stm tank to rail kit

[BayState300GT]

Is the stm tank to rail kit worth it? My car is daily driven, 950cc injectors, gt35r, wiesco/ eagle, 272's. Also is it easy to install? Thanks.

 

[rvaughn]

Ok, he changed his car damn it. I KNOW he had a 1g when I first looked at his profile.!

(the 2g hanger is still on the radar... just a ways out)

Glad to hear it man, if there is anything we can do (maybe read I) as far as sending parts or cash monies to help support development, just let us know! I'm not made of gold but I'd be willing to toss some cash your way in terms of an assist to help production if it means I can get my hands on said product faster!

This is how myths are created and propagated on the interwebs. Even though it may seem silly to get fired up over something so trivial, i agree w paul. The record HAS to be set straight by someone lest it be seen as the "truth".

edited out


Times like these i love 'tuners, great place





I was laughin so damn hard.... hahaha, shame it wasnt a 1g right? Still that was hilarious

I found it entertaining!

 

[dsmcurse]

Calan, why is it EVERY time i have the smallest debate with you my rep bar goes to red? I think its completley stupid. As for the Mod with the fast and the furious graphics, thanks for changing my rep bar ya richard.

Do I really think you can compare cornering a car to fluid flowing thru fittings? No, its called sarcassim. Duh.

Did I go on here and announce to EVERY SINGLE MEMBER YOU ALL NEED TO CHANGE YOUR 90* FITTINGS?!?!? NO, F no i didnt say that at all. Will 90's work in a fuel system? Ya. For absolute max performance/flow would a 45 be better? Ya.
Let me explain to you why I say and beleive what Im talking about. I too thought "what flippin differance does it make?" How I started to explain how i first hand witnessed the differance in flow, Im gonna further elaborate ok?

I rigged this huge off shore boat at Thunder Jet, it was the first of its kind for the company, Idid the absolute best job I could, thought it was tittys, I knew a rep from Yanmar was gonna be out soon to test all the rigging and make sure its all "good-to-go". The rep comes out and checks over the boat, says "all looks good except the sea water pick up feeding the coolant system probably isnt gonna flow to well with those two 90's in there" I thought "whatever dude that system is just fine"

So, we go out on the water, guy brings a water-test bag full of tools and gidgets and gadgets, we tap into the exhaust, back-pressure good. Tap into the fuel system and test fuel pressure, fuel is good. Guy does this, guy does that, then we stop, kill the motor. The guy unhooks the water feed off of the heat exchanger (water to water radiator) temporarily hose clamps in this in-line fluid counter, he instructs us that were gonna do this test at cruising speed of 2100RPM, boat goes up to instructed RPM, he stop-watch timed by hand as he hit the button on the fluid counter. I think it was like 60 seconds or somethin (this was like 3 years ago, so specific values are lost in wasted memorie space) it flowed x-amount of gallons per minute. He says "yep, its under spec".

Take boat back to shop, de-rig the hose and such coming off of the seacock (fresh water pick up) we re-do it to only have 45* fittings, this routing made the hose's longer, (and didn't look as pretty) I was so skeptical, I was also pissed that he had me change what I had worked so hard on rigging and making look good. Take boat back to water, perform the same test under the same conditions, same RPM same every thing. It was a considerable amount more of flow. I SEEN THIS WITH MY EYE-BALLS DUDE! I was there.

So, thats why Calan, thats why I beleive what I beleive. now your gonna go on to say "oh well you cant compare that to the fuel system of our DSM platform", I know. I know because that was your same awnser when I asked you to explain why brand new semi-trucks run open snot tubes off the valve cover pointed straight at the ground? "well thats not a DSM valve cover" herher.

So my stupid rep bar changes back to red (FML i just got it back to green...) because of a simple debate. And just like last time, YOU TOTALLY TWIST MY WORDS AND BLOW $HIT OUT OF PREPORTION.

