Every word I wrote was original...so I guess you are saying I could be writing for a magazine. Thanks I'll add it to my resume.

And you're still trolling I see...

 

Your welcome, and actually I am about to jump in my boat and utilize the trolling motor! I hope to be trolling all day long, maybe I will troll right into a large Bass if I get lucky!

 

There have been guys that have ground or machined the front of an Edelbrock head,on a BBO,to get it to clear the RobbMc pump,but you will be close to the water jacket,so be careful,if you do decide to do that.
I have a prototype pump that will clear any head on any olds block,but the test car is not finished yet,and I have other things to do.There is only one other car with one on it,and it belongs to the guy that made this pump.So far,so good,but he wants more results before offering them to the public.So far,there are only 2 pumps.His & the one I have.
Regardless,if you run a higher output pump,you need to address the sending unit & the lines.When I did Stan Kryla's car,I installed a stock tank,with a RobbMc sending unit,and Stan ordered a 1/2" stainless line from Inline tube,to replace the stock 3/8" line on the frame.To replace the main fuel line,you will need to lift the body off the frame,one way or another,to get the old one out,and the new one in.
You can also get a sending unit from RobbMc,with the AN fittings,if you want to run the braided line from front to back.I did this on this other car,as it had the braided line already in-place,from an electric set-up.

 

I ran a RobbMc pump, but it never worked good on the strip with my Q-Jet, running a Holley HP now and love it..

 

Do you know which Holley HP you are running?

 

HP 125, which does not require a regulator, comes set at around 7.5#, mounted above the rear axle, on a custom mount, using mostly stock fuel line.

 

Does Holley still make fuel pumps for the Olds? Didn't see any Olds pumps at Summit or Holley web sites.

 

I don't think Holley makes an Olds mechanical pump..

 

holley does not make a pump, there are pumps from carter, etc made just for 1970-1972 442's that have higher flow, also Rocket etc have pumps.

 

I have an electric fuel pump on the way! I am going to test this theory the RIGHT way. If AH64PILOT is correct i sould see some gains. Pump should be here Monday. I will take pics and document the results. If I am wrong I will eat some crow and give my apologies! I am goung to put it in between the tank and the metal lines first to make sure I gain all this power, if it works I will hard mount it!

 

Let us know how it works out - I am curious to see how it does! I wonder about mods like these.
BTW, did you get some bass?

 

hahaha a few pan fish and one big Cat, and a buzz lol

 

sometimes as i get older its the serenity, the lake breeze, and a beer makes it all worth while, slowing down to think about how much I love my fiance, cars, and the ability to tinker etc makes it all a great day

 

OK, here's what doesn't work:

The RobbMc mechanical Olds fuel pump will not, repeat: will not fit on an engine equipped with Edelbrock heads. Period.

I know, because at Robb's request, I attempted a test fit of the first new-design (squared off sides) RobbMc pump on my BBO With Edelbrock heads. I took measurements and photos and sent them to Robb and we agreed it simply will not fit without major fabrication (ie: grinding a pocket into the water jacket on the head, then welding up the area to prevent coolant leaks). There simply isn't enough space in the fuel pump mounting area for that big pump.

I'll try to dig up the pics I took if anyone has an interest in seeing them.

 

By the way, the highest flow mechanical fuel pump available for Olds V8's, aside from the RobbMc piece, is the Airtex #40736. It's cheap and available. It will still hit against the Edelbrock head on a BBO, but you can flatten the cannister a bit on that side, combined with grinding slight clearance on the head, to get it to fit.
Forget about the Holley and Carter mechanical pumps, they are not significantly higher-flowing than a stock pump.

 

Any idea what kind of horsepower / cubic inch that Airtex is capable of feeding? As you can see there was a debate on whether an electric or mechanical was the way to go for a high horsepower engine...although I think someone missed the whole debate preferring to listen to himself talk rather than read a rebuttal.

