Engine/Transmission (1998.5 - 2002) FINALLY!!!! Some one puts an end to Carter!!

[rweis]

FLynes - Well, the high end units generally also filter etc, but the Walbro, AirTex, etc seem to be able to pump the fuel very very adequately. They do require a bypass back to the tank for the excess (which adds $ for the bypass valve), but I think that design (seperate psi setting) is way better than an internal design pump bypass that may or may not be settable or be effective (as was the Carter design).



I think the large volume pumps, psi set by bypass valves not associated with the pump, filtering by filters not associated with the pump, are making their way into the mainstream.



Short answer - Yes.



Bob Weis



An interesting read is "Pump School" - an education in fluid handling about what pumps are designed for which applications. The Carter was doomed from the start. Also an interesting read is the DC intank setup and design problems with it on the Glacier Diesel Power site, tech articles, 4th article.

 

[FLynes]

Thanks for the links, Bob. That was really good info.

 

[rweis]

An aside -



Now that we (TDR) have finally figuered out the 2nd gens (DrawStraws, inline filters, inline pumps, bypass valves set psi, bypasses back to the tank, and can replace a VP44 (if we have to) we can buy 2nd gens fairly cheap.



The general population does not know what we do and they know only "it failed after 50k miles". A 2nd gen low mileage (because the VP44 fails about every 50k) + ~ $2000 in fuel system parts and you have a good truck.



Turning the first of many 100,000 miles, and loving it!



Bob Weis

 

[JR2]

Wow just read the whole thread..... lift pumps, the new "auto transmission"



Some of you need to step back from the computer and go get some fresh air. You all get too excited about a post. What happened to the the good old days when a guy like Mav1 could post up about something he found and not take a a bunch of ($*#(*$ about it. I don't care if you have a fass or an Air dog or a Rasp or a walbro and what you think about it. I clicked on the thread to read about the new pump. Its the hard time you gave Mav1 about specs and stuff that have made me move on to other diesel boards more than here.



Remember post count does not mean squat if all you do is post the same thing over and over.



By the way, I run a stock carter on the frame rail, 13 psi at idle and 8-10 at WOT. MACH4's and Drag comp... still on first VP44 at 60K miles. If this new pump really puts out 19si I will run it, and laugh at all you guys with $700 lift pumps.



Sorry for the rant, but I feel better now.



Mav1, thanks for the lead on the new stock replacement pump.

 

[kglenn]

Mav1, I also would like to thank you for your lead for a replacement for the pos that comes on our trucks. I think some of us have lost touch with the guy who has to use his truck in as an everyday driver. I live where these trucks are used to work, not as a hobby or a hot rod. When people buy these trucks, they should not have to worry about these kinds of problems. When you keep up normal maintenance according to the manuel why should you have to worry about being dead on the side of the road? You can get mad at me for saying the truth but not all of us have alot of extra money to spend on something we shouldn't have to address in the first place! And don't tell me buy a new one so it will be under warranty, all they will say is it had contaminated fuel. I am not a dodge hater, I have owned four of them in all and two of them now. I keep up with filter changes and general maint. and have only replaced one VP44 and two delivery pumps and consider myself lucky, but as I said before, we shouldn't have these worries to start with, so when you act like some of you did when someone has found an option for a STOCK REPLACEMENT PUMP it just hits me wrong. Again, thanks for the information for me and some more of us who are not going to spend rediculas amounts of money on over priced fuel pumps that people are still having problems with.

 

[John - K5AWO]

MAV1, again thanks for you posts on this pump.

As a couple of others have stated, I am in the camp of "it is a daily driver for work", and not a play toy. I do not spend a lot of money for "useless" options that make it a play truck and not a working truck.

My truck still has the OEM lift pump and it seems to be doing fine. There are 3 more OEM lift pumps under the back seat for me to use should they ever be needed. They were given to me by my son who found them in a lost spot and thought they needed a good home. So, dear ole dad here probably will never need to buy another lift pump for as long as I am able to drive.

