E10 and a fuel leak

Hi all,

I have put this in a separate thread as it is a different topic, but it follows on from my (now successful thanks to this forum) conversion to weber from Pierburg 2e2 thread.

Having now got the running nicely, after a minute or two of running I noticed a very large puddle of petrol on the floor by the rear wheel - fuel filler side.

So my guess is that I have a large leak in the fuel return pipe.

I know I now need to examine the fuel tank sender unit as I believe that is where the return pipe comes into the tank as well as any other pipework I can see.

I have also read what I can find here about E10 and I can see that there is guidance that E10 corrodes rubber and while this is avoidable through buying premium grade, actually if I am going to the hassle of tracing a huge fuel line leak, I am thinking I may as well go the whole hog and make the lines E10 compliant.

Firstly has anyone any suggestions as to where breaks are likely most likely to occur in the return line? I'll trace it but just if anyone has any experience of this.

Secondly has anyone gone through the process of upgrading lines to E10 fuel lines? Any idea how much of what fuel line I'll need? I'm guessing there are metal lines too. I n noticed someone mentioned using copper pipe for this.

Are there any gotchas that make this is a really difficult job?

Any guidance and experience gratefully received. 

OLD RUBBER hoses were not rated for ethanol anything.
E10 E15 and any iteration will rot non E-rated hoses.

When running e10, you have to usually replace al the ruvver hoses with "Ethanol" rated hose.

It also eats various rubber bits in the fuel system.
I suspect that is why I started replacing all my fuel hoses and such on my cars after about 6 months, as that is all we have over hear, and it wrecks havoc.

Briano1234 said

When running e10, you have to usually replace al the ruvver hoses with "Ethanol" rated hose.

It also eats various rubber bits in the fuel system.
I suspect that is why I started replacing all my fuel hoses and such on my cars after about 6 months, as that is all we have over hear, and it wrecks havoc.

Thanks Briano1234, that sounds like the right thing to do. From what I have read the E10 is fine as a running fuel apart from the effect on rubber bits.

Heritage in uk offer e10 safe hose so ill get some of that. What do you think about replacing metal parts of the fuel line? Worth doing?

Trying to work this fuel line replacement out, I've read on a number of posts how with the Weber's a restrictor in the fuel return line is advised and some say that actually you can do away with the swirl pot and just direct connect the fuel pump to the carb, and cap off the return line into the sender tank cap.

Is there any downside to this? Is it safe with the fuel pressure? I guess on my old landrover there's no fuel return line at all and it has a similar looking mechanical fuel pump?

I think if this is safe then I'd prefer to do this but just hoping that someone has some experience of running this setup?

metal is fine, no need to update.
As far as Carbed and rubber bits, I am more of a diesel head, as well as digifant.
When I had Carbed cars, there wasn't e-10 rated anything.  It was real gas, as far as my Rover3500 days, it was really great to run it on AvGas.

Briano1234 said

metal is fine, no need to update.
As far as Carbed and rubber bits, I am more of a diesel head, as well as digifant.
When I had Carbed cars, there wasn't e-10 rated anything.  It was real gas, as far as my Rover3500 days, it was really great to run it on AvGas.

Good to know. Thanks.

I used to have a Rover 3500 SD1 as a student. Genius car. Felt like starship enterprises to be in, rear seat folded down flat enough to use as a camper car - which accommodated all 6'5" of me. Scarily fast in an adult, library chair way - if only the electric windows would work for longer than a day

Argoman said

Trying to work this fuel line replacement out, I've read on a number of posts how with the Weber's a restrictor in the fuel return line is advised and some say that actually you can do away with the swirl pot and just direct connect the fuel pump to the carb, and cap off the return line into the sender tank cap.

Is there any downside to this? Is it safe with the fuel pressure? I guess on my old landrover there's no fuel return line at all and it has a similar looking mechanical fuel pump?

I think if this is safe then I'd prefer to do this but just hoping that someone has some experience of running this setup?

When I did my Pierburg to Weber conversion, I ran the car with the return line clamped without a problem.

What I did notice though, on my car (1.8 Cabrio auto 1991) with the return line deleted, it would not start up as readily as when I had a restricted return line.

With both a full return and a restricted return, my car started instantly the key was turned.

With a full return, the  engine suffered a fuel starvation problem after a mile or so of driving, or within 10 mins idling , and I could clearly see bubbles in the fuel filter

Have you actually identified where the leak is or assuming its the return line?