fuel pump relocation under steering rack pictures? Options

[Geezer914]

Anyone relocated the fuel pump and filter under the steering rack with to make it easier to change the fuel filter? Pictures? Thanks

[JeffBowlsby]

A concern with the front mounted pumps is that pressurized fuel is now routing through the cabin. I’m not comfortable with that.

[JamesM]

A concern with the front mounted pumps is that pressurized fuel is now routing through the cabin. I’m not comfortable with that.

Don't own a 75-76 car then i guess. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)


With a swap to stainless lines and the center tunnel being a mostly enclosed metal tunnel with the few small openings under carpet I think ones chances of being directly exposed to gasoline from having the lines under pressure are very, very low.

At its worst I dont see it as anymore dangerous than anything else about driving a very small 50+ year old car.

Also I find it very preferable to vapor lock, especially on long trips.

[wonkipop]

A concern with the front mounted pumps is that pressurized fuel is now routing through the cabin. I’m not comfortable with that.

Don't own a 75-76 car then i guess. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)


With a swap to stainless lines and the center tunnel being a mostly enclosed metal tunnel with the few small openings under carpet I think ones chances of being directly exposed to gasoline from having the lines under pressure are very, very low.

At its worst I dont see it as anymore dangerous than anything else about driving a very small 50+ year old car.

Also I find it very preferable to vapor lock, especially on long trips.

on the other hand stainless steel is brittle!

i've done the metal lines, but i bent them up myself out of mild steel tube.

just a thought.

but you are right. something else in the 50 year old car is bound to do you malicious harm in a stack - before the fuel lines finish you off. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

[barefoot]

With a swap to stainless lines and the center tunnel being a mostly enclosed metal tunnel with the few small openings under carpet I think ones chances of being directly exposed to gasoline from having the lines under pressure are very, very low.

At its worst I dont see it as anymore dangerous than anything else about driving a very small 50+ year old car.

Also I find it very preferable to vapor lock, especially on long trips.
[/quote]

on the other hand stainless steel is brittle!

i've done the metal lines, but i bent them up myself out of mild steel tube.

just a thought.

but you are right. something else in the 50 year old car is bound to do you malicious harm in a stack - before the fuel lines finish you off. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)
[/quote]

I question your comment about SS being brittle, I've spent many years with SS in aircraft fuel systems and unless SS tubing is flexed to the point of fatigue failure it is not brittle. Fatigue failure would require many hundreds of flexes to near plastic bending to behave in a brittle fashion.

[wonkipop]

[quote name='barefoot' date='Feb 5 2023, 08:18 AM' post='3055699']
With a swap to stainless lines and the center tunnel being a mostly enclosed metal tunnel with the few small openings under carpet I think ones chances of being directly exposed to gasoline from having the lines under pressure are very, very low.

At its worst I dont see it as anymore dangerous than anything else about driving a very small 50+ year old car.

Also I find it very preferable to vapor lock, especially on long trips.
[/quote]

on the other hand stainless steel is brittle!

i've done the metal lines, but i bent them up myself out of mild steel tube.

just a thought.

but you are right. something else in the 50 year old car is bound to do you malicious harm in a stack - before the fuel lines finish you off. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)
[/quote]

I question your comment about SS being brittle, I've spent many years with SS in aircraft fuel systems and unless SS tubing is flexed to the point of fatigue failure it is not brittle. Fatigue failure would require many hundreds of flexes to near plastic bending to behave in a brittle fashion.
[/quote]

fair enough. its your car. i know what i want in mine.
wasn't talking about fatigue failure. was talking about impact failure and ductile to brittle transition.
see my closing remark above. maybe it was the aussie term "stack". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
translates as crash in american english.
thats the reason for the plastic fuel lines in the 914 in the first place. crash safety.
fuel lines have been prohibited inside occupant cabins for decades now.
i was a little surprised to learn they were inside the cabin of the 914 when i bought mine back in 89.

there is a risk of a brittle failure if the SS deforms sufficiently. i will concede such forces are likely to have bent the human occupant also in the car such that its a moot point. again see my last sentence above. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

a small thing to consider is that the 1.8 L jets in stock form shuts off the fuel pump when the engine stops. a lot of folks updating to front fuel pump don't wire up the pump correctly losing this feature. their fuel pump runs whenever the ignition is on. if your engine stops in a crash with a stock L jet the fuel pump stops too. so you won't have high pressure in the fuel lines anyway. not sure D-Jets had this capacity. L jets from 74 and 75 certainly did. you are only going to have this feature by properly extending the wiring to the relocated pump.

