Sponsored

Fuel systems with an OEM style bucket

Basspro302

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2021
Threads
9
Messages
282
Reaction score
162
Location
Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2019 mustang gt
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

 
OP
OP

bankyf

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Threads
49
Messages
667
Reaction score
408
Location
Fredericksburg, Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2020 Mustang GT Premium PP1
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.
Theoretically there are already twin pump setups that could supply 1000+hp on E. Why is it that no tuner will touch that? Is there some other down side to return that I/we are missing, some reason that it won't work at higher HP? I wouldn't be opposed to spending the money for a dual brushless setup if I had some solid reassurance that it was a viable option.
 

Decible

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
914
Reaction score
471
Location
Georgia
First Name
Sam
Vehicle(s)
2023 Mach 1 HP
Theoretically there are already twin pump setups that could supply 1000+hp on E. Why is it that no tuner will touch that? Is there some other down side to return that I/we are missing, some reason that it won't work at higher HP? I wouldn't be opposed to spending the money for a dual brushless setup if I had some solid reassurance that it was a viable option.
I was looking at a brushless system. The plus to a brushless system is they don’t require the voltage that a brushed pump does to produce the same output. Which means the pumps don’t heat the fuel nearly as much. They do require some extra electronics because the ECU can’t control the pumps because the car wasn’t equipped with it from the factory. Still a possibility for me. But I think the 4 pump twin module would be easier and give the same result.
 

Gregory347

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Threads
12
Messages
221
Reaction score
115
Location
LI, NY
First Name
Greg
Vehicle(s)
2019 GT A10 PP1, 1987 Buick Grand National, 1985 Mustang
I like this idea as well but Lund won’t play ball with E85 unless the car has a return style fuel system. What tuners will? Not looking for big power just the benefits of the fuel. 750-800 wheel is all I want.
 

Angrey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Threads
92
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
2,392
Location
Coral Gables
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT350
Pumping from the passenger side is not a surge tank.

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
I know what a surgw tank is. No one said they're the same. However, pumping from the passive side into the active saddle is essentially the same principle as a surge tank. Both use lift pumps to keep the primary pumps surrounded and fed with a proper reservoir of fuel. The surge tank is better in that it completely eliminates fuel migration away from the primaries, but obviously means having the additional expense of a secondary vessel and given the typical limitations of most street cars, involves the tank to be installed somewhere inside the firewall, along with plumbing.

I clearly said you can eliminate the problem with either approach
 

Sponsored

Angrey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Threads
92
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
2,392
Location
Coral Gables
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT350
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.
Still won't eliminate the issues of starvation. Even OEM and modified N/A 350s have the issue of power fade when coming out of long left turns. With high hp, you still run the risk of a dry bucket if the fuel is low because the OEM hanger has only a very small amount of fuel in reserve
 

Decible

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
914
Reaction score
471
Location
Georgia
First Name
Sam
Vehicle(s)
2023 Mach 1 HP
Still won't eliminate the issues of starvation. Even OEM and modified N/A 350s have the issue of power fade when coming out of long left turns. With high hp, you still run the risk of a dry bucket if the fuel is low because the OEM hanger has only a very small amount of fuel in reserve
I think the OP was trying to address high HP car with stock drivability. Not having to keep the tank half full ect. If I was going to do a dedicated track car then someone mentioned a surge tank. I’d probably go that way. I’m like the OP and am more interested in creating a daily driver with close to 1K to the wheel on pump/e85 with an occasional track day.
 

Decible

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Threads
51
Messages
914
Reaction score
471
Location
Georgia
First Name
Sam
Vehicle(s)
2023 Mach 1 HP
I like this idea as well but Lund won’t play ball with E85 unless the car has a return style fuel system. What tuners will? Not looking for big power just the benefits of the fuel. 750-800 wheel is all I want.
This system would be plumbed as a return style.
 

WildHorse

N/A or GO HOME
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Threads
216
Messages
8,462
Reaction score
6,533
Location
Home World: CLASSIFIED
First Name
ⓇⒾⒸⓀⓎ ⓈⓅⒶⓃⒾⓈⒽ
Vehicle(s)
'17 S550
Vehicle Showcase
1
4 factory 350/500 pumps should supply enough fuel for whatever power you want while still retaining factory buckets for normal driving.
The factory GT fuel pump is good for 600 hp.
 

Basspro302

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2021
Threads
9
Messages
282
Reaction score
162
Location
Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2019 mustang gt
I know what a surgw tank is. No one said they're the same. However, pumping from the passive side into the active saddle is essentially the same principle as a surge tank. Both use lift pumps to keep the primary pumps surrounded and fed with a proper reservoir of fuel. The surge tank is better in that it completely eliminates fuel migration away from the primaries, but obviously means having the additional expense of a secondary vessel and given the typical limitations of most street cars, involves the tank to be installed somewhere inside the firewall, along with plumbing.

I clearly said you can eliminate the problem with either approach
You weren’t clear, don’t get mad lol.
The venturi system works great, Depending on the demand there really isn’t any risk of emptying the bucket. The pump still draws fuel from the bottom of the tank. The advantage is to be able to run low levels and keep the pump cool (not wot)

Obviously don’t run wot at a 1/4 tank or long sweeping turns.

The radium bucket might be the best solution with a proper return line.
 

Sponsored

Cory S

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Threads
47
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
3,697
Location
Bradford, NH
First Name
Cory
Vehicle(s)
2016 Mustang GT Premium

beefcake

Well-Known Member
Diamond Sponsor
Joined
Oct 18, 2014
Threads
1,416
Messages
12,181
Reaction score
4,661
Location
Bethel
Vehicle(s)
2018 Ford Mustang
run a fore system, stage the pumps. golden.... no reason to do anything else, best quality and customer service out there, we have been running their system for about 10 years now.

you can't ask for anything better.

i run 1300 wheel, daily drive the car. and never worried about fuel, i fill up around 1/4 tank
 

Angrey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Threads
92
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
2,392
Location
Coral Gables
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT350
You weren’t clear, don’t get mad lol.
The venturi system works great, Depending on the demand there really isn’t any risk of emptying the bucket. The pump still draws fuel from the bottom of the tank. The advantage is to be able to run low levels and keep the pump cool (not wot)

Obviously don’t run wot at a 1/4 tank or long sweeping turns.

The radium bucket might be the best solution with a proper return line.
The OEM bucket is tiny and the syphon system is barely more than a trickle. For mortal power levels it's probably okay, but for something that could potentially be drinking 700+ liters/hour, it still presents a possibility that under the right conditions, the bucket can be depleted and the pumps starved. (hence why most of the fuel manufacturers and tuners recommend never mashing on less than 1/2 tank).

You have 2 sending units and they average to yield your fuel level. If you're at a 1/4 tank reading on the fuel gauge (1/4 on each side) and you turn hard at all to the left (or take any sort of left leaning curve) the fuel can and does rush up and over to the passenger side. That means you still have 1/4 tank, but most of it's on the non pump side.

The only place you can find ANY data anywhere about the syphon system flow is from Radium and they've measured it to be around 40 l/h. So while the pumps are pushing fuel, they're expending some of their effort to suck from the other side (like a small leak in the pumps by the way) and combined with a tiny fuel bucket, it won't take long at all (couple seconds) to suck the bucket nearly dry if the fuel is mostly on the passenger side.

Again, even at N/A power levels, GT350 guys have well documented (on Trackmustangsonline) the frustrations about power loss coming out of longer left turns. At those power levels, the motor just chokes a bit.

At big boy power levels, with boost and IAT's, etc, it's risking bad outcomes with the motor (again, why most fuel system companies say, don't go low on the fuel level).

The only way to fully resolve that is to have a reservoir surrounding the pumps that can withstand a full WOT send for several seconds and/or actively PUMP the fuel to the reservoir as replacement. That's where a surge tank comes in or some lift pumps instead of a puny siphon system.
 

Angrey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Threads
92
Messages
2,349
Reaction score
2,392
Location
Coral Gables
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT350
The OEM bucket is tiny and the syphon system is barely more than a trickle. For mortal power levels it's probably okay, but for something that could potentially be drinking 700+ liters/hour, it still presents a possibility that under the right conditions, the bucket can be depleted and the pumps starved. (hence why most of the fuel manufacturers and tuners recommend never mashing on less than 1/2 tank).

You have 2 sending units and they average to yield your fuel level. If you're at a 1/4 tank reading on the fuel gauge (1/4 on each side) and you turn hard at all to the left (or take any sort of left leaning curve) the fuel can and does rush up and over to the passenger side. That means you still have 1/4 tank, but most of it's on the non pump side.

The only place you can find ANY data anywhere about the syphon system flow is from Radium and they've measured it to be around 40 l/h. So while the pumps are pushing fuel, they're expending some of their effort to suck from the other side (like a small leak in the pumps by the way) and combined with a tiny fuel bucket, it won't take long at all (couple seconds) to suck the bucket nearly dry if the fuel is mostly on the passenger side.

Again, even at N/A power levels, GT350 guys have well documented (on Trackmustangsonline) the frustrations about power loss coming out of longer left turns. At those power levels, the motor just chokes a bit.

At big boy power levels, with boost and IAT's, etc, it's risking bad outcomes with the motor (again, why most fuel system companies say, don't go low on the fuel level).

The only way to fully resolve that is to have a reservoir surrounding the pumps that can withstand a full WOT send for several seconds and/or actively PUMP the fuel to the reservoir as replacement. That's where a surge tank comes in or some lift pumps instead of a puny siphon system.
By the way, after discussing these types of issues with everyone from Radium to Aeromotive to Deatschwerks to Fuellab, it became clear to me that the IRS and saddle bag fuel tank setup isn't just a problem for mustangs. Speaking with Aeromotive, they were hesitant to put any R/D or investment into in tank solutions because they run into this very same issue with Corvette guys. They're largely a "go external and be done with it" approach (either in line or surge tank).
 

Basspro302

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2021
Threads
9
Messages
282
Reaction score
162
Location
Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2019 mustang gt
The OEM bucket is tiny and the syphon system is barely more than a trickle. For mortal power levels it's probably okay, but for something that could potentially be drinking 700+ liters/hour, it still presents a possibility that under the right conditions, the bucket can be depleted and the pumps starved. (hence why most of the fuel manufacturers and tuners recommend never mashing on less than 1/2 tank).

You have 2 sending units and they average to yield your fuel level. If you're at a 1/4 tank reading on the fuel gauge (1/4 on each side) and you turn hard at all to the left (or take any sort of left leaning curve) the fuel can and does rush up and over to the passenger side. That means you still have 1/4 tank, but most of it's on the non pump side.

The only place you can find ANY data anywhere about the syphon system flow is from Radium and they've measured it to be around 40 l/h. So while the pumps are pushing fuel, they're expending some of their effort to suck from the other side (like a small leak in the pumps by the way) and combined with a tiny fuel bucket, it won't take long at all (couple seconds) to suck the bucket nearly dry if the fuel is mostly on the passenger side.

Again, even at N/A power levels, GT350 guys have well documented (on Trackmustangsonline) the frustrations about power loss coming out of longer left turns. At those power levels, the motor just chokes a bit.

At big boy power levels, with boost and IAT's, etc, it's risking bad outcomes with the motor (again, why most fuel system companies say, don't go low on the fuel level).

The only way to fully resolve that is to have a reservoir surrounding the pumps that can withstand a full WOT send for several seconds and/or actively PUMP the fuel to the reservoir as replacement. That's where a surge tank comes in or some lift pumps instead of a puny siphon system.
Explain to me how the pump draws fuel from the bucket?
Sponsored

 
Last edited:
 




Top