Another fire, this time with non-K-Jet swap

[Dangermouse]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DeLorean-DMC-12-Base-Coupe-2-Door/122042870059?_trksid=p2047675.c100010.m2109&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%2 6asc%3D37582%26meid%3Df27e75e2dabf4caa8059d0ca7df6 1e74%26pid%3D100010%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D9%26sd%3D1420 51996359

Don't think I have seen this car before, but it had a Chevy short block transplant that then suffered an engine fire, again from a faulty fuel line.

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/O9QAAOSwYSlXg~3f/s-l1600.jpg

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/5qIAAOSwanRXg~3j/s-l1600.jpg

[Nicholas R]

Is this Darryl Tinnerstet's car? I seem to recall him having a supercharged Chevy V6.

I also remember hearing about a guy named Duke who I believe had the same swap but with a Porsche transaxle.

Major bummer; hate to see a loss like this.

[content22207_2]

Is that a fuel pressure regulator sitting on top of the air filter housing? If so, that is why I argue against leaving a high pressure (extremely high pressure in Delorean's case -- 75+ PSI versus ~50 PSI in EFI) pump in the tank on carb conversions.

Carburetor on this car is an Edelbrock (Carter AFB). Fuel inlet is right next to the distributor (top left -- hoses on the front are ported vacuum and PCV). If this car had any sort of fuel leak at the inlet, it would drip or spray onto the distributor (GM distributors are in the back of the engine, basically same place as a PRV). If this car had a high pressure fuel leak, it would spray lots of fuel onto the distributor. Remember that fuel spraying onto the coil pack is what set Darryl Givens' car on fire (3.0 EFI conversion). I've had carb cleaner flash over while looking for vacuum leaks when it hits the distributor. Any flammable substance on a 20,000 plus volt device is a potential problem (GM HEI is closer to 40,000 volts).

For comparison: 2100 carburetors I use have fuel inlet in front (adjacent to the water pump). I had a low pressure fuel leak on a 2100 once (I pull the hose on & off several times a month test driving carbs, stressing it's clamped end). Leak dripped drops on fuel onto the intake manifold, where it promptly evaporated, so I didn't even know it was leaking until I saw it at the next carb swap. No telling how long it had been dripping before that.

No fuel leak is good, but a 6 PSI fuel leak is less bad than a 75+ PSI fuel leak.

For any owner considering a carb conversion, I recommend replacing the high pressure fuel pump in the tank with a low pressure fuel pump specifically designed for carburetion. I usually provide a universal carrier that sits in a stock tank boot and accepts any pump with 1/8 NPT threads (I also provide an electromagnet low pressure pump that emulates a mechanical pump diaphragm, not a rotary vane pump).

Bill Robertson
#5939

[81dmc]

:shock:
Wow, another fire...

IMHO, this car is perfect for a DMCH honeycomb underbody swap.

[81dmc]

Listing was removed for some reason.

[Dangermouse]

well, that's odd

[81dmc]

well, that's odd
I know.

Also the listing didn't have too much information... That's a little fishy to me.

[FABombjoy]

Is that a fuel pressure regulator sitting on top of the air filter housing?
Looks like an inline fuel pressure gauge.

[DMCVegas]

Is that a fuel pressure regulator sitting on top of the air filter housing? If so, that is why I argue against leaving a high pressure (extremely high pressure in Delorean's case -- 75+ PSI versus ~50 PSI in EFI) pump in the tank on carb conversions.

It doesn't matter. It's a carbureted system, AND it still caught fire which is now physical proof that your argument about how carbureted vehicles are somehow less prone to engine fires is positively false.



Is this Darryl Tinnerstet's car? I seem to recall him having a supercharged Chevy V6.

I also remember hearing about a guy named Duke who I believe had the same swap but with a Porsche transaxle.

Major bummer; hate to see a loss like this.

Duke had done a conversion with a 4.3L block as well, but it was naturally aspirated. Darryl's car DID have the same chrome trim around the engine compartment, and the exact same supercharger, air cleaner assembly, water pipes, caps, filters, and braided hoses.

Last time I saw it was in Montgomery, TX when the owner was a temporary neighbor of mine. The only thing the new owner did was install some LEDs around the top of the engine bay.

But I gotta tell you, with all of the similarities, I'm pretty certain this is the same exact car.

http://www.delorean-parts.com/delorean-parts-gallery/blwnawy2.jpg

Can we get an updated link on the eBay auction? It's not working for me.

