Anybody try a sump in the stock fuel tank????

Darius6t9

I'm the Floater. Lurking.
Aug 23, 2008
574
0
0
Rusk, Tx. Again
It doesn't adjust your DIC directly. The DIC gets info from the ECU. And you can change parameters on that all day long. Or something like that. Wish I had read the forums before I went off and bought my Banks system. I want EFI so bad. Just don't have the money for it right now.
 

D-Maxx

New member
Nov 30, 2009
10
0
0
It doesn't adjust your DIC directly. The DIC gets info from the ECU. And you can change parameters on that all day long. Or something like that. Wish I had read the forums before I went off and bought my Banks system. I want EFI so bad. Just don't have the money for it right now.


Cool Thanks!:thumb:
 

LBZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Jul 2, 2007
9,903
149
63
46
B.C.
A mod I think would be a good thing to do to these sumps is to put a small standpipe in it and little drain in the bottom so water doesn't get sucked up and anything that collects in the bottom can be drained off.

Where I live, due to the rapid changing temps and extreme cold weather, I think this would be a very good preventitive addition to an already good idea!!
 

LBZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Jul 2, 2007
9,903
149
63
46
B.C.
Or put a T in the line between the sump and lift pump. Or run a water fuel seperator.

Good idea, except water in that line/filter can freeze.:(
I'd rather it freeze in the bowl than the line on my truck on the side of the highway 300miles from the nearest town at -40!!
 

Mika

Bastardo Finlandias
Oct 25, 2008
291
0
0
Finland
This gives me idea of making sump and dual feed line, liftpumps and filters. Because 2 Dragonslayer cp3`s are coming in my truck, that will take care of all other possible fuel starvation problems when both cp3´s have own fuel line and pumps from tank.
But what volume lift pumps I should use?
 
Last edited:

sweetdiesel

That's better
Aug 6, 2006
10,390
0
0
52
Thailand
This gives me idea of making sump and dual feed line, liftpumps and filters. Because 2 Dragonslayer cp3`s are coming in my truck, that will take care of all other possible fuel starvation problems when both cp3´s have own fuel line and pumps from tank.
But what volume lift pumps I should use?


150gph+ Each:D

I am helping a friend put some nice SS lines,Braided hose and A/N ( JIC ) kit together right now .You want to find a good high volume filter in a low micron rating & you might want individual fuel coolers


There is only a certain amount of fuel that the cp3 will use and it to some can be considered over kill, To me it is just better than underkill:D

And I like the looks of it:)

jUST SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT
 

TrentNell

Finally underway !!!!!
Jul 7, 2008
7,543
0
0
44
slc tuah
This gives me idea of making sump and dual feed line, liftpumps and filters. Because 2 Dragonslayer cp3`s are coming in my truck, that will take care of all other possible fuel starvation problems when both cp3´s have own fuel line and pumps from tank.
But what volume lift pumps I should use?

I am planning something similar Mika , I am using 2 fass 150s' , each CP3 will have its own lift pump , feed line , and return line . Might be overkill and could even foam the fuel but wont know till we try it .
 
Last edited:

LBZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Jul 2, 2007
9,903
149
63
46
B.C.
Let your water separator do its job. its best to get the water out of your tank and the waterseperator will definately do that.

Getting water out of the tank is definetly neccessary and this is another way to do it and it would work and in fact since I started installing water seperators on our russian trucks at work, their fuel system problems have greatly dropped.

But I think a drain cock and a standpipe would be a better way to do this. By not allowing water into the fuel system at all is your best prevention to problems down the road.

Just my opinion on the sump in the bottom of the tank deal-something I would like to do someday.
 

Leadfoot

Needs Bigger Tires!
Dec 27, 2006
904
31
28
48
Western MA
www.matpa.org
IMOP it is a peice for guys looking to get the best fuel supply ( quantity ) they can get . I have no reason to believe it will let you fill your tank with any more fuel and I owned one . It will cure any issues with running at less than 1/4 tank and sucking air though .

Just wondering how true this is/isn't. Not argue or trying to start anything just trying to look at it from a logistics standpoint (which what makes sense in theory does not always pan out in the real world).

The factory has the return go into the bucket where fuel is sucked up through. That would help keep fuel supply at the pickup when acclerating, decellerating, corning, etc.

