96 Beretta Project

[3400-95-Modified]

On the 12psi line? I'm sure it could but then I would have to setup some sort of return system to work with it. I think there is too much thought going into possibility of air bubbles in this system than the true question. I mean I'm only using this system when at the strip where it will be properly purged before use and sit for short periods of time between use... Other than that who cares if air pockets up after the low side regulator when I'm driving it... its not going to hurt anything.

[robertisaar]

would a TINY orifice at the highest part of the feed line be possible? because that would allow trapped air to bleed off into a return line pretty quickly, fuel would slowly get cycled as well.

[3400-95-Modified]

Well In reality the dead headed line is only going to be around 2ft long total... Its coming off the factory feed line and going directly to the regulator and then to the solenoid, shortest run possible. The chance of enough air getting caught in there that would even cause an issue is very slim... And this is where the bang button would come in, Obviously there is a purge solenoid to purge the air from the nitrous line and yes I could do the same with the fuel side if I had a place for that purged fuel to go,(not cool to just spray that on the windshield like the nitrous is) and seeing I don't have a catch can or return line for it the other option is activating the system for a spit second to purge all the lines and ensure fuel is up to the solenoid.

Looking online my design isn't very far fetched from many others out there except for they typically run one very large fuel pump and two parallel regulators, one to feed a carburetor and another to feed the nitrous system... NEITHER is return type too so they would have the same chance of developing air bubbles like your suggesting.

I guess the biggest question here was would a carb regulator work when it's fed from the pressure side of a return system... I can't seem to find that answer anywhere.

[1988GTU]

I'm just wondering if you may have an issue with air pockets randomly entering the system and not being able to prime itself out when you do use the juice. The dead heading of fuel to the 6 lines with fuel can trap air or become stag with aged fuel over time... unless you use it on a regular basis.

Pull up to the ole supermarket at night and do a few hot laps. LoL jk

[3400-95-Modified]

Yes the goal is to improve the system all around... but in order to do so I NEED to drop the fuel pressure to 12psi going to the nitrous system, no way around that. I'm only expecting to eliminate possible vapor lock I had by the sheer design change and shortening of the lines as well as where I'm getting the fuel from for the nitrous setup. It will be T'd off the feed line by the strut tower and run to a regulator close by, rather than from the passenger side of the engine bay, and using fuel that's been heated in the rail already.

I can't do the method you described without installing either a secondary fuel pump, or tank in my car. I have one feed line that is pressurized by the in tank pump, you can't put a 55PSI and 12PSI return type loop on that one feed... the 12PSI would win and the whole system would be 12PSI.

Remember eliminating the possibility of vapor lock was NOT my goal.... I'm going from 1 fogger to 6. I need lower fuel pressure to supply to the system, that is my goal.

This is whats on DynoTune's website, the place I bought the direct port kit from.

https://www.dynotunenitrous.com/store/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=190

Going by that image its just a Holley 4.5-9PSI Carb returnless regulator. No different than the Aeromotive one I picked, just slightly lower pressure.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/hly-12-803/overview/

[1988GTU]

The goal is to improve the setup all around, and to improve it I would feel that going with a system that is similar to the injector return fueling system is the preferred option. Otherwise, you're making a fancy more expensive setup to what you have now with the potential of eliminating vapor locking from occuring.

[3400-95-Modified]

Please explain what you mean...

Only the 12psi line would be returnless... Everything else is the standard return style system.

Right now I have about the same setup just minus the carb regulator in that photo... So I still have the chance of air building up somewhere in the fuel side of things. I had the fuel line tapped off the rail at the test port and I feel that braided line that traveled over the bay and to the solenoid was a bad idea and resulted in some vapor lock in that line. The reason why I feel that way is on initial hit leaving the line i always had a dip in the a/f ratio that could not be tuned out so that was a sure sign the nitrous was getting there first.

