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.

Engine Bay Fire Supression

TrcksR4ME said:
modifications. Comparing racing to this :surepal: ...why is racing always used as a comparison. I think they probably have more fires because they push their vehicles to the max, and I am sorry but most of the wheeling done by people on this board does not compare.

Fierospeeder said:
Offroading is considered a motorized sport and shares the same hazards as other racing.
There are a lot of forms of racing. Isn't offroading a race? You try to compete with others to get through the mud first? Get through the rock crawl first? Who has the quickest time going through the trails? All those examples represent racing. Unless you have something else to call offroading besides motorized sports?


I would like to see stats that say racing has more fires due to mechanical reasons, and not due to a car rolling over 15 times.

I believe, a lot of people on here go hardcore off roading. Unless all the people on here are poseurs and drive their lifted trucks to the shopping mall.


Whats with the obsession of rubber fuel lines? There are numerous ways for a fire to happen in a vehicle, and gasoline isn't the only thing that can cause it. :rolleyes:
 
TrcksR4ME said:
I would also agree with Dorian on this one. I have only heard/seen one fire out wheeling and it was a wiring related issue involving some owner made modifications. Comparing racing to this :surepal: ...why is racing always used as a comparison. I think they probably have more fires because they push their vehicles to the max, and I am sorry but most of the wheeling done by people on this board does not compare.


But people in racing dont do this stuff

dyeager535 said:
I ran EVAP on my car with no valve straight to the carb quite a few years back, (and I never had a problem) but now I think that isn't that great of an idea...fuel vapor, backfire, line straight back to fuel tank with no "check" valve.
 
Who cares what kind sport your into? Whether its a roll cage, a helmet, whatever it takes- you be the judge of how much your rig/life is worth to you.

A fire estinguisher in your car is not required by the DOT- but it is still a good idea. I dont think anyone is going to criticize someone for having safety equipment. You can build the one like in the summit kit for a lot less, but not as neat either.
 
PhoenixZorn said:
Hey guys... before you continue pointing fingers at people for something they didn't do, consider this... My truck had two 2 inch pieces of rubber hose in the whole fuel system, and they were connected to either side of the fuel filter by clamps, which were connected to the steel fuel line with clamps... I pulled, pried, and yanked on all the fittings before I connected it all, and nothing with insecure. All of it was brand new... so in the words of a few others here, it was an "Act of God" and nothing more.

I'm not blaming you justnoting that by your own speculation, a backfire blew your fuel *hose* off the filter. Now, if that is really what happened, how is that an "act of god", when GM used a solid piece of steel in that location? Could your theory of what happened take place if the stock piece was in place? I'm thinking that wasn't the case though, to be honest with you. Even if it wasn't, and a fire started some other way, doesn't rubber burn? I'm not asking for arguments. Just look at it from another viewpoint. A tree falling on your truck when wheeling, from a windstorm, is an act of god. A flood is an act of god. A rubber fuel line in place of steel, melting and causing a fire, (a for instance, not using anyone as an example) is not an act of god. That is preventable, is it not? ("act of god-A manifestation especially of a violent or destructive natural force, such as a lightning strike or earthquake, that is beyond human power to cause, prevent, or control.")

All I'm saying is, don't let a fire suppression system let you get careless with your work. Steel line wherever possible, components in good condition, everything properly tightened, fuel lines routed away from heat, clamped securely in place, all electrical connections insulated and in good condition, etc. That's the way *I* look at it. Others do things differently, doesn't mean they are wrong. God forbid anyone actually learn from their own or others mistakes it seems some believe though.

Anyone can run and build whatever they want. I personally am not afraid of my vehicles going up in flames, (nor any other vehicle that an automaker turns out that hasn't been monkeyed with and isn't under a recall for potential fires lol) because I know that I did everything I possibly could to control the things that may cause problems on my vehicles. If you do your very best working on your truck, AND want fire suppression, go for it! Nobody is telling you you can't. Just don't expect an untampered vehicle to suddenly go up in flames for no reason.

Just some reading for those that care to: Auto fire statistics Notice that the largest category covers just about anything caused by an owners error, of whatever type. The vast majority can't simply be blamed on owners based on what is there, but those instances would be lumped into that same category.
 
I didn't install the rubber lines to and from the filter... on either side of the filter, there is steel line, and 2 inches on each side of the filter is rubber to connect it to the steel... the shop did that, not me... all I did was rotate it to fit the q-jet...
 
