88 Wagonman
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Boise, ID
Just for clarification I obviously know that all cooling systems are "pressurized" I was just referring to the inferance that it was the old closed system.
99 fuel rail to 89 fuel setup
- Thread starter Weasel
- Start date
- Location
- Billings MT/Rapid City SD
Dude your an ass. I miss-typed and meant to write, "the same reason your..." And it doesn't matter which system you have it's still pressurized.
Oh and some reading on vapor lock
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_lock
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-vapor-lock.htm
Seem to mention something about pressurized systems.
Think it's related to this dumb law called pv=rt effects of which are mentioned here:
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Boiling+temperature
http://www.csun.edu/~jeloranta/CHEM352L/experiment8.pdf
But as you so eloquently stated I don't know WTF I"m talking about. So will you please leave this thread and let me rig my fuel rail in my own "out my rear end way"
hubs97xj
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Fort Wayne, IN
Just throwing this out here for you guys to chew on...
Which models have a TSB for heat soak issues? Which models also have a single line (supply at the rail, return back by the tank)? Does a single supply with no return from the manifold really prevent heatsoak? Isn't the fuel rail bolted to a giant heat sink, sitting directly above a bigger heat source?
Which models have a TSB for heat soak issues? Which models also have a single line (supply at the rail, return back by the tank)? Does a single supply with no return from the manifold really prevent heatsoak? Isn't the fuel rail bolted to a giant heat sink, sitting directly above a bigger heat source?
Talyn
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Radford, Communistwealth of Virginia
2000+ have the heat soak issues... they also have the return less system, but that started prior to 2000. The heat soak issue is a combination of the newer intake and exhaust manifolds, which seem to dump heat onto the #3 injector. Perhaps the return less system isn't helping that issue either.
Also, the heat soak issue is after the vehicle sits for a period of time after being driven. (there is also a cold start issue, but thats not related to heat soak). The fuel pump is off, so I doubt it is under constant pressure, and after a while it will lose pressure.
winterbeater
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Royal Oak, Michigan
Sorry, the hot fuel can percolate in the fuel rail when it is dead headed there. Injectors need liquid gas up there not vapor. It does not get hot enough to percolate in the tank. The post return line systems are the ones with the heat soak problems. They went to returnless system to reduce cost and the liabilitiy of more possible points of leakage. This was NOT a performance improvement. Think about it a little more.
88 Wagonman
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Boise, ID
Your right, I did come off as a bit of an ass, I just don't like people making assumptions. I was only able to reply to what you actually typed and not what you meant to type.
Regarding the links you posted, Wiki doesn't even mention the pressure as being a factor at all, and the second one mentions it only briefly. It is my understanding that if you created the same conditions as the carb vehicles (fuel pump inline and not at the starting point, attached to hot engine, higher in the system) and then raised the pressure, you would still likely have the same problem. It is my belief that pressure is not a significant factor in "this" particular application.
hubs97xj
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Fort Wayne, IN
I'd had a few beers and didn't want to call him out on the single line system when I wasn't sure I was right. Anyway, that's addressed.
Can you use the entire fuel system from a 99 (in-tank filter/pump/gauge sender, lines, etc) on the 88? I'd guess the earlier models used a different pump/filter/sender setup which might complicate things, but personally I'd rather jerry rig a gauge sender than a fuel line next to the exhaust manifold.
Can you use the entire fuel system from a 99 (in-tank filter/pump/gauge sender, lines, etc) on the 88? I'd guess the earlier models used a different pump/filter/sender setup which might complicate things, but personally I'd rather jerry rig a gauge sender than a fuel line next to the exhaust manifold.
Slip Kid
That'll buff right out
- Location
- A cornfield in IL
The fuel systems operate at different pressures, so you would need to find compatible fuel injectors that flowed the proper rate at the higher pressure. Pressure goes up once throughout the years, and flow rate is increased several times. It was so long ago that I took that hydraulics class that I couldn't tell you how to figure how flow rate would change at different pressures.
Seems like it'd be easier to use the pump and lines that's there, adapt a fuel rail and use what injectors you already have. The hard part is not supposed to be fuel, it's supposed to be TPS adaptation.
Seems like it'd be easier to use the pump and lines that's there, adapt a fuel rail and use what injectors you already have. The hard part is not supposed to be fuel, it's supposed to be TPS adaptation.
winterbeater
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Royal Oak, Michigan
Seems like you would have to change the tank too. '88 module goes in from the front without dropping the tank. '99 goes in from the top with the tank dropped. Not having to drop the tank for this is a big advantage for future maintenance.
hubs97xj
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Fort Wayne, IN
Motor swap, fuel system swap- changing the tank doesn't strike me as much of an undertaking by comparison. As far as maintenance- if I have to drop the tank every 100K-150K, I could live with that, I think.
winterbeater
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Royal Oak, Michigan
But why would you want too? :dunno:
hubs97xj
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Fort Wayne, IN
I wouldn't put myself in the situation to have to make the decision... but I'd rather play around with the fuel sender wiring than having to cobble together a fuel system. That's just me though.