Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

After 4 years at about 350kw I went in to my tuner after I installed my new intercooler to get a checkup.

All 6 cylinders had awesome compression and the dyno still showed 354kw atw (lower conversion method used as well).

Looking at the shops workers car with the same head setup and turbos using E30 he was getting 437KW...a big jump in response.

It convinced me this E thing is worth the investment - now to order some Speedflow 200 series lines.  How long are the stock lines in an R32 I cant find anything about that.  I know the car is 4500mm.

So I was going to get 13m should be enough for 2 feed lines and 1 return.  Surely someone has noted it before :)

 

Thanks.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/475648-r32-gtr-fuel-line-length/
Share on other sites

You don't need twin feeds.

Distance isn't even 4.5m as the tank isn't at the back of the car and the rail isn't at the front.
best way to do it is to modify and use the Hicas lines as they're right there, or you can do what i did and be dodgy and run the -6 lines in the old brackets for that, they fit right in and tuck up really well actually.
I think i used 9m of hose and i also got a water feed for the turbo and a power steering line out of it.

Depends what you want to do. 

I have a 8an feed and return. I don't think twin feed is necessary. I bought 2 4.5m lengths as that's what aeroflow had. I had some left over, as sneaky Pete said you end up using it for other things.

Better to have more than not enough. It's never gonna be exact.

Proper way to do it would be to run hard lines TBH, less risk with debris strikes from under the car.
Though as said I was lazy and it turned out pretty damn good so i wasn't too worried.

 

P1150624.thumb.JPG.ad65f26004f4e3c63ef88d2eb477f1a8.JPG

 

4 hours ago, WantGTR said:

Depends what you want to do. 

I have a 8an feed and return. I don't think twin feed is necessary.

Given the guy with the same turbos is only making 437kw i'd say -8's not needed in this case.
people have made 400kw on stock lines with E85 and -6 is something like 50% bigger compared to that

11 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

Proper way to do it would be to run hard lines TBH, less risk with debris strikes from under the car.
Though as said I was lazy and it turned out pretty damn good so i wasn't too worried.

 

P1150624.thumb.JPG.ad65f26004f4e3c63ef88d2eb477f1a8.JPG

 

Given the guy with the same turbos is only making 437kw i'd say -8's not needed in this case.
people have made 400kw on stock lines with E85 and -6 is something like 50% bigger compared to that

Agree. Hardline would be better. Would be a pain in the ass to do on the floor in the garage neatly.

I ran mine the same as yours basically. 6an ID isn't much bigger than the stock lines. 8an ID is about 10.5mm inside. 

If you're doing it, better to go bigger. The difference in cost of hose and fittings is negligible. Get ready to spend a few thousand.

You will need a rail, fpr, different fuel filter/s, possibly surge tank with multiple pumps.

Will give you plenty of head room. Sort of wish I went 10an but 8an will be good for 1000hp or so I think.

At least you wont have to touch the fuel setup again because if you upgrade it's pretty much bin everything.

  • Like 1

Yeh plan is to get a Frenchys performance Garage In Tank surge tank with 2 E85 pumps.  This means I do not get any compliance issues having a surge tank and no smells.

ID 1350x injectors

Link G4+ with ethonal content sensor (already purchased) so good bye HKS F-Con you have done me well.

Fuel lines 2 feed 1 return so I am future proofed and dont have to worry about fuel lines been old or ever again haha.

Edited by Stixbnr32

That kit only has a single fitting for feed. Y pipe is in the tank.

If, for some reason, you must have a twin feed rail (see topic on that from a few days ago also) run a -8 feed and Y pipe it into -6 in the bay.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...