Fuel Pump

Michael Fling

Supporter
I'm thinking I like it, but I am not sure why? What does it eliminate? Surge tank needed? Are the high and low pressure pumps still needed?
 
I'm thinking I like it, but I am not sure why? What does it eliminate? Surge tank needed? Are the high and low pressure pumps still needed?

One function of Baffles in a fuel tank (and the function that I am primarily concerned with) is: They prevent the fuel from sloshing back and forth and starving the fuel pump.


Baffles and surge tanks booth serve the roll of providing a steady flow of fuel to the fuel rail. However, baffles also act to keep the fuel load stable in hard cornering (primarily a racing concern) and eliminate erratic fluctuations in the fuel gauge. If this internal fuel pump system works as I think (hope); I will not be installing a surge tank. But the jury is still out!

Jim
 
That's an interesting setup. I like it. I don't think I would skip a good swirl pot though. It has benefits beyond what any in tank pump/baffle setup could offer.
 
I didn't see a price for the unit on the manuf. website??.

I still like my set-up better at the moment though - I'm not convinced. For servicing I like an external pre & post fuel filter, separate pumps and the deaerating effect of a correctly installed "swirl" pot. Since my car is a street ride I also do not care for any type of foam within my gas tank. Just one mans opinion -
 
Am I missing something on it? How does it get the fuel to the pump when low on fuel and fuel is all over the tank? What happens in long G turns? From what I am seeing I do not think it looks better than a surge tank, maybe on the street? Does the return go back into a mini type of surge tank in there?
 
I am going to guess it has about one to two quarts of reserve fuel if that foam 'tank' if fully saturated when the fuel sloshes away. Not as good as a dedicated trap door sump and not as good in a serious cornering (track day) car. Not a bad solution for the street rodder and maybe the street wannabe road racer where a few hard corners in a row at mild RPM is all that is expected. IMO
 
Mike, in the video, they quote a retail price of $525.00. I'm not sure how that compares with other systems?

Jim

Jim - Whoops didn't catch that one.

Troy - I think I read it needs a return side for fuel - back into one of the regulator ports?? for the later LS engine return-less rail system.
 
Last edited:

Ken Roberts

Supporter
That setup more than likely won't fit in the top of the fuel tank unless you chop the top down a bit like I have in this picture. Then you will need a different fuel level sender. Modifying the fuel tank will drive the cost up substantially.

010_zps33c0e72a.jpg
 
Just for clarity, what we're talking about here is a foam cylinder encircling the in-tank pump, with the idea being the the fuel can all rush over to the side of the tank (in a hard corner for example...) and the fuel pump will continue to draw fuel by virtue of the saturation of the surrounding foam cylinder? Is that right?

If that's correct, that seems like a pretty darn good idea. No one turn lasts very long, and normally there's another turn coming up in the other direction.... which, or course, would result in the fuel all rushing over to the other side of the tank and in so doing it re-saturating the foam cylinder and allowing for continued fuel delivery.

I like it, assuming it works. Very simple. Not sure I'd call it a "system".....I'd probably just call it a foam cylinder, but whatever.
 
It appears to be a little more than just the foam, with a basket under the foam to help retain the fuel acting like a sump. It also appears they don't use an internal low pressure pump to fill the "basket" or an actual lowered sump but instead rely on the return fuel to keep it full. With that in mind the basket has to be open on the bottom or porous to allow fuel to enter to start the fuel cycle or it would eventually starve for fuel once the fuel level in the tank went below the edge of the basket. So it will be a step up over no internal baffles or lowered sump of some sort but probably not as good in a race or dedicated track application as a baffled, lowered sump and or external tank holding reserve fuel.

Thats at least how I see the set up.
Mat
 
Hi guys,
In an effort to find an alternative to a large, expensive, space consuming conventional fuel surge tank system; I'm looking at yet another possibility. Because the FP34 044 Motor Sport Fuel Surge Tank is fully enclosed and self contained with a one (1) liter fuel reservoir, it can be virtually mounted anywhere and can be installed either vertically or horizontally. The compact size of this unit allows for additional flexibility in locating the system. Unlike some other alternative systems I was considering, this unit is externally mounted; therefore future serviceability and accessibility would not present a problem.


