Engine/Transmission (1998.5 - 2002) pumps, lines & whatnot

[csutton7]

I'm one week away from hitting 3yrs on my aeromotive setup--100% gravity feed is the key plus running the power thru a relay--chris

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Yup - "Great stuff, the ends-all fix" this year - next year we learn where the weakness turned out to be - sorta vindicates DC - on a failure-per-thousand basis, maybe the stock LP setup wasn't all that bad after all...



Over 2 years and 27,000 miles now with my Carter pusher pump and otherwise stock setup, no complaints! Who woulda thought it, without larger lines and fancy fittings!

 

[Hohn]

Gary, I think the reason for your success is the combination.



The fact that you run a pusher (and higher FP) would normally, imho, cause undue strain on the VP.



But you also run the restrictive banjos still, so even if you see 22+ on your gauge, you dont have that inside the VP entrance, which helps keep it alive. I think that if you had 22+ inside the VP, it wouldn't last long.



I run lower FP, but the Max flow kit from Wildcat has *drastically* increased the available volume. I'm more concerned about volume than pressure. The increase in FP I saw is due mostly to the head pressure of the pump not dropping pressure at the banjos.



All the Cummins and Bosch reps say that the VP doesn't need high pressure and that it can be damaged by excessive pressure (but they never say what "excessive" is).



Yet we know that VPs fail, and more often than not, they fail mechanically, not electronically. That points to either 1) poor initial machine work), or 2) lack of lubrication.



I can only guess as to why the OEM system is so restrictive. It may have to do with damping the VP pulses back through the delivery system so the LP doesn't see them. Or maybe it has to do with VP cooling, you know. Radiators and cooling systems are designed with some restriction so that the fluid spends enough time near the hot area to absorb some heat.



Maybe the stock system isn't that bad. But I thought that it was bad enough to warrant spending money on the Max Flow system.



I'm really happy with this Wildcat Diesel Max Flow setup. When/if my VP dies, I'm just going to go to a gravity feed setup with some other kind of pump.



jlh

 

[rweis]

FWIW



I was re reading the entire thread, good stuff. A lot of ideas.



I do a RACOR 690 10 micron filter pre lp and a Mallory 4307M bypass regulator post lp set to 12 psi.



I check psi post Mallory and post OEM filter so I can tell if the filter is flowing properly.



With the Mallory 4307M I get 12 psi post bypass regulator and about 11 - 11. 5 post OEM filter which should be the input to the VP.



All with stock lp mounted on the frame by the tank.



The psi stays at 12 unless I am towing my 13k 5er and then on hard acceleration it drops to 11 psi and as soon as it gets to cruise (60 mph) and I get out of the pedal it is back at 12 psi.



This is telling me that with DD2's and a Comp on 1 (vp NOT tapped) the OEM lp has enough flow to hold 12 psi to the VP pulling 13k 5er. It also tells me though that on acceleration the psi drops and maybe the OEM lp is a little undersized flow wise in that situation. Seems like it is right on the border line with my setup for hard acceleration.



I only have 35k so far, but so far so good.



Just FWIW



Bob Weis

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

But you also run the restrictive banjos still, so even if you see 22+ on your gauge, you dont have that inside the VP entrance, which helps keep it alive. I think that if you had 22+ inside the VP, it wouldn't last long.



Hohn, regardless of what is done, mods added, larger lines and fittings, the *VP-44 ITSELF* will ALWAYS be the final restriction! And at reasonable supply PSI or flow, you will STILL only get just so much fuel thru that VP-44, pumps, lines, or otherwise!



If adequate FLOW is present at the inlet to the VP-44, the effect SHOULD be a visible indication of pressure as well - all things being equal. I'll grant you that the one SINGLE mod that might make some difference in *my* psi readigs, which are taken right AT the VP-44, would be a larger fitting at that point to minimize flow loss due to THAT restriction between the VP-44 and my guage connection - but even that is seriously dependent upon the remaining restrictions of the internal passageways of the VP-44 just beyond where the inlet fitting attaches. Seems I recall seeing a picture of that passageway, and it was rather small, which might substantially negate getting too overboard with external line upgrades.



