You asked for, you got it. Three new VaporWorx products.

[CarlC]

Tomorrow at RTTC2 VaporWorx was going to introduce three new products. However, the weather looks like it’s not going to cooperate so you guys get to see it first. On Sunday the products will be on display and I’ll be happy to discuss them with everyone.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
First, VaporWorx is offering as a trial sale a RetroWorx kit that maybe used to retrofit current aftermarket stainless steel fuel tanks. The kit consists of a recessed fuel tray, fuel module mounting ring, fuel pressure regulator adapter, fuel line mounting plug, and detailed instructions to properly mount a 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen LS3 fuel module. Geared for the enthusiast who already has an aftermarket custom tank, this kit has the hard-to-make parts but still requires fabrication and welding to complete. The tank needs to be at least 7” tall and have an approximately 7” long fore/aft flat spot on the tank floor. The flat spot on the tank floor should also be parallel to the top of the tank. The cost of the kit is $260 shipped anywhere in the 48’s. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif<o:p></o:p>
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
The second and third products are tied closely together. Many have asked if there is a higher-horsepower offering available. Now there is, for both the standard 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen and the newly adapted late model CTS-V twin-pump fuel module. First, just a bit of tech is needed to justify why VaporWorx chose this new direction.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
The CTS-V fuel module has basically the equivalent to twin Walbro 190lph pumps. It also has a 74psi poppet valve in the module, which is too high for us to use. Is there a 58 psi valve available? Yes, but there are several problems using it. The cracking pressure is 44 psi, so it starts bypassing fuel really early. Hence, lots of useable fuel is bypassed at the pressures we need it at. The other problem with using a 58 psi mechanical regulator with the CTS-V module is heat generation. Twin pumps running at full speed puts a lot of heat into the fuel. A better method was needed, and like the fuel module, VaporWorx looked to the OE’s and how they solved such dilemmas.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
The OE’s solved this problem by using a pulse width modulation (PWM) system to control the speed of the fuel pump. Pulse width modulation is where an electronic system very quickly turns the full system voltage on and off. If the pump is turned on for 10ms, and off for 10ms, then the pump is only running at a 50% duty cycle, hence making much less heat. There are many aftermarket systems that utilize PWM to control a variety of electric motors on our cars such as cooling fans, electric water pumps, and fuel pumps. However, all of the current aftermarket systems use either the TPS sensor, RPM sensor, or a manual switch to control the fuel pump speed. With the 58 psi mechanical regulator the same problems with cracking pressure and heat still exist. In a supercharged application the TPS signal may not properly indicate what the actual fuel demand is. The way the OE’s do it is to use fuel pressure as the feedback mechanism to control the speed of the fuel pump. By controlling the speed of the pump in this manner heat generation is minimized but fuel demand can be constantly controlled. Only the fuel needed by the engine and module venturi pumps is provided and no more.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
In conjunction with DC Controls, VaporWorx has built and tested a new stand alone pressure-based fuel pump speed control to work with both the 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen and CTS-V pump modules. With this new control system the 58 psi mechanical regulator is no longer needed. Hence, all fuel pumped goes to the engine to make power or to the venturi pumps. No excess fuel is bypassed like that in a mechanical regulator. Using the new control system at 13.5v the 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen pump has a pressure vs. output curve almost identical to a Walbro 255lph high-pressure pump utilizing a C5 Corvette fuel filter/regulator. In other words, it can provide enough fuel for 720HP N/A (0.5 BSFC) and approximately 600HP supercharged (0.6 BSFC) with a 10% safety margin. The CTS-V pump can provide 1200HP N/A and 960HP supercharged with a 10+% safety margin. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
The output curve of the controller is currently set to mimic that of a C5 Corvette FFR, and that of many other non-manifold referenced fuel pressure regulators. On the FFR, the idle pressure is 58 psi, and maximum fuel flow occurs when the regulator is fully shut, usually around 50-52 psi. This means that for those that are currently using a C5 FFR or other non-manifold referenced pressure regulating device, no new ECM tuning should be required. VaporWorx is also in the process of making a control system that should mimic a manifold referenced fuel pressure regulator. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
For all models the initial fuel pressure is set by turning a screw on a potentiometer on the controller. Once set there are no other user adjustments needed. The complete system consists of:<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
1) DC Controls PWM fuel pump controller<o:p></o:p>
2) VaporWorx PWM signal conditioning module.<o:p></o:p>
3) Pressure sensor.<o:p></o:p>
4) OE sealed wiring connector for the pressure sensor.<o:p></o:p>
5) Wiring to connect it all. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
The pressure sensor will have a 1/8”-NPT male thread that will need to be spliced into the pressure side of the fuel system. It can be tied into the fuel rail or anywhere along the fuel line. For the Camaro, it is currently tied into the fuel line at the connection where the body line ties into the tank line.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
A simple test to determine how hard the pump is working in a PWM system is to measure the output voltage of the controller vs. the input. Testing of the new PWM control system in the Camaro has shown that at idle both pumps require approximately 6.5v, and at cruise the CTS-V pump uses 6.8v. At WOT in the Camaro, which makes 490RWHP/approx. 550FWHP, the maximum output voltage to the CTS-V pump is 9.3v. When compared to the 13.7v available, it is easy to see that there is a significant amount of excess capacity with the CTS-V pump in this application. The 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen pump is a better choice in this case. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
So why a 6-bar/88psi poppet valve in the 5-th gen and 5-bar/74psi valve in the CTS-V module? They are safety valves. When the ignition key is turned off the fuel injectors and fuel pump immediately shut. However, the fuel pump is still spinning due to inertia. With a closed system and basically an incompressible fluid and solid fuel lines, the pressure spikes. The valves bleed off excessive pressure while still maintaining good line pressure for quick starting. With such a high bypass pressure all pumped fuel is used to supply engine and venturi pump demands.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Below is the tank that is going into James Shipka’s OLC for his run at winning his second One Lap of America challenge this May. James’ tank has every feature offered by VaporWorx and Rick’s Tanks. The fuel module is a 5-th gen model. It has twin corner pickups so that he won’t have to worry about fuel while riding the high banking at Daytona. A GM 33-240 ohm clip-on fuel level sending unit is utilized and is wired through the OE plug on the module hat. The wiring harness includes an OE Delphi sealed plug to the module and a <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on">Delphi</st1:place> quick-disconnect connector that will allow the primary harness to remain with the tank during R&R. The fully potted Vaporworx control box is tuned to operate with the DC Controls PWM controller and was burned in during one hour of pump operation in order to insure maximum reliability. The fuel lines are also securely mounted to the tank using the #10-32 mounting plug on the RH side of the tank. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
This is the tank that is in the Camaro for RTTC2. It has the CTS-V pump and the PWM control system. The tank mounting ring is clocked as it would be for the 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen module, hence a 45-degree fitting at the fuel outlet is needed for proper fitment. Since this tank was built around the 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen module, no provision was made to accept a CTS-V module which requires a separate method to get the fuel level sensor wires out of the tank. In the 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen there are two wires for pump power and two for the fuel level sensor. The CTS-V pump uses the same wiring connector body but needs all four cavities for pump power. Hence, the Fuel Barrier bulkhead was designed. It uses a hermetically sealed and Viton o-ring’ed body to keep fuel from leaking out. The wiring is PTFE insulated and sealed in order to keep fuel from wicking up the wiring and out of the tank. The sealed wiring harness is supplied with a 304 stainless body that is welded into place. Nylon Molex connectors are used inside the tank to make a two-pin plug so that servicing is easy. Like James’ tank, there is a short harness that stays with the tank during R&R and the primary disconnect is made in a <st1:place w:st="on">Delphi</st1:place> sealed connector near the tank neck where access is easier.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Pricing for the new PWM control system will be completed soon and should be similar to those offered by Aeromotive and Weldon but have much better functionality. When used with the 5<SUP>th</SUP>-gen module, or the newly adapted CTS-V module, a very effective fuel delivery system with excellent power potential can be used reliably with readily available replacement parts.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
So, who’s interested? <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

