Visit The Dirt Forum for More Information

Author Topic:   pressurized fuel tanks
topnotch
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 30
posted January 31, 2005 01:31 PM  
i was wondering if anybody ran a pressurized fuel tank, i heard it was run on some grt cars. it would provide consistent fuel pressure to the carb and eliminate the belts, expensive pulley setups and bypass valves. it would be compatible with gas or alcohol without any changes whatsoever and due to the volume it would be consistent pressure. I just don't know what would generate the pressure. any ideas?

Bluebomber
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 52
posted January 31, 2005 02:02 PM  
I may be wrong but wouldn't the pressure decrease and the volume of fuel decreased?

donslink1
Dirt Freak

Total posts: 318
posted January 31, 2005 04:40 PM  
you would think so

Ego Racing
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 724
posted January 31, 2005 05:07 PM  
First thing is most race tracks would not allow you to run it second is if you got a leak in the line or tank it would SPRAY fuel not just drip. So if it ignited it would be a FLAME THROWER!!!!
Second is to pressuerize the tank the could be no vent as used in all fuel cells, so in a wreck that smashed the tank it would EXPLODE sending fuel all over and in a fire it would be a BOMB!!!
NOT A GOOD IDEA!!!

topnotch
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 30
posted January 31, 2005 09:35 PM  
the pressure would decrease but not as much as you think. Secondly. I saw in person a grt mod with NO VENT. And I definitely agree it would be very dangerous. I don't think i would ever try it, but it would definitely be the most consistent fuel pressure regulator system, no rise with rpm, no bypasses to tune, just consistent 7 lbs. and the problem with most block mount pumps is not pressure. it is volume. you would have all the volume you wanted. Somebody know something about this. do tell!

donslink1
Dirt Freak

Total posts: 318
posted February 01, 2005 04:47 AM  
I dont think I would want my car idling at
7 lbs of pressure. I think it is a all around bad idea.

340duster
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 195
posted February 01, 2005 10:20 AM  
The principle behind it is good. You could also run a regulator and limit it to 7 psi and run the tank at a higher pressure. As far as idling at 7 psi goes that won't make a difference as the carb will only take the fuel it needs. If it can run at 7000 rpm at 7 psi it can at idle. The pressure on the fuel bowl is atmospheric.

NOW, the safety aspect is a huge concern. Likely they are using nitrogen to pressurize it (inert gas - this should minimize or eliminate the initial explosion), but, as someone else mentioned, if you break a fuel line or have a leak it will continue pumping until empty. There is a saying about "adding fuel to the fire" kinda applies here.

I WOULD NOT run this system my car (or even my worst enemy)

Kromulous
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted February 01, 2005 10:31 AM  
Are you sure that GRT wasnt vented? You can vent the pressure form the cap as well.

topnotch
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 30
posted February 01, 2005 02:26 PM  
I know for sure the tank was not vented. the guy had just bought the car and it was painted in the traditional black, orange and blue colors. He ran it out of fuel twice before he figured out the tank wasn't vented. Not the cap either. It had two lines on the tank. I think the theory is great except for the racing it around other cars part. The seven lbs of pressure doesn't concern me. the fuel bowl's on a carb are not pressurized. I just hate all the regulators, belts, pulleys, too much pressure, too little pressure, etc.

rrrrick
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 192
posted February 02, 2005 08:14 AM  
Just the saftey risks alone should be enough to stop anyone cold from that idea. Talk to a racer from the 50's that is what they used for fuel delivery.


topnotch
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 30
posted February 02, 2005 10:34 AM  
I'm willing to bet this is still happening at tracks we are racing at today. But, who would check it?

rrrrick
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 192
posted February 02, 2005 02:31 PM  
I guess there may be... people are jackasses that do the stupidest things. that is why there are some rules , to keep stupid people from doing even stupider things. I have seen a racecar burn, and the last thing I would want is to have the added pleasure of pressurized fuel in that mix. Go over to the NE mod board and ask Racer Wilson about racecar catching fire in the pits.



tcmod
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 56
posted February 02, 2005 09:49 PM  
I'll stick with the belt and return line and low pressure at idle and raise the pressure with rpm idea, works great.

Bulwinkl
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 37
posted February 02, 2005 10:40 PM  
if you have a full tank of fuel your not going to get much presser stroage you cant compress liquid unless you used a acumulator(SP) not a good idea worse than a elictric one you cant shut off

George Gilliland
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 92
posted February 09, 2005 11:56 AM  
In the 50's Indy cars had pressurized tanks, they burned many people and were outlawed. In about 1965 there was a bad accident and as a result gasoline was outlawed. That is why at Indy they run methanol, it has proven to be much safer. No one should consider running a pressurized tank in a race car, as the resulting risks are already known.

340duster
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 195
posted February 09, 2005 02:33 PM  
So how is methanol safer? Especially since you can't see the flames.

boas51
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 190
posted February 10, 2005 06:38 AM  
methanol has a higher flash point (does not light as easy), burns slower, and can easily be extinguished with water.

Back to the Archives