Does
i always shut mine off.. some cars you HAVE to shut off to fill up, or else you get that fancy CEL popping up on you.. example, pontiac trans-sport mini vans.. if you fill up with the motor running, you get a 'gas cap' code or some stupid BS.. i had to clear this code NUMEROUS times on my buddy's mom's old van, because she was too lazy to turn the key back when getting gas..
but i've always shut mine off, it's just a habit.. especially since 90% of the time, i get gas at wawa and run in to get cigarettes.. some gas 'attendants' won't even pump your gas if you don't shut the motor down
Yes i
how so? i don't see the pump warming the fuel around it THAT much to really make that sort of impact.. now if it's running and there's a decent temp difference, i could see it being a problem because the 'cold' gas will possibly reach the pump before it has a chance to mix with the 'warm' fuel.. but when you fill up with the motor/pump off, it gives the gas a chance to mix..
i never let mine go below 1/4 tank unless i can help it either.. mostly for the reason of 'just incase' there isn't an open gas station between point A and B
OBDII cars will throw a EVAP code if you leave them on while fueling. I never thought about pump shock. Most fuel pump failures are due to clogged fuel filters. I never fill up at a place where they are filling the tanks. When they fill their tanks it stirs up the contaminants at the bottom and you could be pumping that crud right into your tank.
~Shakes head and exits thread~:punchballs:
Ain't the pump immersed in the fuel in the first place....also, a tank of fuel under a car will not normally become as warm as the ambient air, even on a hot summer day....unless it's in direct sunlight or close to a source of heat.
The pump is cooled by the gas. That's why people that run their cars on empty a lot go through more fuel pumps Any time something hot is suddenly cooled, its not good for expansion. My work trucks we used to fill all the time while running. A lot of them ran 24/7 as manlift trucks that required the engine to be running for operation. Honestly, there were some days where I was pumping gas for 2-3 hours a day in running trucks. Not going to saying anything about smoking through, other then I smoked quite a bit while I was outside...
I doubt the "cold" fuel would be much of an issue. Its warmed underground then it is in your gas tank in the middle of winter. At least down here anyways.
Well
From my experience......yes!!! Filling a motorcycle gas tank on a hot summer then jumping on it is like putting an air conditioner in your crotch........aaahhhhhhh! ;)
it may just be a GM thing, than.. GM's are known for destroying fuel pumps, just ask my sonoma :giggle: fuel pumps always seem to be GM's big problem, along with sucky wiring
:rollin: :giggle: :headbang: :laughing:
I always thought running out or almost out of gas causes pump to overheat because it is designed to pump liquid and not air. Not to mention sediment in bottom of tank.
This
maybe they have 'great wiring' now, but they certainly don't on any of the i work on (90 and older, unless it's an S10/sonoma).. i refuse to touch camaros newer than 81, they all disgust me and i hate the LS motors.. GM is notorious for trash pumps, just as ford has sucky oil pumps and dodge can't build a transmission that'll last long enough to drive off the lot.. ok, the last 1 is a stretch, but i bet it has happened at least once!
Hey Tom, all I work on are gm's, I'm a wrench turner on a fleet of them, every one are wire problems and fuel pumps! The guys that run them always run them down to empty.
Only time I leave mine running, is if its really cold out and I go sit back in the cab. Or if its cold out and my truck has only driven a few blocks and not up to operating temp yet. Im not going to jinx myself with my 2 GM trucks and 150K and 130K and still original fuel pumps, and brag about it. 96 silverado and 00 suburban.
[quote
The fuel pump in my cougar is almost 24 years old and its stock, never been replaced. Ford didnt have problems with fuelpumps, they had problems with fuel sending units. Every ford truck I've owned other than my 01 ranger has had a wrong or not working fuel gauge. In my opinion, fueling a running car is as dumb as getting back in the car after you start the pump. All it take is a small spark to catch your car on fire, I know, this happened to my cousin while her kids were in the car.
Please tell us the kids are ok?????
