mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

the line that goes in the side is the pressure/feed, the one that comes out the bottom is the return...it can't get any simpler than that.

for the impala build, you can see if they make a retrofit sender with a return like i'm using in the chevelle (also not originally equipped with a return line) or you can go to a vent tube and make a new vent for the tank. i've also seen people tee into the filler neck with their return. lots of ways to do it.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Got the warbro pump installed, was for a mustang but I made it work. The nylon(I assume) fuel line seems allot better than the rubber. Hope this pump works perfect, because we all know how much fun I had today dropping that fuel tank....

For the Trans x member I added angle iron for the TQ arm mount, done.

Was the owner of the cars B day, so we cut it short. But I dd get the spare injector we needed and the ls1 injector pig tails thanks to another buddy of mine. The got rod community is unlike anything out there, great rivalry and great friends till the end.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Injector pig tails swapped, front drive complete and belt on. Block offs for EGR on headers installed. Fuel rails and coils secured in place. Should have more tomorrow.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Well, the warbro is a POS. comes in but doesn't do anything but drip fuel from the line. Glad I get to pull the tank again...

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

1994 Toyota Supra, denso fuel pump.

Should be able to find it online for around $180

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

or, a replacement for a 96 chevy truck. can be had at your LOCAL parts store, and is a direct drop in for our cars. also super cheap.

$73 for a good qualiy brand too:
http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/de...0401&ppt=C0025

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Thought those only put out 45 psi? Found the aeromotive in tank drop in for 150$, 340 LPH, but I am not sure if that would be over kill for the corvette filter return system.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

nope, 60+. we have one in my little bro's car with a 5.3 swap. has no problem pegging the 60psi gauge we have on the regulator. refer to post #36 on this very thread

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Yea, forgot since then. It is up to the owner, do not look foreward to dropping this tank again...

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

meh...we did it three times on my little bro's car...it's not so bad...just get the back of the car as far in the air as possible.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Flow vs pressure, i'm sure it can meet the pressure under no load, however that junk is nowhere near the same when it comes to actually making power.

If you dont want to keep dropping the pump, and dont want to listen to a whinebro pump, I'll strongly suggest again the denso pump, but thats about all I can do, now its up to you.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Probably going with the aeromotive 340 LPH. At least I have never had issues with them.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

we are talking about a bone stock 5.3 swap on a budget, not a 88mm turbo setup trying to set the world on fire...it's OK to use parts like this on cars that don't want/need more volume.

i understand that a lot of the community here does an ls swap in stock form, then gradually leans on it harder and harder, requiring more fuel pump volume, and having a pump they can "grow into" is not a bad thing. shoot, i'm running a sumped tank and a tsunami on my car, and the way the car is setup, i can put a second tsunami on pretty easily. i'm all about being expandable. but you can also realize that a certain car will never make over xxx amount of HP, demanding no more than a stock replacement pump can easily handle. when my little brother outgrows that pump, he will need something that would have been too much for the stock setup....when that time comes, we'll address it again. until then, this pump works great.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

For the extra $120, and the longevity of the denso pump, at some point you have to decide whats really worth it to have to drop the tank again, not to mention how much quieter they are is generally worth something on a non track car.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

We have one of these .pumps in a car that sees daily use. You cannot hear it. I don't know why you think this is a bad idea? Other than someone else has a cheaper just as reliable solution as you do?

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Have you done a flow test at pressure on it ?

You can easily be on the edge of running out of fuel real quick especially at the elevated fuel pressure, you took a pump from a truck rated for 250? HP, at 45ish psi, and want to run it on something at 350+ HP, and a 58 psi base pressure, to call that a reliable solution, aside from the fact that it will last nowhere near as long as the denso pump is quite a stretch.