[Mark D]

The listing was taken down a couple of hours ago and I haven't seen a new listing show up yet in my search. Did anyone save any of the other photos before it went down?

[Nicholas R]

It doesn't matter. It's a carbureted system, AND it still caught fire which is now physical proof that your argument about how carbureted vehicles are somehow less prone to engine fires is positively false.




Duke had done a conversion with a 4.3L block as well, but it was naturally aspirated. Darryl's car DID have the same chrome trim around the engine compartment, and the exact same supercharger, air cleaner assembly, water pipes, caps, filters, and braided hoses.

Last time I saw it was in Montgomery, TX when the owner was a temporary neighbor of mine. The only thing the new owner did was install some LEDs around the top of the engine bay.

But I gotta tell you, with all of the similarities, I'm pretty certain this is the same exact car.

***photo removed for size - see original post***

Can we get an updated link on the eBay auction? It's not working for me.

Before it was removed, the listing explicitly mentioned how the mirrors were added to the engine bay. You can even still see them in the photos in the original post. I cant imagine the chances are very high that two DeLoreans out there have the 4.3L supercharged engine and the mirrored engine bay. I think it's safe to say that it is the car in question.

Such a shame; great craftsmanship.

[Dangermouse]

VIN 02542, Bowling Green VA

[DMCVegas]

VIN 02542, Bowling Green VA

Yes, that is Darryl's old car. The LED Projectors on the steering column match the ones in the engine compartment I saw, the fog lights look the same, and the VIN Registry shows it's last known location as Montgomery, Texas.

http://www.citizenkidd.com/DMC/pages/vinview_disp.asp?start=2542

[Drive Stainless]

Yes, that is Darryl's old car. The LED Projectors on the steering column match the ones in the engine compartment I saw, the fog lights look the same, and the VIN Registry shows it's last known location as Montgomery, Texas.

http://www.citizenkidd.com/DMC/pages/vinview_disp.asp?start=2542

How sad. I remember looking at photos of that car approximately 15 years ago and thinking how sweet it was.

[Dangermouse]

Yes, that is Darryl's old car. The LED Projectors on the steering column match the ones in the engine compartment I saw,

Is that what they are? I thought they were cameras, for some reason.

[DMCVegas]

Is that what they are? I thought they were cameras, for some reason.

No, they were LED Projectors. They were all around the engine compartment as well, and if memory serves they and the wires were held up using silicone caulk to "glue" them into place. He was very proud of them. Nice guy...up until he found out I was using his open Wi-Fi. Then I kept on seeing him talking to the same local cop that eventually tried to intimidate me to take my DeLorean away from me. Between that and the tweaker palace upstairs, I split from that place as soon as possible and got my car out of there when I knew the cop wasn't on duty, and made a beeline for the county line.

Anyhow, yes, they're LEDs. Damn shame about that car. It had a beautiful exhaust! First time I ever came into contact with it, I heard it before I saw it. Very unique note. You knew it wasn't just any regular car before it came twisting down the road as it echoed through the pines.

[SamHill]

It doesn't matter. It's a carbureted system, AND it still caught fire which is now physical proof that your argument about how carbureted vehicles are somehow less prone to engine fires is positively false.

Flawless reasoning, old chap. You could have been a scientist.
44501

[Drive Stainless]

Flawless reasoning, old chap. You could have been a scientist.
44501

He almost got it. If Bill had stated that carbureted vehicles were NOT prone to vehicle fires, then DMCVegas would have won the Internet, and we would all be rejoicing in his majesty.

[Mark D]

Thanks for posting up the additional pictures... It's a damn shame to see this thing go up in flames. I was expecting the damage to the interior to be much worse...it's hard to say for sure but this one might be able to be restored if somone was looking for an expensive project.

[Dangermouse]

It's back up

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DeLorean-DMC-12-BASE-2-door-coupe-/122043621028?forcerrptr=true&hash=item1c6a5ddea4:g:xTQAAOSw0kNXhRbd&item=122043621028#ht_196wt_1054

[DMCVegas]

He almost got it. If Bill had stated that carbureted vehicles were NOT prone to vehicle fires, then DMCVegas would have won the Internet, and we would all be rejoicing in his majesty.

Actually he has indeed grossly insinuated that exact kind of statement.

http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?13269-Carb-Conversion-quot-Kits-quot-ETA-March-April-2016&p=197883&viewfull=1#post197883

[SamHill]

Wow. And I'd be willing to bet that this was WITH a fire extinguisher handy.