I never shut any of my vehicles off. especially in winter.... to be honest, it's still safer then the woman who was next to me with the cigarette in her hand pumping gas....:hick:
yes i can, i truely hate em with a passion
I don't think i've ever seen someone leave their car running whilst filling it with fuel.
Oh, and I never let it go below 1/4 tank........
Shad
Found
Whew. All those guys running external pumps must be nuts.
IMHO, your more unsafe fueling up with a running car (minimal risk) than you run the risk of shocking the pump with cold fuel. Making the argument that cold fuel will shock it then admit that they are cooled by fuel is also kind of retarded.
Never run a pump dry. They pump fuel, not air. They are cooled from within whelst moving liquid.
The LS engine is a great engine. They put it in trash but it is what it is. The "good" ones are in their expensive trash. They went to distibutorless ignition, way after Ford. Aluminum blocks, way after Ford, changed their firing order to match Ford. They build good power because of displacement, high compression and good flow despite still using 2 valves per cylinder and old cam in block tech. Good on them, they still manage to get it done. LT engines kind of blow. Far as records being broke, I can only assume this was with a ZR1? (I don't know because i couldn't care less as it's completely irrelevant) which has a $21,000 6.2L boosted engine. Ironically enough after GM guys whine and bust on Ford for breaking records and donky stomping GM by boosting their cobra engine.....Hmmmmm This in a car, not many can afford. How ever, one must wonder, If they were SO great, why are there 50 different variations of the LS government welfare motors out there?
It's not all about the engine anyway, as any car guy knows. I can skull drag my uncles 01 Vette coupe down the track and around town all day when on paper, it should be the other way around. At the end of the day his car is probably the better one. I hate the things.
Ding ding...here we go again...another 5 page e-argument over who has a bigger pen 15.
engine on, or off while fueling...is it really gonna cause world peace?
Anybody that rags on GM for having py wiring has obviously never had an alternator/ignition switch/engine fire on a Ford....look in the junkyards....you'll find a sight more burnt Fords and old Dodge shiznit than you will GM...and I'm NO GM fanboy.
The LS engines ARE good....if they are not, why are tons of Mustang clowns swapping to 'em?
The Coyote is a good engine too...but at nearly 1/3 more bulk and complexity...
Blown, or not...the majority of the serious power junkies will end up with forced induction anyway, so that's kind've silly...it's been back and forth between the pony car companies since 1967...nothing new.
Now..isn't this thread about fuel pumps and cold gas, and not about who had a bigger pen 15 in regards to whether they have a Ford or GM?
I'm not one to bitch about the rivalry, I've done my fair share of putting down GM, but maybe it's that i'm growing up...or just shaging tired of it. Who gives a rat's fat ass...
I'm seriously about to leave ALL the car forums I'm registered on because of the e-thuggery and the constant g and moaning about this part or car or track or f*ck-all is better than that and if you don't agree with the other fella then you're a douche...piss on that.
/rant.
(not directed at anybody in particular..just...frustrated with the bitching on forums...it gets really juvenile after a coupla years..
The ls motors are nearly identical to a ford block in every way. The 351 block is a copied design of a chevy small block. They use the same head bolt pattern spacing. Too bad you can't just swap on an intake and cam and call it a day.
Gm wiring is . I have never had to change or modify any wires on any ford I have owned. And that is all that I have driven. Now as far as work trucks. Having a single harness for the entire car with no connectors is stupid. Gm did this for many years. They also use a 14 guage wire for the alternator on every stock gm vehicle I have ever worked on. They purpousely use parts that change year to year and design them to not be backwards compatable.
When I'm working on a ford, rather then buying a new part, I can have it tested or swap it from any other similar era ford. With a 89 cavilier, there are three different sensors for that year, and none are compatible. When you buy a starter you have to play with shims just to get it to work.
As far as ease of use, price and repairability, I would go ford all the way. gm's have their place, as long as you don't mind paying more for parts that are less available and never have a wire go bad.