So next your gonna fire back with all this technical writing and big 'ol encyclopedia words straight out of a dictionary (I dont think people really talk like that in real life, laugh out loud, who knows?) But the big vocab dont mean your right man. I never said to everyone on here to go change your 90s cause they rob flow, I said a 45 would do better. Duh, maybe Im just SO FREAKIN stupid though and Im not seeing the same picture as you guys? Can someone color me a picture with a crayon? Please?

Remember when we were kids and they had those Super Soaker Squirt Guns? lets say you pump the squirt gun up and spray it through a straight pipe, what happens? The squirt gun squirts out a normal 'ol stream. Now lets pump it up the same amount and spray it through a pipe that has a 45* bend in the pipe, what happens? It sprays out kinda streamish but not so much good as the straight pipe. Now, lets pump up our squirt gun same pumps, hell, give it more pumps and pressure I dont care, lets spray the gun through a pipe that has a 90* bend in the pipe, what happens? The water squirts out like phjehfkawuergfzsdvf and all chaotic. This isnt rocket science here...

Agin, maybe Im just completley making a fool out of myself and Im the only idiot not seeing the picture? (insert crayon picture here please) So i know, "cant compare a squirt gun to our DSM" its still fittings, its still fluid. Im not entitled to my opinion? Or share what ive seen from my experience? Fast and the furious graphics red car guy mod, thank you too for changing my rep back to red. First time I didnt care, thought it was cute, Alex explained to me I should take tuners more serious and try to get along with justin more and dont be as smart-assy and do respect the rules of grammer and punctuation. So I start shapin up and puttin forth more effort and better participation, rep goes back to green. Alright score! Then you change it back to red because I coment Ive seen 45s more than 90s?

Like, whatever though, Its stupid as an actual career mechanic of ten years by trade working out of a nice toolbox every day for a living who isnt a stupid noob to be checked red is ridiculous. I hold ASA certs been to EFI school, worked in the automotive field, marine field and the heavy diesel field. But hey? What the F would I know right?

I successfully built my own car, I drive it as a daily every single day and it clears 600whp everyday doin it, it works for me. Wanna know somethin else Craig? I rip all 600+awhp everyday with NO oil catch can and NO 90s in my fuel system. My fuel system is plenty up to par and is super safe, my open "snot tubes" at the ground work awesome and I can go to a super nice house and park in a super fancy drive way and NOT EVEN worry about my dsm drippin oil on the nice drive-way. Im willing to bet your oil pump cover drips oil out tho huh?

 

[yhype]

I had ClassicTube do this for me in -6 stainless along with my brake lines. I would say go for it.

I would also raise caution to those using a rubber hose in the tank. Be sure its fully fuel rated. I have replaced some for friends after they lost pressure due to the hose breaking down.

A little over done maybe but this is my Sending unit set up

Awesome build Jeff

 

[boost97gst]

Damn....... That is kinda f'd up. Givin the guy a "red block"( that we all care but we do).

I think we need real hard data on this subject to put it to bed. No one on here has provided data but most of us will deduce that in fact a 90 will flow as much as a 45 just 'cause its a common sense "gut" feeling. But not actual data. I believe there is no difference in flow, but i hold no degrees in fluid dynamics or physics so my statement should be taken as "opinion" and clearly not an assertion of truth or fact. You can apply that to your own statements dsmcurse, they are but opinions without actual data.

I say give the guy back the green bar. Just my 2 cents

 

[Calan]

Calan, why is it EVERY time i have the smallest debate with you my rep bar goes to red?

Coincidence maybe?

I don't know why you are back in the red (although based on your statements here, I can guess) or who did it... but it wasn't me. How about you look at your profile to see who neg rep'd you and why, before making comments like that.

Also, discussions of this nature should be taken to PMs, or brought to a mod's attention.

No one on here has provided data but most of us will deduce that in fact a 90 will flow as much as a 45 just 'cause its a common sense "gut" feeling. But not actual data.

Maybe our education system just sucks, but it's not rocket science; it's grade school math, or middle school science at most. If two fittings have the same resistance to flow, and the same inside diameter (cross-sectional area), then they will both flow the same amount of fluid, given the same conditions. It doesn't matter if one is straight and the other shaped like a pretzel.

