If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
"Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... > <snip> >> >If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ >> >> No,, about half an hour maximum will empty a 72 liter tank - and >> totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being >> drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount >> of restriction from the line. >> > >> > >> ><snip> >> > >> > > That is bull. > > Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working fuel pump. Denny |
Ads |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
"Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... > <snip> >> >If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ >> >> No,, about half an hour maximum will empty a 72 liter tank - and >> totally unmonitored, so you can do another job while it is being >> drained. The schrader valve is removed to remove a significant amount >> of restriction from the line. >> > >> > >> ><snip> >> > >> > > That is bull. > > Actually, no it's not. It works great as long as you have a working fuel pump. Denny |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
When i worked at the dodge dealer, the way i removed the intank fuel pumps
was not to drop the tank but raise the bed, the tank can be completly full and never dropped....remove the 6 15mm. bolts...leave the two back ones in but loosen them the ground strap and the three screws attaching the fuel neck to the body comes off, lower the truck with a jack stand under the bed , the bed goes up while the truck comes down, looks like a dump truck dropping a load when it is up Glenn Beasley Chrysler Tech "Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... > > > wrote in message > ... > > On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:54:06 -0400, "Al Smith" > > > wrote: > > > > >Wait a minute. Maybe there are shortcuts in some cases - and I have only > > >done > > >it once - but every fuel pump replacement I have heard about > > >involves dropping the tank. > > > > > > > None of the intank fuel pumps used on carbureted Toyota vehicles > > required removal of the tank to replace. All had screwed on access > > covers either in the trunk or floor under the rear seat to access the > > fuel sender.fuel pickup/fuel pump.. Many other vehicles were built the > > same. > > > > Many of today's vehicles DO require dropping the tank - and MANY of > > those tanks are plastic, not steel.. Many of them have quick > > disconnects to disconnect the fuel lines, and if less than 1/4 full > > pose a very limitted danger of spillage when removing. They are also > > usually relatively simple to drain with a proper fuel transfer pump, > > either electrical, air powered, or manual. > > > > Most fuel injected vehicles can be easily drained from under the hood > > by connecting the transfer pump to the service valve on the fuel rail > > - without getting ANY fuel or fuel vapours into the shop, and with NO > > danger of fire. > > If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ > > > <snip> > > |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
When i worked at the dodge dealer, the way i removed the intank fuel pumps
was not to drop the tank but raise the bed, the tank can be completly full and never dropped....remove the 6 15mm. bolts...leave the two back ones in but loosen them the ground strap and the three screws attaching the fuel neck to the body comes off, lower the truck with a jack stand under the bed , the bed goes up while the truck comes down, looks like a dump truck dropping a load when it is up Glenn Beasley Chrysler Tech "Thomas Moats" > wrote in message ... > > > wrote in message > ... > > On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:54:06 -0400, "Al Smith" > > > wrote: > > > > >Wait a minute. Maybe there are shortcuts in some cases - and I have only > > >done > > >it once - but every fuel pump replacement I have heard about > > >involves dropping the tank. > > > > > > > None of the intank fuel pumps used on carbureted Toyota vehicles > > required removal of the tank to replace. All had screwed on access > > covers either in the trunk or floor under the rear seat to access the > > fuel sender.fuel pickup/fuel pump.. Many other vehicles were built the > > same. > > > > Many of today's vehicles DO require dropping the tank - and MANY of > > those tanks are plastic, not steel.. Many of them have quick > > disconnects to disconnect the fuel lines, and if less than 1/4 full > > pose a very limitted danger of spillage when removing. They are also > > usually relatively simple to drain with a proper fuel transfer pump, > > either electrical, air powered, or manual. > > > > Most fuel injected vehicles can be easily drained from under the hood > > by connecting the transfer pump to the service valve on the fuel rail > > - without getting ANY fuel or fuel vapours into the shop, and with NO > > danger of fire. > > If you have about a week to wait for the fuel to tranfer........ > > > <snip> > > |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
|
#136