I have recently added a Frantz TP fuel filter to the bypass oil filter I've had for a long time - the fuel filter has reduced my available PSI at the VP-44 by about 3 PSI across the board - I see about 18 PSI at steady cruise, 21 or so at idle, and as low as about 15 under heaviest load when towing - I'm lots more comfortable with these pressures, which are still a bit above what was available with the stock setup as it came from Dodge.



I have no quarrel with installation of all that larger stuff some put on their trucks - some of it IS required with the heavy power upgrades some have also installed - but as I said, the VP-44 itself is tha final restriction - and THAT one will always be there, regardless of what any of us do EXTERNALLY!

 

[Hohn]

Gary, you're right about the VP being the final restriction.



I want to be the ONLY real restriction in my system. With larger lines and fittings, I have ensured that the VP has unfettered access to all the fuel it wants.



Your setup also accomplishes the same thing. But because you are generating higher psi through more restrictive orifices, the pump has to work a little harder (which doesn't matter because you have a pusher). It's less efficient.



I'm content to run the stock LP and filter with the max-flow system. I've got over 11psi WOTH with DD2s and an EZ, so I'm confident that the VP gets plenty of fuel.



Only when my LP craps out will I like at other pumps installed back by the tank, and even then, just because the LP is overpriced compared to a cheapie carter FP for $60.



One thing I have been trying to establish is if I can slow down a bigger pump by reducing the voltage to it. I'd like to run the Aeromotive pump, but it's WAY to much fuel for what I need. If I could slow it down and not have to return huge amounts of fuel to the tank, then I'd be in business.



I think we've establishes that the LP solution may be simpler than we believed...



I'd still consider a FASS/Preporator, but mostly for the air removal, not for a reliable pump; there are much cheaper fixes that will accomplish what we seek.



justin

 

[rweis]

Justin,



Put a RACOR 690 right after the tank before the lp, change to whatever pump you want even if it flows way more than you need, put a MALLORY 4307M after the lp you choose, set the bypass psi to 12 - 14, and bypass the excess back to the tank.



Everything I have seen from Bosch about the fuel supply to the VP is it must be free from water, free from particulates, have a minimum lubricity, and not be an alternative fuel.



I think the little OEM lp placed in the right location so it can push, with a bypass regulator to keep the internal check valve on the OEM lp from failing as well as setting the system pressure for the VP, properly cleaned fuel (RACOR 690 10 micron), properly lubricated fuel (Stanadyne Performance Formula), constantly circulated at the right psi (12 - 14 psi), will yield the low cost functional fuel system we are all after.



Bob Weis

 

[Chipstien]

Here is a thought. Has anyone tried the pusher setup using BOTH as Carters. Since the factory + Carter produces more then is neccesary, why not series two 7 psi Carters.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Here is a thought. Has anyone tried the pusher setup using BOTH as Carters. Since the factory + Carter produces more then is neccesary, why not series two 7 psi Carters.



I'd thought about that myself - but since I already have both a spare LP and pusher, just not motivated to try it - lazy I guess...



I *do* know that the 4600 pusher alone is capable of running the truck, even when towing in the hills, with adequate PSI - wouldn't wanna do it on a permanent basis tho'...

 

[Chipstien]

I am thinking it would be fine. I was going to try two factory LP in paralle but have come to the conclusion that using 2 150 dollar pumps would be kinda dumb.

 

[Hohn]

Agreed. I'd venture to say that just ONE cheapie carter back by the tank would be enough if it was a bottom-feed, sump design like Diesel Innovations has.



Guys, I never had a key question answered. Is there a way that I can take a pump like the A1000 and run it off say, 8 volts instead of 14? Would the pump overheat? I'm curious if there's a way to slow down a killer pump with regulating the snot out of it.