 

I ran the 40736 for one season on my 468cid that made 480hp on the dyno. It seemed to keep up with the engine fine, but some folks told me that it was probably helped by the large capacity fuel bowls on the Holley Dominator I was running. I never checked fuel pressure with a gauge, but the engine never seemed to "lay down" even at 113mph through the traps.
Based on my experience, I feel like the 40736 can safely handle 450+hp.

 

I hear it - I love being on the water. We brought back 20 (our limit) stripers a few weeks ago. It will be a good fry.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man how to fish and he will be out on on a boat all day drinking beer."

 

Sneak peak.It should safely feed anything you guys are building.This one is making closer to 600HP.Feeding an engine on a dyno or cruising around is one thing.Feeding it at the track with a little G-force on the fuel,is another.Remember that too.
I should have tried this on the 507 before I switched it to EFI,but it wasn't made yet.

JoeLincoln71442046.jpg

 

Thanks Copper, modifying Edelbrock heads for the RobbMc pump is a crap shoot..

 

I'm also interested in how mr. real57vetteguy does these tests to come up with accuate tests.

 

Brian, is that the "race pump" pushrod style mechanical pump?
http://www.racepumps.com/

 

I have a friend with a 66 Cutlass, 455, stock C heads, Q-jet, Performer intake running the Airtex pump. The car runs 12.20s at 110mph. For a $40 fuel pump I think thats respectable.

 

I had Bill at BTR machine a pocket in the head and weld the water jacket area up to clear the RobbMc pump. He charged $200, if your comfortable with a milling machine and a TIG welder or know somebody who is it looks to be fairly simple.

 

Glan,
That pump has the same finger lever that goes into the block,but I believe it has a similar piston inside the body,like the demonstration picture.

 

I am open to suggestions short of spending thousands of dollars. My thought was:
1) tee in a pressure guage, tape it to the window to look for pressure loss on the mechanical setup during hard pull, obviously I souldnt have a loss with both, what I am going to test is running a mech pump vs running a mechanical with a elec booster, it should prove to be basically the same results as a mechanical vs electric pump
2) test the overall power/feel of the car on both set ups
3)if need be run a dyno on both

electric pump should be here mon or tuesday, and I am waiting on the prosystems carb hopefully tue or wed.

Again, this thread was about clearing an edelbrock head with a fuel pump for a street car. Both myself and the thread starter were advised that we would suffer power loss by running a mech pump and we would see gains by running a elec pump. That might very well be true, I debated it but I ,as well as many others want to know the actual truth. I could have been wrong in my debate.
I do not see this as a me VS ah64pilot issue, I want to know the facts so that the next person that asks the same question can be advised properly and for my own knowledge. I am not doing this to prove I am right, I am doing this to see the actual results!

 

You have failed to tell us what electric pump you are going to use. Using an electric to feed a mechanical is worthless and will prove nothing. The mechanical will hold back the electric. A good high volume pump will also need a regulater. Unless you test one pump at a time you will not get valid results.
"Test the overall power/feel of the car on both set ups" you are kidding ....right? You are going to use your butt dyno for testing?
The only real way to test is at a 1/4 mile drag strip. Make 2-3 passes with the mech set-up (with time slips). Remove mech pump, install the electric pump and regulater and go back the same day and make 2-3 passes with time slips.
You are still going to be hard pressed to tell any difference. Steve said he only realized it when he saw the ET slip. Please post a slip from each pump so we can analize each pump.

Good luck

 

[QUOTE=380 Racer;445113]You have failed to tell us what electric pump you are going to use. Using an electric to feed a mechanical is worthless and will prove nothing. The mechanical will hold back the electric. A good high volume pump will also need a regulater. Unless you test one pump at a time you will not get valid results.Thats incorrect with this particular situation, the supposed issue was that the "G" force from launch was keeping the mech pump from keeping up, so actually a booster pump would solve the issue
"Test the overall power/feel of the car on both set ups" you are kidding ....right? You are going to use your butt dyno for testing? I agree with you to a certain extent, if a car is running out of fuel and loses power at high rpms, or feels sluggish then you add a elec pump and it runs like a rocketship all the way to its shift point then the "butt dyno" can at least tell you it is running better, but I do agree the correct way to do it is on the drag strip but thats not an option for me nor do I have a drag car.
The only real way to test is at a 1/4 mile drag strip. Make 2-3 passes with the mech set-up (with time slips). Remove mech pump, install the electric pump and regulater and go back the same day and make 2-3 passes with time slips.
You are still going to be hard pressed to tell any difference. Steve said he only realized it when he saw the ET slip. Please post a slip from each pump so we can analize each pump.

