[Scott65]

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

Why use it? It's 3 times as expensive, or more. Why not just use aluminum? It's proven, and an accepted process.

Copper/fuel, I'm not sold, but maybe there's enough nickel in it to prevent it from hardening from fuel? Straight copper over time in fuel will just crumble. Isn't there a mercury thing with copper too?

Somebody probably just had some left over from another job and used it for fuel line, or during the time the rubber line formulas were breaking down from the eth, but I still can't figure out why someone would go out of the way to use it for fuel lines.

.

I don't know the why's, but it's mentioned often enough that I don't believe it's due to leftovers... I'm totally unfamiliar, so I figured I'd throw it out there and see if anyone else had used it. For years a lot of the aluminum line wasn't rated for high pressure, maybe that drew some folks towards it? Workability along with a high pressure rating....

[455'73inElCamino]

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

Although I'm not that familiar with Caminos/Rancheros/etc, yeah, that sounds like a good start, try it, and if you have issues, move it. That's pretty much the best you can do.

.

One thing that is stated in vent instruction is to put vent as high as it can go but at least needs to be above the filler neck. Does this mean to be above the filler neck location on the tank or the filler neck where once fills the car up at the gas station?

I dont see any way to get a vent above where I fill the car at the gas station.

[HWYSTR455]

Originally Posted by 455'73inElCamino

One thing that is stated in vent instruction is to put vent as high as it can go but at least needs to be above the filler neck. Does this mean to be above the filler neck location on the tank or the filler neck where once fills the car up at the gas station?

I dont see any way to get a vent above where I fill the car at the gas station.

Get it as high as physically possible, but not sure what they mean. I would think where you stick the pump nozzle though.

.

[455'73inElCamino]

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

Get it as high as physically possible, but not sure what they mean. I would think where you stick the pump nozzle though.

.

I still have not resolved the location of the vent. Where I was going to put it, behind the fuel filler door in the drain hole, was actually directly above the tire. Too scary to put it there. There are no other horizontal locations behind that door so I will need to make a shim or something to make it work.

The rest of the install is "done", I definitely see the advantages of using AN fittings and metal lines where one can do that. I plan on making the final touches next year.

[455'73inElCamino]

https://www.holley.com/products/plum...rts/ZZ6316KERL

I am finally back working on this car. There were many discussions about using metal fuel lines, i.e. steel lines.

What are your thoughts on the above steel line from Earl's?

And what are your thought on not using barrel nuts, etc but using compression fittings and going directly to AN fittings such as the following?

https://www.holley.com/products/plum...ts/AT165006ERL

thanks!

[Squidward]

3/16 line is too small for fuel, but ok for brakes.

Go with 3/8" (6 AN) tubing. If it was me, I would not do the slip-ferrule fitting, but get a 37 degree flare tool. Slip on the tube nut and sleeve, and flare away. I did this with the stock steel line on my Firebird, and was totally pleased with the results. I used AN lines in the back from the in-tank pump/regulator to factory steel line, and AN from the factory line to the push lock hose feeding the throttle body.

[HWYSTR455]

I agree, flare them if you can, saves space, and a fraction of the cost.

I've used the compression fittings before in situations where you're not sure the length of line needed, you snake it in place, and there's little to no room to flare.

True to on the link provided, line size is too small. 3/8 (AN 6) supports decent hp levels in an EFI application, BUT, if you EVER think there may be even the slightest possibility that you may go back to a carb, run 1/2 (AN 8) lines, feed and return.

The Summit aluminum line is fine for EFI apps, and much less expensive.

.

[chiphead]

That's the boat I'm in. Carb/N2O application, so I need 1/2(8AN) line.

Has anybody used 1/2" lines for a chevelle?

The lines on a chevelle go up the pass side, where I need them. I'm going to use a Tanks EFI tank/pump with the regulators mounted on the pass side inner fender.

[HWYSTR455]

Not sure I understand 'used the 1/2" lines for a chevelle' ?