The best way to prevent this is to put a bang button in my system... My cousin has one on his truck so he will purge the nos line first then raise the RPM's and just hit the bang button 1 or 2 quick times to essentially purge the fuel side of things... This obviously engages the system for a split second but if you don't hold it on it's fine. Also know as purging through the engine... and on turbobullet.com someone likes to call it his KACHOW button. LOL

BUT I really expect this system to have much shorter fuel lines (nitrous side of things) and not one that spans the bay over the engine and by the exhaust crossover so I think that would eliminate any vapor lock similar to what I was seeing before.

[1988GTU]

I would assume an aftermarket FPR is available for just that purpose. I've only ever used those carb regulators with carb + nitrous systems. Worked well.

My only concern would be purging air out of a returnless fuel system. Pumping air while its spraying nitrous will be more prone with that design.

[3400-95-Modified]

A lot less feedback on here than I expected... I sent Aeromotive tech an email to see if there would be any issues with that setup and if the Carb regulator would respond the way I would expect/want it to with 43-55 PSI being applied to the inlet of it.

[3400-95-Modified]

It would be a T off of one solenoid that would feed the front distribution block and three nozzles and the other leg would feed the rear block and three nozzles. I see no reason to Isolate those two lines or "two fuels" as you referred to them as. I was told with my current solenoids I could simply put a T or Y after the outlet and run it to the two separate distribution blocks since I'm not looking to run a 200 shot or something, the one solenoid will flow plenty of fuel.

I guess my biggest concern is trying to understand how a Carburetor/returnless style regulator works vs the standard return style regulator that will be on the main feed. AND if it would work in that configuration. I'm attempting to do this without having to add a second fuel pump somewhere and add a pickup in my tank because that would just be a royal pain to accomplish.

[45es]

Not knowing the NOS system, I have to ask. In the diagram you show the 12 psi fuel line going to the NOS solenoid. Is that actually a pair of solenoids wired in parallel and plumbed in parallel down stream to the distribution blocks? If not, what isolates to two fuels up stream of the solenoid?

[3400-95-Modified]

Just drew up this with two regulators... 13301 and 13201(return-less Carbureted regulator)



The low pressure regulator would be set when the high pressure side is at it's full pressure of 55... setting it when the VAC is affecting that side would result in a higher pressure at WOT from the increase supply pressure.... At least I think so.

[3400-95-Modified]

I figure I will get more feedback on this question here because of the wider range of users...

Ok so for my fuel system I need to change a few things... First off I'm running a Walbro 255HP pump... I believe that will still be sufficent for flow and pressure that I need... In reality I'm not expecting or needing it to flow much more than it already is supporting, I'm just switching up how it delivers the fuel.

Now for Direct Port I need to drop my fuel pressure at the solenoid to the 8-12 range to allow for a larger fuel jet to prevent any possible clogs. If I kept the pressure at 55PSI then I would need a VERY small jet and the nitrous guys say that's just asking for a disaster. This will require me to install TWO fuel pressure regulators. I'm already planning on ditching the stock style regulator that I have because I'm sick of dealing with that setup and I have some -6an fittings for the rail.

What would you do...

I had something in mind having two Aeromotive 13301 regulators then realized one would bleed down the supply to 9 psi for the whole thing the way I had it plumbed... Now I'm thinking I need one regulator that is setup returnless style...

[3400-95-Modified]

Apparently Techline has stopped selling to the DIY market... Now they only service shops. Kinda BS so I have to have someone do the coatings for me.

[3400-95-Modified]

Slight modification to the factory Malibu transmission bracket and Voila... works... At least the top part appears to work as I've modded it. The lower part that connects to the oil pan I wont know till I fit a pan to this test block and see.



Slight slotting of the holes on the block side, and had to drill a new one to bolt to the trans housing. I'll be filling in the old hole later.



Pistons and rods all cleaned up as well and separated...

Doing some research on DIY Dry Film Lubricant and thermal barrier applications because I'm having trouble spending $300 to have that done to my pistons by a local coater..