But, that don't mean I am not interested in a better replacement providing it is cost effective. And the FASS and others are not cost effective to me. That's JMO of course and each of us are entitled to our opinions.

But, to bad mouth some one for trying to take the time and effort to make a good post is not called for and not appreciated either.

Keep up the good work MAV1. I appreciate it...

 

[Ramzilla]

Thank you, MAV1...

If anyone becomes aware of an Airtex introduction of a model for the relocated configuration (or more news re the same), please post!

 

[RJWEST]

Questions, ( may be in post, didn't see it )

Is the Airtex a suction pump, IE Does not have to be located below tank like Holly and other vane type pumps require ?

( I would think not based on location it was designed for, BUT
still want to be sure )

Is it restrictive, Ie: Can the VP44 pull fuel through the Airtex if
it is not running ?

 

[Ramzilla]

Is it restrictive, Ie: Can the VP44 pull fuel through the Airtex if

it is not running ?

Are ANY of the the pumps not restrictive?

 

[SnoKing]

Why would it not be better for a failed pump to just cause the motor to die, rather than the VP44 sucking a small amount of fuel to keep it running while you destroy the Injection Pump for lack of enough fuel flow?????



BTW, I replaced my original LP shortly after replacing my VP44 at 52K, because one today is went from 15. 5 at idle to 14. 5. Just did a 7K RV trip and see 15-15. 5 at idle and 11-12 at WOT climbing 7-8 grades at 19. 5K combine weight. This is with Geno's/Vulcan relocate, Geno's tapped bango at the outlet of the filter (for fuel pressure gauge) and self drilled out bango/scharder at the inlet to the VP44.



So in 6. 5 years and 63000 miles, I do not see the problem!



SNOKING

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Are ANY of the the pumps not restrictive?

The info I repost below was just posted in another related thread as well - it fits here, in response to the above comment/question, since at least visually, the "new" pump under discussion here appears to be based upon a Walbro:

That is a good point. The question is will the failed Walbro totally block the flow or only partially block the flow. If it totally blocks flow then the check valves may not be needed. If flow is partially blocked there may be pressure backflow. I think I'll be on the safe side and use the check valves.

On my own "blow test", I was unable to get any flow thru a stopped Walbro 392, and would assume it to be unsafe to expect any such flow under stopped or failed Walbro situations - that was why I wouldn't even consider installing one without some form of bypass. USUALLY, the Carters will pass at least SOME fuel flow thru them when not running - but that too is a gamble - and the reason I originally started installing automatic fuel flow bypasses around my pumps.



For those who are not familiar with my current setup:



#ad




I have now obtained another new Walbro 392, and will replace the old OEM Carter seen above that is installed in it's relocated position in my fuel flow after the Walbro I now have installed, where my Carter pusher pump used to be.



My own Carter pumps, the OEM, and the Carter pusher I had installed, both operated flawlessly for over 50K miles, but the Walbro so far has functioned well enough, long enough, that I feel comfortable with it, and instead of just leaving the other recently acquired Walbro on the shelf as an offline backup, I'll pull the remaining OEM Carter, and install the second Walbro there where it will be quickly accessible and available for operational backup - I paid for it, so might as well install it and have it ready to go if needed!



In my case, the pumps are in series, and switching from one to the other is a simple matter of connecting the power lead from one to the other as desired - normally the Walbro is engaged, and simply pumps fuel both thru and around the inactive Carter further down the line. It is well evident that a SINGLE Walbro, installed and functioning properly, is fully capable of providing FAR more than enough fuel flow for all but the most extreme power mods that we see installed in our trucks - they have been tested on seriously modded trucks as high as about 800 HP as I recall, with NO fuel flow issues.



