Fuel systems with an OEM style bucket

[Andy13186]

I don’t know if there is any validity to this, but I found some information on the web indicating that DW pumps really aren’t that good. They claim that DW has falsified their flow rates and that the Waldro pumps actually outperform them. There were flow test to prove it, but who really knows…. It was enough to convince me that DW pumps may not be worth the premium price.

Thanks for the link. I didn’t realize that existed. I’ll have to dig into it a bit more, but I feel like 1000+HP return systems are unproven. I’m not sure I want to be the guinea pig.

I am happy with my voltage boosted single dw400 in my modified OEM bucket + id1050x with my 18 whipple setup so far. I wouldnt try it on a pre 2018 because it doesnt have the extra injectors and I wouldnt do it on a supercharger system that doesnt have fuel rails (although I am not sure if the rails are actually a limiting factor of this fuel system). I am at 750+ rwhp on e85. This used to be more common setup but tuners dont recommend it anymore on e85. It made 770rwhp but I pullied to a bigger pulley so its a bit safer at around 750 rwhp on low boost. I think it would have been pretty sketchy during winter and may still be sketchy during really cold air , so I could pulley up again to the 4.00 pulley (biggest available) in the winter if there is any fuel problem. I am relatively sure this fuel system setup with like 9 psi of boost is perfectly adequate for e85, and you would still be making atleast 700-720 rwhp with a gen 3 coyote, probably ~70-80 more if turbo charged.

Basically OEM feel with this pump aka its not noticeable in any way other than very slightly longer warm start times occassionally.

Sponsored

 

[Jackson1320]

First I’ve heard of this. Any pictures of this set up?

you have not seen a fuel system with two modules?
https://www.americanmuscle.com/holl...pump-module-system-1050-lph-total-12-175.html
Just use two stock modules with upgraded pumps

 

[Andy13186]

Throwing this out there. This set up hold twin DW400. I think if memory serves me they flow enough fuel for 11 or 1200 HP or you can do the big Ti automotive pumps and hell I have no idea what they support

http://www.radiumauto.com/Fuel-Pump-Hanger-2011-Ford-Mustang-P2165.aspx

This looks like an interesting setup, I wouldnt mind doing this if it can support 900+ rwhp on e85

 

[Jackson1320]

I have a 2 Pump FORE system. I have had mine down to below a quarter tank with no issues, but I would not race it like that. When I am racing I run it at about 3/4 tank just to be safe. The main issue with not having a bucket is fuel slosh when launching. But just putting around I haven't had an issue with being below half a tank.

That being said both the DW and Radium systems to be seem to be really nice.

I get mine low too (fore) no issues.

The bucket is not only to keep the pump from sucking air in turns or hard launch. The bucket fills up with fuel no matter how low the tank is. So as long as there’s fuel in the tank the pump will be submerged. It is designed this way to keep the pumps cool. So without the bucket and the Venturi like on a fore system when you drive around at under 1/2 to 1/4 your pumps are not getting cooled as much as as they should. Lots of times this is why return fuel system pumps go out far more often then returnless.
so I would stop letting your tanks get under half

 

[Jackson1320]

This looks like an interesting setup, I wouldnt mind doing this if it can support 900+ rwhp

I’m getting ready to change to this setup right now. First You get two stock fuel pump modules. Now You can use them with the stock pump I but I choose to install a 535lph pump in each. you will also need a second fpdm then you just wire it up like you would if you were installing a gt350 module. If that’s not enough then you can install a boost a pump on each pump. You will have enough pump for a lot more than 900whp on e85 but don’t forget to upgrade the fuel line or it will not matter how much pump you have

 

[Jackson1320]

I’d like to see photos of this set up in return style.

It can be used as return or returnless

 

[Decible]

you have not seen a fuel system with two modules?
https://www.americanmuscle.com/holl...pump-module-system-1050-lph-total-12-175.html
Just use two stock modules with upgraded pumps

I have not. So there is a location to mount both modules? I guess I’ve never noticed.

 

[Angrey]

Few things.

1) There are several OEM "style" hats on the market now. DIvX, Deatschwerks, Radium, etc.
2) The reasons many/most of the fuel system assemblers and manufacturers recommend a min fuel level is because:

a) The size of an OE style hat/buck isn't sufficient for high hp big volume consumption systems and still presents starvation possibilities.

b) This is where things like a surge tank or other alternatives come into play.

