New fuel line option
12-09-2015, 09:14 PM
#1
New fuel line option
I purchased one of the space age fuel lines to replace the original NLA line on the front, passenger side. But it's just too ugly to use. A friend in the 911 world regularly makes/replaces both fuel and oil lines, there is one on a 3.2 in particular.
So I had him take my old line and make a flare fitting, I then had it plated and he finished it. If anyone wants one done, send me a PM or email.
So I had him take my old line and make a flare fitting, I then had it plated and he finished it. If anyone wants one done, send me a PM or email.
Last edited by Shaun @ Tru6; 12-09-2015 at 09:40 PM.
12-09-2015, 09:29 PM
#2
Rennlist Member
You should have opted for the "OEM" style line from Greg Brown at Precision Motorwerks. Greg has the factory hard line re-plated after welding on an adapter fitting so it can connect to one of his his most excellent teflon lined Lifetime fuel hoses. A work of art IMHO.
Mike
Mike
12-09-2015, 09:37 PM
#3
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,442
Received 1,609 Likes
on
1,050 Posts
Yup. OP has nice plating but a less-than-stellar hose. Or at least a hose no better than the original.
12-09-2015, 09:37 PM
#4
Just did a search and found that one. When I placed my timing belt and while you are in there order with Roger asking for new fuel lines, he sent me the ugly one. Who knew.
12-09-2015, 09:51 PM
#6
12-09-2015, 10:27 PM
#7
Former Sponsor
Nice!
Except for crimping rubber hose onto the far end fitting made for the original plastic line. The barbs on that fitting are really sharp and none of of the rubber hose makers (that I've found) suggest putting their rubber hose over that style fitting. (I'm going to get the usual verbal abuse back from a handful of people that this isn't a problem and I'm just making people afraid to do this for no reason, but in reality, I've yet to find a rubber hose maker that suggests that this should be done. I'm a pretty big dealer for Goodridge and they are adamant about not doing this. Goodyear says right in their literature not to do this. Aeroquip says to not do it, also. So for the trolls out there, save your breath if you want to bash me around for saying not to do this....I'm just telling people what the hose makers say.)
BTW....I make the "ugly" line.....and the "stock" looking line.
Quite frankly, it's all in the eyes of the beholder....
The "ugly" one is far more functional for some people, because it allow easier removal of the valve cover. It is also better insulated, so it keeps the fuel going into the engine cooler.
The "stock looking" one requires the return of the original unbent, undamaged stock line (and a hefty core charge until that happens)....something some people are unwilling or unable to do.
I could care less about making the money on the "core", if they don't return the line, I can't make the next one.
However, people being what they are, I end up without any cores to make the stock looking line.....plus the whole "core" thing is a pain for Roger....so he only stocks the re-routed line.
Except for crimping rubber hose onto the far end fitting made for the original plastic line. The barbs on that fitting are really sharp and none of of the rubber hose makers (that I've found) suggest putting their rubber hose over that style fitting. (I'm going to get the usual verbal abuse back from a handful of people that this isn't a problem and I'm just making people afraid to do this for no reason, but in reality, I've yet to find a rubber hose maker that suggests that this should be done. I'm a pretty big dealer for Goodridge and they are adamant about not doing this. Goodyear says right in their literature not to do this. Aeroquip says to not do it, also. So for the trolls out there, save your breath if you want to bash me around for saying not to do this....I'm just telling people what the hose makers say.)
BTW....I make the "ugly" line.....and the "stock" looking line.
Quite frankly, it's all in the eyes of the beholder....
The "ugly" one is far more functional for some people, because it allow easier removal of the valve cover. It is also better insulated, so it keeps the fuel going into the engine cooler.
The "stock looking" one requires the return of the original unbent, undamaged stock line (and a hefty core charge until that happens)....something some people are unwilling or unable to do.
I could care less about making the money on the "core", if they don't return the line, I can't make the next one.
However, people being what they are, I end up without any cores to make the stock looking line.....plus the whole "core" thing is a pain for Roger....so he only stocks the re-routed line.
