Fuel Accumulator price

[khamul02]

How different is the 80 to 83 model? I noticed it was a $100 more. Weren't all of these things around a $100 just a year or so ago?
The Fuel Accumulator is almost as much as a fuel pump. Is it really that complex . .

[Porsche-O-Phile]

You're trying to impose logic to Porsche parts pricing and availability. This is an inherently illogical system. It's like airline ticket fares. It just is.

[john walker's workshop]

price auxillary air regulators, warmup regulators and fuel distributors if you need an eye opener.

[Gunter]

Originally Posted by khamul02

How different is the 80 to 83 model? I noticed it was a $100 more. Weren't all of these things around a $100 just a year or so ago?
The Fuel Accumulator is almost as much as a fuel pump. Is it really that complex . .

I run an '80 accumulator in my modified SS 3.2; no problems.
Can't think of any big difference between the SC years; they all have 3 connections, 2 on top and 1 on the bottom.
The bottom goes into the return line to the tank in case there is an internal leak in the accumulator. You can check for it leaking by opening the bottom fitting briefly. Use 2 wrenches to counter-hold and a rag to catch potential gas.

Fire Extinguisher nearby!

If you have trouble with hot starts, it could be the check-valve on the pump.

[khamul02]

Gunter,

That is what is going on " hot starting" problems.

So when I disconnect the accumulator on the bottom no fuel will leak out if it is working correctly?

If there a way to check the check-valve on the pump?

[KTL]

I've got an accumulator from a '79 spare parts bin. It's sat for a number of years unused, so I can't attest to it's functionality. But it's my understanding it came off the car in operable condition when the Webers were installed ~ 5 years ago? $25 plus shipping and it's all yours.



WUR and AAR are already sold.

[khamul02]

Is there any problem using a 79 on an 80? There must be some difference to justify the price hike . . .

[boyt911sc]

Originally Posted by khamul02

Is there any problem using a 79 on an 80? There must be some difference to justify the price hike . . .

NO. The two or three ports FA could be used on your '80. SC's could use a variety of FA as long as they are good. Fuel accumulator(s) is a pressure dampering device and helps reduce the noise of the fuel pump.

Removing the bottom fitting of the FA will not tell you if the FA is defective unless you pressurize the system. The bottom port of the FA is the drain line and connected to the return line to the tank. Thus it contains fuel all the time the engine is running.

Tony

[blk911]

Tony,

So if I understood you correctly, when I removed the bottom of my FA on my 79SC, engine off, it leak copious amounts of fuel, but you say that is normal and to examine the check valve?

[Gunter]

Fuel accumulator don't fail that often; there should be no fuel in the return line when under pressure IMHO.
I believe the FA works on a diaphragm against a spring to maintain pressure in the system for quite a while.
Re: check valve.
If you have a lot of miles on the pump, or many years, consider a new pump along with a new check-valve.
There is no easy way to inspect the valve; a lot of work to disconnect it with gas dripping even when you pinch the short fuel hose.
You can try another SC-FA with 3 connections if you like.

When installing a new pump, get a new fuel line. It's a short 1/2" I.D. hose.
The 1/2" hose is hard to find; get about a foot long before you start and then cut the right length when installing the new pump.
Also get new small hose-clamps.
Use dielectric grease on the terminals.

Keep a fire extinguisher close by.

Originally Posted by khamul02

Gunter,

That is what is going on " hot starting" problems.

So when I disconnect the accumulator on the bottom no fuel will leak out if it is working correctly?

If there a way to check the check-valve on the pump?