The OE style system features a jet syphon to draw fuel from the passive (passenger) side. Even with improved jets, this transfer from the passive side (even directly into your bucket) is somewhere between 40-80 liter/hour. Enough to keep the pumps wet, but not enough to feed your motor for extended high flow conditions.

If you want to go lower than 1/2 tank or so, and NOT have a considerable risk of starvation under certain conditions, you're going to need to either pump fuel into your OE style bucket OR you're going to need a surge tank.

The track rat crowd has employed numerous other approaches to try to limit or resolve this, fuel/hydra mat, foam, barricades/dividers that prevent fuel spill over to the passive side, etc. Some of them work better than others, but frustratingly none of them ever really eliminate the issue, especially on long sweeping left turns. (or in the event you turn left hard onto a street and then mash, when you present inertia toward the passenger side, fuel is going up and over away from the active bucket.

The only proven solution is a surge tank and a very obscure setup (that I'm attempting now) to pump fuel from the passenger side rather than suck it. (using some lift pumps).

Pumping from the passive side creates it's own issues (like what happens when you're at 1/2 tank and all of it is on the driver's side, can the lift pumps withstand running dry, or must some sort of activation switch be employed, either tied to the fuel level sender or some other float.

Bottom line, there are buckets now that will indeed support pretty much whatever fuel you need (outside of like 2000 hp full on race cars).

The Radium bucket is the only one on the market that can accommodate 2 L5M brushless pumps. All of the buckets will accommodate twin DW 440 pumps which flow a shit ton without a voltage booster and with a voltage booster they'll support just about anything you might dream up (at 80 psi, without boost they'll flow roughly 700 l/h, with a constant 18V booster they'll flow like over 1000 l/h).

However, like surge tanks, brushless setups are expensive and require a driver/control module (part of the reason they can pack so much flow in such a small package is the external controller).

There are buckets that will support whatever you want, but if you're looking to get past the fuel level issue, the bucket won't solve the issue when going way high hp/flow. The bucket is just too small to effectively provide enough reservoir in reserve for extended WOT or max flow and it'll potentially suck that thing dry after just a few seconds.

 

[Angrey]

I am happy with my voltage boosted single dw400 in my modified OEM bucket + id1050x with my 18 whipple setup so far. I wouldnt try it on a pre 2018 because it doesnt have the extra injectors and I wouldnt do it on a supercharger system that doesnt have fuel rails (although I am not sure if the rails are actually a limiting factor of this fuel system). I am at 750+ rwhp on e85. This used to be more common setup but tuners dont recommend it anymore on e85. It made 770rwhp but I pullied to a bigger pulley so its a bit safer at around 750 rwhp on low boost. I think it would have been pretty sketchy during winter and may still be sketchy during really cold air , so I could pulley up again to the 4.00 pulley (biggest available) in the winter if there is any fuel problem. I am relatively sure this fuel system setup with like 9 psi of boost is perfectly adequate for e85, and you would still be making atleast 700-720 rwhp with a gen 3 coyote, probably ~70-80 more if turbo charged.

Basically OEM feel with this pump aka its not noticeable in any way other than very slightly longer warm start times occassionally.

I think his bigger issue is the fuel level/starvation. There's a TON of fuel setups on the market right now that will "support" (with a giant asterisk) lots of power.

But you have to treat it like a drag car. You shouldn't go below a certain fuel level when asking it for the full sauce.

That means, on a typical drive from Miami to Orlando, if you want the option of mashing you gotta stop several times to keep the fuel above 1/3-1/2 tank. Or you just concede that running the fuel level down low, you have to be on your best behavior and can't do any full send pulls.

It works, but it reduces the streetability of the car.

The other thing at play, that everyone just kinda says "meh" about is the additional electrical load that triple pumps or double pumps with booster are pulling and all that heat that's being soaked into your fuel (especially with return flow from the hot engine bay).

So on a long trip, if you have a typical 2+1 hobb setup, you're drawing like 35-40 amps (without booster) and around 60 amps when you're in boost. So a typical 2 hour drive, when you're banging gears and in and out of boost your system is jumping from 40-60 amps the whole time.

Not only is that hard on the electrical system, it's heat soaking the fuel. Newer components are resistant to chemical attack from E85, but Fore points out (I was impressed) that for typical organic reactions, when you raise the temp 10 degrees C you double the chemical reaction rate. So if you're running brush style pumps, that's more attack of the carbon brushes, or poly components from the ethanol in the E85. Minor concern for sure, but still.