|
|||
|
|||
|
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Putney wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote: > >> How many cars have you heard of that have exploded or caught fire from >> an in-tank fuel pump? In my case, the answer is zero so I don't lose >> much sleep over it. > > > Well *sure* you say that *now*. But would you have wanted to be the > first engineer in history to propose doing that? 8^) Actually, yes, yes I would! I could use the royalty payments on my patent... :-) >> I'm more worried about an inadvertant air bag deployment than I am >> about my gas tank exploding. The former is much more likely than that >> latter and I've heard of several occurrences of unintended airbag >> deployment. > > > Can't argue with that. Oh, come on, I'm sure you can! :-) Matt |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Putney wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote: > >> How many cars have you heard of that have exploded or caught fire from >> an in-tank fuel pump? In my case, the answer is zero so I don't lose >> much sleep over it. > > > Well *sure* you say that *now*. But would you have wanted to be the > first engineer in history to propose doing that? 8^) Actually, yes, yes I would! I could use the royalty payments on my patent... :-) >> I'm more worried about an inadvertant air bag deployment than I am >> about my gas tank exploding. The former is much more likely than that >> latter and I've heard of several occurrences of unintended airbag >> deployment. > > > Can't argue with that. Oh, come on, I'm sure you can! :-) Matt |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Al Smith wrote:
> > "shiden_kai" > wrote in message > news:_TAgd.57890$nl.34438@pd7tw3no... >> Wound Up wrote: >> >> > Also, this type of integration is used secondarily, but not >> > insignificantly, to increase book-billed labour charges and replacement >> > costs on all related parts and diagnostic procedures. Under warranty, >> > this isn't usually a big deal, because the factory-trained techs are >> > specifically trained in the "is/is not" questions that arise, and how >> > to test for them. Off warranty, or at the local shop, properly >> > trained techs use this to their advantage like many other things, >> > simply billing "book time" that doesn't reflect reality, relying on >> > the customer's ignorance. >> >> This shows your lack of knowledge about the times required >> to replace in tank fuel pumps and the older on-engine fuel pumps. >> For someone who knows what they are doing (like myself), there >> is very little difference in labour time needed to change an in-tank >> fuel pump as opposed to the older on-engine fuel pumps. > > Wait a minute. Maybe there are shortcuts in some cases - and I have only > done > it once - but every fuel pump replacement I have heard about > involves dropping the tank. > > e. g. > http://popularmechanics.com/automoti...place_intank_f > uel_pump/ > > There is no way dropping the tank can be compared to disconnecting > two fuel lines and unplugging the electric plug. > I replied to another part of the thread already but will repeat here that the car my wife owns (2001 Impala) has an access door under the rear seat. Pull the seat and then unbolt the access door/cover and you can then remove the pump. |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Al Smith wrote:
> > "shiden_kai" > wrote in message > news:_TAgd.57890$nl.34438@pd7tw3no... >> Wound Up wrote: >> >> > Also, this type of integration is used secondarily, but not >> > insignificantly, to increase book-billed labour charges and replacement >> > costs on all related parts and diagnostic procedures. Under warranty, >> > this isn't usually a big deal, because the factory-trained techs are >> > specifically trained in the "is/is not" questions that arise, and how >> > to test for them. Off warranty, or at the local shop, properly >> > trained techs use this to their advantage like many other things, >> > simply billing "book time" that doesn't reflect reality, relying on >> > the customer's ignorance. >> >> This shows your lack of knowledge about the times required >> to replace in tank fuel pumps and the older on-engine fuel pumps. >> For someone who knows what they are doing (like myself), there >> is very little difference in labour time needed to change an in-tank >> fuel pump as opposed to the older on-engine fuel pumps. > > Wait a minute. Maybe there are shortcuts in some cases - and I have only > done > it once - but every fuel pump replacement I have heard about > involves dropping the tank. > > e. g. > http://popularmechanics.com/automoti...place_intank_f > uel_pump/ > > There is no way dropping the tank can be compared to disconnecting > two fuel lines and unplugging the electric plug. > I replied to another part of the thread already but will repeat here that the car my wife owns (2001 Impala) has an access door under the rear seat. Pull the seat and then unbolt the access door/cover and you can then remove the pump. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|