Good luck

I agree with you and appreciate the suggestions, but I have do what I can with the available resources. The pressure test should give an accurate measure if the car is starving out for fuel with the mechanical which would be corrected by the electric, if it is Do you not agree?
On another note I mentioned I was having cable issues just as ah64pilot mentioned in his build. Yesterday I fixed my cable issue and WOW the car ran tremendously better (according to my Butt dyno) but it still has a lean issue. I feel its caused by the carb being to small as the mechanical pump is not falling below 7psi even during hard pull. The Prosystems carb should be here Tue or Wed, I will install it and see if it corrects my lean condition. From there I will try my best to determine if the elec pump will help or not, but in my particular case I am getting plenty of fuel to the carb according to the pressure guage.

 

I agree completely.

 

Brian, any idea on availability?
I would much prefer to use one of those than the electric pump I have now. A friend is running a Race Pump on his 512 BB Mopar that makes way more power than my engine and it keeps up just fine at 9.90 ET's.

 

No the issue is that YOU believe that The electric pump will not help at all. With what you want to do instead of the right way of testing, you will get your results. It was stated that the G force could have contributed to the problem. Steve also stated the time slip made him "aware" of the difference. So how are you going to measure .6 of a second out on the street? Whole test is INVALID.

 

"You are right, there are plenty of 500-600 hp cars running 3/8 line and a mechanical pump. I had one, until I switched it over...they will run on one, that's not the question. I picked up .6 in the 1/4 mile by going to electric. What was the problem? Fuel delivery on launch. Why? Because the G-force of the launch took 1/2 of the mechanical pumps pressure / volume away."

Above is exactly what he said, and if that being the case a booster pump would solve the issue or just running an elec pump would solve it, I agree. But to know for sure that was the issue rather than the throttle cable, one would have to run a pressure guage and see that it was losing psi during launch and I dont see where that was done. If your not getting WOT on one pass and the next time at the track you are getting WOT do you not think that is worth .6 as well? I am not convinced that the elec pump will not help. However you are convinced that the elec pump alone gained .6 in a 1/4 without seeing any proof that the mechanical pump was losing pressure due to G force during launch.

Another quote
"Car didn't perform as well as we had hoped. I know we are short on fuel as I am using a stock fuel pump from the parts store, but I never imagined it would affect us as much as it did. After launch the car is nosing over going into 2nd gear and it never catches up."

So your statement again is incorrect, he realized there was an issue right after he ran the car at the track, he was using a stock fuel pump from the parts store, My car until yesterday did the same exact thing.... Launched hard, then loses power, hits 2nd and feels like it is losing power from then on. Pay attention to the below quote.

"So we figured out why we had a hung idle at the racetrack, the cheapo Mr. Gasket throttle cable I had broke at the GM plastic clip right at the bracket. It made the cable kink and wasn't allowing the secondaries to open all the way."

This was my issue as well, we noticed that the cable had a frayed wire in the sheathing and it would not let it pull to WOT causing the secondaries not to open all the way. Once we fixed the issue WOW, it doesnt even feel like the same car. With the above posted facts, it should be easy to question if the .6 came from the cable fix, or the elec pump or a combination of both. You seem convinced that it was the pump, in which it very well could have been, but the two facts that you are over looking is the stock parts store shelf mech pump and the secondaries not opening due to a cable issue.

 

No, I'm convinced you don't know how to do an A to B to A test.