You can buy the nozzles from Pegasus and others to put in the engine bay. Plumb it/them with dead soft aluminum tubing. For whatever reason copper is NOT used for this.
I think Pegasus also sells the adapter fitting to hook up the plumbing to a regular fire extinguisher. It would be worth the work to not have to open the hood in order to put out the fire. Perhaps two units, one plumbed into the engine bay and another mounted "normally"?
 
ntsqd said:
You can buy the nozzles from Pegasus and others to put in the engine bay. Plumb it/them with dead soft aluminum tubing. For whatever reason copper is NOT used for this.
I think Pegasus also sells the adapter fitting to hook up the plumbing to a regular fire extinguisher. It would be worth the work to not have to open the hood in order to put out the fire. Perhaps two units, one plumbed into the engine bay and another mounted "normally"?


THANK YOU, A CONSTRUCTIVE POST ON THE THREAD. MORE RESPONSES LIKE THIS ARE WELCOME.
 
Cant see the problem with copper, other than it being a better conductor of heat then aluminum... I go with whatever is cheaper. Oh yeah, two estinguishers are definately better. One dedicated to underhood use, one for portable in cab use. Walmart and home depot all have them for under 20 bucks for more than reasonable sizes. Just cheap insurance. I had a battery fire in the basement once, I had 2 estinguishers readily handy mounted on the wall just in case. Too bad someone took down the smoke detectors...
 
Found something on possibly why no copper tube. Per CSA 5.9 requirements for patio heaters copper tube is limited to 350*f where aluminum is limited to 700*f
Not sure why, suspect it's more due to outgassing of alloying elements than melting temp.

Copper tube does have a rep for poor faitgue life. Don't want those nozzles dropping off from a tube fracture.

One other thing, 2lb extinguishers are better than nothing, by just a little bit.

I used to carry a 10#er in the Ranchero. Need to get it recharged.....
 
dyeager535 said:
I'm not blaming you justnoting that by your own speculation, a backfire blew your fuel *hose* off the filter. Now, if that is really what happened, how is that an "act of god", when GM used a solid piece of steel in that location? Could your theory of what happened take place if the stock piece was in place? I'm thinking that wasn't the case though, to be honest with you. Even if it wasn't, and a fire started some other way, doesn't rubber burn? I'm not asking for arguments. Just look at it from another viewpoint. A tree falling on your truck when wheeling, from a windstorm, is an act of god. A flood is an act of god. A rubber fuel line in place of steel, melting and causing a fire, (a for instance, not using anyone as an example) is not an act of god. That is preventable, is it not? ("act of god-A manifestation especially of a violent or destructive natural force, such as a lightning strike or earthquake, that is beyond human power to cause, prevent, or control.")

All I'm saying is, don't let a fire suppression system let you get careless with your work. Steel line wherever possible, components in good condition, everything properly tightened, fuel lines routed away from heat, clamped securely in place, all electrical connections insulated and in good condition, etc. That's the way *I* look at it. Others do things differently, doesn't mean they are wrong. God forbid anyone actually learn from their own or others mistakes it seems some believe though.
.

So what caused the backfire? The truck was running perfectly.
If there was a steel line, and his truck still started on fire because "rubber fuel line" isn't the only cause of fires, are you going to say, he is still a bad mechanic?
Even if it wasn't, and a fire started some other way, doesn't rubber burn?
everything on this earth burns. And how would the rubber burn, if there is no fire? Something caused the fire, to burn the rubber hose. So how can it be the fault of the rubber hose? There are cars and trucks that burn down with steel lines. So that doesn't mean, "thats
impossible" :rolleyes:

A tree falling on your truck when wheeling, from a windstorm, is an act of god. A flood is an act of god.
A tree falling isn't an act of god. It was windy out. And a flood isn't an act of god. Too much rain and theres no place for water to go, so of course, there is going to be a flood.

A rubber fuel line in place of steel, melting and causing a fire
Dont you need "fire" first to melt the rubber line? I doubt his 2 inch of hose was routed incorrectly.

dyeager535 said:
I ran EVAP on my car with no valve straight to the carb quite a few years back, (and I never had a problem) but now I think that isn't that great of an idea...fuel vapor, backfire, line straight back to fuel tank with no "check" valve.
 
Strange, yet mildly interesting. Got a source for cheap aluminum tubing? 2 lbs of powder is better than 10 lbs that you cant get underhood cause the hood is in place. Powder is very annoying though- takes forever to clean up. If your intake is melted... your gonna have a rough time getting allt he powder out. At least it becomes a cheaper rebuild then...
 

Latest Posts

Top Bottom