fuel pressure regulator????
fuel pressure regulator????
Ok i have an 88 t2 with large streetport three inch intake and exhaust and now for what i think is my problem i have a walbro 255 and i have stock pressure regulator will that cause any problems and i have an areomotive regulator and which one is the regulator on the primary fuel rail or secondary one cause it looks like they both have one on the firewall side thanks for yalls hel.
The walbro will overrun the stock FPR. You'll have higher fuel pressure, which means it will be especially annoying at idle. You'll have a hard time adjusting the variable resistor to properly compensate.
Some use an aftermarket FPR along with the stock one. It's not the best route, but it's been done. Obviously using one is superior.
Some use an aftermarket FPR along with the stock one. It's not the best route, but it's been done. Obviously using one is superior.
Hey RR88, if I remove the stock FPR, do I have to also remove the Pulsation damper ? The car is flooding badly after I removed the stock FPR and was a PIA to get it started.
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,881
Likes: 3
From: Jacksonville, Tampa & Tallahassee
The walbro will DEFINITELY overpower the stock fuel system. There was one on my otherwise stock car when I got it and it would always flood, had problems hot starting and would always shoot a puff of black smoke on startup.
You don't have to remove the PD when you replace the FPR, but most decent aftermarket FPR's have an integrated PD so there's no real need for it if you go that route.
Even if my FPR didn't have that functionality I'd consider replacing the PD w/ a banjo bolt [begin opinion] because the risk of an engine fire is more significant that whatever marginal benifit it provides [end opinion] [begin fact] "Lack of PD" is rarely (I've never heard of it) sighted as the cause for any performance or reliability issues [end fact]
You don't have to remove the PD when you replace the FPR, but most decent aftermarket FPR's have an integrated PD so there's no real need for it if you go that route.
Even if my FPR didn't have that functionality I'd consider replacing the PD w/ a banjo bolt [begin opinion] because the risk of an engine fire is more significant that whatever marginal benifit it provides [end opinion] [begin fact] "Lack of PD" is rarely (I've never heard of it) sighted as the cause for any performance or reliability issues [end fact]
The walbro will DEFINITELY overpower the stock fuel system. There was one on my otherwise stock car when I got it and it would always flood, had problems hot starting and would always shoot a puff of black smoke on startup.
You don't have to remove the PD when you replace the FPR, but most decent aftermarket FPR's have an integrated PD so there's no real need for it if you go that route.
Even if my FPR didn't have that functionality I'd consider replacing the PD w/ a banjo bolt [begin opinion] because the risk of an engine fire is more significant that whatever marginal benifit it provides [end opinion] [begin fact] "Lack of PD" is rarely (I've never heard of it) sighted as the cause for any performance or reliability issues [end fact]
You don't have to remove the PD when you replace the FPR, but most decent aftermarket FPR's have an integrated PD so there's no real need for it if you go that route.
Even if my FPR didn't have that functionality I'd consider replacing the PD w/ a banjo bolt [begin opinion] because the risk of an engine fire is more significant that whatever marginal benifit it provides [end opinion] [begin fact] "Lack of PD" is rarely (I've never heard of it) sighted as the cause for any performance or reliability issues [end fact]
Trending Topics
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,881
Likes: 3
From: Jacksonville, Tampa & Tallahassee
Basically, remove the PD period (unless its new). Old PD's are a liability and have a habit of starting engine fires. A banjo bolt and an aftermarket FPR is the way to go.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trickster
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
25
Jul 1, 2023 04:40 PM
