Quick question for those running an external regulator with a sniper 1. Is there any advantage to using a bypass regulator. Or just go with feed side unit? Pros? Cons?
thanks in advance
Pete

 

A return line is always worth the effort and expense.
Advantages: fuel is cooler, pump runs cooler, pressure is more stable, etc.
Disadvantages: you have to install one.

 

To be clear, it already has a return, Removing the Sniper1 internal reulator, I can either run a return from the regulator to the tank and cap and gut the original, or gut the original and put the regulator on the return.
Pete

 

I've heard the internal regulators in TB EFIs are generally junk. An external makes it easier to see the pressure gauge, I guess.
I guess I'm missing the point of the question?
Most EFI regulators are on the return side of performance applications, as I've observed. So, regulator at the end of the injector rails, returning (bypass) to the tank.
I run a carb; it doesn't have a return. 😁

 

Close off the one side of the lines on the TB unit. Then run a corvette style regulator back by the tank. It will return the fuel back there, instead of running all the way to the front, getting hot, and going all the way back.

 

the benefit of having the excess return fuel run through the throttle body, like it is originally , is it cools the whole unit and the internal circuit board/relays

running an external regulator and the return off of it, removes the cooling. that’s not good for the internal electronics.

 

I've installed lots of SNIPER 1 and 2 systems and used all the different types of returns and regulators including the two that I have on my 442 and Chevelle. If you are interested in the best performance, run a primary and return line from your tank to the engine compartment. Primary goes into the SNIPER unit and the external regulator will be installed on the return line. This solution ensures max availably of full pressure and volume if you want the best performance. You can use internal tank recirc systems and the Corvette style return systems using the fuel filter style but they have limitations that will be noticed depending on how often you go WOT and how much you get into the throttle. If you don't drive the car hard and don't require optimal performance.....the Corvette style regulator would be the second best and then the internal in-tank system....the third best.

Fuel pressure/volume and the proper routing of electrical connections/signals are the two necessary Achilles heels of the SNIPER systems. If you do both of those correctly....they run amazing.

 

[QUOTE=CANADIANOLDS;1672433running an external regulator and the return off of it, removes the cooling. that’s not good for the internal electronics.[/QUOTE]
Then why did Holley remove the regulator from the sniper 2 even though it still has the onboard computer? And the Qjet Sniper NEVER had an onboard regulator. What you just said is total bs.

 

I’ve seen over 600hp AT THE WHEELS with the corvette style regulator. No issues.

 

For the record this is what Holley recommended from the help line. Their reasoning is to maintain cooling of electrical components. As i already have the sniper running with the internal regulator, the supply and return lines are already in place. This is likely the simplest option for me. Gut the original regulator and add a bypass regulator on the return side. I would likely do the corvette regulator if i was starting from scratch. Will advise results.

 

Thanks everyone for the input
Pete

 

exactly. the cooling of the electronics is crucial.

 

I didn’t say running an external regular was a bad idea. I said running the bypass off the external regulator is bad because he was going to gut the original reg and CAP the old reg port.

sniper 1 and 2 are designed to cool the internal electronics WITH BYPASS fuel

that’s why both have fuel bypassing through them ALL the time. Holley agrees with me on this

I don’t know how you get through each day without hurting yourself

 

I have a Holley tech of 8 years close to me, he’s never mentioned this scenario one time, never. He also does installs and tuning on the side, and has used the same regulator I mentioned many times, no issues.
Finally, please explain to me how, when a car sits after being driven, then not running, and you have tremendous heat soak under the hood, what does the fuel do to cool the computer then? Not a fvcking thing.
This may be recommended, but not required by any stretch.

 

As someone who does thermal design for a living, I'm sorry to say you're wrong on this one. Fuel can absolutely be used to cool the electronics, and while it may not melt and die right away, running at higher temperatures tends to reduce service life for electronics.

Is that actually what Holley did? I have no idea. But the underlying theory absolutely works.

 

I never said it wouldn’t cool it. But when there’s no fluid, OR AIR moving, and you still have significant heat exposure, like when it’s parked, how is it going to cool it? It’s not, at least not very well. And at that point the ECU is just as susceptible to that heat and its potential for damage as any other time, fuel flow or not.

Plus the fuel crossover is on the opposite side of the throttle body. And there’s one other clue that shows just how much heat can build in the TB unit, IAT.

 

Yes you did. Literally in the next sentence:

The only time there is no fuel flow is if you're deadheading your pressure into the throttle body, exactly as everyone is saying is not a good idea. As shown in the diagram, there's always flow. There's a lot of flow if you aren't running a PWM pump - which I'd venture most people running a Sniper aren't.

The fuel running through the throttle body acts exactly the same as the coolant running through the block and heads.

 

no it’s not just as susceptible to heat when it’s off… the electronics are no longer being
powered and running anything for one… so that self inflicted heat source is eliminated when shut down.

and yes you did say the fuel cooling the electronics is BS when I said it does cool it.

 

I stand corrected on my “never” comment. However, do this one simple exercise. Bring it up to operating temp, then let it idle like it would be in traffic etc.
Then open the hood and grab a heat gun and aim it at the cover for the ECU. Then tell us how cool it stayed, even when fluid was running through it. I think you’ll find it still gets hotter overall than you realized.

 

That doesn't tell you what you think it does. That's like saying put the car on a chassis dyno and measure the power - thats how much power isn't parasitic loss. It tells you nothing about what the power would be with a more or less efficient drivetrain. It just tells you what is with the status quo.

Fact is, without the fuel flow, the temperature of the unit would be hotter. And "hotter than realized" doesn't matter. Of course its hot compared to ambient, your fuel isn't being chilled. What matters is how hot the components at the junction are compared to their temperature ratings. Most consumer and industrial electronics components are rated to about 85 C (185F) and every degree you can run them cooler than that tends to increase their service life.

*If you want to know how much heat is being removed from the throttle body, measure the fuel flow and the fuel temperature into and out of the unit. That, along with the fluid properties, tells you exactly how much heat the fuel picked up running through it.

 

I agree, it would be hotter without the flow. But like I said before, in my experience it’s recommended, not required.
However you guys do whatever you want.