Fuel line question

[Lee_in_KC]

On that holley instruction sheet, below no. 4 after the warning , it says to use a coarse mesh type filter before the pump & a high quality filter after ,coarse mesh = low restriction. be my guess ?? dave

Ooops! I missed that. Well, based on the flow I was getting when I changed out my pump, that Fram filter isn't very restrictive. 'Course, maybe the reason my first pump failed was because it had to pull through that filter. Oh well, that's hot-roddin'!

 

[Johnny]

Here is what I'm running on my car. It is a Fram unit.

Jim

Is that fuel filter a reusable filter, or do you need to get a new one everytime you change it? How often do you clean or change? My tank will feed from the bottom, so I'm sure I should have a filter like that and also one before the carb.

Johnny

 

[putz]

Is that fuel filter a reusable filter, or do you need to get a new one everytime you change it? How often do you clean or change? My tank will feed from the bottom, so I'm sure I should have a filter like that and also one before the carb.

Johnny

summit racing

 

[Johnny]

Thanks. I believe I'll get one of those puppies. Does anyone run steel braided hose all the way from tank to carb?

 

[Wild Mango]

I can understand you situation,Lee, but I can very easily turn my flex line upward as quickly as it is disconnected, thereby avoiding the siphon effect. As long as my line outlet is higher than the outlet on the tank the is no siphoning effect.

Jim

IMHO a fuel shut off as close to the tank as practical is a safety device the same as battery switch. I always make the fuel and battery shut off easy to find and easy to get to. Ditto for a tip valve on the tank breather as well. JM2CW

 

[Mike]

Aren't the needle and seat assembly or the fuel filter the most restricting factors?

Good point. A fuel system can only move as much fuel as the smallest restriction will allow. Check-ball style pressure regulators are also another tight restriction.

Does anyone run steel braided hose all the way from tank to carb?

Only those who live in palaces, on streets paved with gold. :winkn: (Oh dear, I wonder how many people are going to be offended by that bit of humor?) There's no reason to not run braided hose all the way, other than the obvious cost involved.

One thing to keep in mind, when considering large diameter fuel lines is the actual weight of the fuel column within the line. There is a point of diminishing return. You can actually get a line so large that the weight of the fuel in the line can stall forward fuel motion on acceleration. Anyone ever notice the fuel cells mounted up front in the Pro Stock and Pro Mod cars? You're never going to get a T to accelerate at the same rate, but it is a reminder that bigger is not always better.

 

[Ted Brown]

Mike, you wrote... You're never going to get a T to accelerate at the same rate, but it is a reminder that bigger is not always better. If you think this is true, you have never owned a good running T Bucket

 

[sstock]

This was the dialog I was hoping to get. Great discussion and I learned a different perspective.
Thanks,
Steve

 

[Gerry]

Does anyone run steel braided hose all the way from tank to carb?

That will be me then.

I am using EFI not a carb, which is running at 70plus PSI. Also the fuel lines are inside the body not on the chassis. So for safety I ran from the small reserve tank to the EFI and back to the bypass and tank return all in SS braided hose. The cost of the line was not too much, its the fittings that add up to a bunch of bucks.
gerry

 

[Mike]

If you think this is true, you have never owned a good running T Bucket

But you have, right? Ted, you might get your pals down at the donut shop to believe that line, but I know better.

I don't just think what I said is true, I know it is true. Tell you what I'll do - you tune your T-Bucket up, take it to the drag strip of your choice and if you can put a time slip in my hand to prove me wrong, I'll kiss your ass at the public place of your choosing. I'll also pay a photographer to record the moment and the image will be posted on the front page of this Web site until the Second Coming. We both know those blown gassers you built would out-run your T-Bucket all day long, and even they would suck mud at trying accelerate like today's Pro Stockers.

Just so you'll know what you're up against, the Pro Stock low qualifier at Pomona had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.991 second
330 foot - 2.758
660 foot - 4.225 at 168.22 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.489
1,320 foot - 6.553 at 211.69 MPH

The low qualifer at Gainesville had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.985 second
330 foot - 2.734
660 foot - 4.189 at 169.47 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.440
1,320 foot - 6.495 at 213.47 MPH

The low qualifier at Las Vegas had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.997 second
330 foot - 2.800
660 foot - 4.307 at 163.65 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.603
1,320 foot - 6.695 at 206.51 MPH

At altitude, Mike's car was still under 1 second at the 60 foot clock.

The low qualifier at Concord had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.981 second
330 foot - 2.752
660 foot - 4.225 at 167.16 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.494
1,320 foot - 6.562 at 210.97 MPH

Ted, this is 2011, not 1968. The V-6 in the dragster makes over 640 HP (measured on a dyno, not guessed at or calculated with pencil and paper) and the car only weighs 1350 lbs. That car can only run 1.030 60 foot times, 2.920 330 foot times and 4.50 660 foot times. How heavy is your T-Bucket? And how little horsepower does it make? And you want me to believe that a good running T-Bucket can accelerate faster than that? Ain't gonna happen. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not in this lifetime.

