Proper Fuel line and FPR routing

[UH-60Pilot]

Need to know the proper way to hook up an Aeromotive A1000-6 FPR. The car is running in the current config., but I wanted to know if it could be better. I will be replacing all of my lines with ones that are PTFE lined so my garage does not smell of fuel after I get home.

Part of me says to just leave it the way it is because it works. If anybody has experience with this, please chime in. The fist picture is my current setup followed by option 1 and 2.  Please excuse the cruelty of my diagrams, they are not to scale;)

[Tictakman]

your last drawing... you will be pressurizing both lines the same and then any excess over your set fuel psi will dump back into the tank from the fpr.

Zak

[twokrx7]

I bet you are going to get a lot of opinions, I'll offer mine but my flame suit is going on for this one.

I you are keeping the power level reasonable, "current" config is fine and what I would run assuming the regulator is designed for it (and I am currently running this config on my 1000+ whp Jeep), less connections so fewer leak points and should not have any issues with fuel pressure distribution in the rails.  If going for BIG power I am with Tictakman.

My only concern about current config is the design of your FPR if making BIG power.  I run a Fore FPR on my Jeep and talked with them at length to confirm the regulator is designed for this config, to allow 1000whp worth of fuel flow through the regulator housing without adding restriction.  My old Aeromotive FPR was not well designed for that config as the internal flow path had horrific geometry compared to the Fore.  My 7 with the aeromotive FPR was more like config 1 and it worked fine until it got "old" and struggled to control fuel pressure when spraying n2o, now has a Fore FPR and fuel pressure regulation on the nitrous has been spot on.

GL!

[coltboostin]

Option C is by FAR the best for actual fuel flow, but all of them will work.

I am currently using option A on my current car with twin 255 and 80's @ 730whp.  It is not preferred, but my only option with unmodified stock rails.

[UH-60Pilot]

Thanks for your input guys. I will change my setup to option 2.

Now I have to spend some money on new fuel lines and some extra fittings.

[coltboostin]

Are you running into a fueling issue now, or just looking to change it up?

[UH-60Pilot]

No issues now. I will be replacing my lines soon, and wanted to do it the correct way.

I thinking "if ain't broke, dont fix it" and should leave it alone though. I have not ordered the new lines and fittings yet.

[largeorangefont]

If you do any track racing the config you have it in now burps the fuel system before air bubbles get to the fuel rail if you have problems with fuel slosh in turns.

I have my car set up that way.

[MoparX]

I'm carbed, but had my fuel system set up the same way for a while.  I found that I would have issues related to the fuel getting too hot inside the fuel line between the regulator and carb.  It would percolate inside the hose and I was able to confirm this using a piece of temporary clear tubing.  The fuel didn't move enough and got too hot.  I wound up redoing my fuel system similar to your second drawing and have not had any issue since.

[N2v8fcs]

I'm running your option 2 set up on my turbo FC build.
My DD FC is set up like your option 1.

[Jordan Innovations]

Your last one, "Opt2" is how I've had mine, and how everyone with aftermarket rails should do theirs.  With factory rails, you can do option 1 with an adapter fitting off the Schrader valve, and that's what the big hp Corvette guys that want to run stock looking crap do (and is better than the current dead-head setup).