|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> Fuel petcock /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1315104141 Message started by VOLKY on 09/03/11 at 19:42:21 |
|
Title: Fuel petcock Post by VOLKY on 09/03/11 at 19:42:21 I have a 2006 S40 with 18,000 miles. Bought it three weeks ago. The bike will only run when the petcock is pointing to the prime position. On reserve or on position will only run for about 1/4 mile and runs out of fuel. Any sugestilns what's wrong with it? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by EJID on 09/03/11 at 19:55:45 Serowbot is usally the first to chime in on this issue, but here's a clue... Test your Petcock,.. don't just turn it to Prime.. (http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1251932429/1) It's a vac operated petcock & I would first check the condition of the vac line (no cracks & properly clamped on) before diving in further. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Boofer on 09/03/11 at 20:26:27 Buy this Yamaha part which makes your petcock MANUAL for $25 or buy a Suzuki replacement for $85. Part number is 5LP-24500-01-00. Used mine today when I ran out on the hwy. It has less reserve. I rode about 10 miles and put in 2.4 gal on sidestand up a little into filler neck. Some like it some don't. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/03/11 at 21:25:10 Just replace the vacuum line from the carb to the petcock. That will fix it. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Boofer on 09/03/11 at 21:31:54 I would suggest the vacuum line if it didn't have 18,000 miles on it and he can take Serowbot's petcock test. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/04/11 at 07:02:14 7F52525B584F3D0 wrote:
Yes, do the test. My vac hose fix is based on age,.....as I doubt that miliage has anything to do w/ diaphram aging. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by VOLKY on 09/04/11 at 07:07:55 What is the serowbot test? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/04/11 at 07:16:37 5C45464153464B444E2A0 wrote:
I don't have it, but never fear, these old cojers will wake up soon and post it. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/04/11 at 07:31:41 I think this is Serowbots test http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1251932429 See, I told ya one of them old cojers would wake up ! ::) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/04/11 at 09:40:22 You're doing fine Routy, just keep answering all his questions as they come up .... See, I told you Routy was a good'un -- right helpful and nice too. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/04/11 at 10:23:21 0221292B282121283F4D0 wrote:
OF, Just because the goin gets rough, don't be pawning your job off on me ! You do just fine,.....as long as I don't get too far away ;D |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/04/11 at 15:53:41 T'ain't rough, ssmmoooth sailing as always. Simply tell them what to do, only then will they learn enough about it to supply you with the hidden clues you needed to tell them what to do .... huh? ;) I mean, it takes them a try or two for them to tell you enough for you to figure out their rear brake is adjusted too tight and that was why "their carburetor was malfunctioning" and they had lost them some high speed performance due to that last pesky oil change .... Beyond that, a good sense of humor helps a lot. You'll get the hang of it after a time or two or three -- no sweat, it's easy. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by VOLKY on 09/09/11 at 15:17:37 Ok, here is what I found. The vaccum line is connected to the carburator, but was not connected to the petcock. I ran the engine and does have vaccum. Now, I can not find where the hose connects to the petcock. On the left side of the carburator is the fuel line from the petcock to the carburator, and another smaller hose (same size as the vaccum hose) that goes from the petcock to the left side of the carburator. I can not find where the vaccum hose goes. Can anyone help me? Pictures will be greatly appreciated. Hopefully this will solve the problem. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/11 at 15:24:06 tech section index (see below) carb specs |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/09/11 at 15:31:52 Sounds like you have a vent line hooked to the petcock vacuum tap... Where do they go?... and what do they connect too?... They go here,... and they connect to nothing. They should be open to atmosphere... http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/serowbot/vents001.jpg Vac line goes from carb rightside to rear of petcock... ;)... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by VOLKY on 09/09/11 at 15:38:50 like I said before, I just bought the bike three weeks ago. Wonder why they did what the did? Looking at the pic, there are two lines (hoses) that connects to nothing. On my bike the left side is connected to the rear of the petcock. WoW, wonder what the old owner was thinkning about? I will connect the vaccum line to the petcock and will see what happens. Will keep youo posted. Thanks for all your help and advice. I do have the repair manual but does not explain much about the petcock. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by VOLKY on 09/12/11 at 20:13:44 Well, i connecte dthe vaccum line to the petcock and put clamps on them. Ran the bike for 100 miles in the "ON" position until ran out of gas. Switched to reserve position, and went to the gas station and fill up with 93 octane. Seems to be working. The whole problem was that whoever (prior owner) disconnecte dthe vaccum line. Thanks for all the help!! |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/12/11 at 20:27:20 Cool!... Nice to know somethings getting fixed around here... ;)... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/13/11 at 05:40:20 Volky,......you did it right,..... He is one of few that didn't let "PP" (petcock paranoia) get to him,... run right out and spend $35 on a needless replacement petcock,........as so many do. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/13/11 at 11:40:58 353A203B27213230383621530 wrote:
Routy,... if you would write a disclaimer explaining why people shouldn't swap to a Raptor, and why they should keep, fix, or replace with a new stock one,... I would gladly add it to the Petcock test post in the Tech section, and credit it to you... This way,.. you could stop your incessant ranting in every help post and just refer people to your opinion with a link... If you choose to,... PM me the script you'd like to add... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Bubba on 09/15/11 at 08:05:07 Volky, check your can chain tensioner your miles are up there...me thinks if the PO had those lines hooked up that way he certainly didn't check the cam chain...just my 2 cents |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Mattdw on 09/15/11 at 09:14:15 3920232436232E212B4F0 wrote:
Same thing happened to me when I bought my first Savage, a '96...except I found another bonus a few days later. There was NO air filter in it either. :) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/16/11 at 05:29:14 160F0C0B190C010E04600 wrote:
Why 93 octane? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/16/11 at 18:12:22 3620372A32272A31450 wrote:
Routy,... if you would write a disclaimer explaining why people shouldn't swap to a Raptor, and why they should keep, fix, or replace with a new stock one,... I would gladly add it to the Petcock test post in the Tech section, and credit it to you... This way,.. you could stop your incessant ranting in every help post and just refer people to your opinion with a link... If you choose to,... PM me the script you'd like to add... [/quote] Wow,.....seems I been reprimanded. Hey Bot,....you on the rag or what ? Get over it,.....thank god I'm here to keep you guys in line ! :o ::) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by mojo on 09/16/11 at 18:29:23 I'm starting to look at bikes. One comment seems to be universal if it does not run: "It probably just needs some carb work" Ya, it probably does, along with some other things. :) I ain't gripin', just enjoyin' the facts of life. ;D 0C0516090400150E0F610 wrote:
Same thing happened to me when I bought my first Savage, a '96...except I found another bonus a few days later. There was NO air filter in it either. :) [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by VOLKY on 09/16/11 at 19:53:27 Why not 93 octane? Idk. I heard is cleaner and u get better performance. ::) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Boofer on 09/16/11 at 20:34:40 4751465B43565B40340 wrote:
Routy,... if you would write a disclaimer explaining why people shouldn't swap to a Raptor, and why they should keep, fix, or replace with a new stock one,... I would gladly add it to the Petcock test post in the Tech section, and credit it to you... This way,.. you could stop your incessant ranting in every help post and just refer people to your opinion with a link... If you choose to,... PM me the script you'd like to add... [/quote] Just send him what he wants. It's only fair. You go off on a tangent about the float leaking and fire after a crash. AS I SAID I have never had a problem other than gas starvation. I went through the process and changed hoses, took the petcock apart, changed hose clamps. It still left me setting waiting for the gas to run into the carb. IT WAS STARVING FOR GAS. I put up with this crap for a year before changing to the Raptor petcock. I recommend it to anyone who is at the end of their testing procedure, unless they want to buy a new Suzuki petcock. I also use Seafoam IN THE QUANTITY SPECIFIED on the label to keep the shiny things in the carb shiny. I only do this about every month or so. Now man up and give Serowbot what he has asked. My bike spit out a lot of oil all over the engine today after seeping for about 9,000 miles. Now, after listening to others on here I am guessing that the cap plug has let go. I am not being stampeded into a tear down. It makes sense. If it's something else, I don't intend on blaming Serow or Versy or others. I will probably tear into the timing chain issue while it's apart. I told Versy once I would ride it till it had to be torn down. He didn't make me do it. It just makes sense with all the anecdotal evidence we have. If it's good ok. If not I'll fix it. Sorry to the others about this post, but you just stir up trouble. Stirring up trouble just messes up the new guys so they don't understand what's what. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/16/11 at 22:32:21 Boofer, You on the rag too,....just because your bike blew up ? Hey, if you don't like what I say,.....or my opinions, just learn to ignore them. I'm here to help too, and sometimes add a little humor to it all,....if you can't handle it, do something about it, like leave !! And I don't think Bot needs your help, he does fine all by himself. Maybe you are too dam old ! :o ;D |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/17/11 at 03:57:09 No, I am the one that has gotten too old. Routy is too Rowdy, still all young at heart and full of piss and vinegar. A common ailment of the very young at heart I am told. Routy has not experienced petcock anything yet as his bike is pretty new. We shall see how he handles it when it occurs to him and his scoot. All we can do for Routy is wish him well until he is dicing in traffic and has his first sudden power loss, then we can wish that he not have anybody running up close behind him ..... ;) yup, them vac petcorks and all their odd little "acting up" symptoms can be plumb dangerous in heavy traffic, they can ..... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/17/11 at 05:05:13 Ok,.....I got ruffled a little. But OF,....you're not too old ...trust me,.....you're too kind to be old. ;) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/17/11 at 06:09:30 Too kind, huh .... sometimes I wonder about that "too kind" stuff. Wuz I being too kind when I teased Verslagen about him being a virgin engine rolling test bed for an "early onset oil consumption" episode due to an impending future vac petcock fuel starvation failure? And now I've teased you about your future first vac petcork episode when it sputters and dies on you in tight packed traffic .... and somebody runs a SUV up your rear fender because you suddenly slowed down in the middle of traffic. It is all jest good ol' cranky/teasing unless it might actually happen in reality, in which case wuz it really being kind at all? ================== Routy, in the name of all things sane and good, please don't go into heavy traffic and play traffic/chicken with your vac petcock once it starts acting up on you any at all whatsoever. I implore you, don't put your body at risk over a "disputed opinion" because although I like to be right, I don't like to be right all THAT much !!! Me being right and you being hurt -- that is a poor assed trade I'd never make intentionally. In other words, don't you be doing this kinda stuff -- I'd rather be wrong, really I would. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/17/11 at 22:35:03 I doubt that you are 1/2 that serious about my well being. Actually since this PC stuff started,....since I been involved anyway, you guys have been batting a very poor average as far as any fuel issues being cause by the vac PC,.....even if we include the vacuum line,...... even if we include a shortage of vacuum source. There has been a couple vac line issues, and a couple vac source issues, but even some of those were not thoroughly verified. And in reality, any bike that will still do 85 to 90 mph, is not in any danger of not being able to accelerate out of trouble at 10 or 20 or even 50 mph. There has been many posts of fuel problems at low speeds, sometimes even at idle, whether it be lack of throttle response, hesitations etc etc, but yet will run good at crusing and WOT speeds, and the problem gets blamed on to the vac PC. I don't think thats fair to those who lack the knowledge of how a fuel system really works. I have been accused of.......what ?? Telling the truth ??? Tell me where I was ever dead wrong when I said the problem was not the PC or the vac line, or the source ! I have ended up right most times ! You guys are perdy smart, I'll be first to admit, but you're not smart enough to always be right ! If you notice, I am not always real quick to post an answer, not till I analyze it from several posts. Why am I even bothering w/ all this ??? Why are you concerned about my well being, when you are not concerned about your own,......meaning I firmly believe that the vac PC is a saftey device, in more ways than one. But yet when I posted the news story of a fellow rider nearly burning to death riding a bike that I'd bet a lot of money did not have a vac PC, nobody wanted to hear about it possibly being an issue. Now what if a fellow rider here that you so quickly told to change out the PC,.....before you even really knew the detailed facts of the fuel problem, got into a wreck like the one in the news last nite, and really did burn to death,.......what would you be feeling like today :o Lets pray that don't happen ! Hey, don't mean this a personal attack,......like was thrown on me by a couple here, only as a few thoughts from my point of view. Keep up your good work,.....most you guys do a fine job ! What all did I say above ?? Your guess as good as mine ;) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/18/11 at 00:51:13 Routy, I'll talk with you more later. Until then, it might be best for us to hold off on the heavy petcock discussions that might be picked up on by a legal secretary doing Google searches/research for her lawyer boss. Google does source crawl our site -- go punch in "vac petcock Savage" and see what you get. I was surprised, to be sure. We are not the only ones seeing the vac petcock issues. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/18/11 at 07:46:46 You got it. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by drharveys on 09/22/11 at 18:04:43 Hate to interrupt you guys, but I just finished the petcock swap on my bike. The problem was pretty classic -- the bike felt like it was ready to switch to reserve, but still stumbled on reserve. Ran OK on prime, so I did the swap. It went just fine, only now I've got to re-check how far I can go before, and after, I hit reserve. Maybe I'll bring along a spare 1/2 gallon and do a fuel check ride. Hey, the weekend is coming up! 8-) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Bubba on 09/23/11 at 08:09:43 problem solved...hooray! |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/24/11 at 06:29:10 I just replaced my stock petcock with a raptor. I noticed the idle went up about 200 rpm. To me that means the vacuum draw to operate the stock pc was causing some loss of efficiency. So by extrapolation I might get a little better mileage? :-/ BTW the reason I changed it was because I found it very difficult to turn the stock one due to arthritis in my hands. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/24/11 at 07:00:22 454E4E474B44455F5E2A0 wrote:
Something is definently strange. The fact is, it doesn't consume any vacuum to operate a vacuum petcock. If it was consuming vacuum, it had a vacuum leak,.....plain and simple. And the leak was very likely not coming thru the PC itself, or you would have had more problems. But what is strange, is that if you had a vacuum leak,.....or in the case of consuming vacuum, it would not have been a quality idle, and most times the idle speed will slow, and become smoother when a vacuum leak is stopped. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/24/11 at 07:58:08 "The fact is, it doesn't consume any vacuum to operate a vacuum petcock." Some how energy is used to pull the spring in the petcock and the rubber vac line acts like a spring as well. This is what I meant by "using" vacuum. That energy is now available some where else. Simple enough to verify- set your pc to prime, pull the vac line off the carb and cover the nipple on the carb with your thumb. Does your idle increase? Years ago I installed an aftermarket cruise control on a Land Cruiser. I found that it would slow down while going up even gentle hills. The problem was that there was not enough vacuum generated by the engine to keep the diaphragm open in the cc actuator. (the vac line also ran the power brakes). The solution was to make a vacuum reservoir. I took one out of an old Volvo (everything was run with vacuum on old Volvo's) and put it on the vacuum line with a check valve at each end. Worked a charm. That "savings" in vacuum when using the Raptor has to benefit something. Unfortunately I don't know enough about carbs to figure out exactly what. :-? "and most times the idle speed will slow, and become smoother when a vacuum leak (use) is stopped." Doesn't this kind of prove my point? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/24/11 at 08:36:16 ...either way,... that Raptor is definitely easier to turn, and it'll be still be easy 3 years from now... Easier to remove the tank, too... ;)... I don't know why the idle went up either... a fixed leak would do as Routy said,... I don't know about the vac energy change... my car does drop in idle when I apply the brakes at a light, and it's in neutral... ...maybe it's just excited about getting the new Raptor... ;D... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/24/11 at 11:00:12 It probably drops rpm when you put the brakes on because of the increased load on the alternator. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/24/11 at 11:16:22 Hmmm,... maybe some LED tailights would be good... :-?... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/24/11 at 18:31:49 I hate to be picky, but, hey,.. it is Saturday night,... and this stuff is fun to chat about! ;D This statement is true: "The fact is, it doesn't consume any vacuum to operate a vacuum petcock." If there are no leaks, the vacuum applies a small amount of force to move the diaphragm/valve/spring/whatever,.. and no more vacuum activity takes place,.. simply a static force doing no work, and, therefore, using no energy. This statement is technically incorrect: "Some how energy is used to pull the spring in the petcock and the rubber vac line acts like a spring as well. This is what I meant by "using" vacuum. That energy is now available some where else." It is a force that moves the stuff in the vacuum petcock, not energy. There is no energy gained or lost when the vacuum petcock is opened or closed by vacuum. There is no energy freed up to be used somewhere else. If the vacuum operated systems put such a huge load on the vacuum source so that there is not enough vacuum FORCE available, then you have some other issues to address, but there is no ENERGY being transferred through the vacuum line, since we don't have things like vacuum-operated windshield wipers as installed on my Dad's 54 Chevy. Now, what does all this have to do with this thread? -- If the bike runs better when the vacuum lines are plugged up and a Raptor petcock is installed, it is because vacuum leaks were eliminated, and/or constrictions in the petcock were removed. -- If the bike runs better when a new vacuum-operated petcock is installed and the vacuum lines are connected properly (meaning leak-free), it runs better for exactly the same reasons. Either way, if you get rid of the malfunctioning parts, and install good parts (Raptor or stock), you will get an adequate fuel flow to the carb. Either way, there is no energy being used or saved, vacuum-wise. I love this stuff! |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/24/11 at 18:55:06 Ahh haa!,... so I was right!... The bike is just excited about getting a new petcock... ... aren't they cute when they get a new toy.... ;D... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by verslagen1 on 09/24/11 at 19:00:38 7D4348555855583A0 wrote:
Technically, you're incorrect. The work done is very small. So the energy used is very small. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/24/11 at 19:02:21 I'm glad that there is at least one person here that understands and agrees w/ what I said in the first place. Thanks bob,....you said it well. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/24/11 at 20:14:40 7B687F7E616C6A68633C0D0 wrote:
Technically, you're incorrect. The work done is very small. So the energy used is very small.[/quote] Okay, okay,... There is work done, and energy used in order to move the diaphragm a tenth of an inch to open up the valve to let the fuel flow. It is a tiny force applied for an instant to move the diaphragm. Once the diaphragm is moved, no more work is being done. I'd wager the amount of energy used would be less than an erg,... less than one billionth of a horsepower, corrected for time. This amount of energy is small compared to the amount of work being done by the engine. It is like comparing the amount of energy used for your Nikon Coolpix to take a picture of a space shuttle taking off, to the amount of energy used by the space shuttle taking off. Space shuttles notwithstanding, a Raptor petcock, for all of its advantages, does not free up any energy to be used elsewhere. BTW, both our bikes in the Double RYCA build have had the stock vacuum petcocks replaced with,....... wait for it,.................. RAPTORS!!!!!! yay |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 04:30:05 It takes force to hold that spring open. If you compress a spring between your fingers you are using force, and expending energy. If you put that spring on a scale and compress it you can figure out how much energy. With the raptor, the force to hold the petcock open translates to a bit more vacuum at the throat of the carb. More vacuum pulls more air and more air pulls more fuel. Not much maybe but some. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/25/11 at 04:59:44 Why did your idle pick up 200 rpm from changing the petcock to a Raptor? Because your bike took one more step towards being a true pork eating Carnivore !! -------------------------- Seriously, you capped off a potential vac suction leak draw point .... .... and you made sure your bowl was always full right up to the top fill point at all times. Either (or both acting together) may have richened your idle mixture slightly enough to make your idle speed go up a little bit. Plus the fact you are running the snot out of your bike now since it is running better for you, so you are getting your engine loosened up a bit more than you used to (and your idle speed goes up a bit for that reason too). |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/25/11 at 06:04:09 2E25252C202F2E3435410 wrote:
Sorry, but you have a misconception about force and energy. They are not the same. When you sit on the floor, your ass is exerting a force on the floor. If you sit there motionless for an hour, the force does not change. There is no work being done; no energy being used. This statement is not correct. "With the raptor, the force to hold the petcock open translates to a bit more vacuum at the throat of the carb." Once the diaphragm is moved, there is a force still there, but no energy being used. There is no air flowing through the vacuum line, therefore the vacuum at the throat of the carb is the same with the Raptor petcock and the stock petcock. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 07:16:24 Gyro: the force of gravity keeps your a$$ on the floor. ;D The kind of force we are talking about is called "elastic potential energy" This is the force required to keep the springs (don't forget the vacuum line is a spring as well) at tension. Energy is expended to apply this force. This may (or may not) help explain what I am talking about: When I was in HS our science teacher attempted to demonstrate how water will boil in a vacuum. He put a beaker of water under a bell jar and began pumping the air out with a vacuum pump. Nothing happened. The spring (the air in the jar) was too strong for the vacuum pump to lower the vacuum enough to boil the water. I suspended a balloon in the jar full of water, inflated it some to displace some water, hooked the balloon up to the same vacuum pump and turned it on. Nothing happened for some seconds, then all of a sudden the balloon deflated and the water boiled off enough vapor to displace the volume of air in the balloon. Why? Because the spring (air in the balloon) was a lot smaller than before. The vacuum pump had to keep applying force to maintain the vacuum in the bell jar. I closed the valve on the vacuum line and shut off the pump. Then the force of the difference of pressure, in this case elastic potential energy, kept the balloon deflated. My point here is that energy is used to keep tension on any spring. If I had a vacuum gauge I could calculate how much energy is needed to keep the petcock open. Vacuum in a carb can be created in two ways: resistance to airflow caused by the air filter, and air flowing over an orifice in the carb. Putting in a less restrictive filter allows more air which pulls more fuel (assuming your jet system will supply it). Same thing if you plug the orifice, as you do when installing raptor. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 07:34:03 Another thought: the vacuum that was being used to hold the petcock open is now being used to raise the slider a bit more. yes? no? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/25/11 at 07:55:53 No. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 08:01:52 333C263D212734363E3027550 wrote:
Explain, please? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by verslagen1 on 09/25/11 at 09:01:08 The fact that the vac petcock is there does not effect the average vacuum per se, only the volume. So the only effect is to create a tiny lag in response. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 09:10:05 OK thanks. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/25/11 at 10:29:52 5B505059555A5B4140340 wrote:
Explain, please?[/quote] To hold the valve open, the vacuum has to be there, and it must stay there, and it will stay there as long as the engine is running. So it is fact that energy is being used, (gasoline) and vacuum is being used but not consumed, therefore there is no reserve vacuum left after changing to the Raptor to be used for anything else that actually consumes vacuum (like vac wipers), nor does the vacuum increase for lack of the valve. Change it to an air pressure operated valve,....same thing,....air pressure must be there and stay there, and that consumes energy, (motor running) but again, no air is being consumed, so if you take the valve away, there is no air reserve left over to operate anything else that actually consumes air, nor does the air pressure increase. But then, you knew all that ;) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by HJH on 09/25/11 at 12:47:57 Are you kids ever going to quit fighting? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 13:43:18 Who is fighting???? We had a discussion and I learned a few things. :) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/25/11 at 15:59:32 585A58100 wrote:
HUH ?? Whats that about ?? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/25/11 at 17:13:03 78776D766A6C7F7D757B6C1E0 wrote:
HUH ?? Whats that about ?? [/quote] HJH just forgot to insert the smiley to show us all he was teasing us. Right, HJH? I hope the issue is settled now. (not that it matters very much) To sum up, there is no energy used to keep the vacuum petcock open. There is only a force used, not energy (or work done). IOW, the level of vacuum downstream of the carb is the same for a stock petcock and a Raptor petcock. :) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by gerald.hughes on 09/25/11 at 17:20:01 I am a little confused. Have the "Petcock" wars replaced the "Oil" wars? What is the petcock equivalent of Klotz? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/25/11 at 17:22:02 6361766568602A6C71636C6177040 wrote:
Raptor |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by drums1 on 09/25/11 at 18:13:40 So, if Raptor is to petcock, as Klotz is to oil, then I assume, since you have Raptors on the twin RYCA bikes, you also use Klotz in them both also ?? ::) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/25/11 at 19:13:32 4C5A5D455B19280 wrote:
