View Single Post
  #2  
Old July 24th 05, 12:13 PM
Bill Putney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes - I knew that - *BUT* for the purposes of preventing vapor lock in
the engine area, it does no good, don't you think? The recirc in the
tank consist of the pressure regulator (at the tank) dumping excess fuel
back to the tank from the pressure relief valve - not the same thing as
recirc'ing all the way from the fuel rail. With under hood temperatures
rising over the years, that's one of the reasons they had to abandon the
engine-mounted fuel pump and recirc the fuel. I guess the Chrysler
engineers forgot about that lesson learned.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')


tim bur wrote:
> actually it does have a recirc fuekl system but it's done in the tank
> if it's a 2.7 thgere is a good chance the motor sludged up and the chain jumped
> a tooth
>
> Bill Putney wrote:


>>
>>Damn! Is there some reason they can't use the phrase "vapor lock" in
>>those TSB's!!!???
>>
>>Are we seeing in the problem that the TSB is reporting a consequence of
>>not having a recirc fuel system?
>>
>>Bill Putney
>>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
>>adddress with the letter 'x')

Ads