67 Firebird Fuel system Upgrade
 

My Firebird has never run at the power level I expected. I have not driven it much over the recent years as I have / added other toys taking the limited fun time.
After the engine refresh roller cam swap last year, spending more time on it now. Searching this forum for trouble shooting tips, I finally nailed it to the fuel delivery system. I have a pressure drop when accelerating and a flow test yield low volume. I took the wide band from my 2004 GTO, and definitely running lean. Carb is Qjet 800 cfm done by Cliff years ago. Engine is 455, ported 6X, roller cam similar to a high lift 041. Street car for cruising and fun. Currently have a Carter mechanical pump, and stock 3/8” lines.

I am thinking of two options to address this.
1. Robbmc 550 fuel pump, his ½”fuel tank sender unit, Inline Tube can custom make a ½” line and also supply a ¼” return line. This will be around $700 for the parts
2. Tank Inc electric fuel tank / pump kit. About $950
I believe the Tank Inc route may be better. My concern is routing the two -6AN push lock fuel hoses (feed /return lines) and where to put the regulator.
Any install advice ?

Your pump itself is likely fine for your level of HP, it’s the small stock fuel lines with all of its tight bends and no bottom feed from the tank, the pump has to suck instead of being pressure fed by the weight of the fuel in the tank.

If you want to do it right once with room for growth go with the Tanks system. 8an feed and return.

I've said this many times. I typically just do a tanks inc setup with -8 feed and return on anything that's approaching 500hp or more. That way I'm done with the fuel system for good and it'll support anything you want to throw at it. It's a reliable and quiet setup as well.

As far as install I usually follow original fuel lines with the -8 lines unless I see a better route. It's installation specific per car.

As far as Pontiacs go I always mount the regulator where the original fuel pump was. Make a bracket and mount it there, then I bend a steel line from there to the carb much like a factory setup.

If your not up for all that you could attempt to save some money by just installing a Robbmc pump and run it that way first to see if it's ok. It may or may not work well enough but it's only $200 to try that first.

Agreed with OCM and Formula that the way to do this right and once is to go with the Tanks Inc setup.

The first gen F-body tank is a nice piece that looks factory. Don't skim on the fuel sending unit though, spend the little extra for the floatless sender, or for even more accuracy, get one of the fancy LiDar senders. -8 feed and return as stated.

I run my -8 lines along the passenger side of the car, in the same location as the original fuel line/s. You can either do as Formula mentions if you want to try and retain a more stock look, or you can also run the lines up the firewall to the regulator. Yet another option is to run the regulator near the tank and run a single line forward. Lots of options and none of them are predominantly right or wrong.

This isn't the cheapest way to do it, but if you go with something like a Walbro 255, you'll support over 600 hp, won't run the bowls dry at WOT and should you ever decide to move to EFI of some kind, all you need to do is change the spring in the regulator.

Regarding the regulator near the tank, is that a good idea? Always read the regulator should be as close to the carb as possible for best results..not sure why but seems to be what most people say/do.

A friend that owns a body body shop and does high dollar builds & LS swaps in classic cars likes to use the factory corvette type regulator that mounts back by the tank, very clean install and only 1 line for feed to the EFI/carb.

I am considering going tanks inc to replace my robbmc set up that works great overall but has some random cut out issues on low 11sec runs with a Q-jet, I have a nice robbmc regulator that can work for efi or carb, just not sure of best place to mount it. I like FJs idea of mounting by the stock fuel pump but wont that contribute to heat soak more than being up closer to the carb?

X2 always read the regulator should be close to the carb as possible

Don’t forget wiring the tank pump. I love the in tank setup but for just a cruiser I would think about the mechanical pump. We have done both, both work but one is much simpler to install and maintain if the pump does fail. Again it’s all about what you’re doing with it. Good luck either way.

I did the tanks Inc thing after fighting mine forever.

I now have a Terminator X system but I ran the in tank unit with a carb for like a year and it was great.

I also have my regulator near the tank and a short return line which operates fine.

To be fair when I had the carb I had the regulator in the engine bay and a full return line, but now that I know the remote regulator works fine I wouldn’t run all the extra line again.

Rocktimus- Which pump did you use with the carb? Im sure the regulator by the tank works fine, GM did that on 4th gen firebirds & vettes, but is it ideal or could it be better by the carb/FI? What type of line did you use for feed/return? And where did you run them?