[Bryce]

Very cool stuff. At any point do you plan to make somethig compatible with a bladder, think race fuel cell.

Also are these compatible with race gas, leaded race gas?

[parsonsj]

I read it once.

I'm going to read it again.

I think I want one of everything. Just one possible fly in the ointment: any chance of an aluminum version of the tank top?

[CarlC]

Already going down that road Bryce and jp. Making an aluminum ring is no problem. The hard part is welding it without too much distortion. I'll have to talk to my sheetmetal guy about an aluminum fuel tray.

I don't know about leaded fuel compatibility.

[THE TECH]

Nice product

[wegner426]

Another vote for aluminum fuel tray......what years CTS-V has the dual pump setup? I am having a horrible experience with my custom made aluminum fuel tank for 74 Cuda and am going to have to pull the tank back out. I need to be able to support about 1100 HP for a turbo engine, just in case the boost gets cranked up. Will this fuel tray/module setup work for a tank that is flat on the bottom, but sloped so it is deeper in the front?

Thanks,
Chad

[neki67]

Making an aluminum ring is no problem. The hard part is welding it without too much distortion.

Carl,

How about using a strong (high tech) adhesive like they use in the aircraft industry?

[John McIntire]

Very very cool product and very useful information! I think I have to go back and read it a few more times to fully comprehend!

[CarlC]

Rene,

Using an adhesive seems too good to be true, especially from a long-term reliability standpoint. The last thing I want to see happen is the adhesive fail due to long-term fuel exposure.

[Denvervet]

I'm interested and think the 5th gen setup will work perfect for my 620hp(FWHP). I am still waiting for my vaporworx tank and haven't purchased fuel module, regulator,etc so this maybe good timing. This looks like an optimum setup over the long haul. Help me get my tank so I'll be able to have a need for this ;)

[CarlC]

Another vote for aluminum fuel tray......what years CTS-V has the dual pump setup? I am having a horrible experience with my custom made aluminum fuel tank for 74 Cuda and am going to have to pull the tank back out. I need to be able to support about 1100 HP for a turbo engine, just in case the boost gets cranked up. Will this fuel tray/module setup work for a tank that is flat on the bottom, but sloped so it is deeper in the front?

Thanks,
Chad

Chad,

Some basic requrements:

1) The tank will need to have a 7" - 8-1/2" overall height in the area where the module will be mounted. 8" is ideal. A 1st-gen Camaro has a similar shape to what I believe you are describing.

2) Center of the hole for the module is approx. 4-5/8" from the front of the fuel tray. From there you will need a 3-1/2" radius to clear the module reservoir and venturi/corner pickup lines. The top and bottom of the tank also needs to be parallel so that the module will seat flush against the bottom of the tank.

3) What BSFC is your engine builder basing the fuel requirement on?

David,

I wish I could help but that's out of my control. I suggest talking to Hector at Rick's to find out the status of your tank. 620hp should be OK for yours, but you hit the nail on the head. What is it going to cost you now vs. what is it going to cost to do again?

3) The pump is from a 2010 CTS-V.

I can have aluminum rings made. If there is enough demand I can have some made but there is a setup charge that should be amortized over multiple parts. I there's five or more it would make the cost easier to swallow. So if you're interested in a modified large-flange aluminum ring, please chime in. If a larger aluminum flange was used then the ring could be placed anywhere and simple fabrication processes could be used. No tray needed.

[parsonsj]

Count me in for an aluminum ring. The larger one sounds like the way to go.

jp

[JEFFTATE]

This is so informative .
Thanks Carl .

[newmexicosaint]

Nice!! I will have to re read to determine my best option. Thanks Carl

[MuscleRodz]

Rene,

Using an adhesive seems too good to be true, especially from a long-term reliability standpoint. The last thing I want to see happen is the adhesive fail due to long-term fuel exposure.

Aviation fuel tanks unless bladders are sealed with mil spec 8802 and 100LL has 4 times the lead ragular gasoline use to have. Lasts for many many years without failure

[MuscleRodz]

I think I read it correctly, but the controller will work as a stand alone unit, and new pump capable of 1000 hp? I am glad I have not call Hector yet for the new tank for N-XSS

[CarlC]

Mike,

The last picture has a CTS-V pump in it. That tank was built for a 5th-gen module, hence the clocking of the ring is set up for it. However, the picture shows how a CTS-V pump can be put into a tank designed for the 5th-gen module. A 45* hose fitting is needed, and it may need to be bent to 35-40* to get the hose routing just right.

1000hp how? Supercharging? Turbos? Getting the BSFC is important so that the right pump choice is made. The controller is a stand-alone unit.

[MuscleRodz]

910 hp LS3 with TVS2300 magnacharger. We will more then likely detune a bit once in the car. Second question, if using a GM computer would it be possible to do away with the DC controller and let the computer control fuel flow just like the new cars do?

[CarlC]

I believe you can do it but you would need the proper ECM and CTS-V fuel system control module, then tie it all together. Also, that system limits the voltage to the pump to 12v vs. the 13.5v that the cars electrical system can provide. Hence, there's a performance reduction. I also don't know how much the programming can be changed in the FSCM, but there have been very mixed results with trying to use voltage boosters with the FSCM and not throw ECM codes.

910hp should be easily doable with the DC Controller, the Vaporworx signal conditioner, and CTS-V pump.