SO, in my own opinion and usage, flow from seriesed pumps, normally only activating one at a time should be sufficient. But what I *will* do, is install additional wiring and a switch that will instantly allow selection from one Walbro to the other from the driver's seat - or BOTH simultaneously.



WHY?



Because the primary remaining threat to proper fuel flow is a clogged fuel filter or other obstruction that one pump alone can't overcome - in that case, the ADDITIVE flow and PSI of the 2 pumps combined may very well keep me moving on down the road until such obstruction can be corrected.



In my case, I have an added Frantz sub-micron fuel filter in my system - it provides added restriction to fuel flow even under the best of conditions - and a bad tank of fuel or gelling fuel could potentially benefit from increasing fuel flow and PSI on demand - that can more easily happen with seriesed pumps than paralleled ones.



Much of the above occasionally come under fire from guys who criticise the 24 valve engine - and resent the need or recommendation of add-on "fixes" to the OEM fuel system. Yeah, if you aren't comfortable with the use of tools, and crawling around under a vehicle (it's my HOBBY, and I actually ENJOY these sort of activities - but that's just me! :-laf), it can be a pain - but actually, guys like me and Bob - and many others have already done the testing and research - and now relativel inexpensive complete kits are readily available to do what we have already tested and done.



The actual cost of providing the increased protection with setups like ours is little more than that of a spare tire - and provides the same sort of emergency protection - it's really not that big a deal, and CERTAINLY not reason to scratch the 24 valve engines of as consideration for purchase. I have used my own in RV towing situations all over this USA even BEFORE many of the current mods were done - and I'd start out across the USA again heavily loaded in a heartbeat - with absolutely NO concerns!

 

[wlowe]

Why would it not be better for a failed pump to just cause the motor to die, rather than the VP44 sucking a small amount of fuel to keep it running while you destroy the Injection Pump for lack of enough fuel flow?????



SNOKING

I think the essence of your question is what is harder on the VP44, running it dry or running it with restricted flow. I would assume that Cummins thinks that restricted flow is better since they now incorporate a bypass in their campaign lift pumps. Just my opinion.

 

[PRout]

In my case, I have an added Frantz sub-micron fuel filter in my system

So, basically, this is conditioning the fuel while you drive. . By having the regulated bypass next to the VP, it is constantly circulating the overpressured/unused fuel back to the tank, after it has been "sub-micron" filtered by the frantz. Seems to be a very similar concept to the bypass oil filtering, only for fuel instead. I'm really liking this benefit. We're talking removing some very small particles in the fuel (which is going to keep the entire fuel system almost as clean as new) and any water that was missed by the water separators should be stopped by the frantz as well. Another benefit of this is it is nice to be able to "visually" inspect the TP element when removed from the canister. That in itself tells you a lot about your system.

Actually this whole post (or series of them) by Gary and others have reflected upon a lot of thought and experience and IMO could help a lot of 2nd gen readers if they pay close attention. - Thanks.

The only downside I found about adding the frantz in the fuel supply to the VP was you lose the ability for the VP to "pull its own fuel" from the tank if the lift pump quits or hiccups. That is why I removed mine. But by adding the redundant lift pumps, it seems THAT risk has been greatly minimized.

 

[MAV1]