cute! Your "logic" is entertaining, but I would submit that a Raptor is a change from original configuration while using Klotz is just another acceptable alternative -- no change in configuration. Anyway, I was only being a smart aleck when I said "Raptor" in response to Gerald's question. FWIW, and at the risk of reigniting another "war",... our bikes will be using Rotella Synth. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Routy on 09/25/11 at 19:36:13 Quote: It is a tiny force applied for an instant to move the diaphragm. Once the diaphragm is moved, no more work is being done. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I was under the impression that the valve is "normally closed", which means it is held open against spring pressure. If this is true, then the quoted statement is incorrect. That doesn't change anything, but thats beside the point,......ain't it ? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/25/11 at 19:45:08 +1 |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/26/11 at 05:46:10 3C3329322E283B39313F285A0 wrote:
Yes, the valve is normally closed when the engine is not running. The spring holds the valve in the closed position. Start the engine and vacuum is applied to the diaphragm in the petcock. The vacuum lowers the pressure on one side of the diaphragm, sucking it to move against the spring pressure, opening the valve, letting fuel get to the carb. In any event, there is no work being done by the vacuum once the diaphragm is moved and the fuel starts to flow. The tiny bit of work being done happens in the blink of an eye, and is completely finished once the valve has been opened. The vacuum situation downstream of the carb, then, is exactly the same for both types of petcocks, Raptor or stock. There is no energy being used to hold the fuel valve in the petcock open. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/26/11 at 11:08:38 OK what does hold it open and what is it called? force? work? energy? magic? If it is a force, what kind is it? Where does it go when you don't need it anymore? :-? :-? :-? :-? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by HJH on 09/26/11 at 11:22:03 And after all of this, have any opinions about the correctness of the petcock fix(or not) changed? Reminds me of discussions of trucks, cars, women, guns, politics, religions, and brands of beer. Lots of verbiage from the competing(discussing) parties, and the rest of us just do it or not, based on the information supplied, without engaging in the discussion. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by arteacher on 09/26/11 at 11:30:29 This all started when I asked why my idle went up after I changed petcocks. I still haven't gotten an answer. :'( :'( You were busy at the time and just didn't notice it .... Seriously, you capped off a potential vac suction leak draw point .... .... and you made sure your bowl was always full right up to the top fill point at all times. Either (or both acting together) may have richened your idle mixture slightly enough to make your idle speed go up a little bit. Plus the fact you are running the snot out of your bike now since it is running better for you, so you are getting your engine loosened up a bit more than you used to (and your idle speed goes up a bit for that reason too). |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/26/11 at 13:28:50 7F74747D717E7F6564100 wrote:
A force holds it open. --- The force is supplied by the intake vacuum working on one side of the diaphragm. This force is enough to overcome the spring force trying to hold the petcock valve closed. --- When the engine is shut off, the vacuum goes away, which removes the hold-the-valve-open force from the diaphragm. The force from the spring then pushes the diaphragm back, closing the valve, shutting off the fuel. There's probably more than one reason why your idle rpm increased when you changed petcocks. My main suspicion would be that you had a leak somewhere in the vacuum line going from the carb to the petcock, or in the petcock diaphragm itself. When you replaced the petcock, you coincidentally fixed the leak, causing the increase in rpm. This should also have resulted in a smoother idle. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/26/11 at 13:47:47 7C7E7C340 wrote:
You are correct, methinks. :) This discussion is one those just like those categories you mentioned. Guys who like revolvers will never like semi-autos. Liberals and conservatives will never see eye to eye. Loud pipe guys think loud pipes are great, quiet pipe guys think quiet pipes are great. Raptor petcock guys vs stock petcock guys,,.... so on and so forth. Some folks feel the stock Suzuki parts work just fine when in good repair, and have the advantages of convenience (not messing with the petcock after every ride) and safety (the fuel shuts off when the engine shuts off). Some folks feel the Raptor petcock is more reliable, more positive, easier to work with because it is smaller, and is more safe because it is less likely to fail in traffic. It's cheaper too. Take your pick. One other thing to keep in mind,.. we are not talking megabucks or major modifications here. If you change from one petcock to the other, and after a while you don't like it, change it BACK! Change it every month, FCS. It's not like you are converting to a RYCA CS-1 or something,... |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |