Landracing Forum

Tech Information => EFI Questions => Topic started by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 02:52:36 PM

Title: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 02:52:36 PM
Not suck as in "is a POS" but suck as in will it draw fuel up and out of a fuel tank?

The reason I ask is I'm swapping a '91 5.0 into a '71 Ford F-100 and will be using the factory EFI.  The gas tank is in the cab and the fuel pick up comes out of the top of the tank.  From there it turns down, goes out the bottom of the cab and runs along the frame rail up into the engine bay.

I've seen some people use a high volume low pressure pusher pump to get the fuel to the high pressure EFI pump but I'm on a serious budget.  This dual pump setups also usually requires an accumulator which again adds more cost to the project. 

I plan on using an inline Walbro 190 or 255 pump that'll be mounted under the cab on the frame rail.  There will be a filter between the pump and the tank.

So what do you think?  Will a single low mounted Walbro work or am I going to have problems?

Thanks,

Nate 
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: Sumner on March 11, 2009, 03:48:27 PM
Not suck as in "is a POS" but suck as in will it draw fuel up and out of a fuel tank?

The reason I ask is I'm swapping a '91 5.0 into a '71 Ford F-100 and will be using the factory EFI.  The gas tank is in the cab and the fuel pick up comes out of the top of the tank.  From there it turns down, goes out the bottom of the cab and runs along the frame rail up into the engine bay.

I've seen some people use a high volume low pressure pusher pump to get the fuel to the high pressure EFI pump but I'm on a serious budget.  This dual pump setups also usually requires an accumulator which again adds more cost to the project. 

I plan on using an inline Walbro 190 or 255 pump that'll be mounted under the cab on the frame rail.  There will be a filter between the pump and the tank.

So what do you think?  Will a single low mounted Walbro work or am I going to have problems?

Thanks,

Nate 

Nate I'll bet it would work when the tank is full, but I would have serious concerns when it moved towards empty, but that is totally a guess.  You could always try it, but I would strongly suggest welding in a pickup at the bottom of the tank....

(http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/turbo%20motor/4-28-08-11.jpg)

I did this last spring since I want to move to fuel injection on my truck when I get the time.  How I did it is here.....

http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/turbo%20motor/TM-page-2.html

I went with a Bosch #044 pump (middle), an Earl's Performance 230208ERL pre-filter (left) and a Golan -8AN Fuel Filter (right) along with a Aeromotive 13301 Regulator.  These are also the same items I'm using on my lakester except for a different regulator.  This way I carry the lakster pump and filters in the truck with me as spares on trips.  The Bosch pump seems to get really good long term reviews from owners.  So far I have about 5000 miles on this setup.  I've cleaned and welded on tanks before, but this time I paid $50 to get the tank cleaned and sniffed.  Cheap insurance and then I made the sump and welded it it with my TIG.  I would really suggest a TIG in this situation as I always seem to have pin holes with a mig.  So with your resources from helpful fellow LSRacers you could just do it right in the first place for very little money, just some time.

I got the two pumps and the filters from these guys:

http://www.jayracing.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2_5&products_id=1

They had the best pricing I could find at the time and were very prompt on shipping.  I'd use them again.

Good luck and how about some pictures?  Sounds like a nice project,

Sum
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 05:32:31 PM
Hey Sum thanks for the info.  Assuming the siphon effect works all the way down to almost empty (so long as there isn't an air break in the pick up tube) I think my original idea will work but I'm not one to try just to find out it doesn't.  I also don't want to do anything detrimental to the pump.  When I was at Snow, the pumps could pull fluid but the more you made then pull the less they wanted to push and their output pressure was cut in half. 

I originally dismissed the idea of adding a sump to the tank but now it sounds like a better idea.  Shouldn't be that much more work plus it's the right way to do it and it'll work right the first time.

Nothing too special with the project.  Truck was given to me with a very tired 460 in it.  The truck was given to me under the condition that I swap something with EFI into it which I will gladly oblige.  I'm looking for reliability and fuel economy.  The motor will stay stock for now but I'm thinking aluminum heads, cam, intake, and exhaust are in the foreseeable future.  I'd like to make 300 hp or so.

Thanks,

Nate         

 
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 06:10:10 PM
Also, I read through your turbo build up with great interest Sum.  I'm doing something very similar but with a twist.  Back in September I picked up a very cherry '29 Tudor Sedan.  I'm building it to be a street car and wanted to do something a bit different with my motor choice.

I'm collecting parts to run a turbo EFI 3.0L Mercruiser (Chevy II) four banger.   :mrgreen: 

Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: Stan Back on March 11, 2009, 06:56:54 PM
The acorn didn't fall too far from the tree.
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 07:18:52 PM
 :-D
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: McRat on March 11, 2009, 07:51:31 PM
I tested several different lift pumps on my truck, and ended up with the Edelbrock 1792 (~$200 at Summit), and so far have been happy with the choice.  It will self-regulate to about 12-13psi, and will supply over 1000HP worth of fuel in diesel applications (the pump is intended for GASOLINE ONLY).  Lifespan has been excellent, with 2 years daily-driver usage on 3 different trucks.  Carter's, Holley's and Mallory's all gave me problems with life expectancy.  The 1792 is made by Essex Industries who are known for making aircraft pumps.

The "suck" question is important for another reason.  Gear-style pumps like the 1792 will "suck" fuel no problem.  HOWEVER, they will shut you down if they fail and one tooth stops blocking the orifice (about 1/3rd the time).  Pumps that use impellers won't leave you stranded, but they aren't as good at sucking fuel uphill.
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: Joe Timney on March 11, 2009, 07:59:28 PM
Nathan,
Is that Mercruiser a Chevy motor or a Ford motor with a Chevy bell housing bolt pattern???

joe
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: JimL on March 11, 2009, 09:29:49 PM
Nathan, I need to warn you!  I did the same method on a 1976 FJ55 (using a Ford 460 EFI fuel pump externally).  When the fuel level gets low, the fuel starts sloshing, the pump starves, and burns up.  EFI pumps are cooled and lubricated by the gasoline flow.

I solved the problem with the method shown below.  Use a cheap, low-pressure pump to make constant flow to, and return flow from, the sub-tank (I used a little $20 one from Pep Boys), and put the EFI pump at the lower level of the sub-tank.  I made my sub-tank out of an old R12 bottle, but for a later project I used a piece of 4" square tube, 12" long.  That worked out fine, also.

The main point is keeping the sub-tank full, so it cannot slosh and aerate the EFI pump.  This method proved completely reliable (I built that rig in 1991 and the current owner is still driving it, 18 years later).  This also double filters the fuel, when using an old gas tank.

Hope this helps. 
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 11:02:58 PM
Nathan,
Is that Mercruiser a Chevy motor or a Ford motor with a Chevy bell housing bolt pattern???

joe

Hey Joe,

The Merc I'm using is called the 120 or 140 and is a bigger version of the 2.5L/153ci Chevy II motor.  The 120/140 has a 4" bore and a 3.6" stroke.

The other Merc you might be thinking of is the 470 motor which is Merc's own design.  It uses their proprietary block design with a BBF head and a Chevy bellhousing with a Ford crankshaft flange.

I'm planning on running an aluminum Fontana midget motor head on my motor.  The Fontana head has huge intake ports that are canted up above the exhaust ports.

Nate
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on March 11, 2009, 11:26:24 PM
Nathan, I need to warn you!  I did the same method on a 1976 FJ55 (using a Ford 460 EFI fuel pump externally).  When the fuel level gets low, the fuel starts sloshing, the pump starves, and burns up.  EFI pumps are cooled and lubricated by the gasoline flow.

I solved the problem with the method shown below.  Use a cheap, low-pressure pump to make constant flow to, and return flow from, the sub-tank (I used a little $20 one from Pep Boys), and put the EFI pump at the lower level of the sub-tank.  I made my sub-tank out of an old R12 bottle, but for a later project I used a piece of 4" square tube, 12" long.  That worked out fine, also.

The main point is keeping the sub-tank full, so it cannot slosh and aerate the EFI pump.  This method proved completely reliable (I built that rig in 1991 and the current owner is still driving it, 18 years later).  This also double filters the fuel, when using an old gas tank.

Hope this helps. 

Hey Jim, thanks for the heads up.  That's the definitive answer I was looking for.  I really don't want to risk a burned out pump so I'm going to either go with a sump on the tank or an accumulator like you've described.

Thanks,

Nate
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: Milwaukee Midget on March 11, 2009, 11:35:55 PM
Nate,

Just a thought about your tank.  I had a '66 F100 with a 390 that I installed Holley Projection on.  It required a return line, and I was kind of nervous about recirculating fuel in and out of a tank in the cab.  What I did was get an auxiliary tank from a Camper Special and bolted it to the frame outside of the cab.  It cleared up the space behind the seat for storage and made me a bit less paranoid.

Good luck with the upgrade.

Chris
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: McRat on March 11, 2009, 11:57:06 PM
IMO, don't run a return-style pump.  Nothing but trouble.  Aeriating the fuel is dumb.  Let the real injection pump do the return duties.
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: Rick Byrnes on March 12, 2009, 06:10:34 PM
Nate
Nice choice on engines.  Midget motors rock.

Put a small sump and outlet on the bottom of the tank and call it a day.  You will never have to worry about it.
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: LSR Mike on March 31, 2009, 04:52:36 PM
I saw this a little late but check the Rule book for Pickups, Modified and Production, last paragraph.


"Pickups with Cab mounted Gas Tanks shall have gas tank removed . The tank shall be re-located so as to offer no aerodynamic advantage"

you have a different problem.
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: Milwaukee Midget on March 31, 2009, 11:00:56 PM
I saw this a little late but check the Rule book for Pickups, Modified and Production, last paragraph.


"Pickups with Cab mounted Gas Tanks shall have gas tank removed . The tank shall be re-located so as to offer no aerodynamic advantage"

you have a different problem.

I guess it's not clear - are you racing this truck?
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on May 15, 2009, 01:11:06 PM
I guess it's not clear - are you racing this truck?

Sorry for the late response but no, the truck is strictly a street vehicle.
Title: Re: Does a Walbro "suck"?
Post by: NathanStewart on June 24, 2009, 03:29:16 PM
Jusy an FYI I finished the swap about a month ago.  The truck runs and drives great!  I'm dropping the R&P down to a 4.10 from a 3.70 soon and I hope to bring it out to El Mirage some time.