Ask thunder chicken about when he was working at a dealer ship and some one cut the wires out when they stole the stereo and he had to rip the entire car apart, because there was only one harness with no connectors.
The ls motors are nearly identical to a ford block in every way. The 351 block is a copied design of a chevy small block. They use the same head bolt pattern spacing. Too bad you can't just swap on an intake and cam and call it a day.
Gm wiring is . I have never had to change or modify any wires on any ford I have owned. And that is all that I have driven. Now as far as work trucks. Having a single harness for the entire car with no connectors is stupid. Gm did this for many years. They also use a 14 guage wire for the alternator on every stock gm vehicle I have ever worked on. They purpousely use parts that change year to year and design them to not be backwards compatable.
When I'm working on a ford, rather then buying a new part, I can have it tested or swap it from any other similar era ford. With a 89 cavilier, there are three different sensors for that year, and none are compatible. When you buy a starter you have to play with shims just to get it to work.
As far as ease of use, price and repairability, I would go ford all the way. gm's have their place, as long as you don't mind paying more for parts that are less available and never have a wire go bad.
Ask thunder chicken about when he was working at a dealer ship and some one cut the wires out when they stole the stereo and he had to rip the entire car apart, because there was only one harness with no connectors.
Sha
The
you just answered part of it right there, corvettes.. i don't like any other car they came in either.. the biggest reason, everyone thinks it's cool to drop them in everything with 4 wheels.. i used to think they were pretty cool, outside of their original engine bays, until i saw 1 in an SS396 chevelle.. the sight of that motor under the hood of my favorite car made me sick
LOL, Bob and weave. If you're going to tout the awesome ingenious of the LS engine every chance you get, (on a Ford forum particularly in unrelated subject matter) then be prepared to defend it.
Yea I mean you might as well take a loudspeaker and go down to your nearest trailer park and start shouting "Wal-Mart sucks!" LOL
Several years ago I used to fill up my car with it running until an old woman freaked out and complained to the gas station attendant that I was gonna blow us all up. The attendant agreed and told me over the intercom to shut my car off. I tried to explain that nothing was gonna happen, but it didn't matter. So after that I just started turning my car off.
Pretty sure the Ford mod engines preceded 1997...by well, the better part of a decade.
The windsor Ford engines first debuted in the 60's...unless the design was copied from the first version of the SBC...
It's the automotive field...copying other's designs is how things have been done since 1903. Get over yourselves. Breathe deep, hit the back button, and move on. :D
Say that load enough here, you might just get beat with a rusty HO cam...lmao (not by me, I can't stand the place..)
I've worked at GM dealers for most of my working life, and I can say from experience that GM fuel pumps suck... in TRUCKS. It seems GM has not been able to make a decent truck fuel pump in decades. I've replaced lots of 'em in all sizes, shapes and generations of trucks and SUV's from 1989 to the current generation. GM truck fuel tank sending units suck too.
GM wiring, on the other hand, has always been some of the best. Sure, GM has had some boneheaded wiring ideas (like mounting the PCM in the wheelwell of J-cars, right where the wheel is guaranteed to spray salt and shiznit all over them, a design flaw that resulted in several recalls), but for the most part GM wiring is robust. GM doesn't seem to have the module issues Dodge & Ford do either, and GM wiring diagrams are far and away the best out there, easy to follow when you do have a problem. Unfortunately this is changing with newer vehicles, with more and more computers in the vehicle causing more and more problems. $400 power window switches in Trailblazers comes to mind.
Haystack: That Caddy wiring harness thing was because that car was the first model year of that style, with a brand new style of radio, and was one of the first in the country. It's not uncommon for brand new vehicles to have new parts supply issues, especially when that new part is something you would not commonly replace. And where did you come up with the 351W being copied from the SBC? The two engines have nothing in common other than cylinder count and layout. The SBC head uses 5 bolts per cylinder compared to the Windsor's 4, so they certainly don't share head bolt patterns...