As Paul mentioned, given the conditions we are talking about (our fuel systems), the two fittings have close enough to the same resistance to flow as to be virtually meaningless, unless one of them has some bizarre internal structure or something (in which case it wouldn't have the same resistance to flow).

What kind of "data" would you need to see?

 

[boost97gst]

Data usually is gathered with equipment, not speculation. I fn agree with you, unless theres a restricion in the diameter of said fitting or any obtrusions they WILL flow the same. My point was and is, no hard data was provided by either argument.

I personally dont need "convincing". Like i said, its common sense in my book.

 

[StarFawkes]

Im just completley making a fool out of myself

Meep meep.

 

[Diamond Star Werks]

Whether this is a non issue or not for fuel flow, the only one with real world data seems to be dsmcurse. I just see "well noone has had an issue with it so it can't be" from anyone else.
How many dsmers have pushed there fuel system to the limit using 90* fittings and then switch to 45s or straights to say whether or not there is a gain or not? None I bet. Why because noone builds a fuel system for their car that they have to push to its limit to reach there goal.
Fuel systems are purposely overbuilt for goals made so there will arise no issues with it. Same reason you buy injectors larger than needed to keep you away from 100% IDC. As you just don't want to be on the limit of your fuel system. This is why it's never been an issue.
This is simple highschool physics and logic. Air is a fluid, water is a fluid, gasoline is a fluid. Saying there is absolutely no flow restriction difference between a 90* fitting and 45*/0* fittings is indeed ignorance. Even with fluid under pressure in a filled space, going against a flat surface causes backpressure.
It is just the same as air being forced out of a compressor housing and through the pipes. Every bend in the system causes back pressure. Same with the exhaust. Every bend/turn will increasr back pressure.
Run a 20' pvc water line straight and then one with 4 90* turns in it same length. Measure flow at the end of both at 40 psi. The straight pipe will flow more I guarantee.
Fluid is Melocular particles that are affected by gravity and momentum. Therefore it is affected by degrees of turns in direction. The effect may be minimal in fuel systems but it is nonetheless an effect.

 

[Calan]

This is simple highschool physics and logic. Air is a fluid, water is a fluid, gasoline is a fluid. Saying there is absolutely no flow restriction difference between a 90* fitting and 45*/0* fittings is indeed ignorance.

Holy crap. I give up.

Fluid Melocular particles that is affected by gravity and momentum. It is affected turns in direction.

"and the garble gook that flim flams the budda goo"....

If you are going to babble, at least try to use real words and phrases... or stop posting while trashed.

 

[black97spyder]

Whether this is a non issue or not for fuel flow, the only one with real world data seems to be dsmcurse. The effect may be minimal in fuel systems but it is nonetheless an effect.

^^ agreed

 

[Diamond Star Werks]

Holy crap. I give up.



"and the garble gook that flim flams the budda goo"....

If you are going to babble, at least try to use real words and phrases... or stop posting while trashed.

I'm finding it hard to stay awake now. Post edited changed .edit. a few words. Basically I just agree with curse that 90s add back pressure. Short version. Good night you all.

 

[99gst_racer]

I think we need real hard data on this subject to put it to bed.

Sure. See post #3: http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/bolt-tech/437738-fitting-hose-end-technical-info-data.html

Pressure drop vs. flow. With the fuel pump flow that 99.9% of us DSMers see, there is no pressure chages with a 90* fitting. Hence, no flow changes with straight vs. 45* vs. 90*.

I say give the guy back the green bar. Just my 2 cents

He wasn't negative rep'd for this thread at all, regardless of what he thinks.

 

[99gst_racer]

Saying there is absolutely no flow restriction difference between a 90* fitting and 45*/0* fittings is indeed ignorance.

There absolutely *can* be flow restrictions caused by bends. But that's not to say there always is. Like I've been saying all along, it all depends on the flow rate and the orifice diameter. We're talking about the DSM fuel system here, not boats, brakes, or squirt guns. And with the common DSM flow rate and orifice size, there is nothing to gain by ditching the 90's.