Just out of curiosity, were ever able to get one of those blown gassers to run 163 MPH at the finish line? Mike Edwards was running that fast at 660 feet in Vegas. And look at the conditions - 83° F air temperature, 19% relative humidity, barometer at 27.62 inches, which calculates to a corrected density altitude of 4,645 feet. What was your best ET and MPH from one of those blower cars, Ted? And what kind of weather conditions did it take to run that fast?

I stand by what I said. You are n-e-v-e-r going to get your T to accelerate like a Pro Stock car. And my offer also stands. Your ass kissed by yours truly, the day you prove me wrong.

 

[Rick]

But you have, right? Ted, you might get your pals down at the donut shop to believe that line, but I know better.

I don't just think what I said is true, I know it is true. Tell you what I'll do - you tune your T-Bucket up, take it to the drag strip of your choice and if you can put a time slip in my hand to prove me wrong, I'll kiss your ass at the public place of your choosing. I'll also pay a photographer to record the moment and the image will be posted on the front page of this Web site until the Second Coming. We both know those blown gassers you built would out-run your T-Bucket all day long, and even they would suck mud at trying accelerate like today's Pro Stockers.

Just so you'll know what you're up against, the Pro Stock low qualifier at Pomona had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.991 second
330 foot - 2.758
660 foot - 4.225 at 168.22 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.489
1,320 foot - 6.553 at 211.69 MPH

The low qualifer at Gainesville had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.985 second
330 foot - 2.734
660 foot - 4.189 at 169.47 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.440
1,320 foot - 6.495 at 213.47 MPH

The low qualifier at Las Vegas had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.997 second
330 foot - 2.800
660 foot - 4.307 at 163.65 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.603
1,320 foot - 6.695 at 206.51 MPH

At altitude, Mike's car was still under 1 second at the 60 foot clock.

The low qualifier at Concord had the following short times -

60 foot - 0.981 second
330 foot - 2.752
660 foot - 4.225 at 167.16 MPH
1,000 foot - 5.494
1,320 foot - 6.562 at 210.97 MPH

Ted, this is 2011, not 1968. The V-6 in the dragster makes over 640 HP (measured on a dyno, not guessed at or calculated with pencil and paper) and the car only weighs 1350 lbs. That car can only run 1.030 60 foot times, 2.920 330 foot times and 4.50 660 foot times. How heavy is your T-Bucket? And how little horsepower does it make? And you want me to believe that a good running T-Bucket can accelerate faster than that? Ain't gonna happen. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not in this lifetime.

Just out of curiosity, were ever able to get one of those blown gassers to run 163 MPH at the finish line? Mike Edwards was running that fast at 660 feet in Vegas. And look at the conditions - 83° F air temperature, 19% relative humidity, barometer at 27.62 inches, which calculates to a corrected density altitude of 4,645 feet. What was your best ET and MPH from one of those blower cars, Ted? And what kind of weather conditions did it take to run that fast?

I stand by what I said. You are n-e-v-e-r going to get your T to accelerate like a Pro Stock car. And my offer also stands. Your ass kissed by yours truly, the day you prove me wrong.

Not enough coffee this morning Mike? :hiding:

 

[RPM]

"Just out of curiosity, were ever able to get one of those blown gassers to run 163 MPH at the finish line? Mike Edwards was running that fast at 660 feet in Vegas. And look at the conditions - 83° F air temperature, 19% relative humidity, barometer at 27.62 inches, which calculates to a corrected density altitude of 4,645 feet. What was your best ET and MPH from one of those blower cars, Ted? And what kind of weather conditions did it take to run that fast?"

Yes Ted just how fast did those gassers run?

Stone Woods and Cook

 

[Ted Brown]

"Just out of curiosity, were ever able to get one of those blown gassers to run 163 MPH at the finish line? Mike Edwards was running that fast at 660 feet in Vegas. And look at the conditions - 83° F air temperature, 19% relative humidity, barometer at 27.62 inches, which calculates to a corrected density altitude of 4,645 feet. What was your best ET and MPH from one of those blower cars, Ted? And what kind of weather conditions did it take to run that fast?"

Yes Ted just how fast did those gassers run?

Stone Woods and Cook

We ran the SWC car at 198 in the quarter, (all at a clocked closed strip, testing) and that was with the best//crappiest tires going back then, if that car had the tires they have today, watch out... It is still not HP that wins a short drag race it is traction, and a just right combo is what I drove... I was never beat on thew street in over 40 years, from a dead stop, if todays cars were running yesterdays tires, you would not see those times at all...