Trending Topics
12-09-2015, 10:51 PM
#8
Hi Greg,
I wish I had known about your OEM style line but this was a fun exercise.
Noting the barbs, we did something different, here's a pic. The Cohline line uses standard fittings. The hard line was cut and then a flare fitting used to join the two. I wanted the two piece line so it was easier to install. You can thread each end on and then join the two. It's not lifetime like your great lines, but Cohline has to be at least 10 years. What do you think?
I'm surprised people aren't willing to send in their old lines. 3.2s have the notorious T line and folks send them in as fast as a possible when they learn of the service.
I wish I had known about your OEM style line but this was a fun exercise.
Noting the barbs, we did something different, here's a pic. The Cohline line uses standard fittings. The hard line was cut and then a flare fitting used to join the two. I wanted the two piece line so it was easier to install. You can thread each end on and then join the two. It's not lifetime like your great lines, but Cohline has to be at least 10 years. What do you think?
I'm surprised people aren't willing to send in their old lines. 3.2s have the notorious T line and folks send them in as fast as a possible when they learn of the service.
12-09-2015, 10:57 PM
#9
And yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I started Tru6, a 65-89 911 surface refinishing/restoration shop after seeing so much bad plating, powder coating and anodizing out in the world.
https://rennlist.com/forums/928-foru...r-7-years.html
Need to scroll down a bit. I honestly can't wait to get a piston, cams and my heads done to rebuild this motor to as new.
https://rennlist.com/forums/928-foru...r-7-years.html
Need to scroll down a bit. I honestly can't wait to get a piston, cams and my heads done to rebuild this motor to as new.
12-10-2015, 12:14 PM
#10
Captain Obvious
Super User
Super User
Nice!
Except for crimping rubber hose onto the far end fitting made for the original plastic line. The barbs on that fitting are really sharp and none of of the rubber hose makers (that I've found) suggest putting their rubber hose over that style fitting. (I'm going to get the usual verbal abuse back from a handful of people that this isn't a problem and I'm just making people afraid to do this for no reason, but in reality, I've yet to find a rubber hose maker that suggests that this should be done. I'm a pretty big dealer for Goodridge and they are adamant about not doing this. Goodyear says right in their literature not to do this. Aeroquip says to not do it, also. So for the trolls out there, save your breath if you want to bash me around for saying not to do this....I'm just telling people what the hose makers say.)
BTW....I make the "ugly" line.....and the "stock" looking line.
Quite frankly, it's all in the eyes of the beholder....
The "ugly" one is far more functional for some people, because it allow easier removal of the valve cover. It is also better insulated, so it keeps the fuel going into the engine cooler.
The "stock looking" one requires the return of the original unbent, undamaged stock line (and a hefty core charge until that happens)....something some people are unwilling or unable to do.
I could care less about making the money on the "core", if they don't return the line, I can't make the next one.
However, people being what they are, I end up without any cores to make the stock looking line.....plus the whole "core" thing is a pain for Roger....so he only stocks the re-routed line.
Except for crimping rubber hose onto the far end fitting made for the original plastic line. The barbs on that fitting are really sharp and none of of the rubber hose makers (that I've found) suggest putting their rubber hose over that style fitting. (I'm going to get the usual verbal abuse back from a handful of people that this isn't a problem and I'm just making people afraid to do this for no reason, but in reality, I've yet to find a rubber hose maker that suggests that this should be done. I'm a pretty big dealer for Goodridge and they are adamant about not doing this. Goodyear says right in their literature not to do this. Aeroquip says to not do it, also. So for the trolls out there, save your breath if you want to bash me around for saying not to do this....I'm just telling people what the hose makers say.)
BTW....I make the "ugly" line.....and the "stock" looking line.
Quite frankly, it's all in the eyes of the beholder....
The "ugly" one is far more functional for some people, because it allow easier removal of the valve cover. It is also better insulated, so it keeps the fuel going into the engine cooler.
The "stock looking" one requires the return of the original unbent, undamaged stock line (and a hefty core charge until that happens)....something some people are unwilling or unable to do.
