Fuel lines and fire !!
10-10-2012, 03:37 PM
#61
Pro
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Palgrave, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
10-10-2012, 04:05 PM
#62
Pro
To be fair the other day I pulled out my drive way and a hundred meters up the road I lost power and started smelling fuel. I stopped opened my door and leaned down and could hear fuel pissing on the floor, so I switched the engine off, jumped out with my fire extinguisher but no flames. Thank God!
The Gates hose that runs over the cam cover on the passenger side had come loose and popped off the barbed fitting.
Now I think it was because I clamped it wrongly, but I'm not sure.
This experience was too close for comfort, but the other viable replacement is 10+ times more expensive than the gates system. What we need is some competition to bring the price down :P
The Gates hose that runs over the cam cover on the passenger side had come loose and popped off the barbed fitting.
Now I think it was because I clamped it wrongly, but I'm not sure.
This experience was too close for comfort, but the other viable replacement is 10+ times more expensive than the gates system. What we need is some competition to bring the price down :P
10-10-2012, 07:26 PM
#63
Rennlist Member
Sounds as though you clamped it wrongly.
I've replaced all my hoses on 5 84 cars and several 32 V cars with reinforced high pressure fuel hose R 30-9 from several manufacturers.
I'll replace them again after 4 years service.
No issues. Nor do I expect any.
Superior hoses would be great. I bet Precision Motor Werks has created them. Kudos. You are the best in the world at re-engineering 928's, maybe other cars too!
The setup I have is adequate.
If at some point I feel otherwise, then I'll build my own sets.
This thread feels snarky. Reminds me of the shock absorber thread.
Feel happy you have the high end customers, Greg, who can afford the paramount level in everything.
Not all Porsche owners are that well-funded. My R 30-9 setup is engineered well-enough to allow me hobby access, which I would loose if the California hoses were mandatory.
I hope more people can afford them, and they buy them. Especially certain hoses you pointed out.
But i won't apologize for not buying paramount over engineered hoses.
I've replaced all my hoses on 5 84 cars and several 32 V cars with reinforced high pressure fuel hose R 30-9 from several manufacturers.
I'll replace them again after 4 years service.
No issues. Nor do I expect any.
Superior hoses would be great. I bet Precision Motor Werks has created them. Kudos. You are the best in the world at re-engineering 928's, maybe other cars too!
The setup I have is adequate.
If at some point I feel otherwise, then I'll build my own sets.
This thread feels snarky. Reminds me of the shock absorber thread.
Feel happy you have the high end customers, Greg, who can afford the paramount level in everything.
Not all Porsche owners are that well-funded. My R 30-9 setup is engineered well-enough to allow me hobby access, which I would loose if the California hoses were mandatory.
I hope more people can afford them, and they buy them. Especially certain hoses you pointed out.
But i won't apologize for not buying paramount over engineered hoses.
Last edited by Landseer; 10-10-2012 at 07:55 PM.
10-10-2012, 08:23 PM
#64
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
I have two different solutions, for that particular fuel line. I take the stock fuel line, cut it off, weld on an AN fitting, have it replated, and then make a short hose to connect the two (using my trick metric adaptors on the chassis side.) There can be a "wait" for this "version"...depending on where in the cutting/welding/plating process the stock lines are at.
The other solution is that I make a hose that eliminates going over the valve cover. It's a one piece hose that goes around the front, under the thermostat neck. I personally like this solution better, in terms of routing, but using the "original line" does make it look more stock.
I sell equal amounts of each.
__________________
greg brown
714 879 9072
GregBBRD@aol.com
Semi-retired, as of Feb 1, 2023.
The days of free technical advice are over.
Free consultations will no longer be available.
Will still be in the shop, isolated and exclusively working on project cars, developmental work and products, engines and transmissions.
Have fun with your 928's people!
greg brown
714 879 9072
GregBBRD@aol.com
Semi-retired, as of Feb 1, 2023.
The days of free technical advice are over.
Free consultations will no longer be available.
Will still be in the shop, isolated and exclusively working on project cars, developmental work and products, engines and transmissions.
Have fun with your 928's people!
