A Different Gra Lpg Setup
#1
Posted 04 March 2008 - 06:01 PM
As much as i would love to go Liquid or Vapour LPG injection it seems at the moment that i can't justify spending 5-6g+ on a setup, maybe in 3years + when i can get my next LPG grant and hopefully the prices come down a little
But for now i am keen to hear peoples thought and sugestions on a setup simliar to this for my in the build 355 LH. Has to be under bonnet no scoops etc.
Really don't like the look of the standard GRA twin T/B convertor setup, but this i do like the look of
Yes i think its a Ford, and know i wont have twin turbo's YET.
Would prob joint the two pipes at the front and run it under the rad hose and into a pod or airbox where the charcoal canister goes or into the guard. Convertors i will try to hide under the guard if the hose isn't deemed to long for this.
Planning to go single turbo later on so this setup should be easily adapted to that at a later stage.
Do you guys think that this "active" style hat will flow ok?? I was thinking of using one of the active hats buy have heard that they don't flow that great in NA.
Also peoples thought on tank location: In the LPG standard under the parcel shelf setup i am told this is good because it keeps the weight over the rear axel, better handleing???????? or does the higher centre of gravity undo any advantages????
Like Knoath, large tank in tub cut into the boot floor, std petrol tank position, were the car was desiged to take the weight??????
Don't care about boot volume loss just wana know whats going to handle better!
Not looking into the manifold tanks coz they have a smaller capacity and are harder to plumb a true twin oulet, twin line setup into which i need for my power levels
These look awsome but are not to proven in higher HP NA and Forced induction setups that i know of yet, but will still look into them as i would prefer the stock look. Anyone know of a fitter installer that would fit one of these in Melbourne???
Or any reports on them????
Thoughts people
#2 _CHOPPER_
Posted 04 March 2008 - 08:42 PM
#3 _Brewster_
Posted 04 March 2008 - 09:38 PM
I was going to go GAS once, until I found out how much it was going to cost, and my plan was cut out the boot and weld in an open drop tank and place two smaller tanks side by side and have it set up so it drained both tanks at the same time, and not one at a time.
#4
Posted 05 March 2008 - 05:05 PM
Although one thing I have looked at is, the Ford ute tanks are two tanks bolted together and linked with external pipes. There are 2 different sizes of the 2 tanks one about 35 litres and the other about 55 litres. So to gain clearance you may be able to use 2 small tanks bolted together with the necessary piping to link the two tanks. The tanks are 285mm in diameter so I'm not sure with clearance underneath however my thinking was it was about the depth of a droptank. This set up will get you a greater volume of gas to the about manifold tank but clearance may be a problem.
Oh and you do want the tank as low as possible so anywhere near the standard tank location will be the best for handling.
#5
Posted 06 March 2008 - 06:45 PM
Anyone notice a significant difference in there cars handling with a full->empty drop tank? better, worse?????
#6
Posted 09 March 2008 - 03:10 PM
what bout twin 425 impco carbs on a tunnel ram.got pica of this on a 308 and is pretty decent set up!
#7
Posted 09 March 2008 - 06:29 PM
twin 425s on a 308 with 2 converters.
#8
Posted 10 March 2008 - 12:06 PM
Would really like to go the technocarb path so it can look stock, just researching it more. But the twin GRA front mount setup would look killer when i get a turbo though
Old setup was out the bonnet and a bit of a head F$&k so not doing that again, Here she is
#9
Posted 10 March 2008 - 12:34 PM
#10 _CHOPPER_
Posted 10 March 2008 - 12:38 PM
#11
Posted 10 March 2008 - 03:51 PM
#12
Posted 10 March 2008 - 08:13 PM
hey luke do you know how much those techno carbs are worth??
#13 _73LJWhiteSL_
Posted 11 March 2008 - 07:12 AM
Sorry to hear this Peter, I was kinda hopping on getting the tank out of the boot, but i guess I will just have to live with it.I've been doing a bit more research on the tanks and the manifold tank I was talking about doesn't fit under the car as it is too long and the two Ford tanks would be too low. So unfortunately without more research and expense it seems the only real alternative is the tank in the boot, which would be a A86 which holds 68 litres or a F84 which holds 60 litres.
Steve
#14
Posted 11 March 2008 - 10:12 AM
TorqueGas in QLD is a australian distributor for them they seem helpfull but the dude was trying to say how good they are when they got 200 rwHp out of one...... i want 270+ rwHp
#15
Posted 11 March 2008 - 11:35 AM
#16
Posted 11 March 2008 - 01:01 PM
#17
Posted 11 March 2008 - 06:07 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users