flow through bypass comments

Fwiw, here is my take on the so called flow thru port, supposedly incorporated in the latest Carter revised fuel pumps.
It is common knowledge that the Carter manufactured lift pump is prone to failures of many and diverse kinds. Given that Cummins is contractually bound to use Carter lift pumps for our trucks, and since Carter obviously has done nothing to address the pos pump. it would make sense for Cummins to want a pass through in the lift/pump and keep the VP44 going.
Now on the other hand, let's say we have a manufacturer that has done the R&D on the 24v lift pump debacle and has produced a far better pump. One that is designed for more reliability and less frequent replacements. Why then would a manufacturer put a bypass in a pump that is far better manufactured, designed and produced!? Seems to me that if a bypass is necessary, then that's the same as saying that pump is pos and is going to fail.
Nowhere in the motoring world, engines and public use vehicles has there been any manufactured in redundancy for any system, much less the fuel system. The way I'm wrapped, I'm goin to lean toward the system and fuel pump that keeps as close to stock as possible. I am not concerned about whether the new AirTex pump has a bypass. I'm going to count on it as being a superior product as compared to the oe Carter lift pump as stated on their website. So far, the Airtex pump I installed on the frame rail and adapted to the Vulcan Big Line Kit has been flawless. I like the rule of K. I. S. S.
I know there are many on this forum whom have seen fit to add a secondary backup pump to their system and this post in no way criticizes that. Whatever blows your skirt up. I want my truck to be as it should have been from the manufacturer in the first place. How many other vehicles have you purchased and had to re-engineer the fuel system. I think nada! These trucks should be no different. For those needing gph for their mega-bombed fuel burner, I say thank goodness something is available. For those of us wanting a stock replacement that performs, functions and delivers as advertised, I'm going to run it until experience tells me otherwise, and I doubt that will happen. I don't care to try and reinvent the wheel.

The only true knowledge is experience, everything else is just information.

Maverick

 

[RJWEST]

MAV1 , First Thanks for the post, genrated a lot of good info.

I have a different opinion on the LP bypass... .

For me and engine to ' Quit ' is not an option
( my assumption being that a LP which does not bypass fuel will starve the IP completly, causing an immediate eng shutdown )

I have owned another Make Diesel that was prone to intermittent'
eng Quits , Scary & dangerous ,


I did test a Holly Blue for Bypass function ( lose wire on pump +12v wire ) Truck ran fine ( drove about 3 miles )
I did have a Fuel Pressure gage that did not have a 'stop'
at the zero point,This allowed the gage to read below zero,
With the Holly Blue not running. there was approximately 7 PSI suction on gage ( estimate by distance below zero )

 

[BK]

MAV1, as I posted early on, and I'll say it again, thanks for the post on the new product.



About the new Carter LP...



If I understand it correctly, there was a NTSB recall for the pumps because " a school bus may get caught on the RR tracks".

So the retro fit / campaign kit included a low pressure warning light to let the driver know the LP is on it's way out, and the pass through so it would die trying to get off the road.



So the new LP design has little to do with us, since Cummins has no warranty agreement with Dodge on our engines. So - so far the recall hasn't extended to Dodge. I guess it will take someone getting stuck on the RR tracks with a TDR and being struck by a train, to date Dodge could careless.



For the legal eagles that know more than I about the recall (then I've read), I plead for your forgiveness. Above is how I understand the "facts" I've read 2nd hand. Of course if I'm incorrect, please do chime in. TIA.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

MAV1 , First Thanks for the post, genrated a lot of good info.



I have a different opinion on the LP bypass... .



For me and engine to ' Quit ' is not an option

( my assumption being that a LP which does not bypass fuel will starve the IP completly, causing an immediate eng shutdown )



I have owned another Make Diesel that was prone to intermittent'

eng Quits , Scary & dangerous ,





I did test a Holly Blue for Bypass function ( lose wire on pump +12v wire ) Truck ran fine ( drove about 3 miles )

I did have a Fuel Pressure gage that did not have a 'stop'

at the zero point,This allowed the gage to read below zero,

With the Holly Blue not running. there was approximately 7 PSI suction on gage ( estimate by distance below zero )

YUP, exactly!

Seems to me that if a bypass is necessary, then that's the same as saying that pump is pos and is going to fail.

If we truly believed the fuel system in our trucks is infallible, especially with these latest "wonder pumps", why do we still keep and recommend gauges and low PSI alarms?



I have had about *3* loss of fuel flow situations where it was NOT the pump at all that failed - one was gelled fuel, the other2 were lost electrical contact that stopped one of the pumps - I'd have been left walking without system mods that kept me moving on down the road.