10-10-2012, 08:29 PM
#65
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
To be fair the other day I pulled out my drive way and a hundred meters up the road I lost power and started smelling fuel. I stopped opened my door and leaned down and could hear fuel pissing on the floor, so I switched the engine off, jumped out with my fire extinguisher but no flames. Thank God!
The Gates hose that runs over the cam cover on the passenger side had come loose and popped off the barbed fitting.
Now I think it was because I clamped it wrongly, but I'm not sure.
This experience was too close for comfort, but the other viable replacement is 10+ times more expensive than the gates system. What we need is some competition to bring the price down :P
The Gates hose that runs over the cam cover on the passenger side had come loose and popped off the barbed fitting.
Now I think it was because I clamped it wrongly, but I'm not sure.
This experience was too close for comfort, but the other viable replacement is 10+ times more expensive than the gates system. What we need is some competition to bring the price down :P
My wife actually asks me "Why do you bother doing this stuff, for other people? Why don't you just use the pieces you make on your own customer's cars and forget the rest of them?"
Some days I wonder, too.
10-10-2012, 08:33 PM
#66
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
Basic Site Sponsor
Sounds as though you clamped it wrongly.
I've replaced all my hoses on 5 84 cars and several 32 V cars with reinforced high pressure fuel hose R 30-9 from several manufacturers.
I'll replace them again after 4 years service.
No issues. Nor do I expect any.
Superior hoses would be great. I bet Precision Motor Werks has created them. Kudos. You are the best in the world at re-engineering 928's, maybe other cars too!
The setup I have is adequate.
If at some point I feel otherwise, then I'll build my own sets.
This thread feels snarky. Reminds me of the shock absorber thread.
Feel happy you have the high end customers, Greg, who can afford the paramount level in everything.
Not all Porsche owners are that well-funded. My R 30-9 setup is engineered well-enough to allow me hobby access, which I would loose if the California hoses were mandatory.
I hope more people can afford them, and they buy them. Especially certain hoses you pointed out.
But i won't apologize for not buying paramount over engineered hoses.
I've replaced all my hoses on 5 84 cars and several 32 V cars with reinforced high pressure fuel hose R 30-9 from several manufacturers.
I'll replace them again after 4 years service.
No issues. Nor do I expect any.
Superior hoses would be great. I bet Precision Motor Werks has created them. Kudos. You are the best in the world at re-engineering 928's, maybe other cars too!
The setup I have is adequate.
If at some point I feel otherwise, then I'll build my own sets.
This thread feels snarky. Reminds me of the shock absorber thread.
Feel happy you have the high end customers, Greg, who can afford the paramount level in everything.
Not all Porsche owners are that well-funded. My R 30-9 setup is engineered well-enough to allow me hobby access, which I would loose if the California hoses were mandatory.
I hope more people can afford them, and they buy them. Especially certain hoses you pointed out.
But i won't apologize for not buying paramount over engineered hoses.
Especially with posts like this....
Makes me feel like I need to applogize for making nice pieces that people can close their hoods and never think about, again.
F*^k!
10-10-2012, 08:44 PM
#67
Rennlist Member
You aren't just making nice ones. You make the absolute best that money can buy. No question.
I'd recommend any owner to check with you first for them.
But the R 30-9 alternative has no-doubt saved an inordinate amount of cars.
From the looks of the original hoses I've replaced, its better than keeping the originals. You challenged that mantra. Hope you are right.
I'd recommend any owner to check with you first for them.
But the R 30-9 alternative has no-doubt saved an inordinate amount of cars.
From the looks of the original hoses I've replaced, its better than keeping the originals. You challenged that mantra. Hope you are right.
10-11-2012, 10:04 AM
#68
Racer
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Baltimore,MD
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fuel hose
i am not an expert, but have done many fuel hoses on my own porsches and other performance cars and have a hydraulic hose techie i go to......here is my 2 cents and everyone may disagree but here goes.
greg is absolutely correct. you do not put even 30r9 hose on barbed fittings and clamp them down with fuel injection clamps....unless it is pushlok hose specifically designed for it and has the psi for it. and pusklok hose goes on without clamps. the specific reason for this is the problem with overclamping, underclamping and barbes tearing inner lining i suppose.
as to poster who said it is the difference between sub par and over par i.e. premium, i disagree, you do not clamp 30r9 hose on barbed fittings period, it is not the case of high performance hose and teflon lined, it should not be done.