[SamHill]

Actually he has indeed grossly insinuated that exact kind of statement.

http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?13269-Carb-Conversion-quot-Kits-quot-ETA-March-April-2016&p=197883&viewfull=1#post197883

He didn't say immune. He said it hadn't yet happened to his knowledge.

Wherever you have fuel + fire you may get that which I do not desire. And the fiberglass promotes so much melted nougat so very quickly, it is of primary concern to all owners to have an unbiased discussion of ways to prevent or halt something that we are all susceptible to. The risk is real. #Deloreanfiresmatter

P.S.: Condolences to the owner.

[DMCVegas]

Now one thing that I DO know is that 5-Speed transmission has one of Darryl's "bullet-proof" input shaft couplers on it. Don't know if the fire may have damaged it though. If not, that's a turn-key transmission. Though for the price asking, it's also on par with an Esprit's gearbox as well.

[content22207_2]

Looks like an inline fuel pressure gauge.

No reason to put an inline fuel pressure gauge on a car with a proper low pressure carburetion pump.

I bet this car had a high pressure pump in the tank, a regulator in the engine compartment, and they were using the inline gauge to set the regulator. I've argued against doing that in another thread. Makes no sense to jamb all that pressure against an intentional obstruction -- basically like jambing a fire hose against a brick wall to let only a trickle out onto your tomato plants. Just put a proper low pressure pump in the tank and be done with it.

As stated, I've had a low pressure fuel leak on my own car. It dripped, not sprayed.

At 6 PSI, a carbureted fuel system is about 1/3 cooling system pressure -- not much at all.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[OverlandMan]

BAT posted it on their site, though it appears to just be a link to the eBay auction. The eBay link works as of the time of this post.

http://bringatrailer.com/2016/07/12/not-so-stainless-fire-damaged-1981-delorean-dmc-12/

[gulwng3]

So far, two people have figured out that the left front fender and the hood with gas flap are worth nearly $5000 alone. If I just had more ambition...

Andy

[Michael]

So far, two people have figured out that the left front fender and the hood with gas flap are worth nearly $5000 alone. If I just had more ambition...

Andy

Unfortunately there is not a whole lot of (desirable) parts left other than those 2 panels. When you consider the labor of geting the car back home, time spent on removal and selling, there is just not that much money to be made there even at 5k purchase.

[David T]

Hard to say it burned because it has a carb. That fact doesn't necessarily lead to that conclusion. What probably is of greater concern is how the carb conversion was done, what kind of hoses, fittings and seals. Another factor is how resistant the parts were to the newer fuels containing Ethanol. You say the conversion was done 15 years ago, the hoses and seals could have deteriorated a lot in that time. All it can take is a bit of dirt in the float valve of the carb and then you get fuel all over the top of the hot motor. Conversely, on a fuel injected motor the fuel is under much higher pressures and a minor leak can turn into a blow torch. So the bottom line is either can burn well. Fuel leaks usually give some warning, a smell, a puddle, something, before you get the big fire. Ignoring the warning signs can lead to a mess. Same for electrical fires.

[OverlandMan]

So far, two people have figured out that the left front fender and the hood with gas flap are worth nearly $5000 alone. If I just had more ambition...

Andy

I would think the frame might have some value, though not sure how hacked it became with the engine conversion. The binnacle looks OK. Maybe the doors aren't warped? The RF fender may not be as valuable as the LF but still value there. Point being, at the current price up to a point, this could still be lucrative.

I would consider it if I had the room just for some body panels and odds and ends, assuming all the panels including the hood are in good shape.

[81dmc]

Hard to say it burned because it has a carb. That fact doesn't necessarily lead to that conclusion. What probably is of greater concern is how the carb conversion was done, what kind of hoses, fittings and seals. Another factor is how resistant the parts were to the newer fuels containing Ethanol.

Agreed!

Here's what the seller stated...


This item was rebuilt on a rebuilt/rebuildable title in Washington State. It was built as a show car with an upgraded engine to a Chevy short block V6 engine with super charger. The car had mirrored panels installed in the engine compartment with lighting for presentation at shows. The car recently caught on fire while on a cruise through town and sustained damage to the engine compartment, rear of the vehicle, seats, doors. I will post pictures to try and accurately show as much of the damage as I can. The car was running fine prior to the fire and we think the fire was started from a ruptured fuel line that had been recently installed.

So, it comes down to this. Don't go el cheapo on fuel lines! For example, even $50 for a high pressure line is definitely cheaper than a $5,000+ mistake!

