrounding tank. With the car accelerating and the G forces sending the fuel away, it's only in that condition when the motor is applying load so in that condition the return line flow is reduced.

The only way to properly supply the bucket (or a temporary reservoir) is through a separate lift pump that's not part of the primary flow, the return flow.

The siphon system will help keep it topped off, but the net flow from the return side is pretty slow (with 100% efficiency, half of the flow that comes from the siphon is from the primary pump itself, so it's just churning fuel from the bucket, through the siphon, back into the bucket, with a little more from the other saddle).

 

[SheepDog]

Still doesn't address boost ramp. In order to maintain a desired net pressure, it's indexed via the vacuum line.

So they're using the primary side to power the siphon.

I'm just curious on the return style setup how you get an accurate boost pressure that far away.

Of course just about anything can be smoothed out in the tune.

With a "traditional" return style setup with the regulator forward, the when you mash and you make 16 psi of boost, the regulator delivers base pressure + 16 so you get a nice 55 psi + boost pressure of near constant pressure at the port.

Yeah, I think that with the return setup, most people (myself included) have the block off plate installed and are using a presure regulator on the return side in the engine bay. I asked them about that too, and he/she said they have never seen an issue with running a vacuum line back to the tank to feed the hat mounted version. I guess the volume of air inside a 1/4" line is so small, that the response is still "nearly" instantaneous.

Now Im wondering if a MAP sensor couldn't be added to the intake manifold, provided that there are provisions in the PCM to read it. This way, you wouldn't need a vacuum line back to the hat, and the PCM could ramp up the pressure based on the MAP sensor input. @engineermike, can these PCM's support a MAP sensor?

 

[engineermike]

Now Im wondering if a MAP sensor couldn't be added to the intake manifold, provided that there are provisions in the PCM to read it. This way, you wouldn't need a vacuum line back to the hat, and the PCM could ramp up the pressure based on the MAP sensor input. @engineermike, can these PCM's support a MAP sensor?

Roush adds a map sensor but the os is built for it and it’s not used to control the fuel pump.

The factory fuel pump control is pretty flexible and is a function of fuel demand and rpm. I’d suggest using that, with the challenge being converting the oem output into something you can use.

 

[bankyf]

car - 40-60k
wheels and tires - 5k
suspension - 3k
power adder 6-10k
fuel - how cheap can i get by.....

i never understand the rationale to this equation

My Original post was never about cheap. In fact, I’m absolutely willing to pay more than the cost of a typical return system to keep returnless. I don’t understand why we need to go back 2 decades in technology to supply fuel to these cars.

Timely that someone would like this post today…. Last week I received one of the first KPM fuel systems in the US. I paid a bit more than the beloved “Fore” fuel system and it should achieve way more than what I was asking for over two years ago when I started this thread. It’s odd that I was accused of being cheap just because I didn’t want to settle for a mediocre solution to the problem. I’m working through some small hiccups with KPM right now, but I will start a new thread about the install soon.

 

[beefcake]

Timely that someone would like this post today…. Last week I received one of the first KPM fuel systems in the US. I paid a bit more than the beloved “Fore” fuel system and it should achieve way more than what I was asking for over two years ago when I started this thread. It’s odd that I was accused of being cheap just because I didn’t want to settle for a mediocre solution to the problem. I’m working through some small hiccups with KPM right now, but I will start a new thread about the install soon.

KPM is doing a nice job on their systems. You are still going to be somewhat limited horsepower wise but for the guys that you know 900 maybe 1000 wheel it’s a nice option we are offering

https://www.beefcakeracing.com/kpm-fuel-systems/

Sponsored