skippydiesel

Dont know the back of pump brass fitting diameter /thread but when you find out check out the Aeroiflow catalogue for adapters https://aeroflowperformance.com/ they have a staggering range. As for the return line restrictor jet - it can go in manifold, the barb that you fit to the manifold or the above barb. I would thread the metal component to suit - more secure. Just make sure you select a nice small jetorofice (they all the same external size/& thread)

Thanks Allen - your well informed (experience) advice has come a little to late , sorry! I have bitten the bullet and modified the female pump fittings. I started by using the die on the male NTP fitting - some small improvement but no way near enough. I found that tap was too long to work effectively, on the pump female thread fittings, so I measured carefully and cut/reduced the length of the tap accordingly. I took my time, used some cutting grease (which also helped contain shavings) cleaned the tap frequently and test fit the NPT fittings often. Result: The NTP fittings are nice and snug/pump and will have thread sealing paste applied ,when system installed permanently. (Note: Pump will be installed on cockpit side of firewall) My thanks to all who advised.

Your analogy is fair up to the point of pilot training and retraining (BFR's). Understanding and adhering to the rules would even make car drivers safer (& more efficient) but there will always be the human factor & the unexpected - news to day stolen car involved in 3 car "pile up", 3 dead, Old. - likely the stolen car was being driven by an unlicensed person, possibly in an erratic manor.

No apology needed - we are all friends on the Forum. I think the part number of the adapter fitting may be: AF816-06-02 If it be the correct part it is 1/8-27 NPT

Check out the specification's (above) on the pump. To make such a significant change, would involve dismantling a brand new, completely sealed, unit with the possibility that reassembly may not result in a reliably functional pump.

Nev, no offence mate but your comment does not address my desire to fit a suitable level sensor into my main fuel tank. PS My mistake I wrote 40lL - its a 40L main tank not a 401L tank

I have done this BUT these are tapered fittings. If you imagine a cone that must fit into another cone you will see that both sides (male/female) need to have exactly the same taper to fit snuggly any deviaton will see either a loose fitting or a "proud" fitting.

This is what the adapater fitting looks like. One screws in on either side of a Facet pump cube. The pump has a 1/8 -27 NPTF fitting on each side. The adapter above screws in okay but will not go past a certain point leaving about 3-5 mm of the the thread exposed. This would not be a problem, except that I would like to fit a non return valve to one side of the pump. The fittings that facilitate this, are about 5mm short of completion/joining . If I can get the adapter (above) to screw in just a wee bit more my concept will work.

I have my tap & die. Used the die on the male fittings - some improvement The tap, due to depth restrictions, does nothing on the female side. Am considering modifying/shortening the tap, so that it can better "profile" the female fitting

Thanks Thruster, I am a little confused; "I did not install the old school float and variable resistance senders " - do you mean you installed the variable resistance type senders? I have been researching Capacative senders (sometimes known as Princeton Capacitive Fuel Level Probes) but have yet to hear from anyone who has experience of this system (reliability/accuracy/tolerance of fuel type variation). As a back up I have also looked at the latest column float style - mainly marine. I have a three tank system, 30L x 2 wing tanks and a 40lL in fuselage tank. I am particularly keen to have the fuselage tank fitted with a reliable level system, as this will be the primary tank for flying, the wings acting as reserve supply to the centre .

A good number of "viewers" but no comment - nobody fitted a fuel tank level sensor?

Aside from the simplest & best, the ever reliable sight tube, I am intersted in your experience and recommendations (with rational) for a fuel tank level sensor.

I have about 2 hrs ,C172, flying time in The Okanagan Valley (Rocky's), BC Canada. They were going to let me go up, with two little sons, without an instructor but I insisted on having one (foreign langrage/customs/unfamiliar geography, etc) . Glade I did, I not only had a far more relaxing/enjoyable flight with tour commentary from the instructor, he also taught me two things: Carb heat on, just before reducing power EVEY TIME Its good piloting manors, to expedite your exit from the active runway, particularly on a RPT air field - Fly down the runway in ground effect, cut power just before exit.

Wonderfully articulated Turbs. I have always felt that the Fords/Holdens of the 1970 (when I started driving) were inferior (with the exception of tank like ruggedness) in almost every way, to the (mainland) European offerings but as time went by my opinion changed. By the 90's (or thereabouts) the quality, handling and engine technology had become World standard BUT we failed to understand the need to make vehicles that would be attractive on the World market. There is no country that has the same challenges as Australia with it remoteness from World markets and its small population base BUT there are other economy's that face similar challenges, such as the Japanese and the Scandinavian's and their problems have been overcome. I have always suspected that Australia's, failure in this market place, probably had more to do with the American parent companies - if one or both had been European or even better Australian, we may have seen a more dynamic market focus eg when every European & Japanese manufactures was offering a diesel option, for most models, neither Ford or Holden did so.