as an owner you may get away with it, and good for you. but as a professional there are liability issues and i understand that.
personally for me, if i knowlingly do something that i know is wrong and not recommended, i cant sleep at night and i dread one family member having an "incident" that i knew i could have prevented.
that is why i repeatedly research and ask questions on this forum and elsewhere before i do a job especially when it regards fuel lines.
i am willing to take risks, but not in this area. when i first read on this forum that people were clamping fuel hose on barbed fittings, i was a bit shocked......
again it is your car and your decision and lets leave it at that.
greg is absolutely correct. you do not put even 30r9 hose on barbed fittings and clamp them down with fuel injection clamps....unless it is pushlok hose specifically designed for it and has the psi for it. and pusklok hose goes on without clamps. the specific reason for this is the problem with overclamping, underclamping and barbes tearing inner lining i suppose.
as to poster who said it is the difference between sub par and over par i.e. premium, i disagree, you do not clamp 30r9 hose on barbed fittings period, it is not the case of high performance hose and teflon lined, it should not be done.
as an owner you may get away with it, and good for you. but as a professional there are liability issues and i understand that.
personally for me, if i knowlingly do something that i know is wrong and not recommended, i cant sleep at night and i dread one family member having an "incident" that i knew i could have prevented.
that is why i repeatedly research and ask questions on this forum and elsewhere before i do a job especially when it regards fuel lines.
i am willing to take risks, but not in this area. when i first read on this forum that people were clamping fuel hose on barbed fittings, i was a bit shocked......
again it is your car and your decision and lets leave it at that.
10-11-2012, 10:30 AM
#69
Racer
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Baltimore,MD
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fuel lines
i think the best alternative solution for all is pushlok hose. i have used it on v12 engines, and if anyone had experience with this, it is clampless and literally just pushes on, but only goes on one way. it will not be easily removed unless you cut it with a razor.
the problem is this type of hose is pricey, and sometimes you have to order like 100 feet when you only need 2!
i will do more research on it, but it seems to me that this makes more sense to me, of course you can cut off the barbs etc and weld an fittings as per greg, that is fabrication etc and good for custom work but for us with not the right equipment etc
but i also wonder in lieu of welding an fitting, you cut the fuel line, and use a ferrule compression fitting and put a hose between the 2. i have used this technique before on another porsche......
the problem is this type of hose is pricey, and sometimes you have to order like 100 feet when you only need 2!
i will do more research on it, but it seems to me that this makes more sense to me, of course you can cut off the barbs etc and weld an fittings as per greg, that is fabrication etc and good for custom work but for us with not the right equipment etc
but i also wonder in lieu of welding an fitting, you cut the fuel line, and use a ferrule compression fitting and put a hose between the 2. i have used this technique before on another porsche......
10-11-2012, 11:42 AM
#70
Rennlist Member
It is indeed our choice which fuel hose and components to use......Im going with Gregs stuff.
Porsche has decided not to make some of the fuel lines making our choices limited.
Rather not drive than risk the horror of being caught in a car fire, the car then becomes the least of my worries.
Cant imagine having the family in the car and a fire.
Porsche has decided not to make some of the fuel lines making our choices limited.
Rather not drive than risk the horror of being caught in a car fire, the car then becomes the least of my worries.
Cant imagine having the family in the car and a fire.
10-11-2012, 11:43 AM
#71
Rennlist Member
...
The other solution is that I make a hose that eliminates going over the valve cover. It's a one piece hose that goes around the front, under the thermostat neck. I personally like this solution better, in terms of routing, but using the "original line" does make it look more stock.
The other solution is that I make a hose that eliminates going over the valve cover. It's a one piece hose that goes around the front, under the thermostat neck. I personally like this solution better, in terms of routing, but using the "original line" does make it look more stock.
The thing that always bothered me about that particular factory hose is that it needs to flex: one end is attached to a hard-line on the body, the other end end is a hard-line clamped to the engine block. And presumably that short piece of rubber/plastic hose in between is the part that is supposed to flex. But with ours, even the low-miles GTS, the hose is as stiff or stiffer than the hardline, and it is mostly the steel line over the cam-cover that does the flexing. (Assuming the engine mounts aren't toasted).