The point is, a lot or most of the fuel systems on the market are basically made to get the car to run on the dyno or the drag strip. They're NOT able to ensure your motor has fuel for other things like long trips or road racing, etc. A lot of guys just say "race car life" and that' s fine for a trailer queen, but if you want a 1000 hp car and you want to be able to drive and use it like it's stock, most of these current fuel system offerings can't do that (or if they do, it comes with risks or drawbacks).

 

[Andrew@Lethal]

The plan has been to end up with at least some portion of those kits all along . Would you be willing to substitute the DW X2 hat, or at least provide a really solid argument as to why I shouldn’t?

Yeah give me a call. 1.877.253.8425

 

[bankyf]

I think his bigger issue is the fuel level/starvation. There's a TON of fuel setups on the market right now that will "support" (with a giant asterisk) lots of power.

But you have to treat it like a drag car. You shouldn't go below a certain fuel level when asking it for the full sauce.

That means, on a typical drive from Miami to Orlando, if you want the option of mashing you gotta stop several times to keep the fuel above 1/3-1/2 tank. Or you just concede that running the fuel level down low, you have to be on your best behavior and can't do any full send pulls.

It works, but it reduces the streetability of the car.

The other thing at play, that everyone just kinda says "meh" about is the additional electrical load that triple pumps or double pumps with booster are pulling and all that heat that's being soaked into your fuel (especially with return flow from the hot engine bay).

So on a long trip, if you have a typical 2+1 hobb setup, you're drawing like 35-40 amps (without booster) and around 60 amps when you're in boost. So a typical 2 hour drive, when you're banging gears and in and out of boost your system is jumping from 40-60 amps the whole time.

Not only is that hard on the electrical system, it's heat soaking the fuel. Newer components are resistant to chemical attack from E85, but Fore points out (I was impressed) that for typical organic reactions, when you raise the temp 10 degrees C you double the chemical reaction rate. So if you're running brush style pumps, that's more attack of the carbon brushes, or poly components from the ethanol in the E85. Minor concern for sure, but still.

The point is, a lot or most of the fuel systems on the market are basically made to get the car to run on the dyno or the drag strip. They're NOT able to ensure your motor has fuel for other things like long trips or road racing, etc. A lot of guys just say "race car life" and that' s fine for a trailer queen, but if you want a 1000 hp car and you want to be able to drive and use it like it's stock, most of these current fuel system offerings can't do that (or if they do, it comes with risks or drawbacks).

Agreed.... Now how do we fix that properly?

 

[Jackson1320]

I have not. So there is a location to mount both modules? I guess I’ve never noticed.

Yes the tank has a spot on each side

 

[Jackson1320]

Two stock buckets setup as a return style fuel system will supply plenty of fuel. You have the returning fuel dump into the buckets keeping the pumps submerged just like stock. Now sense you have a return style fuel system you are constantly refilling the buckets so you don’t have to worry about the buckets running dry. You may need to modify the buckets to allow more fuel in but that’s easy

 

[Decible]

Agreed.... Now how do we fix that properly?

If Jackson1320 is correct the twin module GT350 return style fuel system might actually be a solid solution. 4 factory 350/500 pumps should supply enough fuel for whatever power you want while still retaining factory buckets for normal driving. An alternator upgrade may be needed but I don’t think a boost-a-pump would be needed. As far as plumbing goes you should be able to Y-block the two modules together for a single feed line.

 

[Basspro302]

Few things.

1) There are several OEM "style" hats on the market now. DIvX, Deatschwerks, Radium, etc.
2) The reasons many/most of the fuel system assemblers and manufacturers recommend a min fuel level is because:

a) The size of an OE style hat/buck isn't sufficient for high hp big volume consumption systems and still presents starvation possibilities.

b) This is where things like a surge tank or other alternatives come into play.

The OE style system features a jet syphon to draw fuel from the passive (passenger) side. Even with improved jets, this transfer from the passive side (even directly into your bucket) is somewhere between 40-80 liter/hour. Enough to keep the pumps wet, but not enough to feed your motor for extended high flow conditions.

If you want to go lower than 1/2 tank or so, and NOT have a considerable risk of starvation under certain conditions, you're going to need to either pump fuel into your OE style bucket OR you're going to need a surge tank.