 

Well lets say I drive 1-1/2 hours to the drag strip, knock out a few passes in my street car with street tires, drive 1-1/2 hours home, install the elec pump, drive 1-1/2 hours back..... well including time to wait to make a pass, install time, mans gotta eat thats atg least 8 hours, gonna be tough to do in a day, but if it were at all possible how accurate and scientific is that method while in on street tires? Quite possible all that power I stand to gain with the electric pump might make me spin even more resulting in a a loss of time, might actually run slower in the 1/4 with all that extra power?
You must have forgotten this thread was about a street car, my car is a street car. I am the one buying the extra pump, paying for the dyno if it comes to that, spending time to do the test, providing the labor etc etc, if your so stoked about it having to be done what you consider to be the right way then ok.... I will be happy to PM you my shipping address, contribute a set of slicks that will fit an unmodified 65 442. I'll find a set of wheels and have them mounted. If I snap that 10 bolt rear end then split the repair cost with me and I will run your idea of an accurate test all day long!

Better yet, lets find someone with a car they run at the drag strip that is running a mechanical pump, lets split the cost of an elec for them and let a non biased person do it on the track? I am not trying to prove anyone wrong I want to know the results, thats why I have a pump coming, why would I go through all this if I were convinced of anything?
On second thought I will send the pump I havecoming to someone honest and trustworthy that is running a mechanical pump, they can install the electric, and see the results, if they produce gains I will sell it to them to keep, if not I will pay for shipping back to me

 

Just my opinion, but most fuel supply issues are going to be on the big end, not on the line. Holleys especially have a lot of fuel in the bowls. I think an experienced racer could look at the time slips before and then after with the .6 gain, analize the splits, and determine if it was a fuel supply issue. Or at least determine where the time was made up. Also, Nick is correct in that weather and track conditions can have a huge effect on performance.

Also, IMO, not a fan of the "pusher" electric pumps. Then can create problems. If the mechanical pump is inadequate, run an electric with a regulator and return.

 

I do agree 100%.

The statement made "After launch the car is nosing over going into 2nd gear and it never catches up." Doesnt sound like a loss of fuel due to G-force, the guys I know that have experienced loss of fuel during the launch Due to G-force claim right at launch the engine almost cuts out completly nose dives, then it comes back on strong for the rest of the run, which is totally the opposite of his description.
Now do a reverse test, if you have an adjustable throttle cable go put about 1/4-3/8 slack in the line and go launch your car, with the secondaries not opening all the way it will launch then fall on its face just as he described and just as I experienced this week.
Captjim just brought up the most valid point of this debate. "I think an experienced racer could look at the time slips before and then after with the .6 gain, analize the splits, and determine if it was a fuel supply issue"
There is no possible way ah64pilot was pulling a 1.85 60 ft time while experiencing g-force failure at launch, TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE! This should be the end of this debate, and I over looked that fact until it was mentioned about checking the times. I am 100% positive the car ran a better 60 ft time after he installed the new pump and fixed the cable to obtain WOT, but it ran a better 60 ft time because of the secondaries opening fully.
If in fact the mechanical pump could not overcome the force of the car launching it would stumble and almost die before regaining fuel, to accelerate, resulting in a MUCH slower 60 ft time. if such a failure happens it is unheard of to run under a 2 second 60 ft time, during a failure of fuel supply due to the force of launching a car the biggest loss of performance will be seen within the first 60 ft, the pump will quickly regain pressure and volume.
A 1.85 60 ft is not a bad 60 ft time, and a darn good one with the secondaries not opening all the way. His car runs great and I bet it would run almost identical if he would have taken it to the track after the throttle cable fix before he installed the electric pump.

 

For any of you who are still watching this channel...

My throttle cable broke on the 2nd pass of the night. The 3rd pass was the quickest. And when I say the secondaries weren't opening all of the way, I'm talking about the last 1/16" to be fully vertical.

