really!!!!!!!! my 72 cudda and my 69 newport both have engine mounted fuel pumps and
there is no vapor lock there

Bill Putney wrote:

> 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')