The track rat crowd has employed numerous other approaches to try to limit or resolve this, fuel/hydra mat, foam, barricades/dividers that prevent fuel spill over to the passive side, etc. Some of them work better than others, but frustratingly none of them ever really eliminate the issue, especially on long sweeping left turns. (or in the event you turn left hard onto a street and then mash, when you present inertia toward the passenger side, fuel is going up and over away from the active bucket.

The only proven solution is a surge tank and a very obscure setup (that I'm attempting now) to pump fuel from the passenger side rather than suck it. (using some lift pumps).

Pumping from the passive side creates it's own issues (like what happens when you're at 1/2 tank and all of it is on the driver's side, can the lift pumps withstand running dry, or must some sort of activation switch be employed, either tied to the fuel level sender or some other float.

Bottom line, there are buckets now that will indeed support pretty much whatever fuel you need (outside of like 2000 hp full on race cars).

The Radium bucket is the only one on the market that can accommodate 2 L5M brushless pumps. All of the buckets will accommodate twin DW 440 pumps which flow a shit ton without a voltage booster and with a voltage booster they'll support just about anything you might dream up (at 80 psi, without boost they'll flow roughly 700 l/h, with a constant 18V booster they'll flow like over 1000 l/h).

However, like surge tanks, brushless setups are expensive and require a driver/control module (part of the reason they can pack so much flow in such a small package is the external controller).

There are buckets that will support whatever you want, but if you're looking to get past the fuel level issue, the bucket won't solve the issue when going way high hp/flow. The bucket is just too small to effectively provide enough reservoir in reserve for extended WOT or max flow and it'll potentially suck that thing dry after just a few seconds.

Pumping from the passenger side is not a surge tank.

Few things.

1) There are several OEM "style" hats on the market now. DIvX, Deatschwerks, Radium, etc.
2) The reasons many/most of the fuel system assemblers and manufacturers recommend a min fuel level is because:

a) The size of an OE style hat/buck isn't sufficient for high hp big volume consumption systems and still presents starvation possibilities.

b) This is where things like a surge tank or other alternatives come into play.

The OE style system features a jet syphon to draw fuel from the passive (passenger) side. Even with improved jets, this transfer from the passive side (even directly into your bucket) is somewhere between 40-80 liter/hour. Enough to keep the pumps wet, but not enough to feed your motor for extended high flow conditions.

If you want to go lower than 1/2 tank or so, and NOT have a considerable risk of starvation under certain conditions, you're going to need to either pump fuel into your OE style bucket OR you're going to need a surge tank.

The track rat crowd has employed numerous other approaches to try to limit or resolve this, fuel/hydra mat, foam, barricades/dividers that prevent fuel spill over to the passive side, etc. Some of them work better than others, but frustratingly none of them ever really eliminate the issue, especially on long sweeping left turns. (or in the event you turn left hard onto a street and then mash, when you present inertia toward the passenger side, fuel is going up and over away from the active bucket.

The only proven solution is a surge tank and a very obscure setup (that I'm attempting now) to pump fuel from the passenger side rather than suck it. (using some lift pumps).

Pumping from the passive side creates it's own issues (like what happens when you're at 1/2 tank and all of it is on the driver's side, can the lift pumps withstand running dry, or must some sort of activation switch be employed, either tied to the fuel level sender or some other float.

Bottom line, there are buckets now that will indeed support pretty much whatever fuel you need (outside of like 2000 hp full on race cars).

The Radium bucket is the only one on the market that can accommodate 2 L5M brushless pumps. All of the buckets will accommodate twin DW 440 pumps which flow a shit ton without a voltage booster and with a voltage booster they'll support just about anything you might dream up (at 80 psi, without boost they'll flow roughly 700 l/h, with a constant 18V booster they'll flow like over 1000 l/h).

However, like surge tanks, brushless setups are expensive and require a driver/control module (part of the reason they can pack so much flow in such a small package is the external controller).

There are buckets that will support whatever you want, but if you're looking to get past the fuel level issue, the bucket won't solve the issue when going way high hp/flow. The bucket is just too small to effectively provide enough reservoir in reserve for extended WOT or max flow and it'll potentially suck that thing dry after just a few seconds.

putting a pump on the other side is not a surge tank.
A surge tank is a separate tank that holds the big fuel pumps and you use the stock in tank pump to feed it.
I guess technically what you said is a surge tank but the fuel can still slosh over.

http://www.radiumauto.com/MPFST-Multi-Pump-Fuel-Surge-Tank-P1565.aspx

That is a proper surge tank

Sponsored