OP
OP
Growing up doesn't have to suck
- Thread starter iamdub
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
pwtr02ss
Full Access Member
I vote near the firewall so if I go that route, I won't have to lay on the ground to steal your hard work and ideas.
kbuskill
***CAUTION*** I do my own stunts!
Same
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
Dammit. You just reminded me what I wanted to do when I got home this evening. I wanted to take inventory of my fuel system QD adapters and stare at the firewall area for a bit. Looks like I'm headed to the shop in my pjs.
kbuskill
***CAUTION*** I do my own stunts!
Slight update, the P1174 code, that I was getting every time the truck was driven, hasn't reared it's ugly head since replacing the O2 sensors. That makes me smile, but only slightly.
I haven't checked the E% since fueling up the other day but will check it before fueling up again and report back.
I haven't checked the E% since fueling up the other day but will check it before fueling up again and report back.
IMHO there is nothing better in the world sometimes than doing that. I just got done doing that myself. Especially this time of night, feels so at peace out there and gratifying. Even feels a little naughty, like sneaking out in the middle of the night on Xmas to see if the presents are under the tree.
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
Preliminary ideas-
The QDs I have fit great on the fuel rail. Even the safety lock fits:
The factory feed line at the firewall goes from hard pipe to an ~8" section of flex hose that snaps to the fuel rail. I could disconnect the flex hose from the rail and connect it directly to the sensor inlet. Then, just make up one hose with two female QDs to connect the sensor outlet to the fuel rail. There are 90° options for the QDs if needed for better routing. With this, I'm limited to put the sensor wherever I can aim that ~8" piece of factory flex hose.
The other idea is all the same, but using a male QD-to-hose barb to make an extension for the factory flex hose for more freedom in locating the sensor. I wanna minimize connections and keep it as clean as possible, so I'll likely do as described above.
Or, I'll put the sensor near the tank, utilizing that connection in the same manner, to keep everything hidden under the car and safer in case of a leak. I don't know why I'm so concerned about a leak- I'm the aśshole driving around with nothing but a 15-year-old plastic cap holding back 50+ psi fuel from spraying all over the engine.
The QDs I have fit great on the fuel rail. Even the safety lock fits:
The factory feed line at the firewall goes from hard pipe to an ~8" section of flex hose that snaps to the fuel rail. I could disconnect the flex hose from the rail and connect it directly to the sensor inlet. Then, just make up one hose with two female QDs to connect the sensor outlet to the fuel rail. There are 90° options for the QDs if needed for better routing. With this, I'm limited to put the sensor wherever I can aim that ~8" piece of factory flex hose.
The other idea is all the same, but using a male QD-to-hose barb to make an extension for the factory flex hose for more freedom in locating the sensor. I wanna minimize connections and keep it as clean as possible, so I'll likely do as described above.
Or, I'll put the sensor near the tank, utilizing that connection in the same manner, to keep everything hidden under the car and safer in case of a leak. I don't know why I'm so concerned about a leak- I'm the aśshole driving around with nothing but a 15-year-old plastic cap holding back 50+ psi fuel from spraying all over the engine.
Last edited:
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
Back when that valve spring broke, I couldn't wait to diagnose it so instead of getting in bed, I made a U-turn and headed to the garage. I was out there at 11PM in my boxers taking the valve cover off.
pwtr02ss
Full Access Member
Next time you know to share a pic with paw paw!
gooffeyguy
Tom
You know my vote..... on firewall plugged into the back of the fuel rail.
It'd be more accurate to what the engine is seeing
It'd be more accurate to what the engine is seeing
Last edited:
randeez
Full Access Member
How'd the pushrod look in those boxers
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
Sooo... I don't like the idea of the plastic locking ring on the fuel rail inlet. Also, all Dorman could tell me about the fitting is that they've "been tested up to 15% ethanol on long running trials". The fittings have Viton O-rings which is fine. But I was trying to ascertain the particular "plastic" the body is made of. I really think they'd be fine, but I'm not willing to risk anything on it. So, I dug around more and ran across this:
It's a stainless braided (Teflon?) hose for a GTO, designed as an upgraded direct replacement for the factory part. There are two part numbers, #651120 and #651121 that have identical specs. One is for the LS1 GTO and the other for the LS2. I emailed Russell asking for clarification. It may just be a difference in length and I asked them for those specs as they're not listed anywhere. I think this would be a clean, plug-and-play solution with OEM-style connections. I'd get some extra fuel line clips to have them on all the connections. I'd probably fab up a sheet metal bracket to use one of the studs on the upper bellhousing bolts so I'd just have to get a metric nut to attach it. For wiring, I'll either run my own circuit or, since I don't like extra unused/abandoned wires and plugs, I may repurpose the AFM VLOM circuit since it's conveniently right there at the firewall. Just cut off the VLOM plug and splice the Ethanol sensor harness to three of the wires, then repin accordingly at the PCM. No additional wiring and it'll all be like a factory design.
The pondering and research continues...
It's a stainless braided (Teflon?) hose for a GTO, designed as an upgraded direct replacement for the factory part. There are two part numbers, #651120 and #651121 that have identical specs. One is for the LS1 GTO and the other for the LS2. I emailed Russell asking for clarification. It may just be a difference in length and I asked them for those specs as they're not listed anywhere. I think this would be a clean, plug-and-play solution with OEM-style connections. I'd get some extra fuel line clips to have them on all the connections. I'd probably fab up a sheet metal bracket to use one of the studs on the upper bellhousing bolts so I'd just have to get a metric nut to attach it. For wiring, I'll either run my own circuit or, since I don't like extra unused/abandoned wires and plugs, I may repurpose the AFM VLOM circuit since it's conveniently right there at the firewall. Just cut off the VLOM plug and splice the Ethanol sensor harness to three of the wires, then repin accordingly at the PCM. No additional wiring and it'll all be like a factory design.
The pondering and research continues...
pwtr02ss
Full Access Member
Exactly how I like 'em.
kbuskill
***CAUTION*** I do my own stunts!
Still waiting on the parts list... no rush. Keep up the good work.
randeez
Full Access Member
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
That shall come to fruition within the following pages.
OP
OP
iamdub
Full Access Member
Russell/Edelbrock replied: From end of straight fitting to center of 90°, the 651120 is 12 1/4" and the 651121 is 11 3/8". First off, I don't really see why it was worth making two otherwise identical flex hoses with less than an inch difference. You'd think splitting the difference and just making one 11 3/4" hose would accommodate all. Anyway, I think I should get the longer one cuz, in my Universe, stuff would fall out just so that I'd be 7/8" short if I didn't.
randeez
Full Access Member
i guarantee you some old as **** would order the wrong one and complain his bright yellow GTO with a showroom quality stock engine bay has been tainted by the extra 15/16" slack that it has provided and that he will never buy another edelbrock product for as long as they live
