CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
I swapped the fuel inlet to the back. Pretty easy. The crossover tube is a bitch to put on the front since the intake sits higher there. So I put the tube on upside down to get the fittings on so the middle part is now taller than each fuel rail. Then I forced it down and it now contours the intake. It does touch the intake but I could put a piece of rubber tube in the center just to keep it off the intake.

The Edelbrock rail fittings are -6AN O-ring. I'm removing the plug at the end of one rail and have both fuel rails go to the Aeromotive FPR and have my fuel line go into the FPR well so the rails, and fuel source all go into one point. The fuel pressure sensor will also be in my FPR. Its costing me a crap load of AN fittings and braided hose but it will look decent when done. Already have the FPR from previous 9 second car. Honestly I'd rather have the fuel line from the pump go through each rail then into the FPR but its too many fuel lines going across the engine.

You got a build thread on this with some pics?
 
You got a build thread on this with some pics?
I need to update my build thread (Potent Rodent Revival) with some updated pictures on this topic. Just ordered the fittings last night from Summit.
 
Trying to decide the best way. Was going to do option 2 but may go with option 1 to route the fuel lines. The only thing that worries me with option 1 is the 2nd (top) fuel rail having less fuel to supply the injectors.

Option 1
FPRdiagram.jpg

Option 2
FPRdiagram2.jpg
 
Trying to decide the best way. Was going to do option 2 but may go with option 1 to route the fuel lines. The only thing that worries me with option 1 is the 2nd (top) fuel rail having less fuel to supply the injectors.

Option 1
View attachment 288918

Option 2
View attachment 288919

The returns on the second picture will average the return pressure to the regulator, so if there is a “weak” side, you’d never know without either two gages or two regulators

Conversely on the first, the last injector supplied will still achieve the minimum set by the regulator

For fun I expect you to put a gage at each injector so we can monitor the pressure loss through the system

#stillbetterthantbi
 
I have a friend (oddly named) Chuck Ford (he’s a Chevy guy) who has an NHRA Crew Cheif of The Year on his resume’ and now builds superchargers for Don Shumacher as well as others.
.
Years ago before his fame and fortune he built an engine for me, 1,100 horsepower 377 with fuel injection and a Mondo supercharger. The fuel line came from the tank to the pump then to a “y” fitting just before the fuel rails then joined back together to the regulator and then back to the tank. I don’t recall where the filter was.
 
Last edited:
I have a friend (oddly named) Chuck Ford (he’s a Chevy guy) who has an NHRA Crew Cheif of The Year on his resume’ and now builds superchargers for Don Shumacher as well as others.
.
Years ago before his fame and fortune he built an engine for me, 1,100 horsepower 377 with fuel injection and a Mondo supercharger. The fuel line came from the tank to the pump then to a “y” fitting just before the fuel rails then joined back together to the regulator and then back to the tank. I don’t recall where the filter was.

Yeah I agree for something with 1100 hp should run that. I did some research and found stock LS1 fuel rails run in series like the one above (option 1) and many have no problems with 800whp. For more than that, I'd run the setup below like Aeromotive suggests. Takes more lines and fittings. I'd run the Y at the front of the fuel rails.

fueldia.jpg
 
Yeah I agree for something with 1100 hp should run that. I did some research and found stock LS1 fuel rails run in series like the one above (option 1) and many have no problems with 800whp. For more than that, I'd run the setup below like Aeromotive suggests. Takes more lines and fittings. I'd run the Y at the front of the fuel rails.

View attachment 289214
That’s it.
 
FYI

The plug for the computer requires just over 2” hole if you are going through the firewall to hide the ECM in the same location as a factory TBI

In my case it was TBI conversion, so I opted to locate it inside the cab

The plug system for the ECM has a cam lock, and looks pretty durable and waterproof. Under the hood would probably be no issue
 
So I happened to remember that when I first started mine up, I entered a base map for a mild engine as this cam is at the lower end of the range in Edelbrock's range. It seemed kinda rich, and so I dropped it down to a stock base map, which seemed better. I now wonder if it could be partially due to the air density here. I am at about 4700 feet.
I did change it very soon after initial fire-up, and only a few miles. Basically no time for it to learn. But I liked the result. So I believe that it maybe it's better to be at the top end of the "stock" range at my elevation, with this engine and camshaft.
 