As for firing order, I'm too tired and don't care enough to look it up, but I wonder how firing orders would compare when one considers that Ford numbers their cylinders differently than GM (and everyone else). Ford numbers theirs front to back, bank to bank (IE pass side 1234, driver's 5678) while GM numbers them as they appear on the crankshaft (IE one bank is 1357, other is 2468)...
Thun
this became a battle of long paragraphs.. i have ADD, i can't take this ish! i'm out of this 1 lol
Ummm.... This started out as an interesting thread. Not sure how it became Ford vs Chitty. To figure out Ford and Chevy have same firing order if you re-number cylinders? Tom, you sir have waaay too much time on your hands.
We didn't experience the 10% ethanol thing here in Canada (to my knowledge) so I don't think that would be a factor in the truck pump failures i've seen (and if it was, it'd affect all fuel pumps, not just gm trucks). I think it's just because gm truck pumps suck. Maybe it's how they're mounted, perhaps their operating pressure and/or volume, but for some reason they fail, frequently and suddenly (and sometimes strangely - I've seen them refuse to work with less than 1/4 tank, likely from overheating). Never heard of fuel pumps dying due to cold fuel, though. If there was any fuel in the tank at all, the temperature change would be so gradual and the temperature difference so small (fuel kept underground stays at a fairly consistent temp year round) that I can't see it causing failure. Of course I live in a relatively cool climate, where the temp rarely goes above 90 (and rarely goes below zero in winter)...
I know gm uses suppliers to make their pumps, but in this case the suppliers suck ass. Gm wheel bearing suppliers suck too (gm vehicles have a horrid track record for wheel bearings, all models and spanning at least two decades). The cheapest supplier isn't always the best one...
just ask honda and their 287668970 recalls over the past couple years :rollin:
it's a common arguement chevy guys make.. who really cares.. and it went into chevy vs ford because tom brought up shiznitmaros :toilet:
I don't have any problem with chevy's. I've just never owned one. Every one of my freinds who has had a gm, it was a peice of . I have watched them deal with all kinds of wiring problems. But honestly, I have never really dug into wiring on any of my cars. Also have had a lot of wiring problems on the chevy trucks at my last work. Might have just been my experiance. I have seen many times where there was no connector anywhere in a harness with gm's, and I did remember thunder chickens experiance.
All and all, they are still just cars. I like fords because they are cheap and generic. In my opinion they are also easier to work on and replace parts. For the most part, they do it right, and only once. But as I have said, I have not owned or dealy with very many chevy's.
The sbc and sbf have so much in common, it will blow your mind when you really dig into it. Many ls engine actually run the ford h.o. firing order. I have seen people use chevy heads on a ford block where they turn the intake and exhaust around. They basically just bolted them on, then made headers to bolt to the intak, flipped the headers so they pointed forward, then welded throtttle body s to them. I am sure there is more to it then that, but noone wants to give anything up on how they did it, or share pictures.
A car guy is a car guy. I don't car if mr. Tom drives a porshce, as long as he likes these cars and wants to help me with wiring problems.
Haystack, normally I respect what you have to say, but....that up there.......ummm...LMAO, share some of the stuff you been hittin...lol
No way ANY GM head will bolt to a Windsor Ford without some serious fab work...and why bother? You can buy a set of aftermarket heads that flow better than any stock SBC head could ever dream of. For probably shiznit-tons less than the cost of making a Ford engine work with GM heads..
I don't know if Renzo would drive a "porshce" but I'm sure he's worked on or at least been in a Porsche or 2..lol
Really...wtf does all this have to with the thread's subject?
And:
Funny, the argument didn't really start until ran your pie hole about anti GM this...that ...and there. "shiznitmaros"?
Don't like 'em? STFU and click back...you sound like a skipping cd... :flip:
yes, shiznitmaros.. most people will agree that GM dug their designs out of a dumpster from 81-up.. and i can express my opinion on them as much as i like.. THIS IS A FORD FORUM, not a GM forum..
as for the GM heads on a windsor.. i'll never believe it until i see it in person.. pictures simply will not cut it.. it sounds extremely far fetched and even more unrealistic.. if it's true and real, i want to see some dyno numbers.. intake runner CC's are larger than exhaust runner CC's, so i don't see how it could have a 'great' outcome
Not to help with the g contest of Ford vs Chevy, but after owning both, here it goes...