[MuscleRodz]

I believe you can do it but you would need the proper ECM and CTS-V fuel system control module, then tie it all together. Also, that system limits the voltage to the pump to 12v vs. the 13.5v that the cars electrical system can provide. Hence, there's a performance reduction. I also don't know how much the programming can be changed in the FSCM, but there have been very mixed results with trying to use voltage boosters with the FSCM and not throw ECM codes.

910hp should be easily doable with the DC Controller, the Vaporworx signal conditioner, and CTS-V pump.thanks will be in touch soon.

[wegner426]

Chad,

Some basic requrements:

1) The tank will need to have a 7" - 8-1/2" overall height in the area where the module will be mounted. 8" is ideal. A 1st-gen Camaro has a similar shape to what I believe you are describing.

2) Center of the hole for the module is approx. 4-5/8" from the front of the fuel tray. From there you will need a 3-1/2" radius to clear the module reservoir and venturi/corner pickup lines. The top and bottom of the tank also needs to be parallel so that the module will seat flush against the bottom of the tank.

3) What BSFC is your engine builder basing the fuel requirement on?

David,

I wish I could help but that's out of my control. I suggest talking to Hector at Rick's to find out the status of your tank. 620hp should be OK for yours, but you hit the nail on the head. What is it going to cost you now vs. what is it going to cost to do again?

3) The pump is from a 2010 CTS-V.

I can have aluminum rings made. If there is enough demand I can have some made but there is a setup charge that should be amortized over multiple parts. I there's five or more it would make the cost easier to swallow. So if you're interested in a modified large-flange aluminum ring, please chime in. If a larger aluminum flange was used then the ring could be placed anywhere and simple fabrication processes could be used. No tray needed.

Carl,
Thanks for the response......I think the fact that the top and bottom of my tank are not parrallel will probably disqualify me from adding this to my current aluminum tank. If I give up on it and get another tank made I will certainly call you. I just have quite a bit invested in this one already with a fabricator that I believe got in over his head and did a bit of a hack job.

Chad

[CarlC]

Chad,

No problem. If you find that you can lay the module over a little bit so that the upper and lower are parallel you should still get very good performance. Even if the module was only 3/4-full, and no other fuel was available to re-fill the module, that would supply enough fuel to support north of 500hp for 15 seconds. That's a long time for that kind of power.

[lynetta.everson]

Thanks for this information :)

[John McIntire]

Hey Carl,
Would this setup be available in a fuel cell design instead of a direct replacement tank for a specific car?
Just curious.
Awesome product!

[CarlC]

If you're talking an aluminum ring to weld into a cell, then yes. I'm working on one now.

[CarlC]

As a follow up here’s the installation of the new fuel system for James Shipka’s OLC.

The OLC has been sporting a traditional fuel system utilizing an external filter and pressure regulator. The fuel pump was also a standard pump-on-a-stick design. More than once the pump starved when the fuel level fell below ½-tank. With the upcoming One Lap of America competition looming on the horizon the last thing one should be worrying about is if there is going to be a fuel delivery problem on the track or on the street. Reliable fuel delivery on the high banks of Daytona is paramount, but being able to make a 704 mile overnight run also means that you don’t want to stop every 150 miles to put gas in the car. There's no time for that.

David Pozzi and I spent the past two days replacing the entire fuel system in OLC. The first step was to remove the old fuel system. For those that have seen the underside of a 1st-gen Camaro with a Lateral Dynamics 3-link suspension, you know that there is not much real estate to work with between the front of the fuel tank and the Watts link. If you have not seen one, imagine a structure with moving components that takes up about 6” of the space between the tank and differential. See the hose, filter, regulator, hoses, etc in the photo? That was all fitted between the tank and the Watt’s linkage.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Getting all of that in there was like fitting 5lbs of stuff in a 5lb hole and was not easy at all to service.

Our task was to take all of that and replace it with this Rick's Tanks part.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

So, let’s get cracking.

David and I worked on a plan to try and keep the electronics stealthy but also make them easy to replace if necessary. David whipped up this mounting plate that bolts to the bottom of the package tray. It has #10-32 nutserts to allow for fast and easy component R&R without having to remove the entire plate.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

The controller needs to be mounted as close to the battery as possible so that the power leads are short and can be mounted directly to the battery terminals. This is important to keep the RFI noise to a minimum. Pulse width modulation systems that have long primary power wires will create a lot of RFI. Since the OLC has the battery mounted just behind the rear seat, it made the controller placement decision easy.

With the controller mounted it was time to route the wiring. All that is needed is to attach the following:

1) Connect the Vaporworx signal conditioning module to IGN+
2) Connect the yellow wire from the Vaporworx SCM to the yellow wire on the DC Controls PWM controller.
3) Connect the two-pin blue/white plug from the Vaporworx SCM to the DC Controls PWM controller.
4) Connect the three-pin connector on the Vaporworx SCM to the fuel pressure sensor connector.
5) Connect power from the battery to the DC Controls Controller input.
6) Connect power from the DC Controller output to the fuel pump.

Most of the above connections above are plug-and-play. For example, 1,2, and 3 are either non-interchangeable Weatherpack connectors or a simple plug-in deal. It’s pretty hard to connect the SCM incorrectly.

With most of the electronics installed it was time to put in the new tank. Unfortunately, it needed the Pozzi Tuned treatment to get it to fit in James’ car. Due to time constraints it was decided to use a tank that was not designed for OLC but thought it would fit. Well, it didn’t. Thanks to the talents of Mr. Pozzi, he managed to turn this….

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Into this….

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

While David worked his magic I continued work on the car by replacing the -8AN hose that ran from the old pump to the engine with a new -6AN PTFE hose. The fuel pressure sensor is located between the pump outlet and the -6AN hose using an Earl’s -6/-6 male union with a 1/8”-NPT fuel pressure gauge tap on one of the flats. The other hose is a vent.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

A GM 33-240 ohm fuel level sending unit was used. Since the OLC has a programmable Autometer fuel gauge it was decided to use the custom programming mode to set the full and empty points. This is easy to do with the module out of the tank since the float can be moved by hand.

Once fitted up to the car it was easy to see that David did a great job on modifying the tank to fit around the OLC’s exhaust system. After making the final fuel line and fuel pressure sensor connections it was easy to see that there is a lot more room available in front of the tank.

With everything connected it was then time to calibrate the gauge. Due to the shape of the tank the gauge reading is not linear. In other words, a ½-tank reading on the gauge only takes four gallons of fuel, but the tank is a lot bigger than eight gallons. By putting in one gallon at a time, taking notes, and then making a laminated fuel level card that can be used to keep exact track of the actual amount of fuel in the tank can be done.

