2nd Gen Non-Engine/Transmission Fuel Tank lines ASAP

[Grinder1]

OK TDR miracle workers, here's the problem. I need my truck ASAP for a job that just came in. Had decided to finally replace fuel sender and/or float assembly on my '95 2500 4x4 and just as I disabled rig the phone rang. I'm a very patient mechanic but the #@$%! supply and return lines would not come off the tank sender module. I tried everything to get those damn QD 2 tab connectors to release which they would not . Finally had to cut both poly lines 4 inches from module, dropped tank, and of course the fittings come off piece of cake BECAUSE YOU COULD ACTUALLY GET AT THEM!! Would like to replace poly lines with quality rubber hose. I can splice into the metal lines at the frame rail no big deal but... ... ... ... . does anyone make a 3/8" hose barb to female QD adaptor? Or I could attach hose directley to the plastic male QD stubs on the module but not sure how good the seal would be. Don't want to suck any air on that supply line. A parts person thought that someone made a hose mender kit for QD hose fittings but not sure if that included poly hose. What are your thoughts on this "situation" members?

Also... ... ... ... does anyone have a line on a better than OEM float/sender/pickup/return module or the seperate parts?

 

[CSnyder]

just use rubber fuel line and new hose clamps. Ive done it numerous times and they never leak.

 

[Grinder1]

OK sounds good. Connect new rubber hoses directly to sender module and at the metal lines at frame, eliminating the QD fittings and OEM poly line altogether. Did you flare the metal lines? Did you single or double clamp new hoses?

 

[rweis]

There are a couple of threads about replacing the fuel level sender / float system. I have a thread about it and have been running it for 9 months (10k miles) with zero problems. I have an '02. There is a KEY measurement that HAS to be right to get the correct replacement fuel level sender. Read the thread. I think I still have 1 PF26 left. Connects right up to DC CANBUS system.



I did the DrawStraw II and love it. Some do not like it because of the lack of a tank sump. You have to decide. The type of terrain you normally drive in is a factor. Are you willing to fill up at 1/4 tank or do you want to go to the "low fuel" light? Of course you get rid of the "canister filter" and the too small fuel line that has several bends inside of the cannister. But ... . you decide.



AN-6 lines are good. Some do AN-8 to the VP44 and AN-6 returns. Lots of threads about fuel cooling (some are mine).



Good luck



Bob Weis



Rubber hose and hose clamps work just fine. The fittings are for "ease of disconnect" and assembly line build up I think. Engineers recommend a "hose clamp"? for assembly line assembly?, right.

 

[CSnyder]

OK sounds good. Connect new rubber hoses directly to sender module and at the metal lines at frame, eliminating the QD fittings and OEM poly line altogether. Did you flare the metal lines? Did you single or double clamp new hoses?

Yep I eliminate the poly lines completely. I once tried changing the poly lines without a box on and I fought them for 45 minutes before throwing them in the garbage. I only use one clamp on each end as long as they are heavy clamps and I never flare the metal lines. You can cut the poly lines off easily with a utility knife.

 

[Grinder1]

Thanks for the info guys. Gonna go with the rubber hose and clamp method. Simple elegance, sure don't see that much anymore. BTW I replaced the classic 5/16" return line at the rear of engine 9, that's right, 9 years ago. Used standard Gates fuel line and it's holding up just fine. The Dodge engineer that called out the spec for that factory crap hose should be keel hauled.

 

[KevinSmith]

Keelhauling (from Dutch kielhalen; "to drag along the keel") was a severe form of corporal punishment meted out to sailors at sea.



The sailor was tied to a rope that looped beneath the vessel, thrown overboard on one side of the ship, and dragged under the ship's keel to the other side. As the hull was often covered in barnacles and other marine growth, this could result in lacerations and other injuries. This generally happened if the offender was pulled quickly. If pulled slowly, his weight might lower him sufficiently to miss the barnacles but might result in his drowning. If the rope snapped, the Captain could conclude that the punishment was not done properly and order it carried out again.



Keelhauling was legally permitted as a punishment in the Dutch Navy. The earliest official mention of keelhauling is a Dutch ordinance of 1560: the practice was not formally abolished until 1853. While not an official punishment, it was reportedly used by some British Royal Navy and merchant marine captains, and has become strongly associated with pirate lore.

 

[PC12Driver]

Keelhauling (from Dutch kielhalen; "to drag along the keel") was a severe form of corporal punishment meted out to sailors at sea.

Thanks, Cliff!

#ad


:-laf