If you're running your own feed & return lines, you can choose whatever path you want.

On full frame cars it's pretty straight forward, can go the whole way (back to front) with hard line, and can mount the post filter in line on the frame rail.

Any time you traverse from body to frame or visa-versa, with hard lines, you need to use soft lines for the transition. Don't need to on a full frame car, but ensure the adel clamps you use are slightly larger than the line, or fit loose enough to allow for movement. (this is all for preventing work-hardening and failure)

Think I've provided many acceptable examples, as have others, can look at my posts with pics.

EDIT: If you run through the frame rail in the front past the K frame area, make sure you have clamps on either side of the coil spring pocket, to avoid it moving into the path of the compressing coil spring. (for obvious reasons)

.

[gassman_67]

has anyone mounter the tank vent to the rear crossmember? That area would be higher than the tank.

[455'73inElCamino]

I am not sure how to connect hardline up to the sniper itself. The inlet/outlet size on the sniper is 9/16-18. I dont see an easy way to get to hardline that uses the standard 3/8" inverted flare that one might by from the automotive store. BTW, is the 3/8" inverted flare 37 or 45 degrees?

It seems easiest to me honestly to go from the sniper to their supplied "9/16-18 female o-ring to -6 AN) fitting to an "-6AN to Vapor guard" fitting to vapor guard hose ...

So taking the advise of using hardline, how do I make the conversion from 9/16-18 to something that is hardline friendly?

[HWYSTR455]

You can go from hard to soft easily with available fittings. You can't go from a solid object like a firewall or inner fender to the sniper, it has to flex. (Maybe I'm not understanding you though)

Take a look at the example install thread I did, it answers a lot of questions:

http://www.forums.maxperformanceinc....=1%2F2+install

.

[455'73inElCamino]

Your thread was really helpful - thanks.

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

You can go from hard to soft easily with available fittings. You can't go from a solid object like a firewall or inner fender to the sniper, it has to flex. (Maybe I'm not understanding you though)

.

I am aware that the connection between sniper and solid objects needs to be flexible.

I am now thinking - aluminum/steel line from sniper using AN fitting. Connect to a "plate" I will put on back of head. Use 90 bulkhead AN fittings there. Then vaporguard line from bulkhead to hardline at frame. Softline will run from bulkhead down backside of fender to hardline flared for AN fitting. Back of hardline for return will just use FI clamp.

From hardlnie to softline to tank. Will an compression fitting on steel line work with an aluminum AN fitting?

[HWYSTR455]

There are specific compression fittings for steel lines, the aluminum compression fittings are really just for aluminum line. I posted the part numbers for the steel compression fittings in a couple diff threads, should be easy to find that info.

That Earl's vapor guard hose requires either a clamp or the crimp strip, and I don't particularly care for that, especially since it requires a specific tool for the strips (FI clamps are an added cost too). The Russell Twist-Loc hose and fittings is a straight push-on deal, no clamps needed, rated 250psi for fuel inject, and believe it may even be less expensive.

http://www.russellperformance.com/mc...wist-lok.shtml

http://www.russellperformance.com/mc...wist-lok.shtml

I sometimes don't have the chance to go through an entire thread, or read every post in it's entirety, apologize for some of my posts that are a little off base.

.

[455'73inElCamino]

Originally Posted by HWYSTR455

There are specific compression fittings for steel lines, the aluminum compression fittings are really just for aluminum line. I posted the part numbers for the steel compression fittings in a couple diff threads, should be easy to find that info.

That Earl's vapor guard hose requires either a clamp or the crimp strip, and I don't particularly care for that, especially since it requires a specific tool for the strips (FI clamps are an added cost too). The Russell Twist-Loc hose and fittings is a straight push-on deal, no clamps needed, rated 250psi for fuel inject, and believe it may even be less expensive.

http://www.russellperformance.com/mc...wist-lok.shtml

http://www.russellperformance.com/mc...wist-lok.shtml

I sometimes don't have the chance to go through an entire thread, or read every post in it's entirety, apologize for some of my posts that are a little off base.