So I happened to remember that when I first started mine up, I entered a base map for a mild engine as this cam is at the lower end of the range in Edelbrock's range. It seemed kinda rich, and so I dropped it down to a stock base map, which seemed better. I now wonder if it could be partially due to the air density here. I am at about 4700 feet.
I did change it very soon after initial fire-up, and only a few miles. Basically no time for it to learn. But I liked the result. So I believe that it maybe it's better to be at the top end of the "stock" range at my elevation, with this engine and camshaft.
How about some motor info just for reference?
 
How about some motor info just for reference?
Small block.....






:haha:




Didn't I tell the boring story already??
354 CID '72 block, Edelbrock 5089 heads with 2.02 /1.60 valves, compression is estimated at 9.7(?), not sure.. cam was originally intended for TBI, seem to recall 425/447 lift and 210/220 duration. Shorty headers.
The duration numbers are part of what Edelbrock makes the decision on to select base map.
 
Small block.....






:haha:




Didn't I tell the boring story already??
354 CID '72 block, Edelbrock 5089 heads with 2.02 /1.60 valves, compression is estimated at 9.7(?), not sure.. cam was originally intended for TBI, seem to recall 425/447 lift and 210/220 duration. Shorty headers.
The duration numbers are part of what Edelbrock makes the decision on to select base map.
:yawn:

Joking aside. Figured its easier to post the specs and the base cal on the same page.
 
Added small clamps to the vac line for the MAP, didn’t feel very snug

Also extended the throttle linkage out and the bracket up. Part of this had to do with using a 1977 cable, and the geometry wasn’t good before

3CEAFD3C-B859-4089-A994-956BA40262D1.jpeg

91938CB1-F99C-4DF4-A2BB-0FF318F783A3.jpeg
 
So this morning, it was down to 13* overnight, the truck hadn't ran for 5 days. I didn't get out to start it early, it was about noon. My phone weather said it was 18*, the truck thermometer said 22*, the ECM said 19* coolant temp, 29* intake air temp. Not much breeze, and the black hood had been sitting in the sun all morning.
I hadn't done any adjustments on cold start or cranking fuel. It started fine at 21* about a month ago, but today it fired and died. I tried it two more times to see what it would do, it was trying, but couldn't keep it running for more than a couple of seconds, and it was not firing many cylinders. I should have played with the settings in the computer, but I just gave it a little throttle and it started up pretty good then. I let off of the throttle after a couple of seconds.
It then ran fine, and had the idle target at 1100 rpm for that temperature.
My assumption is that it has cut enough fuel during the past few weeks of learning that it now needs more for the cold temperature starting.
I let it run, touched the pedal gently a few times to see if it would stumble, no problem. After it got to 155* I took it for a drive and all seemed fine.
Now I have to wait and see if the little adjustments that I did are enough, and in the correct direction. It gives you the option of +/- 20% on cold start enrichment at different temperature levels, as well as +/- 20% during cranking.
 
Did that get WOT then? I have my throttle bracket down some compared to yours, to have it pull at an upward angle. I did it to try and keep it some what in line when the throttle lever goes down at WOT. I was trying to explain that on the phone. But, I don't always succeed.
 
Yep I think so, hit the stop anyway

Starts and ends level
:waytogo:
 

I think I have you beat on the ghetto fab. I was too cheap to buy the alum. Edelbrock bracket and just re-drilled my cheap chrome piece of crap so it sticks in further. To top it off, I was too lazy to cut off the extra hole. Then I have the awesome brass vacuum splitter/manifold.
I was going to try to work on it today but between between being sick and its freezing in my garage and my heater is out of propane I decided to have a lazy day and buy more parts... :)

20181225_144720CR.jpg
 
Top Bottom