Cheaper, yes that it is.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

The vortec 5.7 made 255-270 depending on what resource you believe. The injectors are at the same pressure which is why I went with this pump. A stock 5.3 makes 295. This pump works fine for stock swaps. Of course, unless i do a flow test, you will not be convinced. Keep your numbers in perspective. I did not say this pump would feed an ls7. Precision pumps are made by federal moguel, a brand I trust.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

http://www.gmtruckclub.com/forum/sho...#axzz24yUhtjhY

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Just to be safe, I think the more expensive option would be best perhaps.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

A stock 5.3 does make 295, of course by the time its made it into any thirdgen its either at the very least had a custom Y pipe and exhaust added, as well as an intake manifold change and cold air intake, this one obviously has headers as well, its well beyond the 295HP factory rating, you want to suggest using a pump that not only is likely to either be out of fuel for the application, or very close to it, as well as not going to last as long, for a whopping $110 difference ? Where is this logically a good idea ?

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

how do you know this is not enough pump though? just guessing? it is feeding a swap just fine at the moment. this seems like such a silly argument. you say it won't work, yet have no experience with it. i put one in a car, and it's keeping up just fine (a swap that has a nice y-pipe and catback, along with intake swap, etc.).

there is nothing wrong with spending more money to have things that will keep up with future mods. i am not saying it's a stupid idea to spend a lot of money on a good fuel pump. i even said that i have a big pump on my car with room to go to two. for the cost of this pump and the fact that it keeps up with stock swaps just fine, i can't see it "logical" to discount it as an option all together.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

I did not say it wont work, I said you dont know the flow rate on it, and its a bad idea.

Do you go bungee jumping and grab a bungee cord that you saw someone else lighter than you jump with and use it ?

Have you put a wideband on the car and made sure its not leaning out ? A pressure gauge ? Again, his isnt a stock engine, 295HP being the stock rating, headers and exhaust, intake manifold and cold air, with a fuel pump from a non performance engine with 250HP rating, how does this math add up to it being a good idea.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

yes, wideband read 11.5:1 under WOT(rich actually...still running stock conservative tune too), and pressure is rock steady at 60psi...sounds like i need to do a flow test so you will believe me otherwise...

fyi, this is the same part number for a fuel pump for a 1996 impala ss. i'm sure you know plenty of people running more than a stock engine on a stock fuel pump in those cars...


*edit* found some facts:
ok, they flow 50-60gph, which is equivalent to 190-227lph (50*3.78541=189.xxx), (60*3.78541=227.xxx).

according to www.fuel-pumps.net , the constant to mutliply an N/A combo's HP by to come up with lph requirements is .38. so, how much could this pump feed? well, a little algebra shows that (assuming the low side) 190/.38=500hp, sounds like this is WAY more pump than a stock 5.3 swap would ever need...even zone's swap with his little bit of bolt ons here and there.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Yes the parts store lists it at 50-60 gph, they also seem to list it at 80-90psi, the reality is that it probably does 50-60GPH, free flow, or 80-90psi peak, at an actual 58psi, flow is going to be much less.

Here is one example for the stock impala pump and an actual flow rating at the used pressure:

http://treperformance.com/i-63691-ch...1994-1996.html

100 lph @ 55-60 psi a much more realistic number, using a .50 bsfc, thats good for 330HP, get a bit optimistic and go for a .40 bsfc and it will run out at 400HP, a far cry from 500HP, and a mark that can quickly be surpassed with a 5.3.

The 100LPH at actual pressure is a lot more believable, as well as inline with peoples typical use and surpassing the ability of their stock pumps.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

so, what you're saying, is that even on the low end, at 100lph, we can see it support 330hp. an ls1 intake (non-ls6, like what's being used here) swap over a truck intake is worth nothing according to ls1tech. all it does is move the power band to the right about 500rpm. so what you're saying is that zone's will run out of fuel pump cause he has headers and catback? show me one gas burner situation where a set of shorties and exhaust system picked up 35+hp in stock form.

the pump is clearly sufficient for stock to bolt-on 5.3 swaps. even a cam/head 5.3 is not going to make 500hp, no matter how many magazine articles you read. keep in mind that volume and pressure are inverse functions of each other. if pressure goes down, volume goes up. i'll refer you to this chart from Aeromotive's website about their A750 pumps:



5.3 doesn't come alive till you give it positive manifold pressure. once you do that, then yes, this pump shouldn't be an option, at all. especially when there are better pumps available on the market.

i'm sorry you disagree with my real world results. where are yours?