Bypass valves are NOT an apology for a poorly designed or installed pump, but rather common sense insurance against problems that is both easily and inexpensively added to the system.

The only true knowledge is experience, everything else is just information.

YUP - I agree - and that's EXACTLY why my setup is designed the way it is!

 

[MAV1]

I don't recall saying anything was infallible. To my knowledge, there is no such thing. I do recall saying I'm tired of the pos Carter and it's well documented, ill designed, poor production caused failures. When I started this thread, at no time did I condemn or criticize others for their choice in their preferred lift pump. Nor have I ever hijacked or *******ized anyone else's thread as has been done to this one. It's amazing how some people think they are the only one's that know anything and jump all over some one for simply expressing another option. Somewhere I missed where someone appointed you as God Gary. To the best of my knowledge, he hasn't died and no one elected you to the post! Your tripe is pathetic and I feel sorry for you. If you spent a 10th as much time making a difference in your grandkids lives as you do blowing your own trumpet and having a love affair with your truck, they'd have the best grandpa in the whole world.
I have never trashed your input, which is rarely contributory instead of more self worship, and I have never criticized your walbro. And since we're on the subject of walbro and your incorrect insistence that the Airtex is a takeoff of the walbro, let's get this straight; the walbro was not ever in anyway developed and designed for the second gen. 24v Dodge/Cummins. The walbro is incorporated in gas engine systems requiring high fuel pressures, somewhere around 60-70psi to operate sequential port fuel injected engines, which require high fuel pressure at the injectors. Free enterprise being what it is, someone came up with the idea of adapting the walbro to our trucks. Thus Glacier diesel was born, and I tip my hat to them. Kinda wish I had thought it up. In order to use a walbro, a bypass is required to return fuel to the tank because when the pressure is regulated down, volume goes up and there has to be somewhere for the access to go. I elected to hold out for something cost effective and requiring less complication. While I'm sure the walbro does a fine job, I don't care to complicate my truck any more than it already is. Your sidekick parrot is so quick to point out that the walbro pump can be had for $100, while at the same time, states other things are needed to make it viable, i. e. regulator, bypass and return lines. Give me a break!
The Airtex E7153 newly introduced pump was designed and developed expressly for our application. It requires nothing but simply removing the present engine mounted pump and installing in same location with supplied hardware. And for those that want to relocate it, a simple adapter on the outlet side which screws onto the banjo fitting and in turn, accepts a AN fitting on the other end. And it doesn't cost an arm and a leg! You are loath to allow others to have there own desires and ideas, while trumpeting yourself like a maniac. What a life!

One last thing, you took a cheap shot at me about aggressive posting and supposedly inviting your sh*^. OH REALLY. If someone told you to take a flying leap off of a mountain, ya gonna do that too?! Obviously you have no prudence. I hope one day to be a big enough man that I can pray for one such as you, self justifying by pot shotting and ridiculing others. Right now I feel such a contemptible, self worshiping, pompous, arrogant pathetic excuse for a human being ought to have to pay for others to put up with your crap. I'm sure, being the pencil di*^ person you are, you will no doubt have to have the last word. That in itself is proof enough of the above.

Have a nice holiday,

Cal Roberts a. k. a. MAV1

P. S. I'm going to follow JR2's lead and use forums where there is less discrimination and more maturity. Thanks for the kind words to those that have come out and recognized and thanked me for the contribution I tried to make.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Thanks for reviving this thread so you can add more of your comprehensive mature and adult, congenial comments - all good reading and much appreciated... :-laf:-laf

 

[rweis]

My point was the gear pumps seem to be working in our application and non gear pumps do not seem to be working in our application for a whole host of reasons.



However, take the course that is best for you and see where it leads.



The very best outcome will be you prove the gear pump statement wrong and we all will have more options which is better for everyone.



Try it, test it, see where it leads, let the rest of the TDR population learn from your results good or bad.



Bob Weis

aka "sidekick parrot"