Anyone able to confirm or comment on the reason most say to have the regulator near the carb for best results? Maybe related to having the most consistent or accurate pressure? Might only be for carbs and FI doesnt matter as much? If the reg by the tank works ok for a carb, that saves extra work running a long return line.

I dont remember the exact model because I didnt buy it, this was a lucky local find. Guy had a turbo LS 68 Camaro that he was parting out. So the pump is way overkill for me. It was made to support like 700 boosted HP, which means its good for like 900 NA.

Im using the fixed Holley regulator and filter in one setup. Its not adjustable, it sets you at ~60 psi and thats what you get. I have a 1/2 stainless line that runs most of the length of the car. -8 AN line in the engine bay and making up the short return system from the filter/regulator. A couple of very short pieces of injection pressure-rated rubber as jumpers here and there.


On the "why is this better" part of it. It might technically be "better" to have the regulator closer to the carb, but considering so may of the OEMs do it the other way I gotta think better is a relative term. One that can be over-ruled by the convenience of not putting all the extra fuel line in.

Theoretically, having the regulator near the tank vs the carb should not matter. Fluid pressure in a line increases simultaneously across the entire length of the line or tube. I will say having the regulator up on the firewall, near the carb does make access to it much easier. It's more serviceable that way.

Thanks for the replies. Just curious why some or most Ive read say that the reg should be as near to the carb as possible... maybe thats only for carbs & FI is different?

For an adjustable reg, it would obviously be easier to access in the engine bay area as opposed to crawling under the car if needed. But for FI it doesnt need adjusted.

On my robbmc 1100 pump, it can be dialed down to ~7psi and not need a regulator for my 1978 Q-jet but that limits the flow a lot, so for track use I use a regulator and can turn up the psi to about 8.5 on the reg without overpowering the needle/seat and turn the pump up for more flow. That might be beneficial on a electric pump too, street use adjust to 5-7psi for most q-jets & other carbs, but for track use you can turn up the psi a bit if that improves fuel supply. Just speculating and probably needs tested to see if that would help.

If the reg can be back by the tank for a carb that would make for a much simpler return set up.

That may be due to different type of regulators being used. If you're regulating something without a return line, you're dialing down fuel delivery to the carburetor. With a return system common with an electric fuel pump, you need a bypass regulator. That works by sending the amount of volume necessary to create a given pressure while returning any remaining fuel back to it's source.

OEM's haven't had regulators in the engine bay for quite a while. With modern PWM pumps, most are deadhead systems that sent fuel volume based on input to a fuel rail pressure sensor. Those OEMs that do still use return style systems often have the regulator near the tank. I would say it doesn't matter as a result. If you feel more confident with it closer to your carb, run it in that configuration.

Makes sense. Might be that a deadhead regulator is whats supposed to be best near the carb, my current set up is deadhead so I have it as close to the carb as possible.

The robbmc regulator like many others can be either type by changing the spring & using different outlets. I like the idea of being by the tank for easier return line routing, I have 1/2" & -8 for feed from tank to pump & pump to carb, running a short return from regulator to tank sounds like the best option. Will do some more research & ask tanks inc & robbmc what they suggest for regulator location when the time comes.

Sorry for the hijack but hopefully this info can help the OP or others considering in tank pumps.

Na, been doing it for many years that way, doesn't matter how hot it gets here, 105-110-115+ degrees outside and it never causes an issue with heat soak or vapor lock, even with the junk 91 pump gas we have.

Edit:
I should add that now of course I say this and it's probably critical to point out that as I mentioned in the post below I run a full length return line from that regulator, so that regulator always has constant fuel flow through it no matter what the engine is doing. If it's idling it's moving more fuel back to the tank so there is no stagnent fuel just sitting in that regulator getting hot.

Now if you try dead heading a system like this with the regulator mounted off the fuel pump boss on the engine, there are no guarantees that you won't run into some hot fuel issues, because well.....it's dead headed and when the car is idling that fuel just isn't going anywhere.

As far as where to put the regulator, there are many thoughts on that.

Me personally, I prefer a return line the full length of the car, which means my return style regulators are always mounted somewhere near the carb or EFI unit. Whether it's on the engine at the stock fuel pump location, the frame, or up on the intake, doesn't really matter to me, just depends on what the purpose is of that particular car, whether I'm hiding things or not.

