Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

Consensus in the necessity of the in-tank pump? - update: It's out! Yuk!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-10-2007, 12:51 PM
  #1  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default Consensus in the necessity of the in-tank pump? - update: It's out! Yuk!

Yesterday I went to go for a drive and the car would not start. Looked at the FP gauge on the fuel rail... "O"

I pulled the FP relay and jumpered it. I could hear the pump being energized, but not spinning. So I disconnected everything and hooked up a battery directly to the pump and tried working it back and forth by reversing the polarity. Nothing!

I've got an 044 pump on the way, but in researching I saw that the in-tank pump is notorious for failure. I have a suspicion that some debris is causing the external pump to be seized. Since I live in Michigan - a not too hot (yet) climate, I was wondering if there was consensus or wisdom about removing the in-tank pump?

I know the 044 pump is plenty strong, just concerned about the in-tank's priming function.

Last edited by AO; 09-10-2007 at 11:30 PM.
Old 09-10-2007, 12:57 PM
  #2  
SwayBar
Drifting
 
SwayBar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago Bears
Posts: 3,477
Received 291 Likes on 198 Posts
Default

Sorry to hear it Andrew.
Old 09-10-2007, 01:48 PM
  #3  
ROG100
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor

 
ROG100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Double Oak, TX
Posts: 16,816
Received 830 Likes on 326 Posts
Default

Andrew,
It made a big difference to performance on my GTS. The internal was toast and looked as if it had been for a long time. The external failed and I changed them both out - what a differece.
Roger
__________________

Does it have the "Do It Yourself" manual transmission, or the superior "Fully Equipped by Porsche" Automatic Transmission? George Layton March 2014

928 Owners are ".....a secret sect of quietly assured Porsche pragmatists who in near anonymity appreciate the prodigious, easy going prowess of the 928."






Old 09-10-2007, 01:54 PM
  #4  
Jim R.
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Jim R.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Long Island and Lake George, NY
Posts: 917
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

I left mine in, after replacing the still functional original a couple of years ago. I would bet at least 10 years before needing another replacement, and helping to push that 044 for better volume/pressure can't hurt with the shot of boost.

But, if you want to keep it simple, pull it and buy the strainer. I just wanted that extra bit of fuel up top, I saw my fuel pressure gauge crash under boost before installing the 044 pump (like down to 20 psi or so!).

Good non-answer, and pretty scientific too!

Jim
Old 09-10-2007, 02:00 PM
  #5  
Emickelsen
Burning Brakes
 
Emickelsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bakersfield, Ca.
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

In my humble, unprofessional, and relativly young/newby/unexpierienced 928 owner opinion, it sure was nice to just pull off a simple panel and have the pump lookin right at ya. Of course I never had to deal with an internal pump. That might be easy to. The hardest part of mine was to get the fittings off. I couldn't imagine doing that inside a tank. As for the performance...............hell, I don't know. But then again, what do I know. My vote for the external pump.
Old 09-10-2007, 02:02 PM
  #6  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

OK so that's 2 for "leave it in." I wonder if I shoudl attempt the Louie Ott repair method, or just replace? Guess I should pull it apart first and see what's going on first.
Old 09-10-2007, 02:40 PM
  #7  
SwayBar
Drifting
 
SwayBar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago Bears
Posts: 3,477
Received 291 Likes on 198 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Andrew Olson
I was wondering if there was consensus or wisdom about removing the in-tank pump?

I know the 044 pump is plenty strong, just concerned about the in-tank's priming function.
Andrew, I would not remove the in-tank pump.

Sure it may have failed, but look how long that bad-boy hung in there to begin with. Also, I'm sure there's a good reason why the engineers felt the need to install two pumps versus going the simpler and cheaper route of one.
Old 09-10-2007, 02:57 PM
  #8  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

You're probably right... I'll call DR and Jeannie.
Old 09-10-2007, 03:29 PM
  #9  
UKKid35
Drifting
 
UKKid35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,687
Received 55 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SwayBar
Also, I'm sure there's a good reason why the engineers felt the need to install two pumps versus going the simpler and cheaper route of one.
They only installed two pumps in some cars in some markets.
Old 09-10-2007, 03:30 PM
  #10  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

I thought the in-tank pump was standard from 89 on?
Old 09-10-2007, 03:38 PM
  #11  
UKKid35
Drifting
 
UKKid35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,687
Received 55 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Andrew Olson
I thought the in-tank pump was standard from 89 on?
You may be right (at least in the US), but does that mean all pre-89 cars need intank pumps retro-fitted?

Anyway, none of my comments are relevant to boosted cars...
Old 09-10-2007, 03:49 PM
  #12  
atb
Rennlist Member
 
atb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 4,869
Received 33 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

I thought the in-tank pump was standard from 89 on?
I think it was standard on some of the 16v models too wasn't it?
Old 09-10-2007, 03:55 PM
  #13  
RyanPerrella
Nordschleife Master
 
RyanPerrella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Beverly Hills, CA
Posts: 8,929
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

put it in

its easy to replace, it costs between $100-$150 and if it fais after another 5 years, so what replace it again. The issues i had with removing mine were 1) draining the tank, not difficult just make sure you run the tank down to empty and that you have a suitable catch pan for the remaining few gallons. 2) my pump was in two peices and it took awhile to get it out cause the back half was getting caught up on something it didnt come straight out. So removing it took some time. Install was easy, make sure you get the gasket too, the pump dosent come with it, and dont overtighten it.
Old 09-10-2007, 04:02 PM
  #14  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

OK Ryan... would you please walk me through the steps for removal since you've BTDT? I'll do a writeup with pic if you tell me.
Old 09-10-2007, 04:05 PM
  #15  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,134
Received 72 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

I agree with the idea that flow will increase on the second pump if it is primed with the intank.

But the issues are:

1) They are brittle. As in simply removing them, usually, for 4 people I know and myself, breaks them.

2) The actual line size for the pump is very small. Like, extremely small. So much that I think an 044 would be trying to suck through it at ITS rate.

4) Usually, then they die, they blow chunks into your main pump. It may not kill it, but in my experience, it may impede the pump AT THE MOST inopportune time.


Quick Reply: Consensus in the necessity of the in-tank pump? - update: It's out! Yuk!



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 02:28 PM.