Here it is all mounted up.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Here’s the full electronics package. Wire routing was done to keep it easily accessible and make maintenance easy.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

The last order of business to do before firing up the engine was to flush the fuel line. After that, the OLC came to life with little drama. With a mechanical fuel pressure gauge mounted to the fuel rail it was difficult to set the fuel pressure due to gauge fluctuations. The batch-fire injector pulses plus the large injectors working at idle would cause the gauge to fluctuate. We relocated the gauge near the output of the pump which reduced the fluctuations but not completely. An extension was used to allow the gauge to be viewed while driving. As soon as any driving power was applied the gauge fluctuations stopped.

At idle the pump only requires 5.1 volts to power the engine and venturi pumps. At cruise 5.9 volts, and at WOT a maximum of 12.1 volts. With 14.5 volts available there is plenty of pump capacity in reserve. This pump is a very nice match to feed the big Katech 427ci LS7 engine on the track, and when combined with the Vaporworx fuel control system both long life and little fuel heating is possible.

Thank you to James for trusting Vaporworx (me). I’m in your corner for the One Lap. Mary, I’m sorry for the spilled milk. David, get some rest!

[Denvervet]

Any word on $ for this setup yet. About to get my tank and will be ordering pump module, etc. Looking forward to it.....I think. ;)

[bri-rock]

Carl, I understand that the discharge for either of the two pumps has AN-6 fittings. Are there any pressure loss issues potentially? I was looking at a 600 hp, forced induction application. The folks at Aeromotive were recommending AN-8 going from the pump to the engine bay for my application.

[CarlC]

-6 is fine for what you want to do. I'm running near that with mine (very similar build to your sig) with -6, and GM runs a lot more power than that on production cars with the same size lines.

The CTS-V has the same 3/8" quick connect fitting. For over 750hp it's a good idea to up-size to a -8 after the pump since the fittings are usually the limiting factor. The OE plastic tubing is really nice since it maintains good inner diameter all the way to the front of the car.

For any fueling application it is good to try to keep the number of fittings to a minimum. When a fitting does need to be used care should be exercised to not use a fitting that will restrict flow. Sharp elbows really hurt flow.

I have pricing done based on an assumption of how much time it will take to make the conditioning modules. I need to make a batch to see how close my estimate is. I should have it done by mid-week.

[Denvervet]

Thanks Carl for all your hard R&D on this. Looks like a great idea.

[newmexicosaint]

Any word on $ for this setup yet. About to get my tank and will be ordering pump module, etc. Looking forward to it.....I think. ;)

I too am in the same boat and would like pricing. Carl, who do we call for pricing info and pump selection details for specific application? Thanks!

[James OLC]

I can't thank Carl, Rick and Hector enough for their help with this! Fuel delivery is one area where I think that there have been Huge improvements made overall for our cars over the last few years and I think that the VaporWorx setup is now pretty much the ideal solution. With the CTS-V pump and Carl's controller you can have an OEM quality system that can support over 1100 HP without heat issues at idle. One of the things that we found at Silver State year before last was that the Bosch pump really didn't like running in the heat for long distances once the tank reached the half full point. When I got back to the trailer and David and I loaded the car up in Lund the fuel pump was almost as loud as the car was at idle - not a confidence booster. Combine that with the limitations of the old pump/pickup which tended to uncover/starve at some really inopportune moments it was time for something new.

So now we have minimal heat, minimal external plumbing/fittings, OEM parts, dual pickups and a reliable fuel level indicator - too cool!

Thanks again everyone and a big thanks to David for helping make this possible!

[parsonsj]

This is good stuff. I also tried to get an Aeromotive exterior pump and regulator to work for II Much. I moved the regulator around (4 different places), and slowly built an inventory of pumps, hardline adapters, filters, and regulators as I tried several different ideas. When I sold the car it was pretty reliable (and on its third A1000) for several hours at a time.

But this is the way to go. It's the right solution for fuel injection cars that need high fuel rail pressure and want to drive their cars at non WOT for hours at a time.

[CarlC]

My day job keeps getting in the way, and I really need to build a proper website.

PM me for info for specific applications. Please leave your phone number in the PM since voice is much faster and easier than typing.

I spent this evening building controllers to get a good handle on the labor time for production parts. Production includes actual pump testing and circuit tuning. It's a time eater. Testing and potting is next, so pricing should be complete by mid-week. Sorry it's taking a while, I just want to make sure I get it all correct.

[CarlC]

Update:

I have pricing completed, however I'm going to hold off posting it until I have all of the sell-able components in hand and can take pics to display just what you're going to get. In other words, I want to wait until the production wiring, ring terminals, pressure sensors, etc. are here and ready to go. I have ten Vaporworx signal conditioning modules and 3-conductor cables completed.

In the above pics everything has Weatherpack connections. To try and keep the price down I'll offer the initial kits without them except for one. I put them on mine since for testing I'm always swapping them out. Since the kits are for permanent installations crimping/soldering is an advantage since the wiring length and routing can be done to your taste.

Here's what would need to be user-connected:

Connect/solder the blue wire from the Vaporworx signal conditioner to IGN + / Fuel pump on +.
Connect/solder the yellow wire from the Vaporworx signal conditioner to the yellow wire on the DC Controls controller.
Connect/solder the red wire from the 3-conductor cable to Pin3 on the Delphi fuel pressure connector/wire pigtail.
Connect/solder the black wire from the 3-conductor cable to Pin2 on the Delphi fuel pressure connector/wire pigtail.
Connect/solder the white wire from the 3-conductor cable to Pin1 on the Delphi fuel pressure connector/wire pigtail.
Plug the Weatherpack connector on the 3-conductor cable into the Weatherpack connector on the Vaporworx signal conditioner.
Connect the + input of the DCC controller to BAT+ using the supplied Weatherpack sealed 25A link.
Connect the - input/output of the DCC controller to BAT -. This a common connection for both the battery and fuel pump feed.
Connect the + output of the DCC controller to the fuel pump.
Connect the - input/output of the DCC controller to the fuel pump.

It may seem like a lot, once you get it in your hands it will make sense.

Sorry for the delay guys but I want you to be able to see exactly what you would get before committing.

[newmexicosaint]

Carl

You have the red and the white wires from the 3-conductor cable to pin 3 on the Delphi fuel pressure connector wire/pigtail. Is that correct?

[CarlC]

Whoops. Got my wires crossed (in more ways than one.)

Thanks for the catch.

[HOSTILETAKEOVER]

Just to be clear. This pump / regulator / controller setup is compatable with any vaporworx tank?

I have a vaporworx tank on order through Prodigy and I have a forced induction high Hp LS motor. It would appear that this is the way to go. I just want to make sure I don't need to change my order to make use of this advancement.