I could care less about making the money on the "core", if they don't return the line, I can't make the next one.
However, people being what they are, I end up without any cores to make the stock looking line.....plus the whole "core" thing is a pain for Roger....so he only stocks the re-routed line.
12-10-2015, 12:22 PM
#11
Captain Obvious
Super User
Super User
I purchased one of the space age fuel lines to replace the original NLA line on the front, passenger side. But it's just too ugly to use. A friend in the 911 world regularly makes/replaces both fuel and oil lines, there is one on a 3.2 in particular.
So I had him take my old line and make a flare fitting, I then had it plated and he finished it. If anyone wants one done, send me a PM or email.
So I had him take my old line and make a flare fitting, I then had it plated and he finished it. If anyone wants one done, send me a PM or email.
12-10-2015, 01:12 PM
#12
Former Sponsor
Hi Greg,
I wish I had known about your OEM style line but this was a fun exercise.
Noting the barbs, we did something different, here's a pic. The Cohline line uses standard fittings. The hard line was cut and then a flare fitting used to join the two. I wanted the two piece line so it was easier to install. You can thread each end on and then join the two. It's not lifetime like your great lines, but Cohline has to be at least 10 years. What do you think?
I'm surprised people aren't willing to send in their old lines. 3.2s have the notorious T line and folks send them in as fast as a possible when they learn of the service.
I wish I had known about your OEM style line but this was a fun exercise.
Noting the barbs, we did something different, here's a pic. The Cohline line uses standard fittings. The hard line was cut and then a flare fitting used to join the two. I wanted the two piece line so it was easier to install. You can thread each end on and then join the two. It's not lifetime like your great lines, but Cohline has to be at least 10 years. What do you think?
I'm surprised people aren't willing to send in their old lines. 3.2s have the notorious T line and folks send them in as fast as a possible when they learn of the service.
There's nothing wrong with good high pressure rubber hose, as long as it doesn't go over barbs made for plastic hose and it is monitored carefully for shrinkage and deterioration. This is especially true when this hose is crimped onto the proper fittings, like you did at the junction to the steel line.
It looked like, in your picture, thst you re-used the original deep female 16 x 1.5 fitting at the chassis attachment position, which would have been originally used with the plastic hose and have those really sharp barbs. If that is the case, I'd encourage to to not do that, but crimp on a -6 hose end made for this style hose and use my custom adaptor (on the end of the "ugly" hose) to adapt that to the chassis end.
Regardless of what some trolls claim, rubber hose with hose clamps over those sharps barbs is a very bad idea.
To repeat, this is not only my opinion, but also the clear warning from the companies that make and distribute rubber fuel hose.
BTW.....I also agree with you that rubber hose with crimps over the proper fittings is a decent "short term" solution. Good for 10 years? Maybe, maybe not.
Since you mentioned the 3.2 Carrera fuel hose, I'll use that as an example. Porsche originally crimped on very high quality rubber hose on that "T" hose you speak of. Those hoses shrank and leaked, some way earlier than 10 years. I personally replaced a boatload of them. They decided that the vibration and rubbing was the issue, so they then covered that rubber hose with a plastic spiral protection sleeve. Those hoses leaked also, some before the 10 year mark. I replaced a boatload of those, also. Their final (and damn expensive to buy) solution was to go to a really thick, extra re-inforced special synthetic rubber hose and then double clamp it onto the fittings.
Part of my "advantage" over the trolls is that I've been working on Porsches for almost 50 years and have had the time to see how Porsche addresses their fuel lines...and "solved" leakage problems with rubber hose.
In my mind, I've seen all the burned 928s (and 3.2 Carreras) I ever need to see and decided to make the fuel hoses as safe as modern technology can make them.
12-10-2015, 01:28 PM
#13
Burning Brakes
What you can 'get away with' doesn't do justice to these cars IMO.
12-10-2015, 02:09 PM
#14
Rennlist Member
So,
now you have a redundant ugly hose that you can't stand the sight of. Send it to me (I will pay freight) and I promise that it will never assault your eyes again.
Seriously, if your'e looking to sell I could be interested.