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

I guess you misunderstood your own pressure vs. flow reference, and must have missed it when you read my post.

Again, the pump you listed does 50-60 gph, FREE FLOW, heres where your illustrated flow vs pressure comes into play, at operating pressure its only going to flow 100 LPH

If you've had it survive on something just above the 330ish HP mark, its pretty obvious in my post that even a .4 BSFC is possible, giving you room up to 400 HP.

I dont care how many magazines you want to read and disbelieve, but 400HP is an easy mark out of a 5.3 with a cam, let alone ported heads. Remember this is flywheel ratings.

What you are saying is for the whopping $110 saved, its a better idea to do that, have no room at all for safety, and run a lesser quality pump, great idea indeed.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

I told you this is a good pump for a stock or mild bolt on 5.3 swap. If your plans are to go with more HP immediately or in the future, do not use this pump. My data shows it is sufficient for a stock swap. buy the damned bigger pump, I was merely giving a budget option to the stock swap guys. We are no longer talking about the same situations, therefore our argument is halted. Have a good day.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

We are talking about the same situation.

Yes on the very end of its flow ability it can support said engine.

However anyone selecting a component for proper use doesnt select the component that just barely meets the requirement, rarely is that a good idea, this is not that exception.

GM coupled that pump with engines making 250-275 HP for a reason, ignoring the fact that there was logic involved in selecting a pump that flows more than just barely what the engine requires doesnt make any sense.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

So by that thinking, this pump wouldn't be enough for the 340 ft lbs of the 1996 Impala SS lt1 engine, yet this.is the service part number for that car...

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Where are you now coming up with a fuel requirement off of peak torque ?

Again, the pump is maxed out in the 330-400HP range, GM used it for 250-260HP applications, where are you coming up with this stuff ?

The pump is not a good choice, saving a small amount here just isnt worth it.

Sure it will run a stock-ish swap, but its not a good choice choosing a pump thats already at the edge of its window.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

I am looking at an aftermarket replacement part number that covers several different applications. This very same part number (precision E16008) work in most mid 90s gm vehicles. The info I am looking at is just as easily available through Google searches to you as they are to me. this pump works fine, I posted flow ratings and my findings through my data aquisition. I have answered every question you have presentd. I don't know what else you want me to say. I have no issue using this pump in stock swaps, if you don't want to, fine.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

You went from the standard HP rating, to somehow saying that I'd say it wouldnt due to the torque figure on an impala, yet I already referred to that very same vehicle, its rated for 260HP, you seem to be about as mixed up on this as you are with flow vs. pressure.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

HP is a function if torque, right? Specifically a derivative, so they are directly related. One can have a 260 HP engine that makes less torque, and another engine with 260 that makes more torque. You can net your bottom dollar that the more torquey engine will have a higher fuel demand. You asked for flow numbers, I gave you flow numbers, even calculated at a universally accepted constant for you. The only thing you are saying is that its not enough pump to be reliable on even a stock engine.

You're exhausting, I'm out man...I suppose you win.

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Its a 100 LPH pump, at the pressure it will be running.

Its good for 400 HP max.

Even with a stock 5.3 swap putting out 330 HP, its not a good choice for the minimal cost difference, you couldnt even put a cam in without running out of fuel.

I guess your goal was to "win", I never saw a way to "win" just hoped to get you to at least realize its not a good choice to select a component thats at the edge of its limits to start with. And make it clear that it was free flow you were looking at, and in real world use it would never do the 500HP you claimed it would.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

stock 5.3 is 295hp, where is this extra 35 hp coming from?

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Headers ? Exhaust ?

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

those things alone would be worth maybe 20...again, i said this is a good option for stock swaps. for those either
1) wanting to swap to the newer gen motors to take advantage of the fuel economy and more powerful stock form engine

2)for those wanting to get their feet wet with the platform and their future plans are so far beyond what even a 255lph pump would do that it makes sense to get going with something like this for now, and upgrade big time later.

this pump is ideal for the budget minded guy, that is trying to make the swap happen for little or no money, or make the swap pay for itself, etc. the pump you're talking about is the same cost as the long block we are using in my little bro's car, and twice as much as the trans, lol.

i absolutely agree that overkill on fuel is ideal. i have way more pump than i currently need in my car, and have the ability to expand to a fuel system that will support 2000 hp pretty easily. but my car was not built with the same mindset as my little bro's stock swap cruiser built on a part time parts store employee's budget. a "wine drinker's taste on a beer drinker's budget" if you will...

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

You can think they are worth 20 HP all you want, and that a 5.3 like that will only have 315 crank HP.

http://www.performancetrucks.net/for...-462827/page2/

283 rwhp in a truck, even if you went with an unbelievably optimistic 18% loss, thats still 345 HP, a far cry from the 315 you are claiming.

You want to compare the cost of the pump to the longblock, again, you are talking about a $110 difference, not 200$, not $500

$110 to not have to drop the fuel tank, really ? Let alone the lost money on the wasted pump when you do have to upgrade ?

Yes, if friday afternoon the only thing stopping you from driving the car is a fuel pump, you've only got $80, and you absolutely must drive it, sure, otherwise it's a bit silly to not go with something a lot more appropriate.

dprest68

iTrader: (1)

Okay guys... I think we see both sides of the argument thoroughly. Can we please wrap this up and call it a day?

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Well, I will say, this was The first and last warbro pump I ever buy. They are officially junk in my book. Lol

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Alright, swapped the pump for the precision that Matt suggested, booger is pushing fuel. Got the Trans all set up and ready, corvette filter installed and fuel lines connected, checked for leaks. Tried to roll the engine over, no dice. Starter clicks. Bad starter or low charge. Hope it is the charge. Was late so we were happy to get the progress we did.

3.8TransAM

Heya zone, remember me in the burgundy 91 GTA when I was down in Houston for SAM?

Nice swap.

Did have something to add regarding Walbro pumps, there are fake chinese knock offs of them being made and sold as such. Just google it.

Real Walbro pumps have a very good name in the turbo buick and TTA community with a very low failure rate, so it might be something to look into.

I have Walbro's in every car I own currently(real ones, not the work beaters) and have about a dozen friends cars with them as well with zero failures.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

What box do they come in? This was supposed to be the real deal, at any rate, if I was to make the camm on this, I would have went with the aeromotive 340 LPH. I have the same luck with them as you do with warbro. Thanks for the heads up, this may have been knock off, but they did say they are "tested", I'm sure not wet tested though.

cprmn14

iTrader: (3)

didn't walbro sell their name to another company a few years ago? I heard that after I got mine last year.

evo-offer

can it be TRE you mean? maybe i´ve could be wrong

weberflorida

iTrader: (2)

Looks cool. Keep up the good work. I am about to venture to an lsx swap and sell off all my stuff. AFR's HSR hotcam 1.6's rockers and slp headers and exhuast. pm if you want any parts.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

I have zero use for SBC parts, LOL.

Anyway, got the girl running today, fired and dies repeatedly, was hot wiring the pump and what not scratching y head. The i thought..."Did i disable VATS?".....nope.


So, need to finish the cooling system, clean up wires and hook the new shifter cable up as well as get some gauges working, a silicone adapter is coming from asia that will hook the MAF to the TPI induction.




Need to figure out how to make the speedo work, get some O2 sensors. remove unneeded wiring as well.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Got the coupler, could not get much better of a fit:

cprmn14

iTrader: (3)

Looks clean. Nice touch on the manifold

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (2)

Thanks. This efi us such a nightmare compared to my carbed setups, but it will be easier the next go round.