The biggest idea of a full length return is to keep that fuel circulating. Anything along the entire run of the car that has the possibility of heating up the fuel before it gets to the engine, whether it be anything near the exhaust, even if it's the radiant heat off the blacktop, has a handful of not so great affects. Worse case being vapor lock or hot start issues. The cooler the fuel the better off you are in many ways. You can think of it this way, the closer the return style regulator is mounted to the carb, then the shorter the feed line has to be that has the stagnant fuel in it, and the longer stagnant fuel sits in the line the more heat it picks up, the shorter the line the less chance of that.
By stagnant I mean fuel that doesn't move much at all when at idle and slow moving situations when the engine isn't demanding much fuel flow. Now the fuel has a chance to pick up heat. No matter what you do, you're going to have a feed line that has stagnant fuel, obviously more so if you dead head a system or run a regulator way back at the tank. It's better to make that line as short as possible from the return regulator to avoid or at least reduce the chance of hot fuel situations.

That's basically the thinking behind that deal.

Now there are other arguments that can be made about pressures and how accurate they are based on where the regulator is mounted. That's a bit of a different discussion.

Good points. For many earlier year cars the feed line is on the passenger side & runs next to the headers along the frame as well as crosses over at the front of the oil pan literally clamped to the pan/timing cover bolts, so if heat is a concern that location could be an issue. I do use heat wrap on the lines in those areas just to be safe.

Road heat isnt really a concern in midwestern or northern states, Iowa gets some very hot/humid days in the mid to upper 90's, even hits 100-103 some years, but I dont usually drive when its that hot with no A/C and when I do Ive never had a vapor lock issue with a deadhead mech pump... electric pump has much higher psi thats supposed to eliminate or reduce vapor lock.

I guess it comes down to where you want to mount the regulator or investing in a full return set up, sounds like it can work both ways with a full or short return line.

Yes you are right, electric pumps are better with vapor lock because they are very good at pushing fuel, even at 6 psi they are better at fighting vapor lock than a mechanical and of course as psi goes up things get better too. Mechanical pumps typically aren't very good at pulling fuel so they are more sensitive to those problems.

Thanks for all of the feedback. I noticed Tanks Inc "kit" includes -6AN, and there is no mention of -8AN on their site. Not sure if that is an issue fitting the bigger line with their pump and regulator.

A -6 line in higher pressure EFI situations will support over 600 hp. -6 line should still be enough when using a carburetor for most people, but at the lower pressures you work with, the flow reduces a bit, so having that extra line will tend to help. Having the larger lines isn't going to hurt you, but you'll have to piece some things together.

You'll need 1/4 NPT to -8 fittings for the the fuel pump hat, different sized fuel filters and fittings etc. If you're doing -8 lines you really just have to purchase everything outside of kit form.

Any recommended source / brand for the fuel lines and fittings ?
I am leaning towards the Tank Inc setup, but as recommended for this thread and other threads, going with -8 lines.

Best value for AN fittings is the summit brand, they are just as good as fragola in my experience but priced better. Im sure there are better brands but they cost a lot more. I like & use the black color fittings, look better than the old red/blue IMO.

For standard braided line the summit brand is also very good & priced better than others. Ive had mine in use for about 10 years with no signs of any problems. Some prefer the black nylon braided or push lock type hose/fittings but again those cost a lot more. For the average street car, standard lines & fittings work great.

If youve never used AN fittings, I can give some tips on the best way to cut the lines & install the fittings, you dont need special wrenches or expensive cutting tools... those tools are fine and if you do a lot of them the special tools are probably best, but if on a budget or only doing it 1 or 2 times, theres is a cheaper way that works great.

Here’s another good thread if you want some more info:

https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...d.php?t=863809

A lot of the same consensus, if you wanna do it once and have the fuel system ready for more power, just go in tank.

On the other hand, jhein, who started that thread, ended up with a RobbMC mech pump and that seemed to solve his fuel issues. He estimated that he’s around 500 horse.

I’m leaning towards that route myself, I guessing I’ll have ~450 horse when my 433 gets done. But I dig simplicity, mech fuel pump, qjet and points dizzy is my kinda setup.