[CarlC]

The CTS-V pump will fit in the same ring and clocking as the 5th-gen pump. The 5th-gen pump outlet is pointed straight forward whereas the CTS-V will be pointed at a 45* angle toward the passenger side of the car. If you look closely at the pics in the first post you can see the differences.

The wiring harness will be different. Both the 5th-gen and CTS-V use the same plug body but the wiring is different. The 5th-gen has:

1) Pump +
2) Pump -
3) Fuel level sensor ground
4) Fuel level sensor gauge output.

The CTS-V:

1) Pump 1 +
2) Pump 1 -
3) Pump 2 -
3) Pump 2 +

So, the wiring must be made to accomodate the higher power reqirements of the pump vs. the sending unit.

If your new tank has a fuel level sensor built into it then there is no problem. If you do not have one then there are ways that I offer to get the fuel sensor information in/out of the tank.

The electronic speed control system is compatible with either pump as long as the orginal poppet valve that was supplied with the module is used. The adapted 4th-gen mechanical regulator will not work.

[barraza]

What happens to the pressure regulator on the module when using the PWM system? How is pressure adjusted, and what is the range?

[CarlC]

The "regulator" on the module is a safety valve when used as supplied from GM and with the Vaporworx electronic speed control system. It's operation is explained in the first post in this thread. Basically, when the key is shut off, so do the injectors and pump. However, the pump still turns for a short time, and due to its inertia, a pressure spike occurs. The valve in the module keeps the spikes from getting too high.

The pressure is set by turning a screw on a potentiometer. It is not recommended with the current Vaporworx electronic control system to run the pump at an at-idle pressure below 58psi.

[barraza]

Maybe I missed it, but does the 5th gen camaro pump use a controller to regulate pressure from the factory, or the regulator valve?

[CarlC]

The 5th-gen and CTS-V both use a similar system using a fuel pump control module to modulate the speed of the pump.

[barraza]

I guess my real question is, isn't a 5th gen pump designed to run using a modulated system, instead of wide open against a pressure regulator? To have OEM reliability and life shouldn't it ideally be used with the modulator? I don't need a super HP system, but I want the 5th gen pump to last forever.

I have been down the road of a cavitating pump, and then a surge tank, and I think your system is definitely the best out there. No sense in reinventing the wheel, the OEM systems are do it right once and never think of them again.

[CarlC]

The OE's do use a modulated system. Think 100K mile warranty. The turbine design of the pump is more reliable than a positive displacement gerotor type as well. Combine the two and it's all good.

I'm lucky to have several good "in's" at a fuel pump manufacturer. Each of them said no problemo with using a mechanical regulator and full power with this pump. I ran this setup for quite some time with zero problems. Either way should be reliable for long-term service, but if lots of long road trips are in store (Power Tour, etc.) then the PWM system is a good benefit even for the 5th-gen module. Both have been much more reliable than the old Walbro pump-on-a-stick setup.

Another way to look at this is what the really good aftermarket companies are doing. Lingenfelter is one of them. I respect their engineering and parts very much. They adapt the CTS-V module to other cars, but add a return fitting in some case so that an external regulator is used. That means running the pump at full speed. http://www.lingenfelter.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=L710081410&Category_Code=C416&Store_Code=LPE But, it's still going to add a lot of heat to the fuel load, and at low fuel levels the fuel will heat quickly.

I hear ya on the do-it-once thing. That's what got me into this silly endeavour.

[milehigh69]

Carl
I really need that quote for my 69 camaro. I will take a quote on the ring and the full up tank.I need the CTS-V pump , controller , tank etc. Please.

[CarlC]

The FlowWorx fuel pump control system is the latest release from VaporWorx. This new control system utilizes a pulse width modulated (PWM) speed control system to adjust the speed of a 5th-generation LS-series Camaro or late model CTS-V fuel pump. Unlike other PWM controllers available today, the FlowWorx system allows the user to eliminate all external filters, pressure regulators, and return lines. Only a single pressure line from the tank to the fuel rail is needed.

This system mimics the output pressure vs. flowrate curve of the Corvette C5 Fuel Filter/Regulator. The C5 FFR has an at-idle fuel pressure of 58psi. As fuel demand increases, the fuel pressure decreases. This is normal for non-manifold vacuum referenced pressure regulators. The FlowWorx system is designed to have an at-idle fuel pressure of 58 psi. For the CTS-V the pressure will drop to 53-54psi at the pump at full fuel flow. For the 5th-generation Camaro LS3 pump the pressure will drop to 51-52psi at full flow. The C5 FFR does not reach full flow until the fuel pressure is under 50psi. This difference should not be a problem for engines that are currently using a non-manifold vacuum referenced tune.

The VaporWorx Signal Control Module (SCM) can be used with either the CTS-V or 5th-gen pump. Hence, if you use the 5th-gen fuel module today, and decide to upgrade your engine with more power in the future, the same SCM can be used with the CTS-V fuel module. The higher-output CTS-V pump can be used on stock engines. So, if you know that you’re going to increase the engine power beyond the capability of a 5th-gen fuel module, it’s less expensive in the long run to purchase the CTS-V pump the first time. That way a second fuel module will not need to be purchased.

The system comes with the following:

1) A DC Controls PWM fuel pump speed controller.
2) A VaporWorx SCM that connects to the DCC controller. The SCM is in a matte-black housing with mounting flanges. It is fully potted (filled with non-conductive epoxy) to insure long-term durability.
3) A GM fuel pressure sensor and OE wiring connector. The fuel pressure sensor has been modified to accept, and has been installed with, with a 1/8”-NPT male/male short fitting. A female 1/8”-NPT thread is needed near the fuel pump outlet to connect this sensor.
4) 15’ of three-conductor shielded cable for connecting the fuel pressure sensor to the VaporWorx SCM. This cable will have the fuel pressure sensor electrical plug terminated on one end.
5) 15’ of the appropriate GXL wire to route to the fuel pump. The 5th-gen pump can use a 14ga wire, the CTS-V a 12ga. More on this later.
6) 12ga 25A sealed fuse link with fuse.
7) Four #6 stud ring terminals to attach the power cables to the DCC.
8) Two 5/16” ring terminals to attach the power cables directly to the battery.
9) Heat shrink tubing for sealing the soldered joints (seven splices, all color-coded.)
10) Mounting screws for the DCC and the SCM.
11) Detailed instruction manual.

Here’s the short instruction list so you can get a feel for what needs to be done.