I stand by everything I've said here in that there is absolutely no reason for us to avoid using 90's in our fuel system. Nothing more.

 

[StarFawkes]

I just spent quite a bit of timing reading up on this topic, and it seems to me that the number one limiting factor in any plumbing setup is the size of the piping, while the fittings used only account for minimal loss in flow. In fact, according to math, using two 45 degree fittings in place of a 90 degree fitting would actually cause more loss in flow.

The rep comes out and checks over the boat, says "all looks good except the sea water pick up feeding the coolant system probably isnt gonna flow to well with those two 90's in there" I thought "whatever dude that system is just fine"

So, we go out on the water, guy brings a water-test bag full of tools and gidgets and gadgets, we tap into the exhaust, back-pressure good. Tap into the fuel system and test fuel pressure, fuel is good. Guy does this, guy does that, then we stop, kill the motor. The guy unhooks the water feed off of the heat exchanger (water to water radiator) temporarily hose clamps in this in-line fluid counter, he instructs us that were gonna do this test at cruising speed of 2100RPM, boat goes up to instructed RPM, he stop-watch timed by hand as he hit the button on the fluid counter. I think it was like 60 seconds or somethin (this was like 3 years ago, so specific values are lost in wasted memorie space) it flowed x-amount of gallons per minute. He says "yep, its under spec".

Take boat back to shop, de-rig the hose and such coming off of the seacock (fresh water pick up) we re-do it to only have 45* fittings, this routing made the hose's longer, (and didn't look as pretty) I was so skeptical, I was also pissed that he had me change what I had worked so hard on rigging and making look good. Take boat back to water, perform the same test under the same conditions, same RPM same every thing. It was a considerable amount more of flow.

This just tells me that the coolant plumbing system as a whole was already being pushed to the limit if a simple fitting hindered flow that much. Also you probably got your red chicklet for the way you were presenting your argument, and not for the information contained. If you really wanted everyone to see it your way you could have actually researched and came back with written proof that there is a difference in flow between two different angle fittings.

Fluid Engineering Flow in pipes
Help for calculating the friction loss for typical fittings
http://www.cs.cdu.edu.au/homepages/jmitroy/eng243/sect10.pdf
Let me google that for you

Edit:

And with the common DSM flow rate and orifice size, there is nothing to gain by ditching the 90's.

I agree with this.

 

[Calan]

I just spent quite a bit of timing reading up on this topic, and it seems to me that the number one limiting factor in any plumbing setup is the size of the piping, while the fittings used only account for minimal loss in flow.

Exactly...unless the fitting has some crazy friction coefficient that causes drag on the fluid (which would be extreme given the fuel pressures we run), or the internal design of the fitting causes turbulence that creates a resistance to flow. And you won't find either of those features in off-the-shelf fuel line fittings.

 

[dsmcurse]

Damn....... That is kinda f'd up. Givin the guy a "red block"( that we all care but we do).

You can apply that to your own statements dsmcurse, they are but opinions without actual data.

I say give the guy back the green bar. Just my 2 cents

Also, discussions of this nature should be taken to PMs, or brought to a mod's attention

Ya, so know one can read the topic at debate and maybe learn something

Meep meep.

A wise 'ol owl once told me never argue with an idiot, he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience

It doesn't matter if one is straight and the other shaped like a pretzel.

when my baby was born she had to have a medical tube in her nose for a day, the tube was not pretzel shaped or full of 90's it was straight tube

 

[Calan]

Also, discussions of this nature should be taken to PMs, or brought to a mod's attention.

Ya, so know one can read the topic at debate and maybe learn something

Knock it off. You know exactly what I was referring to. But here it is again, just in case:

Calan, why is it EVERY time i have the smallest debate with you my rep bar goes to red?

when my baby was born she had to have a medical tube in her nose for a day, the tube was not pretzel shaped or full of 90's it was straight tube

Sorry to hear that, but was it made of anodized aluminum and flowing fuel at 35-80psi?

If not, then it is completely irrelevant to this discussion, as most of your statements have been. Please just stop.