Those are my thoughts on the FP34 044, I'm interested in hearing what you SLC builders think of this system. Although I intend to occasionally track my car, tracking is not my main focus.
Jim
http://www.034motorsport.com/fuel-injection-solutions-fuel-pumps-fully-enclosed-fp34-044-fuel-surge-tank-p-21527.ht
 
Hi guys,
In an effort to find an alternative to a large, expensive, space consuming conventional fuel surge tank system; I'm looking at yet another possibility. Because the FP34 044 Motor Sport Fuel Surge Tank is fully enclosed and self contained with a one (1) liter fuel reservoir, it can be virtually mounted anywhere and can be installed either vertically or horizontally. The compact size of this unit allows for additional flexibility in locating the system. Unlike some other alternative systems I was considering, this unit is externally mounted; therefore future serviceability and accessibility would not present a problem.


Those are my thoughts on the FP34 044, I'm interested in hearing what you SLC builders think of this system. Although I intend to occasionally track my car, tracking is not my main focus.
Jim
http://www.034motorsport.com/fuel-injection-solutions-fuel-pumps-fully-enclosed-fp34-044-fuel-surge-tank-p-21527.ht

I'm using this setup. My reasons were:
1) It's big enough for my engine and application. I'll be putting out 400ish HP and should I ever take it to a track, I am unlikely to be on tracks with huge, giant long sweepers where I could theoretically run the risk of drying the system out. Local tracks to me are the pretty twisty Laguna Seca and Sonoma.
2) Street application. Occasional track days. Don't need a huge system.
3) Submerge fuel pump -> quieter.
4) Clever design. I like how you can mount it vertical, horizontal or any other angle. In my case it's mounted behind the driver at a 45 degree angle to the frame rail.

Hope this helps... my car doesn't run yet, so I can't say more than the above...

Tim
 
The phantom system is fairly simple it appears. In contrast, a complex system designed to solve the fuel starvation problem has the potential for creating its own problem, and failings as well. Simple is better than complex as a concept, particularly in a race car where failure means being out of the race completely....not just sitting by the road waiting for a tow truck and being a little inconvenienced...

One of the best "systems" I ever saw to solve this problem was designed and installed by a very creative New Zealander I know...typical of kiwis to be smart and creative and keep things simple. Basically, it was a flexible tube used as the in-tank fuel pick up...with a rock out of the flower bed drilled with a hole in it...end of tube through the hole and glued. The rock would keep the tube inlet on the bottom of the tank and would roll around inside the tank and move wherever the fuel sloshing to (no tank baffles). Worked really, really well.

I know there's good reasons why F1 teams, for example, don't use a rock in the fuel tank. But, for non-professional/weekend teams needing a simple and reliable solution it's a good example of common sense engineering.

"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication" - LD.
 
I'm using this setup. My reasons were:
1) It's big enough for my engine and application. I'll be putting out 400ish HP and should I ever take it to a track, I am unlikely to be on tracks with huge, giant long sweepers where I could theoretically run the risk of drying the system out. Local tracks to me are the pretty twisty Laguna Seca and Sonoma.
2) Street application. Occasional track days. Don't need a huge system.
3) Submerge fuel pump -> quieter.
4) Clever design. I like how you can mount it vertical, horizontal or any other angle. In my case it's mounted behind the driver at a 45 degree angle to the frame rail.

Hope this helps... my car doesn't run yet, so I can't say more than the above...Tim


Tim, I'm looking forward to hearing a performance report on your Mortorsport Fuel Surge Tank once you get your car running. I was attracted to the FP34 044 for the very same reasons as you: Minimum track use and versatility in mounting.


Could you please snap a couple photo's of your fuel pump installation.


Thanks for the in-put!
Jim
 
That looks great Tim! Very clean... :thumbsup:

Those are the same type of braided lines I'm using too.
 
Back
Top