Here's a picture of the fuel pump off my '72 Skylark Buick 350. What is the tab on top of the arm? Did the stock pump come this way 'cause I want to replace the pump and haven't seen anything with this tab/spacer or whatever it is on it. BTW for my basically stock 350 what would be a good replacement.
Thats just a wear pad. Some pumps had them and some didn't. I've had them both ways on my old 350 and my new 455.
Wouldn't this affect the amount of travel of the eccecntric on the arm and thus the pump/flow rate since with the pad the arm would move up and down farther than without it? As far as a good replacement, any suggestions? Thanks for the info.
an extra 1/8 in in travel with have no effect weather that plate is there or not. [Its a wear plate.] Either the new pump will have it or it wont. Either way it doesn't matter. You will not notice or lose any performance from that tiny bit of travel lose or gained.
I got a replacement pump this spring from a local parts store. They ordered it in, took 2 days, mfgr is Airtex, made in USA, company is in Fairfield IL. Part # 40579, around $30. It does not have the additional wear plate. My 72 Chassis manual states that all 72 big block cars, and ALL 72 cars with AC, got the fuel pump with the vapor return line.
BTW, this fuel pump I mention, has only 2 lines, as the engine is in my 68, and is a 350 car with no AC.
3 lines but the vapor return line has been plugged off and A/C removed from car. Set up this way when I got the car and eliminating the return line doesn't show any bad results. Thanks for clearing up the question of the fuel pump arm. Appreciate all your help. Dan
Well there is a problem that could cause performance problems. The 3 hose pump is better as it has the built in regulator. it was use to cure vapor lock but it does also provide a good service. When you reach proper fuel psi it will return excess pressure to the tank. I am sure they plugged it cause the return line was leaking but I would fix it right. I actually wish they did that sooner and put 3 hose pumps on them all. Built in regulators are nice.
If I connect that line won't I have to hook up the "4th" line returning to the old (now gone) charcoal canister, don't they loop to each other or is that "4th" line separate from this vapor return line? Dan
You should have 3 hoses/lines from your tank. A feed n vent line will both be on the left side of the car / frame rail. The return line is on the right side. The vent would hook into the canister. N I bet the return line was leaking and why they blocked it off. Not sure where or what the forth line is your talking about. I do know there is a line from the canister to the carb. And the cruise might tap into that. I recently just re-did all my vac line, fuel and return line but not sure what 4th hose you mean.
There is a line comes from the tank, runs along the passenger side of the frame, then cuts across to the driver's side and comes up just back of where the vapor return and fuel line in are. Fuel line in and vapor lines are together and run the length of the deiver's side back to the tank. The additional line coming from the tank along the passenger side is not connected to anything. The way the car was set up was the fuel in line of course, and the line it pairs with along the driver's side was connected to the 3rd (vapor return line according to my manual). That passenger side line must have gone to the canister - does that sound right? If it did do I even need to worry about it?
that line on the passenger side is your return line. It would hook up to the fuel pump. the vent or vapor line next to the feed fuel line would goto the canister.
Fuel Pump Thanks for clearing that up because the previous owner had the vapor line hooked up to the fuel pump and the return line was not hooked up at all. Surprisingly, the car started, idled, and ran very good except for a very slight idle fluctuation. I'll definitely change the hook-up and see what difference this makes. Since I don't have a canister or hose connection for it at the carb I'll have to leave that line disconnected.
Yep I guess it would work that way. I would just let the vent vent that way. Maybe put a small filter on it just so bug can't find their way inside. The vent would goto the canister and then into the carb. But hooking a vent directly into the carb could cause problems with a full tank. if it started sucking raw fuel instead of vapors. Though hooking it into the air cleaner lid some how would be OK. That way any vented fumes gets sucked up n burnt. But there is not enough vacuum in the air cleaner to suck raw fuel.
I have a 72 350 and my vacuum canister has two lines on top, one says tank and the other says fuel pump. The one that is hooked up to fuel pump side is about 15" long and it just hanging between the frame and power steering pump unplugged! The car runs fine but should it be hooked up to something? Tim
Tim, 1 hose goes to the standpipe (near the fuel tank), and the other hose goes to the air cleaner snorkel. No charcoal cannister connection to the fuel pump.
