Product Engineering Pump

CMNS PWR

Registered User
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
36
Reaction score
0
Location
Blacksburg, VA
Whats the real skinny on this pump? I am looking for a "permanent" fueling system fix that will be reliable. I can't quite afford the FASS/Preperator at the moment. I see the 4200 model is set at 18psi. This is too much to subject the VP44 to for an extended period of time at startup, no? The 4100 model is a bit lower as far as fuel pressure. Rip has a good price on the system, which is a portion of the reason I am leaning toward it.

In the past (summer 2003) in talking with Andy at ADT, he said there were some problems with these pumps. Are these problems resolved?
Is there enough drop in pressure in bent lines and fittings for the VP to be happy? Doesn't the VP need ~8 psi to start, then likes to see 13 at idle? Seems to be a potential problem.

An alternative would be to regulate the incoming pressure, perhaps by using larger diameter tubing near the VP.

Are there any detrimental effects to a mechanical 15psi fp gauge by ******* it at 18+ psi?
 

russs

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Posts
378
Reaction score
0
I am also leaning towards a PE when this lift pump dies. I think the reliability issues have been resolved. The electric motors on the pumps were rated for gasoline and Diesel has a higher viscosity. The pumps werent failing but the motors were. I'm pretty sure thats been resolved, plus Rip has some suggestions for feeding this beast electricity if you mount it back at the tank.
 

Whit

Registered User
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Posts
3,808
Reaction score
0
Location
lost in Why-homing
Gents, I want to offer a fix that has worked for me but is not possible for all, I notice alot of members here that have great concern on the L/P issue. After all the L/P issue will never go away till we re-engeneer the system, DC obviously does not care. When something fails DONT put it back the same way...........try something different.
I firmly believe that the OEM lift pump is an OK pump, but also think that the setup is the problem, NO pump likes to pull a vacumn but prefers a positive head pressure, the OEM setup is the problem, the pump is on a constant vacumn from pulling up to 2 feet and from up to 8 feet away, there is not a pump on the market that will survive this kind of application or punishment. I am sure I will catch some flack over this but IMHO a pusher pump is only a bandaid at best and with 2 pumps you then have twice the chance of failure. I know alot of members are using pusher pumps and some with success With that said once again there is only one fix for this IMO, You MUST install your L/P lower than your supplied fuel source and the less line between the fuel and the pump the better, You MUST also have adequate delivery lines to and from the pump, at least 1/2" line to be safe, some of you may comment that the inlet and outlet of the pump are like 3/8" and that is true but trust me here larger line is necessary in order to supply the least resistance as possible. If you have ever studied hydrolics than you know what I mean.

Here is what I have done to correct my OEM fuel delivery system. I purchased an auxillary inbed fuel tank, this is my MAIN supply to my delivery pump ( no longer a lift pump ) I have installed a ball valve at the bottom of the tank for maintenance purposes and 1/2" line to the pump, 1/2" line from the discharge of the OEM pump to the OEM filter housing in its original location and 1/2" line from the filter to the VP-44.............................RESULTS ARE I now idle at 15 psi of pressure and cruze 75 mph at 15 psi!!! and at wot I can only pull it down to 12 psi!!! As far as fuel usage from my Cummins I have 275 injectors and a comp box, the above stated readings are with the comp on 5x5. Before this mod my numbers were cruze 75 mph at 12 psi, WOT at 4-5 psi.I now use my OEM fuel tank as a storage and transfer tank, I use a small 40 dollar pump for this task, something interesting here is at first I used the oem line from the OEM tank to the aux tank and it took about 30 minutes to transfer its contents up to the aux tank ( main feed ), I didnt like that so I installed 1/2" line and now I can transfer in 13 minutes!!! That tells me alot about fuel delivery lines because the transfer pump and its location didnot change, I simply reduced the resistance of the lines.

I really wish I had a amp load reading from the liftpump from before and after this mod. I know it is less because the pump is not working near as hard now. It no longer is SUCKING.

OK OK, I know that this setup is not for everyone but the same logic can be applied to this concept on the OEM tank as a main fuel delivery system. It is not very expensive and will help alot.

If you dont have an inbed tank than buy a bottom bung tap and come off the bottom of your OEM tank to the pump. This will give you the same concept, The fuel supply must be higher than the pump and the pump needs to be as close to the fuel source as possible.

Bottom line is if you dont want a lift pump than turn it into a supply pump.

Also I had what I thought was a bad lift pump ( crappy psi and down to 2 psi at WOT ) sitting on the bench that had 12k miles on it, just for grins I installed it and guess what I have good readings, so now I have a spare pump for future use.

Cheers, Kevin
 

RAF

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
177
Reaction score
0
Whitmore,

I have to agree with you on this. The L/P is located in the same spot on the engine no matter who the truck manufacturer is. Most all of the medium duty trucks use 1/2 line,yet stiil have some probs due to it's location. Pulling fuel from dual tanks up to a 'T' on top of the trans and then thru a Raycor filter is asking the pump to do a lot in that situation. The pump is pulling thru a lot less on the Dodge,but thru a smaller line.


Moving the pump back to the tank area and using a bottom pick-up is a good idea,tho I would use some sort of filter before the pump to catch any crud from drawing fuel off the bottom of the tank.

I'm still trying to decide whether to relocate the stock pump, or to go with a PE or FASS set up.
 

Whit

Registered User
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Posts
3,808
Reaction score
0
Location
lost in Why-homing
Fass is expensive but a very good unit, with the Fass you eliminate your oem filter, If you go with the Fass also go with biger fuel line.

Cheers, Kevin
 

Dodgeman101

Sled ******
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Posts
114
Reaction score
0
Location
in a van down by the river
I just put on a PE4200 1 week ago and it is leaking and getting noisy already. I also went with the PE due to cost less then the Fass or Prep. I think it is a good solution but I got a bad one. Rip is taking good care of me. It started out at 18 psi solid and I liked that it didn't give hard starts and the truck runs much smoother, I kept the OEM fuel filter and already had bigger lines on the engine, but added 3/8 line from tank to filter. The 4200 was what Rip recomended due to were I am at hp if you are stock you may get away with the 4100 as you don't need the pressure.

Good Luck with your decision.
Dodgeman101
 

renegade681

Registered User
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Posts
2
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver
Originally posted by jackofalltrades
wait 2-4 weeks and you will be amazed :)

Is this in regards to the smaller Preporator pump that he's making? Just wondering and if it is do you know about how much?
 

Venom

Testing Some Crap Out
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Posts
14
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by jackofalltrades
my lips are sealed, and this pumps uses no power , its perfect

Any Info yet?
 

renegade681

Registered User
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Posts
2
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver
Well I couldn't wait any longer so I went with the Fass. My carter 4601HP gave out after about 1 month and about 1600 miles.
 

ofcourse

1% r
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Posts
43
Reaction score
0
Location
Fed Way, WA
I agree. I almost jumped on the Fass or PE.
I'm holding out for the ________.
My lips are also sealed.

TC
 

ISB24V

Registered User
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Posts
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Indiana
Its the smaller Preporator or "airdog". Its been advertised by Charles Eckstam for some time now. Not cheaper by much but nonetheless smaller and powerful.

I'm still gonna pass. Simply gutting the filter fabric out of the fuel module intank and putting a 30 micron spin on prefilter and a 5 micron final filter...in addition to putting the OEM pump back near the tank has produced 13-50psi under all conditions and consistently for 1.5 years.

No OEM filter is nice too. All 3/8" hose and straight fittings except for one 90 at the VP44.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
91,304
Posts
1,129,990
Members
24,114
Latest member
Tyler9828

Members online

Top