[Citizen]

I would think the frame might have some value, though not sure how hacked it became with the engine conversion. The binnacle looks OK. Maybe the doors aren't warped? The RF fender may not be as valuable as the LF but still value there. Point being, at the current price up to a point, this could still be lucrative.

I would consider it if I had the room just for some body panels and odds and ends, assuming all the panels including the hood are in good shape.

No one's mentioned the wheels and tires yet. Could be worth $600 and $250 respectively.

...

[81dmc]

No one's mentioned the wheels and tires yet. Could be worth $600 and $250 respectively.

...

Don't forget things like the pedal box too!

[Jonathan]

I saw that too about there being recent fuel line work. So it wasn't necessarily carb vs K-Jet and it wasn't necessarily cheap fuel lines vs "good ones". At least there doesn't seem to be enough info to say that one way or the other. It does serve as a reminder that new problems often come from whatever you worked on most recently. Sometimes a nuisance issue, other times much worse.

I don't know what the story was to require the recent fuel line work, but some things on our cars are better left alone than proactively replaced. Like I said, no idea if the fuel lines on this one were damaged or were fine and this was just an upgrade. Anytime you get working on a system doing replacements that are aimed at avoiding future problems, you can land yourself a current problem instead sometimes. Not by the notion of replacing things in advance all on its own, more to do with the potential for making a mistake of some kind or a failure in a new part that wasn't expected.

~

Just another comment on kinks or bends in the fuel lines... the fuel lines aren't "rubber" and they aren't "stainless" either. Whatever the outside material is, it is just there for exterior protection from rubbing, heat, or getting cut into by something against it. The real line material the fuel actual travels through is plastic, if I'm not mistaken. It's what is inside that outer protection and is the portion that can get kinked, like David said. And you won't easily see the kink either because it's hidden under the outer layer.

Same concept for stainless braided brake lines and so to for that weaved looking hose you can get for the water line going up to the back of your toilet. All of that is just the exterior protection and the important material is what's underneath.

~

I'd say there is a pile of parts worth well over $5,000 in that car as it sits. What Michael was getting at though, I think, is that his time isn't worth $0.00/hour and neither is yours. So all the time and effort (and real costs) of trailering it somewhere and having somewhere to store it, and then the slow and tedious process of taking parts off, advertising them, boxing them up and shipping them and cashing in on them is really going to eat into your profits especially if you add up all the costs associated with your time.

If you already have a large storage spot for this and can get it there cheaply AND you don't end up feeling rushed or hurried to tear down this parts car, then yea, this would be a nice one to have off to the side. It would be more of a benefit to the community or a fun learning experience for someone than it would be a good investment from purely a dollars and cents perspective.

[steve.s]

hi Guys...Steve here from the UK

i am considering a bid...but to rebuild, i certainly do not believe in breaking any classic that is save-able.

i have rebuilt one other so know what's needed. May be able to source a rear pontoon. over here we have a few choices of prv to get a cheap enough engine.

so judging if it is cheap enough...obviously with shipping. Advantage is our import duty would be very small. but have to make sure it can be registered here with a salvage title.

and yes fuel line connections were always a weak point. after having mine burst above the tank, and fuel gushing over the whole tank and cover plate i installed lines with racing line connections (which were impossible to come apart). For carbs surely the HP tank pump would be just way to high.......

my worst job had to be the fuel accumulator....lovely petrol running down your arms!.

Steve
ex owner vin 1621

[Dangermouse]

That would be great if it could be saved.

Let us know what you find out about the title.

[content22207_2]

For carbs surely the HP tank pump would be just way to high.......

Obviously you can not push much more than 6 PSI into a carburetor otherwise the needle valve won't be able to shut off fuel inlet when the bowl is full.

An option is to use a high pressure fuel pump and a regulator to reduce fuel pressure (massively reduce -- less than 10%) before it enters the carburetor. I recommend against doing that, but not all owners feel the same way.

I strongly suspect this car had a high pressure pump in the tank and a regulator in the engine compartment -- not a setup I recommend (and not a setup I provide with my own carb conversions).

Device sitting on the air filter housing appears to be either a regulator or an inline pressure gauge used to set a regulator.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[SamHill]

Speaking of fuel pumps: I have been using an Airtex E84070 with a Bill set up since April 2013. I honestly had to look up the pressure, I had no idea. It's mounted on the Bill supplied blank plate which covered the former charcoal canister. DMCMW installed their gas gauge and sealed up the tank. No vapor lock. Not a recommendation of any sort but seems solid so far. It also gets good reviews, for what it's worth.