Richard Noggin is speaking from his plethora of drag racing experience when he demands that he knows why I ran better the 2nd time out (that is sarcasm). Hopefully you are educated enough to know that what may happen in (his) theory doesn't always happen in real life. He obviously can't get over himself enough to wrap his head around the fact that he may not know everything. It's ok...I have timeslips, and they tell me I picked up .6 in the 1/4 mile by switching over to an electric pump...regardless of whether my throttle opened the last 1/16 of an inch or not.

60' 330' 1/8 mph 1000' 1/4 mph
1.873 5.287 8.151 85.98 10.639 12.761 105.95 (Run 2 - Feb 10 2012)
1.855 5.247 0.000 00.00 10.592 12.732 105.00 (Run 3 - Feb 10 2012)
1.807 5.105 7.837 90.49 10.212 12.237 111.35 (Run 2 - May 16 2012)
1.775 5.035 7.748 90.93 10.113 12.118 112.55 (Run 3 - May 16 2012)





P.S. The point I was trying to make to the OP was that for the headache of clearancing the Edelbrock heads to use a good aftermarket mechanical pump it would be easier to switch to an electric IMO. The reason I suggested that to him is because for the last 3 weeks we had been emailing back and forth about a 496 stroker and various other high horsepower combinations. For Richard Noggin to assume that he knows the OP's entire background concerning his engine build is preposterous. Had he looked in the big block forum he might have seen a few of Steve's posts concerning stroker kits and other high performance upgrades that, IMO, would justify running an electric pump.

There are two fellows on this thread that are notorious for being quite difficult to get along with. It is a shame they have such stubborn ideology and aggressive means of communication. I feel that whatever GOOD information they could have put out is undermined by their browbeating and ridiculing. I'm sure they have some knowledge when it comes to cars, but it's not worth listening to their bad attitudes to get it. I seem to be doing just fine without it

 

The OP stated that the car will not be raced. IMO, electric pumps are more trouble and less reliable than a good mechanical pump. Whether a mechanical pump will supply enough fuel under race conditions is another discussion, and that is where this thread kinda went.

Thanks for posting the time slip. No expert by any means, but it looks like most of the gains were made down low, which to me is probably not a fuel supply issue. Again, different day, different conditions, hard to say, but .6 is a LOt to pick up, however you did it.

 

I never claimed to know everything, but I do claim to know that if you experienced fuel pressure loss due to g force during launch then the second time out there would be a much greater difference in 60 ft times than .10 or less.
This to me is a friendly debate, the name calling and comments seem to be the aggressive part of this thread. If your pointing a finger at me about being difficult to get along with then I think you have the wrong person, I have been in a few debates but all were friendly and none resulted in name calling etc. I have simply posted some facts and statements and have stated several times that I would like to know if the electric pump will make a difference, but I also dont think you can state that the pump gave you .6 gains when you also had a cable issue. What I do find a little odd is the comments below.

March 25
"So we figured out why we had a hung idle at the racetrack, the cheapo Mr. Gasket throttle cable I had broke at the GM plastic clip right at the bracket. It made the cable kink and wasn't allowing the secondaries to open all the way"

August 20
"The throttle cable breaking caused a stuck (high) idle condition that was misleading. While replacing it with the lokar cable I believe it wasn't opening all the way, but there's no way to really tell. I made a 12.7 pass before the suspected breakage and a 12.7 pass after the hung idle (suspected breakage) so who knows"

August 27
"My throttle cable broke on the 2nd pass of the night. The 3rd pass was the quickest. And when I say the secondaries weren't opening all of the way, I'm talking about the last 1/16" to be fully vertical"

In the three statements above you are really changing your story, how in the last 7 days did you come to the conclusion that it was 1/16" when before you didnt really know then before that the secondaries werent opening?

If in fact having a debate over advising someone to go out and spend their hard earned money, time and labor to make changes to their street car that is not needed is being difficult then I am guilty.

 

Frank needs more time & testing on his pump,before he brings it to market.That way there will be proof of what it can do,not just a guess or an estimated theory.