Mustang and Ford Performance Forums banner

Walbro 525 Pump

9K views 17 replies 7 participants last post by  eschaider 
#1 ·
I am sourcing a Fore return style system for my TS build. Has anyone played with the Walbro "Hellcat" pump? I know everyone talks about the 465. It seems like minimal cost to increase the LPH on the fuel pump and keep a dual pump set up.
 
#4 · (Edited)
That is an excellent race only pump. It has no internal check valve which means the pump must be on always. Always on in a return style fuel system means it is continuously pumping against a head and likely using most of the 30A power budget allocated to each pump. That means if you run two (or three??) of these pumps you have already accounted for 60A (90A if you use three) of your vehicle's power budget and it is dedicated to just running the fuel pumps. How big is your Alternator?

This pump would not likely be a happy camper in a street application. Go down one notch to a pair of F90000285 pumps and don't worry be happy, as the song says.


Ed
 
#5 ·
Ed-
That tells me everything I need to know. This will be a pure street car so no 525 for me. BTW running the big J2Fab Alternator
 
#6 ·
J2 Fab makes a number of "Big" alternators. Just like ignition reserve provides large and reliable ignition kernels in the combustion chamber so to does power reserve in your electrical system. I would not use anything smaller than a 240A unit with those types of pumps. More to the point, you might want to build a power budget for the car listing out all the consumers of power, totaling up the demand each makes on the electrical system and comparing it to your alternator supply capability. Just like ignition reserve, power reserve serves you better the bigger it is.

240A sounds like a lot until you start to add up all the consumers of power in the car. The number can and usually will surprise you. Marginal electrical systems can play havoc with the ECU, fueling and firing the ignition coils.



Ed
 
#7 ·
I picked up the 270A alternator with all the fixins.( Big 3 cable kit and external regulator). With running a water tank and other extra electrical goodies I figured go big or go home.
 
#9 ·
I think the twin 465's will work great. My end goal with this car is to make it very "beat on-able" with your standard teksid gibtec build. Not trying to light the world on fire at the drag strip, just make above 800whp on e85. I thought the 525lph pump might give me some extra room. The 465s will undoubtedly cover my end goals.
 
#11 · (Edited)
The F90000285 and F90000274 pumps are quite similar but have slightly different flow rates. The xxx285 pump is rated at 470 lph while the xxx274 pumps are rated at 430 lph. Both have internal check valves so they will both work properly in a staged system, should you choose to do that. The xxx285 pump carries about a $35 price premium at most resellers. Also worthy of noting is the xxx285 pump will draw slightly more amperage to support its higher flow rate.

The higher amperage is only a consideration if your car's electrical system is already marginal. The 270A alternator you are using should be more than adequate for the car and two of the xxx285 pumps unless you have some other equipment that has a significant power requirement. The obvious bad boy here would be a high end stereo but you can find non audio problem makers also. If you think you might be close just do a power budget to see how much you are actually using.

Either pump model will serve you well. Obviously the xxx285 pumps provide a bit more head room for the fuel system, the cost for the head room is about $35 per pump and the additional power consumption of the bigger pump.

Ed
 
#12 ·
No high end audio for me. Only go fast goodies. Not even A/C for me. Main electric draws are water pump (trunk tank) and fuel system. Heck pretty much all the lights are LED.
 
#13 ·
Just now looking at the part numbers Ed and isn't the F90000285 pump the "hellcat pump"? Meaning 525lph no internal check valve. Just based off a google search. It shows 525lph but when you go to TIs website it shows 470.
 
#14 · (Edited)
These are the TI Pump numbers and corresponding flow data

  • F90000295 Fuel Pump - 540 lph*
  • F90000285 Fuel Pump - 470 lph*
  • F90000274 Fuel Pump - 450 lph
  • F90000273 Fuel Pump - 400 lph
  • F90000267 Fuel Pump - 450 lph
  • F90000262 Fuel Pump - 400 lph

Believing the data on the TI website is generally good advice - they do manufacture the pumps. TI has not listed the asterisked (*) 285 or 295 pumps on their website yet. The flow figures shown are from Fore Innovations a trusted supplier. Fore flows all pumps before marketing a particular model. Their numbers tend to be closer to real world numbers and may vary a whisker from TI advertised flow figures.

Ed
 
#15 ·
i would be cautious running more than 1 of these pumps, don't underestimate the current draw they require. they need to be wired individually for ground and power. they are horribly inefficient when multiple ones are used compared to other pumps.

i made a 3 pump (f90000274) hat to bolt into a fuel cell to replace a fuel lab prodigy that was getting to be too small. i did my testing on car using MY fuel lines, filter and regulator to get real world data on how they work. i have a -10 supply, -8 return,pumps come on sequentially so bigger return lines not needed( another reason for multiple pumps- save money on huge return lines).
i flow tested the pumps individually at batt only and with battery charger/huge audio capacitor for voltage comparison. these were my results out of memory.

test was done at base pressure set to 40, as more pumps came on pressure went up a bit to about 48 with all three(pressure drop in return line)

individual
11.5v -@87-95 gal/hr @20amp
15v- @100-120gal/hr @25amp

pair
11.2v- @160 35 amp
13.2v @ 190 gal/hr 40 amp

all three

11v @240 gal/hr @50 amp
13v @270 gal/hr @60 amp(batt charger on boost)

my wiring is 10ga for positive and a shared 8ga ground. wiring for each is about 3 ft, battery right next to the cell.
i thought that the non scaling amperage was odd so i did a test with a voltmeter hooked to the positive terminal of one pump and ground with that pump not being turned on so i could measure voltage drop of the ground at the pump itself. it was dam near a volt drop on the ground side with 2 pumps running.

i then upped the pressure to run a few more bu i lost my paper with that info, ill just say it scaled as if there was about 15 more psi than on the supplied chart @ 70 psi.
i did however test my old pump before i installedthe new ones the advertized 190 gal/hr pump actually delivered 170 at battery voltage and 210 around 13.5v with about 30 amp draw.

if i were to do it again i would rater use 4 340's as they scale better with pressure and are more efficient. 4 340s at 70 psi acutually outflow the 450's and use less power
 
#16 ·
Thanks for all the research data, Ashford.

The current draw on big pumps like these can be impressive to say the least. This goes back to an electrical power budget and the importance of knowing how much power you use where and under what conditions. Ignoring these sorts of metrics is asking for problems that are sometimes measured by burnt piston count.


Ed
 
#18 ·
Thanks Joe, for some reason those pages escaped me. That means the 540 lph that Fore measured for the 295 pump was actually spec'd by Walbro as 535 lph and the 470 that Fore measured for the 285 pump was actually spec'd by Walbro at 525 lph.

The big pump outperformed by about 1% in Fore's tests while the smaller 285 pump actually underperformed (compared to Walbro specs) by about 10 or 11 percent.

Interesting numbers ...

Ed
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top