[content22207_2]

5 PSI according to Airtex.

I wouldn't worry about vapor lock. It is highly overrated. Most people don't even know what it is. Really only ever a problem on engine mounted pumps in low flow situations while the engine is abnormally hot, such as stuck idling in a Los Angeles summertime traffic jam. Even then it is rare.

Side wall of the engine compartment is hot, but not hot enough to vaporize gasoline between the tank and your pump. It is of course physically impossible to vaporize between your pump and the carb (that is why vapor lock can not happen on cars with tank mounted pumps).

Bill Robertson
#5939

[dustybarn]

Obviously you can not push much more than 6 PSI into a carburetor otherwise the needle valve won't be able to shut off fuel inlet when the bowl is full.

An option is to use a high pressure fuel pump and a regulator to reduce fuel pressure (massively reduce -- less than 10%) before it enters the carburetor. I recommend against doing that, but not all owners feel the same way.

I strongly suspect this car had a high pressure pump in the tank and a regulator in the engine compartment -- not a setup I recommend (and not a setup I provide with my own carb conversions).

Device sitting on the air filter housing appears to be either a regulator or an inline pressure gauge used to set a regulator.

Bill Robertson
#5939

Before I converted to the Airtex mechanical pump, I used the original Bosch pump. I installed a Holley bypass regulator, though, that worked exactly like a FI regulator, popping off at the pressure setpoint and recirculating excess fuel back to the tank. I believe I set it to 4 psi for the Solex carbs. Operating this way, the pump is only allowed to make 4 psi and higher pressure never occurs anywhere in the system. I think this is a better solution than a shutoff-style regulator, but I think a mechanical pump or a low-pressure electric pump intended for carburetors is even better still.

[SS Spoiler]

Another thing to think about is the heat given off by
the pump constantly running getting the fuel hot. I had a
sump pump that got disconnected and when I checked it
the water was boiling just from the heat of the motor....

[David T]

Another thing to think about is the heat given off by
the pump constantly running getting the fuel hot. I had a
sump pump that got disconnected and when I checked it
the water was boiling just from the heat of the motor....

In a properly designed carb set-up you would have a low pressure/high volume pump pumping to either a pressure regulator or a fixed orifice dumping back to the fuel tank. Probably one transfer pump in the tank and another outside maintaining 4-5 lbs pressure. That provides enough flow to the motor and keeps the fuel under enough pressure to prevent vapor lock. The high flow keeps the heat from building up fast. There should be a filter on the pick-up in the tank to prevent any dirt large enough to damage the pumps from getting to them and after the first pump a second filter to take out the very fine dirt under pressure. Even with a perfect system, once the float valve in the carb gets stuck (from dirt or any other reason like the pressure regulator fails and the pressure gets too high) the carb will spew fuel all over the top of the top of the hot motor.

[SamHill]

I happen to run two filters: one before the pump and one after. The one after is the see through plastic styles just for proof that the fuel is actually getting to the carb. Don't know the efficacy, just know that it works for now. The question I would have is whether having two filters slows down the fuel/reduces pressure to the carb. In my mind it would, but maybe that's all right anyway, since things are running well lately. Second question is what interval these should be changed.

[content22207_2]

In a properly designed carb set-up you would have a low pressure/high volume pump pumping to either a pressure regulator or a fixed orifice dumping back to the fuel tank.

Nonsense. I have never seen a factory carbureted setup that recirculated its fuel. From the Model T onwards it has always been a one way trip from the tank to the carburetor.

Somebody might rig up an aftermarket recirculating system in his own driveway, but from the factory they have always been one way.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[content22207_2]

Another thing to think about is the heat given off by
the pump constantly running getting the fuel hot. I had a
sump pump that got disconnected and when I checked it
the water was boiling just from the heat of the motor....

Dave McKeen did some experimentation. He found that for a stock DeLorean the greatest source of fuel tank heat was recirculation back from the engine.

That said, heat from an engine alone typically isn't sufficient to ignite gasoline. That's why we have spark plugs. There seems to be a misconception that gasoline spilled onto a normally hot intake manifold will spontaneously combust. That is ridiculous -- any engine with centralized fuel delivery (carburetor, throttle body, etc) passes atomized fuel through its normally hot intake manifold hundreds-thousands of times every minute (~4,800 times in PRV's case). Fuel spilled onto a normally hot intake manifold generally evaporates, not burst into flame. It's usually the distributor or spark plugs/wires that sets spilled fuel on fire.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[dn010]

Nonsense. I have never seen a factory carbureted setup that recirculated its fuel. From the Model T onwards it has always been a one way trip from the tank to the carburetor.


I had a 66 Cadillac that had a return line from the glass fuel filter going back to the tank only it was specific to A/C cars only; if it didn't have A/C- it didn't have a return line. Same with my 57 Cadillac.

[content22207_2]

Ignition temperature of gasoline is 150-180 degrees higher than melting temperature of most rubber and electrical wire jackets (500 degrees versus 320-350 degrees). If your engine is running hot enough to auto-ignite gasoline (uncompressed) you have far bigger problems -- on a PRV, all the O rings will already be gone.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[Soundkillr]

I had a 66 Cadillac that had a return line from the glass fuel filter going back to the tank only it was specific to A/C cars only; if it didn't have A/C- it didn't have a return line. Same with my 57 Cadillac.

Toyota did fuel return lines for multiple models for many many years. I have a return line on my 75 celica.

[content22207_2]

Ford never used return fuel lines on its carbureted vehicles -- not even on the most successful single model vehicles of all time (Model T and F series trucks). I am more than willing to follow Ford's lead.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[content22207_2]

FWIW: Low pressure electric fuel pumps I use with my carb conversions only draw 1.4 amps.

(Mechanical fuel pump I use on my own car draws zero amps).

Bill Robertson
#5939

[Soundkillr]

Go ahead... But that doesn't mean it was not done.


Ford never used return fuel lines on its carbureted vehicles -- not even on the most successful single model vehicles of all time (Model T and F series trucks). I am more than willing to follow Ford's lead.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[content22207_2]

If you want to run a return line with your carburetor go ahead, but you will definitely be in the minority (and you will be creating several potential problems IMHO -- I do not recommend such a configuration at all).

Volkswagen Beetle/Bug -- second largest selling vehicle of all time -- only had one fuel line, which is particularly pertinent because its front tank/rear engine configuration matches DeLorean.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[Soundkillr]

Bill, I am speaking about vehicles that came factory with a return line. Obviously several engineers found it important. Now whether you would run one on a delorean set up is up to you. To simply say no car brand from the factory ever ran a return line is an inaccurate statement.

[content22207_2]

This is how nearly all gasoline powered vehicles did their fuel lines for a majority of motoring history:

44534

It's a vetted design that has worked well for more than a century. Personally I see no reason to use anything different (relocating the pump from the engine to the tank is a minor change -- just from one end of the frame line to the other).

(Any DeLorean owner who wants to use a traditional engine mounted mechanical pump in lieu of a low pressure electric pump in the tank has that option. I use Airtex #1436, but there are others that will bolt right up to a PRV).

Bill Robertson
#5939

[David T]

This is how nearly all gasoline powered vehicles did their fuel lines for a majority of motoring history:

44534

It's a vetted design that has worked well for more than a century. Personally I see no reason to use anything different (relocating the pump from the engine to the tank is a minor change -- just from one end of the frame line to the other).

(Any DeLorean owner who wants to use a traditional engine mounted mechanical pump in lieu of a low pressure electric pump in the tank has that option. I use Airtex #1436, but there are others that will bolt right up to a PRV).

Bill Robertson
#5939

Over the years there were sporadic attempts at using a fuel return line. I know for a fact on 67-73 Dodge products they used an orifice to restrict fuel return. It was a fuel filter with 3 ports. One in, one out, and 1 (with the orifice) return to the tank. Just because you don't know about it (or like it) doesn't mean return lines were never used. In the late 70's early 80's to improve efficiency they tried to run the motors hotter and hotter. Some cars had horrible vapor lock problems and many cars used some form of pressurization and return lines to try to keep the fuel from boiling. On some cars that did not have return, once the car was parked and shut off the pressure would rise so high it would overpower the float valve, push into the carb, overflow and the carb would catch fire.On some cars the carb got so hot they had to add insulating spacers to try to keep the carb from boiling the fuel. Holley had a carb with plastic metering units. Very common for them to melt and deform causing all kinds of problems. Once computers got reliable enough they were able to finally replace carbs with electronic fuel injection. Just in time too, carbs could not provide the fuel efficiency and reduced emissions that electronic injection systems can. Enough about carbs, they are a technology that has been surpassed, like vacuum tubes.

[Ron]

I am more than willing to follow Ford's lead.

Bill Robertson
#5939
Ford produced how many vehicles without a return line this century?

Ford hasn't produced a carbureted vehicle for how long now?

:headscratch:

[Soundkillr]

:smackbum:
:biggrin: