grant2k4

I have a 1984 Camaro it’s the 305 carburetor and I’m replacing fuel components and I realized there’s no after market sending unit I can’t find anything on it online it seems 84 was the last year before efi and I’m stuck it’s very weak and left me stranded the other day any help is appreciated

ACebell

Two options - buy this:

82-87 Chevrolet Camaro Pontiac Firebird Carbureted Fuel Sending Unit, Chevy carb | eBay

Or
Mimic the L69 setup and get the Fuel Sending unit for the EFI cars, and buy a "pusher" pump, and wire up an aftermarket relay to activate the pump. From what I read the "general" knew that there was a problem with only using a mechanical pump in these cars. Starting with the L69 they installed a "pusher" pump in the tank. This (I think) was included in the later model LG4 models as well.

gmcman355

Is there a problem feeding the engine without the pusher pump? Ive got an 87 that was factory carb but i believe had an in tank pump that is currently dead. I was planning on switching the sending unit out to the style without pump and just using a mechanical block mounted edelbrock pump but if it needs the pusher pump to maintain proper fuel flow I might need to reconsider my plans

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

How many years did your grandma drive carbed cars before they started putting in "pusher" pumps?

.

Mine (grandma) started driving in the early 1930s and continued up to the early 70s. Quite the little old lady before her time ran out. LONG before these cars appeared in any case. Pretty sure they had it mostly figured out at that time. She seemed to get around JUST FINE for all those years without one of ... those.

Not sure about "edelbrock pump" but in EVERY carbed car I've ever owned, which I'm guessing goes back to before your daddy was even a gleam in your grandma's eye, the block-mounted pump will do JUST FINE as long as there's no obstructions between the fuel in the tank and the pump.

The stock pump that came on L69s was as good as any other. Speaking strictly as the owner of a 83 L69 car.

The auxiliary "pusher" pump was added in the mid 80s to deal with FUEL problems specific to mid 80s FUEL. It's not the mid 80s anymore. The FUEL we have today isn't the same as mid-80s FUEL. Better, or worse, I won't go there; butt, NOT THE SAME. The specific mid 80s FUEL problem that led to those pumps, doesn't exist anymore, for better or worse, because we don't have mid 80s FUEL anymore.

Be aware though, a dead in-tank pump of ANY sort, constitutes an obstruction. Please refer to the above about "no obstructions".

gmcman355

Ive spent a few decades driving without the extra pump which was why I was curious as to the statement of knowing there was a problem using only the mechanical pump on these cars. In reference to the edelbrock mechanical pump it was installed trying to correct a fuel delivery problem as it stated that it had increased flow over a stock pump. Little did i know at the time that my carbed car even had an in tank pump as it was the first time I had ran into this over a couple dozen vehicles. The explanation I was given was that it was cheaper to build all the cars with the same fuel sending unit as most in 87 were fuel injected. This was the first time i heard anything about fueling concerns without the extra pump

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

That's not strictly true. EFI cars use MUCH higher pressure than carbs; 5 psi maybe for a carb, 12 or so psi for TBI, 40s for TPI. So, the pumps would have been COMPLETELY different, in any case.

There WERE for a time however, "auxiliary" pumps, either added at the factory or available at the stealership as a "bulletin" or whatever, for carbed cars whose owners complained of certain various symptoms. Whether any of them actually did any good, or whether they were just some sort of placebo "get out of my face" maneuver, I can't say. I have never seen any of the in-tank pumps supplied for the carb cars so I can't comment too definitively on them. Other than, carbed cars did JUST FINE for THREE QUARTERS OF A CENTURY at least, without any electric assist; and I fail to see where any such was "necessary". Not that an electric pump couldn't have been "helpful", in some situations; only, not "necessary". Which is to say "essential" and "can't work without it", overall.

And again, I know very little about "edelbrock" pumps, beyond the ad copy, and the handful or 2 I've used over the last few decades, which weren't remarkable or outstanding in any way; only, that all the carbed cars I ever had, from the 50s up to at least 83, had no electric pump; yet did just fine. With their stock, totally unassisted, mechanical, block-mounted, STOCK, factory, fuel pumps. So, I'm thinking that if you can get your fuel system unobstructed from tank to pump, then a block-mounted mech pump will work just fine for you. Butt if you have some one or another electric in-tank pump, and it's "dead" or otherwise unserviceable, you'd do well to get rid of it, put it behind you, fuhgeddaboudit, and just go with the old-skool mech variety. Might be necessary in your case to drop your tank and see what's in it, if anything.

gmcman355

That is my plan in the next few weeks to remove the tank for cleaning and hopefully verify that there is a pump in there and the source of my problem. Maybe with any luck it will have a part number that i can cross and figure out what style pump they were using. My speculation is that was likely the TBI style pump which would have been fairly easy for the block mount pump to regulate down to the 5-7 psi the carb would have wanted. In my mind it would not have made sense to use the TPI style with its pressures.