The other hose that bothers me is the U-shaped hose at the back of the engine. It does fail and is difficult to get to for inspection, and often gets ignored until too late. So when I was doing some catch-up PM on our S4 I decided to change the fuel lines with Roger's kit on the recommendations here, and the price was certainly reasonable.
So I pulled the U-hose (which looked perfect) and of course had to cut off the factory plastic/rubber hose which was on there to stay. And of course it was as perfect inside as it was outside. I replaced it with the molded u-hose from the kit, which fit fine, and clamped it as instructed. And then I looked at it and said, "Self, you just replaced a factory hose in perfect shape with a clamped-on hose that looks just like the stuff that tried to burn up your 914 all those years ago. Are you nuts?".
That was a few years ago, and it's been fine and hasn't leaked. I regret cutting up that factory hose, but if I had not done that then I would not have known it was perfect inside. (I now believe that that particular hose decays first from the outside, but I am not certain). But it still bothers me, and it is going to get changed again.
Anyway, it is great that there are options, and as long as folks understand what the tradeoffs are then they can make the choices that are right, for them.
10-11-2012, 11:44 AM
#72
Rennlist Member
I don't see any reason why a compression fitting could not be used. The tricky bit is that Pep Boys, Ace Hardware and Home Depot will not have one for 10 mm steel tube.
My only concern with pushlok is permeability and gasoline smell. That is certainly an issue with most braided stainless AN hose and I have heard complaints about aeroquip push on.
Just to add more fuel to the fire, here is a manufacturer of pushlok hose that apparently endorses clamping the hose with narrow Oetiker style clamps upstream of the barbs.
http://fragolaperformancesystems.com...eracehose.html
The hose is 3.95 per foot at Summit or 31.95 for 10 ft. That is cheaper than Gates Barricade. You would, however, still have to use the barb fittings from Arrnworx of use metric adapters to use AN hose ends.
My only concern with pushlok is permeability and gasoline smell. That is certainly an issue with most braided stainless AN hose and I have heard complaints about aeroquip push on.
Just to add more fuel to the fire, here is a manufacturer of pushlok hose that apparently endorses clamping the hose with narrow Oetiker style clamps upstream of the barbs.
http://fragolaperformancesystems.com...eracehose.html
The hose is 3.95 per foot at Summit or 31.95 for 10 ft. That is cheaper than Gates Barricade. You would, however, still have to use the barb fittings from Arrnworx of use metric adapters to use AN hose ends.
10-11-2012, 12:47 PM
#73
Rennlist Member
The other hose that bothers me is the U-shaped hose at the back of the engine. ..... I pulled the U-hose (which looked perfect) and of course had to cut off the factory plastic/rubber hose which was on there to stay. And of course it was as perfect inside as it was outside. ..... And then I looked at it and said, "Self, you just replaced a factory hose in perfect shape with a clamped-on hose that looks just like the stuff that tried to burn up your 914 all those years ago. Are you nuts?". ..... I regret cutting up that factory hose, but if I had not done that then I would not have known it was perfect inside. .....
Here are all the hoses I changed on my 86.5. Which of these are still available and which are NLA?
I'd still like to see a recommendation list with pics and prices for these from Greg.
10-11-2012, 01:12 PM
#74
Rennlist Member
i am not an expert, but have done many fuel hoses on my own porsches and other performance cars and have a hydraulic hose techie i go to......here is my 2 cents and everyone may disagree but here goes.
greg is absolutely correct. you do not put even 30r9 hose on barbed fittings and clamp them down with fuel injection clamps....unless it is pushlok hose specifically designed for it and has the psi for it. and pusklok hose goes on without clamps. the specific reason for this is the problem with overclamping, underclamping and barbes tearing inner lining i suppose.
as to poster who said it is the difference between sub par and over par i.e. premium, i disagree, you do not clamp 30r9 hose on barbed fittings period, it is not the case of high performance hose and teflon lined, it should not be done.
as an owner you may get away with it, and good for you. but as a professional there are liability issues and i understand that.
personally for me, if i knowlingly do something that i know is wrong and not recommended, i cant sleep at night and i dread one family member having an "incident" that i knew i could have prevented.
that is why i repeatedly research and ask questions on this forum and elsewhere before i do a job especially when it regards fuel lines.