 

[Mike]

Not enough coffee this morning Mike?

I try to limit myself to just a single pot on Sundays, so that could be it.

Ted's an alright guy, but he's still living in the mid-60's. Yeah, yeah, I know, he built a lot of cool gassers "back in the day" when supercharged cars couldn't break the 7 second barrier and only ran 170 MPH. The current Pro Mod records are 5.817 at 255.39 MPH, so all of Ted's "lift bar" engineering is as prehistoric as the cars he was building. Brad Personett has run 5.804, so the current record is going to tumble.

Yes Ted just how fast did those gassers run?

Eleven-ohs at one-thirty? :drowsy: B-O-R-I-N-G. The current SS/M class record is 11.05 and that's a 14 lb. car with a single 4 bbl carb. The H/S record is 11.09, fer cryin' out loud. And a supercharged car couldn't even run 10.90's?

We put one of our V-6 motors in a buddy's SS/AX Camaro and ran as fast as 8.88 with it. It was an 8.5 lb. class, a whopping 268 cubic inches of carbureted V-6 with a PowerGlide and we could run over 2 seconds faster than a blown gas Willys? Even the 11 lb. V-6 SS/BX cars run over 140 MPH.

Then again, if you tried to run one of those old, hang-'em-high, front end gassers 2 seconds quicker, they would have likely gone airborne.

Here you go, Ted, a blown doorslammer running 3.63 and 212.49 MPH at the 1/8th mile -

[media]

Now THAT is how to make a blown doorslammer run fast.

 

[2old2fast]

I don't know 'bout the rest of you , but this latest "beat down" has left me a little nauseous.

dave

 

[Gerry]

I don't know 'bout the rest of you , but this latest "beat down" has left me a little nauseous.

dave

X2
gerry

 

[Mike]

We ran the SWC car at 198 in the quarter, (all at a clocked closed strip, testing) and that was with the best//crappiest tires going back then, if that car had the tires they have today, watch out... It is still not HP that wins a short drag race it is traction, and a just right combo is what I drove... I was never beat on thew street in over 40 years, from a dead stop, if todays cars were running yesterdays tires, you would not see those times at all...

How were you guys able to run so fast, when cars of that era weren't anywhere close?

As a matter of fact, when Montgomery won the Nationals in 1969 (I was there that day, BTW), the Stone, Woods and Bones car was the slowest car in the entire field. Montgomery put them on the trailer, running 8.68 at 163.63 to Bones' 9.16 at 156.52. Why so slow, if you fellows had 198 MPH potential?

John Herrara's flip-top Austin ran a best of 8.87 at 158 MPH. Mazmanian's "Football" Austin ran a best of 8.68 at 161.87 MPH, before he sold the car to Pittman. The Meyer and Cluff Austin pickup ran a best of 8.90 at 162 MPH. Skip Hess managed to run 8.32 at 168.75 MPH, running gas. On alcohol, that car only ran mid 7.60's at 180 MPH. And you fellows could run 198 MPH? 22-29 MPH faster than your peers? It would take something on the order of 500-550 more horsepower to run that much quicker, at identical weights.

Ted, to show you how far out in left field those old chassis designs were, simple math will show it requires 1400 HP to propel a 2200 lb car to 198 MPH. Give me 1400 HP in a 2200 lb car and I'll show you some mid to high-6.70's. How can it be you weren't running 6.70's? It all comes down to simple physics, doesn't it?

And just to show you what a couple of blown gassers can do on today's tires -

[media]

Wow, he barely ran 198 on today's tires, didn't he? You guys must have really been onto something, to run that fast with 40 year old tire technology.

You know, if today's cars were running yesterday's 6-71 blowers, yesterday's fuel pumps, yesterday's ignition systems, yesterday's clutches, yesterday's transmissions and yesterday's suspension systems, we wouldn't see today's performances either. If, if, if. If wishes were fishes. If pigs could fly. We're not discussing "ifs", here. We're discussing proven facts. You in, or you out?

You ready to take me up on my offer, yet? All this goes away, real easily. Give Dave and Gerry some relief. Prove me wrong. And you can run any tire you like, OK?

 

[blownt]

I think I own a "good running T bucket" but there ain't no way in hell its gonna perform anywhere near a P/S or P/M or S/C or even some S/S on the strip nowadays.

 

[2old2fast]

Mike, you seem to be missing the point, Let it go I personally don't much care who's right, wrong, or indifferent !! Didn't 'ja ever here of piling on, get over it jeesh!


dave

 

[Gerry]

Mike, you seem to be missing the point, Let it go I personally don't much care who's right, wrong, or indifferent !! Didn't 'ja ever here of piling on, get over it jeesh!


dave

beating up on an old guy is fun for some. I guess
Gerry