EDIT.
i think i discovered something about the fuel vaporisation problem when i had to swap in a new two port turbine pump a few years ago. i never had the dreaded vapor lock problem before in years of use. but soon experienced it with the new pump. which is still in the standard location under the engine. i believe the fuel was boiling in the stretch of flexible line feeding the pump which is basically gravity fed, as the pump doesn't really suck so much as get fed. i insulated this line and the return line with reflection shielding. the vapor problem stopped. i also rebuilt the original fuel pump. all the way down to the bottom plug. its doable. having taken one of those roller cell pumps apart i doubt very much they were part of the infamous vapor lock problem. i am about to reinstall the original pump. it won't be shielded. the modern pump presently there is not shielded either. but the fuel lines will stay shielded.

[ClayPerrine]

a small thing to consider is that the 1.8 L jets in stock form shuts off the fuel pump when the engine stops. a lot of folks updating to front fuel pump don't wire up the pump correctly losing this feature. their fuel pump runs whenever the ignition is on. if your engine stops in a crash with a stock L jet the fuel pump stops too. so you won't have high pressure in the fuel lines anyway. not sure D-Jets had this capacity. L jets from 74 and 75 certainly did. you are only going to have this feature by properly extending the wiring to the relocated pump.

The D-Jet pump only runs when the "ECU" tells it to. And that requires a pulse from the trigger points. So if the engine stops, so does the fuel pump.

If it is done properly, a fuel pump relocation will also include moving the power lead to the fuel pump into the wiring bundle in the center tunnel. The wire from the factory will reach the front of the seats. From there a properly done move will have the wire extended to follow the harness up to the front of the car. The ground lead would be run from the ground point by the fuse box, so it doesn't have to come all the way from the back.

At least that's the way I do them when I move a pump up front. It takes more time, but it looks like it came from the factory if you do it like that.


Also, I saw the neatest way to relocate a fuel pump on a 914 the other day. Zims has a fuel pump mount that attaches to the same bolts that hold in the steering rack. Pull the rack bolts, put the fuel pump mount up, and put the bolts back. The pump is secure and neatly mounted by the steering rack.

If you are interested, contact @partsguy22 (Aaron). Maybe we can persuade him to post a picture of the mount.

[wonkipop]

a small thing to consider is that the 1.8 L jets in stock form shuts off the fuel pump when the engine stops. a lot of folks updating to front fuel pump don't wire up the pump correctly losing this feature. their fuel pump runs whenever the ignition is on. if your engine stops in a crash with a stock L jet the fuel pump stops too. so you won't have high pressure in the fuel lines anyway. not sure D-Jets had this capacity. L jets from 74 and 75 certainly did. you are only going to have this feature by properly extending the wiring to the relocated pump.

The D-Jet pump only runs when the "ECU" tells it to. And that requires a pulse from the trigger points. So if the engine stops, so does the fuel pump.

If it is done properly, a fuel pump relocation will also include moving the power lead to the fuel pump into the wiring bundle in the center tunnel. The wire from the factory will reach the front of the seats. From there a properly done move will have the wire extended to follow the harness up to the front of the car. The ground lead would be run from the ground point by the fuse box, so it doesn't have to come all the way from the back.

At least that's the way I do them when I move a pump up front. It takes more time, but it looks like it came from the factory if you do it like that.


Also, I saw the neatest way to relocate a fuel pump on a 914 the other day. Zims has a fuel pump mount that attaches to the same bolts that hold in the steering rack. Pull the rack bolts, put the fuel pump mount up, and put the bolts back. The pump is secure and neatly mounted by the steering rack.

If you are interested, contact @partsguy22 (Aaron). Maybe we can persuade him to post a picture of the mount.

masterful explanation mr. p. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)