One thing that I think gets over-looked in the equation is traction. I don't think that most of us posting here are running it out to 120-130mph on the highway and we're probably not running at the local 1/8 or 1/4 mile dragstrip every weekend. We don't necessarily notice any fuel starvation issues as a result, until they get really bad.

So while more power does equal more fuel consumption, one of the big issues involved with supplying fuel is acceleration forces. The guy with 600hp, a RobbMC pump and a well tuned q-jet may be running around just fine with no apparent fueling issue, because when he hammers the throttle he turns power into smoke.

But for that guy there's also another guy with the same setup with a sorted suspension and sticky tires that when he hammers the throttle, the fuel system has to work against those forces.

This is of course not to say don't run a mechanical pump. I'm pointing out that having an idea of how your car is set up, how and when you drive it all matter.

That was me exactly. With the 550 Robb MC and a custom Q jet I never ever had problems on the street. At the track I couldn't get past 300 feet without it leaning out.

Upgraded to the 1000 HP pump and now if I had the tank slap full of gas I could sometimes get a full 1/8th on the slicks, but sometimes not.

Upgrades again to the in tank system and have zero problems anywhere.

I do feel like I have more fuel smell with the Tanks Inc tank. Ive been meaning to try and engineer a carbon canister for the vent. But that's my only complaint.

Speaking of "buy once cry once" if you are going to use soft AN lines for the whole car I would spend a little more and use PFTE lined hose and fittings.

Like I said (kind of) in the other thread mentioned above, If I had the current setup when I first got the motor back in the car, I don't think I would have recognized any "problem". For aggressive street driving my needs are met, easy. I would not be surprised at all if it made a difference racing. This year I'll have a full driving season with it for more observations and tuning (I haven't done any).

Now, we could debate about the simplicity of HEI vs points, but that's another story. LOL

I see this all the time at the dragstrip,guys will show up with really nice builds, big engines ,500 cubic inch plus..and you watch them run down the track and they fall on their face. A/F or fuel pressure should always be monitored under full traction. My car pulls enough G's to shoot the cigarette lighter out of the dash and into the back seat and flops over the passenger side floor mat, just think what the fuel is doing in the tank and the pressure against it in the fuel line.

i went with the Aeromotive system for my 79 with the built in pump.
nice setup indeed, has some growth potential as well, and even if i wanted to go full E85.
the top was a little challenge because i went with #8 fittings, so i had to dimple the floor pan for fit the connectors, but now i have a good return line
i went with Earls lines, i dont recall what its called but its nylon braided???? super flexible, good for any fuel, but NOT cheap, then again what is now...
i don't get any fuel smells like i did when i had braided lines.
i have the adjustable fuel pressure regulator, and could use it if i went with boost
so it has growth potential, fit in stock location and pump is inside the tank
the one con could be that its not really meant for drag racing, specially at lower fuel levels, at least thats in their directions
just thought i would pass it on, again, all in all a really nice setup, and good looking too, and i really love those Earls hoses/fittings. just get yourself the plug test kit so you can test your lines, or.... do it the hard way like i did and you'll find a leak if it didn't connect right

TA man is right, it's a common issue at the track all the time with street car guys.

I like simplicity too, probably more than most, but I also like my street cars to perform like they should, not just look pretty. That usually means a mechanical pump won't cut the mustard. I mentioned earlier mechanical pumps are poor suckers and they have to pull that fuel from the back of the car for 20 feet through twists and turns. That's already marginal. Like TA mentioned you throw in drag strip passes on a good track and then you start to see issues you never thought you had before.

What I've also seen with my own cars, and Cliff has mentioned this before. Even if you don't think you see or feel any issue at the track with a mechanical pump and small fuel lines, the cars still typically will find more MPH and better ET with an upgraded fuel system anyway. The sheer volume supplied with bigger lines and a better in tank electric pump that is good at pushing the fuel forward in many cases yield better performance at the track you didn't think was there. I've seen this happen a few times with my own cars.

Just turn the pump on, you'll find out REAL quick if you have a leak

78W72 brought up hose with some good points, here's some more suggestions. I use this hose and just order 50 feet at a time.

https://www.anhosefittings.com/light...l-and-oil.html


I've been using this stuff for a couple decades and haven't had a single issue with it. It's been in service on dad's car for close to 20 years now, and at least 15 on my own car with no signs of problems to date. I like the style of fittings it's designed for as I can take them on and off and reuse them. It's suitable for all kinds of fluids as you can read in the description including E85, Methanol, and is NHRA approved which is a biggy for me as they do tend to check that stuff in tech.