i am willing to take risks, but not in this area. when i first read on this forum that people were clamping fuel hose on barbed fittings, i was a bit shocked......
again it is your car and your decision and lets leave it at that.
greg is absolutely correct. you do not put even 30r9 hose on barbed fittings and clamp them down with fuel injection clamps....unless it is pushlok hose specifically designed for it and has the psi for it. and pusklok hose goes on without clamps. the specific reason for this is the problem with overclamping, underclamping and barbes tearing inner lining i suppose.
as to poster who said it is the difference between sub par and over par i.e. premium, i disagree, you do not clamp 30r9 hose on barbed fittings period, it is not the case of high performance hose and teflon lined, it should not be done.
as an owner you may get away with it, and good for you. but as a professional there are liability issues and i understand that.
personally for me, if i knowlingly do something that i know is wrong and not recommended, i cant sleep at night and i dread one family member having an "incident" that i knew i could have prevented.
that is why i repeatedly research and ask questions on this forum and elsewhere before i do a job especially when it regards fuel lines.
i am willing to take risks, but not in this area. when i first read on this forum that people were clamping fuel hose on barbed fittings, i was a bit shocked......
again it is your car and your decision and lets leave it at that.
10-11-2012, 02:31 PM
#75
Three Wheelin'
Besides using 30r9 hose what works for the u shaped hose with the 90 degree ends? The
Aeroquip chart for teflon lined hose lists 4" as the minimum bend radius for -6 hose & this is way tighter than that.
Chart:
pplication: Hot air, steam, compressor discharge and most chemical applications.
SAE Rating 100R14A
Other Ratings None
Tube Extruded PTFE
Reinforcement Single Wire Braid Steel
Cover Stainless steel outer braid
Temperature -100 Deg. F to +500 Deg. F (-73 Deg. C to +260 Deg.)
Crimp Fittings PTFE Crimp Fittings
Reusable Fittings Teflon "Super Gem" Fittings
Build a Hose HoseMachine-2807
Additional Links Eaton Master Catalog (PDF)
Video Links None.
Part Number Inside Diameter Outside Diameter Operating Pressure Burst Pressure Bend
Radius Weight
Per Foot
2807-3 0.14" 0.25" 3000 12000 1.5" 0.04
2807-4 0.19" 0.30" 3000 12000 2" 0.06
2807-5 0.26" 0.37" 3000 12000 3" 0.08
2807-6 0.32" 0.43" 2500 10000 4" 0.10
2807-8 0.42" 0.54" 2000 8000 5.25" 0.12
2807-10 0.51" 0.63" 1500 6000 6.5" 0.16
2807-12 0.64" 0.76" 1200 4800 7.75" 0.18
2807-16 0.88" 1.03" 1000 4000 9" 0.26
2807-20 1.12" 1.29" 625 2500 16" 0.34
Aeroquip chart for teflon lined hose lists 4" as the minimum bend radius for -6 hose & this is way tighter than that.
Chart:
pplication: Hot air, steam, compressor discharge and most chemical applications.
SAE Rating 100R14A
Other Ratings None
Tube Extruded PTFE
Reinforcement Single Wire Braid Steel
Cover Stainless steel outer braid
Temperature -100 Deg. F to +500 Deg. F (-73 Deg. C to +260 Deg.)
Crimp Fittings PTFE Crimp Fittings
Reusable Fittings Teflon "Super Gem" Fittings
Build a Hose HoseMachine-2807
Additional Links Eaton Master Catalog (PDF)
Video Links None.
Part Number Inside Diameter Outside Diameter Operating Pressure Burst Pressure Bend
Radius Weight
Per Foot
2807-3 0.14" 0.25" 3000 12000 1.5" 0.04
2807-4 0.19" 0.30" 3000 12000 2" 0.06
2807-5 0.26" 0.37" 3000 12000 3" 0.08
2807-6 0.32" 0.43" 2500 10000 4" 0.10
2807-8 0.42" 0.54" 2000 8000 5.25" 0.12
2807-10 0.51" 0.63" 1500 6000 6.5" 0.16
2807-12 0.64" 0.76" 1200 4800 7.75" 0.18
2807-16 0.88" 1.03" 1000 4000 9" 0.26
2807-20 1.12" 1.29" 625 2500 16" 0.34