1999 Chevrolet Metro - owned it from the beginning. ZERO issues & it's now got over 110,000 miles
1989 Chevy C-1500 - bought it with 256,000 miles & it's got 290,000 miles. I've replaced the tensioner pulley, serpentine belt, and thermostat.
1997 Ford Thunderbird - replaced the upper control arms, driver's side window motor, lower door hinge, and it's got a blown head gasket @ 97,000 miles
1986 mercury Cougar - wiring issues plagued the car, head gaskets, torque converter, driveshaft u-joints, harmonic balancer, it nickle and dimed me to death. It had like 150,000 miles on it when I bought it, maybe 180,000 when I parked it
1994 Lincoln Continental - air ride went out, head gaskets, DCM light stayed on. I think I had it from 90,000 miles to 125,000 miles
1986 Ford Escort GT - that thing nickle and dimed me beyond death. Worse than the Cougar ever thought of doing.
Based on reliability I've experienced, I'd go the bowtie route. But, I bleed Ford Blue... So, what's a man to do?
i've had my fair share of issues in both blue ovals and bowties, but the GM's are more of a PITA.. i hear a lot of people say they've had fires in their fords, but i've never had this problem, or even came close to it.. my sonoma is a different story.. there's a harness that runs from the battery tray area, down to the rad support and to god knows where from there.. i've replaced that part of the harness twice because it has caught fire.. my 88 S10 had the HVAC harness catch fire and that's when the truck got parked, stripped, cut up and stuffed in my shed.. my 79 camaro had an alt fire and my 71 cutlass had a small under hood fire before i bought it.. so i have my reasons for calling GM wiring garbage.. other than that and the stupid intank GM pumps, my GM's never let me down.. my fords have all done me great except for oil pumps and head gaskets(just my SC, typical 3.8)
back to the original topic.. i noticed today that the pump at the gas station says 'turn engine off, no smoking, etc etc, via STATE LAW'
Your opinion on GM to me counts about as much as the eurodollar does to a a donut at wal mart. I don't care if you think camaros newer than you look good, or not. Doesn't feed my Tbird addiction one little bit.
You don't like 'em...good, we get it. I don't either, particularly, but I'm not saying so every post I make in a thread about SOMETHING ELSE.
No Ford engine fires? You're lucky...I've had three, two of which occurred while I was in the vehicle...(both those times were in Tbirds..hmmm). I also happen to drive either an '02 S10 or an '88 Chevy K1500...both of which are and have been far more reliable than any shaging Ford I've driven to date. And I've had ohh...let's see...3 running, driving Tbirds, 2 F-150s, an Escort GT, and 3 Mustangs.
Yeah, I said it...the Chevies are better...at least mine are. I'm a die hard Ford, cut-me-open-and-I-bleed-Ford-Blue guy....but c'mon...I don't come here to read posts bashing Chevy stuff. It's not just GM either...could be Honda, Nissan, your mom, my mom...whatever, I'm just a little burnt on seeing anti-insert subject here bashing that it makes me want to log out and forget this place ever was.
Either way, I'm over it, you, and this thread. Sorry Tom Renzo, for dragging it into the ground...not that I wasn't the only one.
Peace y'all...I'm taking a vacation. :)
zero, none, nada.. i hear a lot about them, but i have yet to see/experience 1.. the only fords i've seen burnt in any way are the py aerostars
i'm not completely bashing chevy, they're not junkboxes.. 3 of my favorite cars are chevy's, i've just had some pretty bad experiences with them.. everyone seems to have different issues with the same vehicles, whether mild or devastating, regardless of manufacturer..