.

I am grateful for any help I get!

I already have the vapor guard which is why I plan on using it. The fittings are pretty tight on the hose so I would not be surprised if it doesn't leak even without the clamps. Regardless, I use two clamps to be as safe as I can and I orient them differently in case that might make a difference.

Actually on my Factory Five build I am now using the russell twist lok product and I understand the product "now". There are just so many choices now it makes it difficult to know what is compatible with what. For me the vapor guard I understood better at the time and do like it. On my Factory Five build the ford donor care used all sorts of push lock connections.

QUESTION:
For fuel hose that is under the car that need to be protected from abrasion, is there any reason why the plastic "wire loom" plastic would work instead of stainless steel weave? I realize metal hose with the safety spring around it might be best, but it is not always practical to use. Comments Please

[HWYSTR455]

Gotcha. Yeah, on the stone guard, I ran for years and many many miles on multiple cars without it, never had an issue. I generally don't take my classics on gravel mountain roads like Motor Trend used to do, so not worried about it. If a stone hits it, being aluminum, it would just dent, would be a rare occasion if it actually were punctured.

If you want to put something on it, you can get stone guard for 3/8 line, but I have yet to see any for 1/2 line. The split tubing for wires is too flimsy, if anything, would use regular rubber fuel line, cut it length-wise, slip it over, and zip tie it. That would certainly protect it if you're concerned, but I don't believe there is any concern there. Your call.

.

[64speed]

I thought the sniper unit itself took a regular -an6 feed and return line. I will have to look at mine

[64speed]

I misunderstood what you said ignore it

[Firebob]

So this has been a pretty long tread with a lot of very good ( I'm sure ) suggestions. I'm just posting my experience so far so take it for what it is.
I bought the cheapest sniper kit that they sell. Came with the external pump, a few fittings, 10ft of hose. They are all the barb type ends with FI clamps. I even put a bubble flare on the steel line coming from the orig sending unit and hose clamped the feed line from the tank. I've had it running on the car for a couple of years now. The unit is supposed to run at a pre-set 59.5 psi but mine runs about 72psi( I think because I run a 5/16" return line). So far, no issues and no leaks anywhere with the fuel system. I'm sure, as always, there're better parts if you want to spend the money but it may not be absolutely necessary in all cases.
Just my .02

[HWYSTR455]

Originally Posted by Firebob

So this has been a pretty long tread with a lot of very good ( I'm sure ) suggestions. I'm just posting my experience so far so take it for what it is.
I bought the cheapest sniper kit that they sell. Came with the external pump, a few fittings, 10ft of hose. They are all the barb type ends with FI clamps. I even put a bubble flare on the steel line coming from the orig sending unit and hose clamped the feed line from the tank. I've had it running on the car for a couple of years now. The unit is supposed to run at a pre-set 59.5 psi but mine runs about 72psi( I think because I run a 5/16" return line). So far, no issues and no leaks anywhere with the fuel system. I'm sure, as always, there're better parts if you want to spend the money but it may not be absolutely necessary in all cases.
Just my .02

That would be my first guess, the return is too small. I believe they say you can deadhead the sniper setups, but don't recall now. The Vapor Guard stuff and other 'push-lock' types are a little different than a typical brass 'barb' fitting, the barbs are different, and the tolerances of the barbs are much more 'tight', to ensure fit/no leaks. One point I was trying to make was, everyone else who makes 'push-lock' style hoe & fittings don't require a clamp, and are rated to the same psi, so the extra expense of the clamps is a pain. They are about a $1 a piece, but you can use regular FI hose clamps instead, might be able to get those in bulk for 50c a piece.

Nothing wrong with the Vapor Guard, just a personal preference for me I guess. Without hose clamps looks much cleaner too.

.