1) Mount the DCC and the SCM near the battery. The DCC needs to be attached directly to the battery with the leads as short as practical.
2) Connect/solder/heat shrink wrap the 20ga yellow wire from the DCC to the SCM.
3) Connect/solder/heat shrink wrap the black jacketed 24ga blue/white cable from the DCC to the same black jacketed 24ga blue/white cable from the SCM.
4) Connect/solder/heat shrink wrap the blue 20ga wire from the SCM to the fuel pump turn on output on your ECM (preferred.) A positive signal is needed to turn on the DCC and SCM. If your ECM is a negative trigger, meaning it supplies the negative side of the circuit, then a relay will be needed to supply a positive signal to the SCM. If an ignition-on signal is used to turn on the DCC and SCM, then precautions for safety such as a Ford inertia switch is recommended.
5) Connect the fuel pressure sensor to a 1/8”-NPT female fitting near the fuel pump outlet.
6) Plug in the three-conductor cable to the fuel pressure sensor. Route the cable to the area where the SCM is mounted.
7) Route the fuel pump power wires from the pump to the area near the SCM.
8) Connect/solder/heat shrink wrap the red, black, and white wires from the three-conductor fuel pressure sensor cable to the corresponding red, black, and white wires from the SCM.
9) Attach the small #6 ring terminals to the wires from the fuel pump. Attach the red wire to the DCC positive #6 output stud, the black to the DCC #6 negative stud.
10) Make positive and negative wires to run from the battery to the DCC. Crimp the 5/16” ring terminals to each wire and attach them to their respective battery terminal. Crimp the #6 terminals to each wire and attach the positive wire to the DCC #6 input stud, and the negative wire to the DCC #6 negative stud.
11) If the fuel line has not previously been flushed of contaminates, now is the time. Disconnect the fuel line at the fuel rail and route it to a fuel can. Fill the tank with at least five gallons of fuel. Turn the key on. The fuel pump should begin to run. The fuel pump will only run for approximately five seconds, and then the ECM will shut off the fuel pump output (blue wire above.) Repeat the ignition key on/off procedure to flush the fuel line of contaminates. Reconnect the fuel line to the fuel rail.
12) Attach a fuel pressure gauge to the engine fuel rail.
13) Turn on the ignition key. The pump should start to run but only for approximately five seconds until the ECM turns off the fuel pump trigger output (blue wire.) Repeat this key on/off several times until fuel pressure is noted on the fuel pressure gauge. Check for leaks and repair as needed.
14) Start the car. Check for leaks and repair as needed.
15) A small flat-blade screwdriver can be used to adjust the fuel pressure. Adjust the fuel pressure by turning the small brass screw on the blue potentiometer mounted on the DCC. The pressure should be set with the engine running since this will provide full voltage to the controller.
16)Test drive the car. Note the fuel pressure during under various driving conditions.

The price for the complete kit above is $449.00 shipped.

For the fuel pump wiring harness, two options are available. The 5th-gen and the CTS-V use the same electrical plug, but the wiring for each is different. This plug is currently only offered by GM, and not as a service replacement item. A 5th-gen fuel tank wiring harness must be purchased and the appropriate plugs removed and new wiring installed. The three-cavity electrical plug for the fuel pressure sensor is also removed and re-wired for the kit.

The following prices are for adding the fuel module plug, the quick-disconnect 4-cavity plug located 20” from the fuel module for easy installation and removal of the tank, and the fuel level sensor wiring. The fuel level sensor wiring can be routed through the plug when using a 33-240 ohm clip-on 5th-gen sensor, or extra length wiring to be attached to a standard aftermarket top-mount fuel level sensor.

5th-generation Camaro Fuel Pump Wiring Harness added to the FlowWorx kit: Add $100

CTS-V Fuel Pump Wiring Harness added to the FlowWorx kit: Add $110

CTS-V fuel module: $449.00 + shipping.

5th-generation Camaro fuel module: $215.00 + shipping.

I’m waiting on all of the bulk production components to arrive before I can say they are ready to ship. I do not want to take anyone’s money before the kits are ready to go. However, in anticipation of that, if you wish to purchase the system please send me a PM so that I can get enough components on the way to me to cover all the orders. The parts I’m waiting for are the DCC’s and the GXL wiring. I have 10 SCM’s and related components ready to go.

For the tanks, there are two sources. If you can fit a stock tank in your 1st-gen F-body then JCG has a modified stainless steel stock tank available. If you need a custom tank, then Rick’s Tanks, or one of their distributors such as Prodigy Customs or L&H Customs, can supply you with one of these. VaporWorx does not sell fuel tanks.

As soon as all of the bulk production items come in I’ll post up photos of a complete kit.

Questions? Please fire away.

[bri-rock]

Here’s the short instruction list so you can get a feel for what needs to be done.

1) Mount the DCC and the SCM near the battery. The DCC needs to be attached directly to the battery with the leads as short as practical.

Carl, why does the DCC need to be located so close to the battery? Is any voltage drop in the wiring so critical to the operation of the unit? I only ask because I thought I was pretty much done running wiring through my firewall. I would like to avoid doing more of this if possible.

[Bow Tie 67]

They are sensitive to electrical interference, the shorter the run the less likely there will be problems.

[CarlC]

I'll post the info from DC Controls below. I can speak from a lot of experience with their fan and fuel pump speed controls that the noise, even with the DCC filter, is significantly less when the wire runs are short and connected directly to the battery. Connecting power leads directly to the battery eliminated the noise that came through the stereo speakers, a common annoyance with this type of controller.

Why do I need to connect the controller to the battery specifically?

There are two reasons for this. With regard to connecting the controller to the starter cable, when ever a current is applied to any wire, the voltage at the end of that cable will initially drop to zero volts, regardless of the gauge wire. During that time, that energy is used to build a magnetic field around the wire. Once the field is built, the output voltage returns to normal. If that same load is then suddenly removed from the wire, the magnetic field collapses, and the output voltage will rise to several times the input voltage. The electrical model for a trunk-mounted battery reveals a peak output voltage of 150V if the load is released prior to the starter beginning to spin. This, in fact, is the same method used in an ignition coil.

The second reason has to do with the controller itself. In order to provide an efficient modulation of the fan voltage, the control unit utilizes pulse width modulation, in that the output voltage is either zero volts, or the source voltage. The duty cycle, or percentage of the time that the voltage is equal to the source voltage, determines the speed of the fan. The fan reacts in the same manor as the wire mentioned above, so, when ever the controller output voltage drops from the source voltage, the fan generates a negative voltage, again several times the source voltage. With a reasonably short wire-run to the battery, the controller can leverage this energy off of the battery in order to continue power the fan, even when the controller output voltage is zero. But the longer the run of wire to the battery, the more the controller needs to leverage this energy off of its internal filter, and because this filter needs to be small enough to fit within the controller package, the leveraging efficiency is much lower than that of the battery, so the energy is simply dissipated as heat. A solution for either of these lies in the surge protected filter offered in the accessories section, which includes both a filter much larger than the internal filter and a 1500W surge protector

[mike67cam]

Carl,

I am extremely interested in the CTS-V setup for my Camaro. I do have one question about integrating a return line. I am looking at using a FlexFuel (E85) control module which interfaces with the Fast XFI ECU. Due to the small port size of the FlexFuel module, most people are plumbing them into the return line of a convention fuel delivery system. Do you think the pressure line can be tapped into, and using a small orifice in the line to limit fuel flow, route a “return” through the FlexFuel module back to the tank?