The only draw back now is that I used to buy it for $4 a foot and it's now $8 a foot :rolleyes: The fittings also can add up, I usually end up spending $200 or more just on fittings.

Definitely in for any tips cutting the PTFE lines and connecting the fittings.

PM replied to.

The vid at summit for the fittings you sent is basically how I do it, except I use a die grinder with a small 4" cut off wheel to cut the lines and I havent used the PTFE line yet that requires the small compression nut, but the process is the same.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-250890b

I say always build a 'system' to support just about anything you plan or even aren't planning to throw at it. That way no matter how many times you change your config you always have enough, never have to worry.

Since carbs are at lower psi, a bypass regulator as close to the carb is common/best practice.

EFI due to psi has much less of a chance of vapor lock.

If you plan on running a high psi pump with a carb, the return line needs to be enough to handle the fuel being bypassed to maintain the lower/desired psi. Sometimes, that means even running a larger line than the feed. EDIT: Always run the same return size as the feed.

I also believe in running as much hard line as possible, for many reasons, but cost is a biggie. The more hard line you run, the less 'soft' lines and fittings you need.

When it comes to AN fittings and line, I've tried just about all of them, but will say, you get what you pay for. These days, I only use Russell and Earl's. There's some specialty fittings that may not be made by those 2, but it is what it is, and can work around that fairly easily.

As for AN hose, they vary in thickness, and it is strongly advised to use fittings from the same manufacturer as the hose.

For 'soft' hose, the PVC pipe cutters work pretty darn good. I've tried some of the AN fitting company's cutters, but always seem to go back to the PVC ones. Obviously, that won't work for stainless covered hose, but not many use that anymore anyway.



.

Another thread on fuel system installs:

https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...d.php?t=749614

.

I am thinking of mounting the regulator at the end of the passenger side cylinder head. Would, put it in front of the carb and close in height.
Any concerns with that location ? (Not my actual engine bay pictured !)

Well, if you put it on the inner fender well, you can run hard lines to it, then 1 soft line from it to the carb.

If you put the regulator on the head, you have to run 2 lines, feed & return.

There's a hole in the frame just before the firewall and past the crossmember too I believe, you could run the lines through it, and even mount it on the frame rail ahead of the upper control arm. That would pass track tech being in the frame rail as it passes the bell housing area.

When you run lines the length of the car, when you fasten them you need to allow some type of movement of the line in the fastener. You can use padded adel clamps as long as you use 1 size larger, so the lines can move as the body twists.

If you have a unibody car, just remember you need to transition from one moving platform to the other using soft lines, like from the body to the frame, just like the factory did. That prevents hard line from 'work hardening' and failing.

Use the factory configuration as a starting point and design from that.


.

Ok, robbed this pic from another thread:

https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...d.php?t=683388

Looks like the line runs on top of the frame rail. You could just carry it further up the frame rail past and close to the control arm.


.

I did an EFI system on a '68 Firebird last year, TanksInc tank.

I bought TWO 3/8" fuel lines from SS Tubes. I was able to mount them parallel to each other. I used 3/8"T to -6 compression fittings on each end to make the connections.

This is a good idea.

Depending on the amount of Serviceability the OP needs with this, I would consider adding the regulator where the subframe crossover rubber hose would be, then either running the cross-over hardline and then hose up to the carb, or running hose from the regulator up to the carb.

This would give a more stock like appearance and routing.

That works well too. I've done the 1/2" steel tubing side by side for the bigger HP stuff and buy it from either inline or SS tubing as mentioned.
I hide the regulator where the mechanical fuel pump would go and at that point I bend a steel 3/8 line to the carb for stock appearances. Quite honestly everyone that looks at it has no clue it's a stout fuel system with a pump in the tank, there is nothing under the hood that can be seen to give it away.

Just a heads up, it's no cheaper to do it that way than it is to buy 50 feet of -8 AN hose with necessary fittings. It comes out to almost the same price. I do them both ways here.

Yeah that's an excellent way to do it. 3/8" is fine for EFI too, good to over 650hp. Carb tho...

How did you make the transition where factory used rubber? Know there's one from the line to tank area, and on unibody cars there's another from body to front frame section.