I'd think it more efficient to only pump what you need to begin with, instead of pumping a million gallons and returning 90% of it to the tank.



justin

 

[rweis]

But if you pump excess and you put a filter between the tank and the pump you will filter the tank many times over and the likelyhood of getting crap in the fuel system and causing a problem should be zero.



I run a RACOR 690 with a 10 micron and I change the OEM fuel filter, maybe every 30k.



Along with the Stanadyne, there should not be any of that bio glob stuff, water, particulates, anything to screw up the fuel system.



Bob Weis

 

[Chipstien]

Originally posted by Hohn

Agreed. I'd venture to say that just ONE cheapie carter back by the tank would be enough if it was a bottom-feed, sump design like Diesel Innovations has.



Guys, I never had a key question answered. Is there a way that I can take a pump like the A1000 and run it off say, 8 volts instead of 14? Would the pump overheat? I'm curious if there's a way to slow down a killer pump with regulating the snot out of it.



I'd think it more efficient to only pump what you need to begin with, instead of pumping a million gallons and returning 90% of it to the tank.



justin

It MIGHT work but the problem is you could overheat the pump.

 

[Hohn]

Bob, I like your angle on filtration.



I'd prefer a filter on the bypass (return) line, and then just a modest screen at the pump inlet, like Aeromotive recommends.



jlh

 

[rweis]

A little long... ...



I considered that, but I wanted to get the water and globby stuff out first before it went through any of the lines / pumps.



I was in the USAF in B-52's in SEA. We had a TERRIBLE time with the bio growth in the jet fuel. We burned just about the entire load (300,000 #'s) every flight, but that slimey brown gunk still grew in the tanks and would screw up the fuel control units on the turbines. Each engine (8 of them) burned 2000 - 4000 # / hr minimum so the fuel passages had to be fairly large, but they would still get clogged by the bio growth caused by the water in the tank.



I thought that a filter on the return line it would not get the water and that bio gunk that should NOT get to the VP IF the OEM ff did not catch it.



Either way is more filtration, which is good.



I basically do not trust the OEM ff for water seperation and bio gunk catching. I think it is a water ABSORBER and NOT a water SEPERATOR.



The RACOR is patented to SEPERATE water, you can choose from 2, 10, 30 microns for degree of filtration, it is easy to change, you can take a fuel sample easily, you can periodically drain sediment / water out of the bottom drain (I drain about 4 ounces of fuel once per week (small jelly jar size) and get some particulates and about 2 or 3, 1/2 a BB size water dropplets), when you do a drain of particulates I do not know what happens to the air that replaces the fluid - but I do not have any inconsistancies with starting after a drain. It has 2 inputs and 2 outputs (I think, maybe 3 of each), you can add fuel heaters to it so you are heating the fuel right as it comes out of the tank BEFORE the lp to help NOT sheering the nylon bushing connecting the lp motor to the pump (which seems to be a possible failure point).



The lp gets super clean processed fuel, sends it along to the OEM 10 micron filter (just in case the lp breakes a part or trashes something like the capacitors that broke off) then the fuel is filtered and heated again if needed, then the fuel SHOULD be ready for the VP. Water seperated / filtered by the RACOR at 10 microns, water absorbed / filtered by the OEM ff at 10 microns.



I put a bypass regulator after the lp to set system pressures below the lp check valve opening to eliminate that problem. It also recirculates the bypass back to the tank, so as I use the tank it gets cleaner and cleaner because ther is less and less fuel, and when the tank starts to get empty and more prone to condensation (water) problems the rate of filtration per volume goes up because the tank volume is going down.



Anyway, that's the logic I used. Fire away, and maybe someone has a better idea.



