La oferta termina hoy.Obtén un 30% de descuento en cualquier curso (excepto paquetes).
Termina en --- --- ---
Mensajes del foro
Cursos
Blog
Artículos de tecnología
En esta sección, hablaremos sobre todo lo relacionado con el tuning . Noticias, productos, problemas y resultados.
= Hilos resueltos
I haven’t seen a post on this topic so I’d like to open the discussion, Return vs. Return-less Fuel Systems: What are the pros and cons that you’ve experienced?
I’m building a fuel system for a Subaru STI Type RA that I drive across the U.S. to attend track days. I haven’t ran it yet, but at the moment my setup goes like this: Pump>Filter>FlexFuel Sensor>F.P.R.>Rails (each bank w/ pulse damper)>1050x Injectors. Rails are mounted with thermal spacers, and all parts are from Radium Engineering. While I haven’t tested it yet, I’m realizing I could be walking into higher fuel temperatures and the risk of running into a fuel pressure drop that the regulator won’t see. (unlikely since I have lots of overhead, unless there’s a leak)
Since this is a stock turbo engine, and my current setup has plenty of headroom, I’m debating if its worth switching to a return style; Pump>Filter>FlexFuel Sensor>Rails>Injectors>F.P.R.>Return to tank. Again I haven’t even started the car now that it has the return-less, so I can’t say it hasn’t worked. I’m just trying to avoid finding out the hard way.
If you have any insights into anything I should change, I welcome your suggestions! Pulse damper location/quantity? FlexFuel sensor location? Brands of fittings I should use? etc…
Cheers!