is it just me, or is this cut-throat argument leaving dodge out? :giggle:
/end of argument.. this has gotten too far out of hand, so i'm walking away from it as well
I've
using 15% ethanol will be detrimental to carb and early EFI cars.. from what i understand, it will deteriorate carb gaskets and harm some fuel pumps and injectors. true? i don't know, as i haven't really cared to look into it.. i run premium or plus in everything i own, because i get more miles to a tank and it keeps things a little cleaner than regular (89) and E85.. 1 think i have heard that really deters me from running E85 is all the i've been hearing about carbon deposits building faster than with regular 89 octane.. again, true? i don't know.. but i'm not willing to find out the hard way
now, i can see if you ran the tank (almost) completely dry, the fuel pump could possibly heat up and go KAPUT once cooler fuel enters the tank, but i'm still not completely sold on it.. maybe over time, if it's done on more than 1 occasion, i could see it being a problem, MAYBE.. i believe some experimenting is in order.. who wants to be the guinea pig? :p
We run 10% ethonal here, state law. Only draw back I havd seen in two years was less power and worse mileage.
http://www.460ford.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-114796.html
I guess the center two cylinder bolt up, and the other two are off by .02". The push rods even line up. I was reminded in that thread about sbc guys running clevland heads. Even a ford t-5 bolts up to a gm, just need to re-drill one hole on the bell housing. I'm surprised I am the only on to know about this.
So you chose to run the car while fueling up based on a loose theory you once heard from one instructor despite it being illegal and more "dangerous" than shutting the car off? Cool. Particurally when you say you never run it lower than a 1/4 tank, which nukes the theory anyway. I'd chalk later pump failures to the Ethanol in the fuel being more likely. The stuff is garbage. Any benefit you gained with it was lost in lost mileage. Kind of a silly topic. Shut the car off like a big boy.
i'm going to have to look into this.. a sbf with LS heads should make unbelievable power, due to the massive flow rate of the runners.. if i remember right, stock LS heads flow better than any aftermarket ford head, which is insane.. only real question is what intake would you run?
I'd read long ago that gm was inspired by the Windsor when designing the lsx engines. I think it was in hot rod magazine. When haystack was talking about the sbc engine being the same as the Windsor, I thought he meant the actual SBC engine, not the ls series. No matter how gm marketing spins it, the ls engine is not a sbc, no more than the Windsor and y-blocks are the same. Gm stopped using the SBC in production vehicles in 2002. The ls is a completely different engine family, having more in common with the Windsor than the traditional small block...
GM is a copy cat lol but all manufacturers do it though.. right now they're playing the HP game though, which is always fun to watch
did some searching, have yet to find anyone who's completed the LSx head/SBF block build.. bill mitchell did it, be he has unlimited machinist tools, so that doesn't count.. lol
I hade talked to about thee people that have done it, but not seen any pictures. The used a sheet metal intake.
A lot of the reason behind the heads looking the same, is yates helped design some of the ls heads.
i read that's really the only option
read that, too.. SELLOUT lol i'm wondering why ford didn't conspire with him to build an unstoppable OHV ford head.. i guess because they moved onto the OHC powerplants.. the roushe/yates aftermarket heads don't impress me much, my dart heads flow better
Tom, you asked to elaborate about gm wiring. I thought about staying out of this discussion,but,I will. Here is some of my list,
#1 shiznitty stepper motors in the IP,
#2 week connector on the 4L80E grommet . The wires break at it.
#3 Trailer harness,
#4 shiznit speakers and wiring,just give out.
#5 ABS wiring
#6 Air bag sensors and wiring.
# 7 - infinity, lots of issues.
Those are a few of what I deal with a lot. I do not have experience with Ford though. Except that is all I own.
my sonoma used to have the 4L60E, it had a pretty trashy harness as well.. replaced it twice and the same 2 wires broke off every time.. solution, TH350
couldn't find any with a 205 case, just the junk GM version of the 1356.. 350's are plentiful in the junkyard
My fault, got away from gas-sin it up ! Where I'm at the law says shut down. I do. I have seen women,excuse me people. talk and pump with there car running ,kids in the back. Ive seen the results. The Feds say it happens.
i think it may be a federal law