I am also thinking of puting a RACOR where the OEM ff is so I get a second water SEPERATION, but to date has not been a problem as far as I can tell. I have never had a WIF light, and catch the OEM ff drain to see what is in it about once every 2 months or so and have never had any particulates or even a single drop of water yet in 35,000 miles (2 years). The OEM ff bowl has been totally visually (I can't see 10 micron particles) clean.



Bob Weis

 

[Jim Fulmer]

Guys, I never had a key question answered. Is there a way that I can take a pump like the A1000 and run it off say, 8 volts instead of 14? Would the pump overheat? I'm curious if there's a way to slow down a killer pump with regulating the snot out of it.



Call Aeromotive and talk to them about this, they sell a regulator to drop the voltage down for continuous street use..... the A1000 is a good sized pump but not a monster, it will open flow about 150 gal/hr.



Jim

 

[RADdodge]

Bob, I share your point of view on the Racor. I use a 30-micron filter and mounted it (along with a Carter) just ahead of the tank. I like the Racor accessory gauge that ties to the WIF and pressure sensors to sense water or a clogged filter with an audible alarm. Also use a heater. I would like to limit the psi, but am not sure on the best method. Turning off the pusher pump works. I too thought about using the 7 psi Carters in series, but the thought came to me after the purchase of the pusher pump and a spare for the lift pump. So how are you regulating the fuel pressure. Did you tap into the return line or add another?



#ad

 

[rweis]

RADdodge,



I put a Mallory 4307M bypass regulator after the lp on the way to the OEM ff and bypassed it back to the tank burp line (the 3/4" line beside the tank filler line). I wanted to set the system pressure BEFORE it got to the VP.



Then set the Mallory to 12psi using my fp gauge.



The reason I used the Mallory is it has HUGE ports so it will not restrict the fuel.



I used the marine version "M" because it was a tougher bypass regulator.



I set it to 12psi to keep the stock lp check valve closed (they open at 14psi and are a real source of lp failure) AS WELL AS Bosch says to feed the VP44 with 12 - 14 psi, so I chose 12 psi.



I think the 4307M will set from 3 - 12 psi. I wanted it to be as loose as possible and yet give me 12psi ie as little spring tension on the bypass regulator as possible.



I think with a way for any pressure spikes from the VP having a way out through the bypass regulator the fp gauges seem more stable than before. I get a nice smooth 12 psi under all but WOT. At WOT ie pulling my 13k 5er the psi will ease down to 10 - 11 and as soon as I get my foot off the floor comes right back to 12 psi.



I don't do a WIF, pressure drop sensor or heater and probably should do the WIF and pressure drop sensor. Should not need the heater in central florida.



I did the RACOR 690 for the 90 gph flow and the large filter surface.



Nice setup BTW, (I put in a manual shutoff like I see in your pics too)



Bob Weis



All the other obvious reasons of constantly cleaning the fuel, seperating the water, particulate filtration, ease of sampling, etc etc etc

 

[csutton7]

I've now passed 3yrs on my 100% gravity fed system with no failures except for filter changing---chris

 

[jpmutt]

Man do I feel smarter now. I just sat and read this entire thread and my eyes are killing me. I have had several thoughts as I have read through. How many people are using the FASS system? I have heard claims of 140 gph and consistent pressures of 18psi. A local diesel performance shop claims this is the best, cheapest, and easiest fuel system to use to eliminate the transfer pump blues. My truck is basically stock and have replaced three transfer pumps and one injection pump. I am very seriously considering the FASS system. I have kicked around the idea of Holley or other style pump back near the tank for a long time. Long before finding this site.



I have also wondered about the use of a 12 valve style overflow valve in the VP pump. The VP's overflow valve is set at 14psi, the P pump's overflow valve is around 22psi. They are the same size and will fit in either pump. What will happen if a valve from the P pump is used in a VP? Will this benefit in any way or will it cause the VP pump to overheat?



Anyway, there is a lot of useful info on this thread and I appreciate everyones efforts. I would like to hear back from some of the original people that established this thread.

Thanks, Jared