Some compression fittings are not recommended for steel lines, one thing to watch out for.


.

A quick view of how I ran the lines: https://youtu.be/mpGT-Dz75Hc?si=QwAc8ZALDF9JxDH1&t=60

The hard lines run from close to the tank, to past the firewall - 1-piece. I have push-lock AN hoses connecting the tank to the hard lines, then braided stainless AN under the hood.

Agree, on the compression fittings. I had to do some research. I'm about to do another EFI system, and bought industrial "Swagelock" type fittings to connect to the steel lines, then use AN adapters on those fittings.

So you just had the push lock ends made on the line ends? Like OE type? That's a great idea!

And nice it's a 1-piece line, that makes it much simpler. Guessing you have frame connectors?

Eaton made compression fittings (Versa-flare) for steel lines, pretty sure I've posted that before. Aeroquip got bought out by Dan Foss, but they are reproducing a lot of their' stuff. They still use the Aeroquip name, maybe even Eaton. They work with steel and stainless steel, go from like -1 to like -12 or higher.

They make -5 to -6 adapters too, so you can go AN on trans cooler lines. (5/16-3/8)

You can flare steel line and use tube sleeves & nuts, but stainless is too brittle, so compression fittings are a great solution. Flaring steel lines is no fun, but possible.

I looked at the Swagelock AbT stuff, but was having trouble finding some sizes, and sourcing was an issue when I was looking so gave up. I will have to look again, since the Don Foss sources can take time to fill an order. Maybe that's better now, last time I tried was close to when the merger happened.

Both can be used in high psi apps, like brake line, quality stuff.


.

"My car pulls enough G's to shoot the cigarette lighter out of the dash and into the back seat and flops over the passenger side floor mat, just think what the fuel is doing in the tank and the pressure against it in the fuel line."

Had to chuckle when I read this.

I had to reach over and flip the passengers floor mat back over after every run. I'd also add that if you were wearing a hat and put your sunglasses on it theer was a good chance they would end up in the back seat or against the back window! I made a time run once with half a can of soda on the front seat between my legs and was wearing most of it and looking for a paper towel coming back up the return road to get my time slip!

Getting back to the topic, it is ALWAYS best to "push" fuel than to "pull" it. An in tank pump, sumped factory tank with a good eletric pump mounted behind it, or fuel cell with a rear mounted pump is pretty much required for one of these cars IF you are making good power and have good traction.

I've tried all sorts of mechanical pumps and larger feed lines but they NEVER work as well as a free flow rear located electric pump, and I always use a return to take the load off the pump so you don't fry the brushes in a month of so of street use........

I see a lot of people insisting on mech pumps, and insisting they 'work', but in the end, many switch, and glad they did.

With a carb, e-pump with bypass regulator is the only way to go. Period. People can argue all they want, but time and time again, it's proven it can't even come close to an e-pump w bypass regulator.

Same with fuel line size. "It works fine", and then when they change to 1/2" they are like "I picked up 3/10ths in the 1/8th!" .

That's not only what you picked up.

And don't talk to me about any mech pump working. Not even the go-to ones. They don't work.

I have an image in my mind of all these garages with an almost new mech pump sitting on the shelf. Or multiple sitting on a shelf.

If you're doing it, do it right, do it once. And you will never have to worry about it again.


.*

.

All depends on the application of the car... mech pumps do "work fine" on millions of classic cars before the factory put e-pumps in the tank. Its only for fast drag racers that an e-pump or big fuel lines are needed.

For the majority of street/strip cars up to about mid 12's a mech pump does work & is very reliable, or at least they were before the china made stuff. I used an edelbrock mech pump at first on a ~520hp pump gas engine that made that number on a dyno, worked great on the street and down to low 12's at the track on first time out with crappy tires but cut out trying to go any faster. Once I got new tires & a robbmc 1100 pump with some tuning sorted out on the car it went 11.2-11.3 at 121-123mph, but does still have occasional cut out on some runs.

I agree an E pump is best for these types of cars, but a mech works fine for street and most street/strip cars running in the mid to upper 12's. Intank is nice with the baffles, but I have heard of & seen way too many cars on the side of the road with failed loud external pumps. In tank is in my future but the deadhead mech works pretty darn good down to low 11s which is a lot more than I expected from this engine/car.

Denial....

I rest my case.


.