Myles
now you have a redundant ugly hose that you can't stand the sight of. Send it to me (I will pay freight) and I promise that it will never assault your eyes again.
Seriously, if your'e looking to sell I could be interested.
Myles
12-10-2015, 02:47 PM
#15
Captain Obvious
Super User
Super User
Looks good to me!
There's nothing wrong with good high pressure rubber hose, as long as it doesn't go over barbs made for plastic hose and it is monitored carefully for shrinkage and deterioration. This is especially true when this hose is crimped onto the proper fittings, like you did at the junction to the steel line.
It looked like, in your picture, thst you re-used the original deep female 16 x 1.5 fitting at the chassis attachment position, which would have been originally used with the plastic hose and have those really sharp barbs. If that is the case, I'd encourage to to not do that, but crimp on a -6 hose end made for this style hose and use my custom adaptor (on the end of the "ugly" hose) to adapt that to the chassis end.
Regardless of what some trolls claim, rubber hose with hose clamps over those sharps barbs is a very bad idea.
To repeat, this is not only my opinion, but also the clear warning from the companies that make and distribute rubber fuel hose.
BTW.....I also agree with you that rubber hose with crimps over the proper fittings is a decent "short term" solution. Good for 10 years? Maybe, maybe not.
Since you mentioned the 3.2 Carrera fuel hose, I'll use that as an example. Porsche originally crimped on very high quality rubber hose on that "T" hose you speak of. Those hoses shrank and leaked, some way earlier than 10 years. I personally replaced a boatload of them. They decided that the vibration and rubbing was the issue, so they then covered that rubber hose with a plastic spiral protection sleeve. Those hoses leaked also, some before the 10 year mark. I replaced a boatload of those, also. Their final (and damn expensive to buy) solution was to go to a really thick, extra re-inforced special synthetic rubber hose and then double clamp it onto the fittings.
Part of my "advantage" over the trolls is that I've been working on Porsches for almost 50 years and have had the time to see how Porsche addresses their fuel lines...and "solved" leakage problems with rubber hose.
In my mind, I've seen all the burned 928s (and 3.2 Carreras) I ever need to see and decided to make the fuel hoses as safe as modern technology can make them.
There's nothing wrong with good high pressure rubber hose, as long as it doesn't go over barbs made for plastic hose and it is monitored carefully for shrinkage and deterioration. This is especially true when this hose is crimped onto the proper fittings, like you did at the junction to the steel line.
It looked like, in your picture, thst you re-used the original deep female 16 x 1.5 fitting at the chassis attachment position, which would have been originally used with the plastic hose and have those really sharp barbs. If that is the case, I'd encourage to to not do that, but crimp on a -6 hose end made for this style hose and use my custom adaptor (on the end of the "ugly" hose) to adapt that to the chassis end.
Regardless of what some trolls claim, rubber hose with hose clamps over those sharps barbs is a very bad idea.
To repeat, this is not only my opinion, but also the clear warning from the companies that make and distribute rubber fuel hose.
BTW.....I also agree with you that rubber hose with crimps over the proper fittings is a decent "short term" solution. Good for 10 years? Maybe, maybe not.
Since you mentioned the 3.2 Carrera fuel hose, I'll use that as an example. Porsche originally crimped on very high quality rubber hose on that "T" hose you speak of. Those hoses shrank and leaked, some way earlier than 10 years. I personally replaced a boatload of them. They decided that the vibration and rubbing was the issue, so they then covered that rubber hose with a plastic spiral protection sleeve. Those hoses leaked also, some before the 10 year mark. I replaced a boatload of those, also. Their final (and damn expensive to buy) solution was to go to a really thick, extra re-inforced special synthetic rubber hose and then double clamp it onto the fittings.
Part of my "advantage" over the trolls is that I've been working on Porsches for almost 50 years and have had the time to see how Porsche addresses their fuel lines...and "solved" leakage problems with rubber hose.
In my mind, I've seen all the burned 928s (and 3.2 Carreras) I ever need to see and decided to make the fuel hoses as safe as modern technology can make them.