Certainly look the goods Marty. Q. The advert says 3/4 (19.05mm) Tour photos show fuel lines quite bit smaller than the oil lines I want it for (20mm OD) will it fit ???

Sounds okay Marty_d - will give them a go.

Yeah the fit & finish is amazing BUT way to many component's are thru away (see my earlier comment on Ford Ranger fuel rerun manifold. Recently helped a lady friend with her Holden Cruz - coolant leak. Went on line seems to be a feature. Relatively new purchase,3 years old, so suggested go to dealership - about $2K later - fixed? She didn't tell me, there was an on going slow leak, just kept driving & toping up, over the next 6 months or so - finally dropped in for a "cuppa" & casually informed me of leak. My advice -take it back to dealership under parts/work warranty. Dealer -"no way, its leaking from somewhere else". I got in on the act and she got the work done for parts only cost - suggested she sell the car ASAP while all in good order. Parts replaced all plastic & include thermostat and various electrical sensors, have no ide wh.y?

There you go! Got to say, my totally subjective exuberance is that car age seems to be going down.

I know my experience is probably the exception: Daihatsu Rocky, 2.8 Turbo Diesel. Purchased new in 1985. Sons learnt to drive in her. Towed a double horse float. Would still be driving her, if not for a young man coming out of a private drive full tilt & pushed us across the road. 750,000 km never opened the engine, other than to check valve clearance's. Other than injector/pump recon, a new clutch, she was still going as well as when new - I will never know but think she may have been good for a million km. Had a "thing" for old Mercedes W123, 300D's (the last of the metal bumpers). You could pick them up for peanuts, I had two given to me, by farmer near Narromine, NSW. Ended up with 7. All well over 500,000km's. So easy to work on. -New timing chain, recon injectors, new suspension components, replace all fluids, brake pads etc and they drove like new. I would guess I spent about $ 1,000/car in parts and they all passed rego inspection first go. Easy 7L/100km fuel consumption. Build like a tank!. The ones with hydropneumatics suspension handled like a tank but the all coil variants were a delight. With a little care, I have no doubt that a million km was possible from these beauties (in the eye of the beholder). Currently have a 2013 Ford Ranger 3.2L, 6 speed manual - great car but I worry about its longevity. Had a small fuel leak, from the fuel return line - Ford wanted $ 500+ for the parts alone plus labour $?, to replace the whole collection system. Took a while but found I could purchase 10 tiny little green "O" rings for $50 (still a ridiculous price) from an aftermarket place - replaced all 5 "O" rings in about 20 minutes - no leak and have 5 "O"' rings left over if problem reoccurs. Seems to me that most cars are not serviced correctly, driven well and cared for, as befits most peoples second largest financial investment. They have become disposable along with so many other items of modern life. Unless I have been seriously misled, city driving is generally bad for vehicle (avoid the low km city car) , stop start systems can only make things worse BUT if you only keep the vehicle for a short time, the next owner will be the unlucky recipient of a repair hungry asset.

Its only the technology that's "been around for years", the vehicles don't seem to last that well at all or am I imagining that the roads are filled with newish looking vehicles these days? So different from the 70's when the average age of a car was something like 10 + years. The young people replace their vehicles within the warranty and or under 100,00km to get a good resale and never so much as lift the bonnet between shop servicing. Old "clunkers" and much loved "restorers" are infrequently seen these days.

True Nev! All mechanical "systems" are, to some degree a compromise, that the pilot must learn to manage, so as to minimise the disadvantages and if available, make best use of the advantages. Carburettors are crude, compared with some of the latest computer controlled, ultra high pressure common rail, multi pulse injection systems BUT have the advantage of relatively low cost and complexity (can even be serviced by the amateur mechanic with every day tools) proven reliability and if used with care, not so bad on the fuel consumption.

On unequal carb delivery pipes: One additional point - the delivery system is "toping up" a float bowl/reservoir, (acts a bit like a break tank) any minor differences in supply, will not impact on the delivery of atomised fuel/air to the engine

I just cant see how these overly complicated (cylinder shut down) stop / start engines can possibly have any longevity. I was brought up to operate (all engines) with consideration when cold/warming up and cooling down/before shut down. These stop/start engines must require extra battery power, more robust starting systems and have difficulty in getting/keeping to/ a sustained operating temperature. Add all this to their target environment - city driving - and I would suggest a recipe for problems.

Hmmm! No offence mate but may be when making a suggestion you add a disclaimer eg its just an idea, no experience, or something to that effect. The stuff you have suggested may be as good as nay other however it looks kind of lightweight/thin and may be more cosmetic than functional. I am not a big supporter of all over fire sleeve application, in Rotax 9's, feeling that a more targeted approach will likely be as effective without the cost & difficulty of applications HOWEVER this aircraft came with orange everywhere and I sort of feel obliged to continue the bling.

Thanks Thruster88 - Have you used/ are you satisfied with this product?