Thanks,
Mike

[CarlC]

Mike,

That should be no problem. Here's an idea on how it might work the easiest.

Near the pump the pressure sensor needs to be tapped into the pressure line. Usually using a -6 male/male union with a 1/8"-NPT female thread is often used at the junction where the tank and frame fuel lines meet. Something like this http://www.holley.com/100192ERL.asp

Using this same fitting drill an additional hole on a hex flat for another 1/8"-NPT thread or whatever works. Using a bit of creativity make an adapter/restrictor that connects to the FlexFuel module connection, then have a return line to the tank via a -3AN PTFE line. The restriction should be very small. A 0.110" hole is all that's necessary on the mechanical 4th-gen regulator to bypass enough fuel to operate properly.

[barraza]

Carl
Any reason the pressure sensor needs to be near the pump? Could it just be mounted on the fuel rail. It would seem easier on front mounted battery applications.

Also. I am probably going to build my own tank, what gauge SS is the retroworx assembly?

[CarlC]

It can be mounted on the fuel rail but there may be some pressure flutter at idle. The injectors opening and closing, especially on batch-fire PCM's, can cause this condition. With the sensor mounted closer to the tank the fluctuations are damped, but there may be some flutter. In some cases, depending on the application, a fuel pressure damper may be a good option. We had this happen on OLC (batch fire) but the car idled fine, and as soon as a very small load was put on the engine the fluctuations went away. Each car/engine combination is going to be unique. There is 15' of wire in the kit which should be enough in most cases to have the sensor in near the tank.

My car with a sequential 0411 GM PCM and 60lb/hr injectors is fine.

The recessed tray is 16ga, but most aftermarket tanks are built with 14ga. The folds in the recessed tray makes it stronger than just a flat sheet.

[barraza]

Carl
It occurred to me that the main hangup in all the fuel pump business is the tank itself, and it's availability / cost. Would it be possible to remote mount the pump/bucket assembly? If I understand correctly, it needs about 7" height, and it looks about 5" in diameter. It could be in its own can, with venturi supply hoses fed into the original tank. It would open the market up to any vehicle that needed a reliable FI pump, without a $1000 tank required. Could be used on anything from an import to trucks to musclecars with enough space near the stock tank. I see the same fuel pump problems across many forums, and the market would love a OEM quality, self contained pump that required just electricity and a few lines to the stock tank. Would it work?

[Denvervet]

Good idea Barraza...where do you propose to put this other can? I know under my car there is no place to put something that size, same elevation, etc in addition to the main tank.

[Payton King]

I may need to change up my tank soon from a fitment standpoint. I have a Ricks tank with a Walbro pump. My recess at the top of the tank is 10'x7'. Is that the same size as your retrofit part on the 1st post? Also the hole size for my current pump is 4.75. What is the diameter of the pump and ring for the 5th gen pump?

Also is there anyway to retro fit your tricky dual pick up to a walbro if I do not change?

[barraza]

Good idea Barraza...where do you propose to put this other can? I know under my car there is no place to put something that size, same elevation, etc in addition to the main tank.

Granted, it wouldn't work everywhere, but I also have a pickup and an Impala awaiting injected engines. Plenty of room and no tanks available for either.

I doubt the venturi suction is enough to draw fuel to the engine compartment, but a well designed container could be easily put in the corner of the trunk.

[CarlC]

I don't think it would work well in a separate tank. Trying to come up with some way to tie into the remote/corner pickup venturi to draw from the main tank, and keep the separate tank a size that would fit for us, would be tough. The module hat diameter + remote pickup nipple length is somewhere around 7", then add to that the hose, so 8" minimum. That's getting pretty big, and we've still not figured out how to assemble it.

A return line to the main tank would also likely be needed, so there's another penetration for both tanks.

The secondary tank would need to be close to the same level as the main. If not then it would be difficult/impossible to prime the pump. If the level of the fuel in the main tank was ever below the bottom of the secondary tank then backflow could empty the module and secondary tank. Now the pump won't prime. The venturi pumps only work when fluid is available to pump.

Payton, the RetroWorx tray kit is designed to replace the entire recessed section on your tank. I tried like heck to make it so a mounting ring would fit in the current tray but it just would not work right. It's not the width, but the fore/aft that keeps it from working. The cam ring is about 7-1/4" if memory serves, and the front edge of the mounting ring needs to be about 1-1/2" from the front wall of the tank. Any farther forward and the module will hit the bottom front corner of the tank and not rest flat on the bottom. If you scour Ebay you can pick up a used pump and wiring harness for $100-$120, so for well under $500 the tank can be retro-fitted with the module. Just the module by itself is very effective (no corner pickups.) Here's what it looks like completed. Your results may vary depending on where the vent line attaches.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

The module needs at least a 5-1/8" hole to fit in to, but the module hat major diameter is 6". The other problem is that the top of the module would stick up above the top surface of the tank using the 10 x 7" recessed plate, making fitment in the car and fuel line attachment difficult.

The corner pickups won't work with just a standard Walbro, or any other, pump. The pickups work by suction, and the Walbro pumps do not have this feature.

[James OLC]

For what it's worth we finally got to put the pressure on our new VaporWorx tank on Tuesday while we squeezed in some last minute testing at Willow Springs. In the past, we were having starvation issues at anything approaching about a half a tank and we were finished by the tie we got down to about 6 gallons left. With the new tank we ran the car down to less then 2 gallons remaining and had no hickups at all, even in the bowl and on the tight Ss coming down the hill. I kept looking at the gauge wondering when it was going to cough but it was absolutely flawless.

A big thanks to Carl and Rick for putting this together!!!

[CarlC]

....no hickups at all.... :cool:


May 3, 2011. :twothumbs:

[ErikLS2]

Nice to hear some real life experience with the setup. That's great news. Can't wait to get mine together.

Great job Carl putting this idea together. Thanks for the contribution to our hobby.

[EFI69Cam]

You could use a mechanical fuel pump to fill the sub-tank. This approach is used on boats. The problem for most applications is mounting. On the boats the smaller tank is mounted on the engine.

