View Single Post
  #1  
Old July 24th 05, 03:22 PM
Bill Putney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

aarcuda69062 wrote:

> In article >,
> 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.

>
>
> Less chance of vapor lock with the return less system since the
> fuel does not pick up engine heat (the whole point of the return
> less system).


I beg to differ. Without recirc, the fuel is in the engine area a while
soaking up heat. With recirc, cool fuel is always coming in at
relatively high volume, and the warmed fuel is going back to the tank,
and any global heating of the tank by that is effectively removed by
ambient temps surrounding the tank (plus the volume of fuel there is
(relatively speaking) almost an infinite heat sink. Sre - you shut the
engine off, and it's going to heat up, but if it starts out a few
degrees cooler, chances are much better that it will never reach the
vapor stage.

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