|
By zuburg - 3 Years Ago
|
Trying to start a remanufactured 292 on a 1956 T-bird. Fuel pump came from a running 239 Y-block but has not been used for over 4 years. After no luck in starting the engine, we disconnected the fuel line that goes from the pump to the fuel filter at the fuel filter fitting. When cranking the engine, no fuel was coming out of the fuel line.
Is this a proper test? How can you test the fuel pump to determine if the inlet is sucking and the outlet is pumping out fuel? Can this be tested while the pump is installed or do you have to remove the pump for a bench test?
|
|
By Tedster - 3 Years Ago
|
|
Fuel should flow from the outlet when engine is idling or simply cranked over with the starter. Most mechanical pumps were something along the lines of "1 pint in 30 seconds", in terms of volume spec. Static output pressure can be tested with a mechanic's vacuum gauge. Make sure any rubber fuel line going back to the tank, and any fitting connections, are in good condition, and tight. Any slight air leaks along the way can prevent the pump from doing its job.
|
|
By Daniel Jessup - 3 Years Ago
|
|
been a looooong time since I dealt with 239 specific parts but weren't the fuel pumps on the 239's installed "upside down" as opposed to all other Y blocks? Not sure if that is your issue or not but I would think it might be an issue. Maybe some of the veterans will chime in here.
|
|
By darrell - 3 Years Ago
|
|
no 54 fuel pump will work if its of a 55 239 it will
|
|
By Hoosier Hurricane - 3 Years Ago
|
|
I'm assuming you have the 292 timing cover for the Bird. The '54 pump will not work on a 292 cover. Get a 292 Bird pump.
|
|
By Ted - 3 Years Ago
|
As mentioned, the 1954 239 fuel pumps are not compatible with the 1955 and newer engines unless using the 1954 timing covers. The 239 pump did install upside down but another identifier for those pumps is that they use a 5/16 bolt for attachment rather than a 3/8 bolt as is used on the ’55 and newer Y engines. If someone has drilled the fuel pump attachment holes larger in the 239 pump to accommodate a 3/8” bolt and tried to put that pump on a later engine in the right side up position, I would think the arm would miss the fuel pump concentric altogether and therefore not work.
I’ll suggest another fuel pump if in doubt about the current pump.
Here are pictures of both the 239 fuel pump (top) and the later model fuel pump (lower).
|
|
By oldcarmark - 3 Years Ago
|
When You get the proper Pump it is installed with Arm under the Cam Eccentric-not on top.
|
|
By zuburg - 3 Years Ago
|
This car has given me lots of problems. It was sold to me purported as a non-original 292 engine. I found out later it was a 239 with lots of T-bird parts attached. I assume someone replaced the original with a 239 and used mostly parts from the original.
From your pictures I don’t think I have either. I don’t have the glass bowl filter.
Here are pictures of what I have.
I’m hoping maybe the pump is OK and somehow I installed it with the lever in the wrong position?
|
|
By Hoosier Hurricane - 3 Years Ago
|
|
That is not a '54 pump in your picture. It looks correct for a T-Bird because the glass bowl filter will not clear the Bird crossmember.
|
|
By Ted - 3 Years Ago
|
As John brings up, the fuel pump looks correct for the application. Here are some scenarios to consider.
- It’s possible for the fuel pump arm to be inserted to the front of the concentric rather than under it which will simply have the fuel pump not working. This happens when not inserting the fuel pump into its spot by not going in at 90° relative to the fuel pump hole and instead the pump is being installed such that the lever is angling towards the front. In this case, you can typically hear a grinding noise where the concentric is rubbing against the fuel pump arm assuming there is enough fuel in the carburetor to get the engine running.
- If the spacers for the timing gear are installed incorrectly, that can have the concentric installed in a position that’s not properly aligned with the fuel pump lever.
- Are you sure you have the fuel pump concentric in place? I have been known to leave them off where I know nothing but an electric fuel pump is being used.
- Just a bad fuel pump. That can be tested by hand working the fuel pump lever with the pump off of the engine.
|
|
By Tedster - 3 Years Ago
|
Just thinking out loud here - but there is some concern here about excessive cranking on a newly rebuilt engine? In this instance troubleshooting fuel pumps.
Maybe a strategy would be to rig up an outboard fuel tank (boat tank) or some type of gravity feed to the carburetor and get the 20 minute break-in accomplished, camshaft lobes and lifters "run in" and working together. Then work on the fuel pump issue.
|
|
By charliemccraney - 3 Years Ago
|
Here's one designed to do exactly what Tedster describes.
https://www.amazon.com/Motion-Pro-08-0032-Auxiliary-Fuel/dp/B000WJ0RCA/ref=psdc_404763011_t4_B004NV42PQ
|
|
By Joe-JDC - 3 Years Ago
|
|
I will go with "Just a bad fuel pump." When I bought my '55 Thunderbird, it had an electric fuel pump in line to prime the carburetor before trying to start the engine. I removed the electric pump, and the carb would not prime with the engine driven pump. I replaced the fuel pump, and now it primes very quickly just cranking over. The fuel pump diaphram rubber was softened by ethanol in the fuel to the point it would not create a vacuum. Joe-JDC
|