[CarlC]

If you're going to all the problems of using an engine-driven mechanical pump then using a standard pump in a surge tank will be easier and less expensive, but will need a lot of plumbing. It isn't exactly stealthy either.

[EFI69Cam]

If you're going to all the problems of using an engine-driven mechanical pump then using a standard pump in a surge tank will be easier and less expensive, but will need a lot of plumbing. It isn't exactly stealthy either.

Agreed... The fuel module in tank is the least "Rube Goldbergish" solution.

[wegner426]

Carl,
Any updates on the aluminum mounting ring / tray? I am trying to figure out a way to make the CTS-V pumps work by refabbing some of the tank I already have. I figured at .65 BSFC for a turbo pump gas engine and allowing an extra 10% capacity for safety margin it should support 850 hp with the CTS-V module. Plan is to find a 5th gen Camaro module regulator and install in the CTS-V module then regulate it externally so I can boost reference it. Just run one of the pumps all the time at 14 volts then use the AEM ECU to turn on the other pump when it starts making boost. Hopefully the fuel heating problems won't be too bad this way.
Can the CTS-V module be easily modified to accept a fuel return?
Thanks,
Chad

[CarlC]

Chad,

Cell phone off yesterday. Sorry I missed your call. I'll try and touch base with you tomorrow.

Are you talking twin CTS-V pumps? 850hp and high fuel pressure/boost referencing will not mix well.

42 psi idle.
+ 8 psi (to get to atmospheric pressure based on 16inHg vacuum at idle)
+ 18 psi boost
= 68 psi

At 68 psi a single CTS-V module won't support your engine. If memory serves you have twin 255lph's now. The 5th-gen module output is almost identical to a Walbro 255lph, so if you're going to go twin modules this would be a less expensive option. You could keep the as-supplied regulators in the 5th-gen as well. The CTS-V is similar to twin 190lph pumps. Twin Walbro 190's at 70psi won't make 800hp @ 0.65BSFC. Twin 255lph pumps will support 860hp @ 70psi @ 0.65BSFC with a 10% safety margin.

5th-gen regulator will not fit in the CTS-V module. I think there may be companies that offer a plug but that means fuel pressure spikes when the ignition is turned off.

The aluminum ring is in the works. I hope to have something in my hands to show in 4-5 weeks.

[GrnDragon]

Sorry I must be missing something, I thought the dual CTS-V setup was good to 960 HP (Supercharged)? But above you said it won't support 850 HP, is that because of using the boost referencing and the lower psi setting?

[wegner426]

I did my figuring based on dual 190 LPH at 58 PSI......converts to 100 GPH x 6.2 lbs per gallon for gasoline. 620 lbs per hours divided by .65 BSFC (pretty aggressive BSFC even for forced induction) comes out to 960 HP. I allowed 10% for pump performance errors etc. and end up at about 860 HP. I plan to run the pumps at 50 PSI and just boost reference the regulator. I will leave the boost at 12 PSI until someone comes up with a 255 pump that is a drop in for the CTS-V fuel bucket. This should put me at 62 PSI under boost and still really close to the 58 PSI where the pumps are rated at. I think the ZR1 uses the same fuel module but with a higher pressure regulator, so that may be an option for me too.

Chad

[CarlC]

It's the high boost pressure that reduces the rating. Pump perormance starts falling off pretty quick after 66psi.

Chad,

If your at-idle fuel pressure is 50psi, and your idle is approximately 16 inHg, that's -8psi. So to get to atmospheric that +8, then +12 for boost. That makes for a 20psi swing, or 70psi. 62psi - 20psi = 42psi at idle.

The Walbro pumps are rated at 50psi, not 58. There's some good info here. http://www.autoperformanceengineering.com/html/fpspecs.html The specs rated around 50 psi since the manifold referenced pressure change for a 3bar/42psi idle to WOT/ATM pressure is 8psi. 42psi + 16 inHg/8psi = 50psi.

Think 3rd-gen Camaro LT1 or Ford 5.0 with a 3bar/42psi at-idle fuel pressure.
At idle the vacuum is approximately 16inHg vacuum, or -8psi atm.
At wide open throttle the manifold pressure increases to 0psi atm.
If the fuel pressure is manifold referenced, the fuel pressure has increased to 42 +8 = 50psi.

Since Walbro wants to rate the pump at WOT N/A, 50 psi makes sense.

[wegner426]

Carl,

I found the flow numbers for the pumps at Lingenfelter's website, if they are the same they are claiming 190 LPH at 58 PSI for their Camaro twin pump setup. May not be the same though. I had considered running 2 camaro modules but if I only run one pump most of the time the other module wont have any jet pump function so may not remain full. I will buzz you tomorrow.

[350SS]

I think you mentioned it already but I can't seem to find it...what are the dimensions of the outside edges of the weld in piece (not including the legs that get bent down)?
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

[CarlC]

It's about 12" x 9". What are your concerns?

The price has been reduced on the RetroWorx kit.

[350SS]

It's about 12" x 9". What are your concerns?

The price has been reduced on the RetroWorx kit.

Not really a concern, just wanting to take some measurments on my stock tank to see where things would end up and what the best placement of the module would be... If I can use a stock replacement tank with the adapter plate for the module it may fit in my budget right now...unfortuantely the setup with a fabricated tank does not :(

[CarlC]

The recessed tray will not work well with a stock tank. The stock tank has corrugations, so there will be big gaps where the the tray flaps will not reach down to. Plus, the tray gauge thickness is much thicker than the stock tank, hence making welding more difficult. You may want to check with Cris at JCG about his version using the stock tank.

[350SS]

I'm thinking the same thing...plus I have a feeling with the tray being recessed, the module wouldn't fit all the way in without lowering the floor of the tank. Of course this depends on the tank but most chevy tanks aren't very deep anyways.

[CarlC]

The module will fit. My proof-of-concept model was based on a stock stainless tank, and Cris' tank is the same model.

[350SS]

Thanks for the info Carl...I'll have to talk to Chris and see what he has to say.

[Skip Fix]

So what am I missing in the pictures here for a sump or baffling to keep the pickup from not coming uncovered or needing a surge tank? The initial pictures and post didn't mention it needed to go into a baffled tank.

[CarlC]

Skip Fix (sorry, I don't know your name),

Check this. It will hopefully make things clearer.

https://www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?72309-Track-Ready-Street-Friendly-Fuel-Tanks-From-Rick-s-and-Vaporworx.

[Sparky65]

Carl,

Whats the availibility of the VaporWorx/CTS-V tank system for a 1965 El Camino?

[CarlC]

Dave,

Check with Hector at Rick's fuel tanks. I don't sell the tanks, just the components and technology to make them work. 915-760-4388