Our tanks are not baffled (at least I did not see any when I installed my KD pickup) and fuel will "slosh" due to physics. Placing a pickup in the center of the tank is probably the worst place for it (except when the vehicle is stationary and motionless). I believe that is why the factory designed that from the start as a fitting in the bottom of the tank would have been cheaper.

All that being said, if the factory fuel pickup is comprimised or altered, it can lead to issues as the tank is drawn down, or if it's a restriction (size of the openings) then I can see where a large diameter bulkhead with large ID fittings and hose would help (although the inlet of the CP3 is pretty small).

The nice thing about the bulkhead fitting at the bottom of the tank is it is non-mechanical (less chances of a failure or part wearing out as there is no moving parts, hoses, etc.).

It was also mentioned about the slime/gook at the bottom of the tank. I think the slime/gook is from the factory pickup not picking up the stuff from the bottom of the tank and then it accumulates. This fitting would not allow this to happen and that stuff would normally be filtered by the fuel filter. If I were to install this fitting I would drain the tank and clean it prior/after install to prevent the accumulated gunk from even being sent to the filter.

I would think the OEM style would provide better fuel quality until it reaches a point where it loses suction (VERY low fuel levels), whereas the bulkhead would provide good quantity/quality as the tank is full or near full, but as fuel sloshes at low levels it would allow more air to enter the system as there are no baffles or catch cans (this may not be an issue as our fuel systems deal with air fairly well compared to older systems). Yes it will allow you to run your tank lower than OEM but at what cost (fuel quality and air).

Thoughts?
 

sweetdiesel

That's better
Aug 6, 2006
10,390
0
0
52
Thailand
Just wondering how true this is/isn't. Not argue or trying to start anything just trying to look at it from a logistics standpoint (which what makes sense in theory does not always pan out in the real world).

The factory has the return go into the bucket where fuel is sucked up through. That would help keep fuel supply at the pickup when acclerating, decellerating, corning, etc.

Our tanks are not baffled (at least I did not see any when I installed my KD pickup) and fuel will "slosh" due to physics. Placing a pickup in the center of the tank is probably the worst place for it (except when the vehicle is stationary and motionless). I believe that is why the factory designed that from the start as a fitting in the bottom of the tank would have been cheaper.

All that being said, if the factory fuel pickup is comprimised or altered, it can lead to issues as the tank is drawn down, or if it's a restriction (size of the openings) then I can see where a large diameter bulkhead with large ID fittings and hose would help (although the inlet of the CP3 is pretty small).

The nice thing about the bulkhead fitting at the bottom of the tank is it is non-mechanical (less chances of a failure or part wearing out as there is no moving parts, hoses, etc.).

It was also mentioned about the slime/gook at the bottom of the tank. I think the slime/gook is from the factory pickup not picking up the stuff from the bottom of the tank and then it accumulates. This fitting would not allow this to happen and that stuff would normally be filtered by the fuel filter. If I were to install this fitting I would drain the tank and clean it prior/after install to prevent the accumulated gunk from even being sent to the filter.

I would think the OEM style would provide better fuel quality until it reaches a point where it loses suction (VERY low fuel levels), whereas the bulkhead would provide good quantity/quality as the tank is full or near full, but as fuel sloshes at low levels it would allow more air to enter the system as there are no baffles or catch cans (this may not be an issue as our fuel systems deal with air fairly well compared to older systems). Yes it will allow you to run your tank lower than OEM but at what cost (fuel quality and air).

Thoughts?

I have a few thoughts

one being the hydrostatic pressure I think would help VS sucking the fuel

I work wit a lot of high volume pumps at work and the suction side is always bigger lin/hose than discharge I truly believe that vloume to the pump helps.

As far as gunk well thats what filters are for....what is the point of keeping it in the tank with the conventional set up?

I do agree with the sloshing though but it has not affected me yet and I probably have the worst style set up....Mine comes out of the front lower part of the fuel cell ( hind site i would of come out the back so that G-Force would push fuel into the line).

Many people would consider alot of this to be over thinking,But i dont care:D
 

LBZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Jul 2, 2007
9,903
149
63
46
B.C.
Sloshing won't hurt you as long as you have a close to full tank of fuel.

Personally, I think pulling out of the top is fine. We just need to get fuel into a bigger cup with larger check valves and draw it out with a larger suction line. Even better put a pump in the tank to push the fuel.