|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1317153881 Message started by paramedic9004 on 09/27/11 at 13:04:41 |
|
Title: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by paramedic9004 on 09/27/11 at 13:04:41 So I am relatively new to this forum. After countless hours of reading about my minor issues, I decided to attempt a few suggestions posted prior to asking questions. 06 model. Stock everything. Just purchased this for a little project bike after seeing the mods that can be done in the Bobber scene. (Die Hard Triumph Guy). Long story short...bike won't go over 60 mph. So I get to reading. First thing I have noticed is that folks wanna pull the carb and rejet or clean or what not. Others say petcock. Others may argue it's the paint color or a leaking gas cap. So I started with easiest and most inexpensive. Change the gasket on gas cap. No Dice Raptor 660 petcock ordered. Install Raptor (5 minutes). Winner winner chicken dinner. So, I decided to post this to see if we could get the ole' petcock debate rolling again. ;D I am sold on the Raptor. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Bubba on 09/27/11 at 13:18:01 to Raptor or not to Raptor, that is the question.... I also had an '06...first time I rode to work in the cold it cut out as I was coasting up to a light. Pulled to the side, gave it lot's of gas and hit the ignition...finally turned over and I revved the throttle all the way to work to keep it from dying at every light. Temps warmed up during the day and ran fine. This sceanario played out twice after this. I ordered a Raptor before ever doing the official petcock test. I've NEVER had the problem since. I HAVE done other mods since then but this was the first one. I'm convinced... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/27/11 at 14:06:08 I wonder how many miracles credited to the Raptor were simply a vacuum leak fixed by working with the vacuum hose -- either by replacing it or snipping off the end and using some unstretched tubing or just sealing better because of the twisting/pulling/etc. from the petcock install. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Bubba on 09/27/11 at 14:14:30 beats me but for 20 bucks a raptor has taken any vac problems out of the equation... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/27/11 at 15:40:45 Yep, Raptor goes in and it no longer matters which of the 5-6 odd vac petcock scenarios was a workin' the evil (along with something else, most likely). Like the man said "Winner Winner, chicken dinner !!" It all goes away and STAYS AWAY forever -- which none of you vac fiddlers seem to get in your vac fiddler thinking -- it NEVER comes back in any of its forms or fashions. ENDED FOREVER |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by MrBrownTX on 09/27/11 at 16:01:45 183B3331323B3B3225570 wrote:
That's sound logic to me |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Routy on 09/27/11 at 17:18:09 If any person is too ignorant to trouble shoot anything, must less understand how it works, or what makes it work, or why it was installed in the first place, then it may appear to be smart to take the simple no brainer way out,....like do the Raptor. But just be advised that you not only did away w/ a "could be" important safety device, and that you must now remember to shut off the fuel, and when you don't, and all of a sudden one day your engine is noisy as hell,.........so you stop and check your oil, and it appears to be empty, when in reality its way over full w/ gasoline, and worse yet it costs you a major......because the crankshaft doesn't really like being lubricated w/ gasoline......or if you ever go down (god forbid) and a fire erupts because the vac petcock did not shut the fuel off when the engine quit running,......or the carb overflowed running raw gasoline to your nearby water heater in your garage, and your house goes phoof !!!Berooooooommm,.......if you're still alive, don't come a snibblin over here,.......cuz I'll be here just waiting !! :o |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/27/11 at 17:38:28 Routy's right... gas in your oil is a bad, bad thing!... I've had it twice,..... ...when my stock vacuum operated petcock leaked down the vacuum line... :-?... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Arizuno on 09/27/11 at 17:45:52 I'll bite - and not to be argumentative. How does the stock vacuum petcock perform as a safety device? And why not offset its various issues, as frequently reported here, with a simpler device that when it's off it's OFF? My first M/C, lo these many decades ago, had such a petcock and for me at least turning it to "off" was simply a part of shutting off the bike. If this is safety vs. KISS principle, please 'splain. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Serowbot on 09/27/11 at 18:40:20 Az,.. if you go down,... and manage to do it on the left side, and kill the engine, and the tank isn't ruptured... ...the vac petcock will stop a fuel leak... providing that it's working after the accident... I'd call it a 35% safety... :-?... left side... 50%... Engine dies... 70%... tank and petcock in tact... 80%... ___________ all three happen at once... 35%... ... 'course, this only matters if the bike would have caught fire... I've been down a few times,... even under a truck, and never caught fire... ... chance of fire... maybe 5%... 35% of 5%... = about 2%... 2% chance it will ever help you in a crash... :-?... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/27/11 at 18:48:49 You're asking Routy to explain his vac petcock beliefs? Good luck there -- nobody has gotten a concise sensible answer from him yet as he has no personal experience at all with vac petcock failures and he only has his interpretations of what he remembers of other people's statements to share with you. And we all enjoy correcting his misinterpretations of what we have said in the past -- it is kinda like a little hobby. ========== Vac petcocks are intended to be a convienience and a safety factor as they are intended to stop all gas movement when the engine isn't running. In theory, this would be nice. The IMPLEMENTATION of this "sounds good" idea is flawed very badly on the Savage because we don't have a mulicylinder smmooooth large steady vacuum action on our big single, we have a bunch of sharp separate vac pulses that vary in frequency and amplitude according to how hard we are on the throttle and how many rpms the engine is turning. Our output vac gas flow is the same way, gas pulses of varying frequency and amplitude in proportion to what the engine fed into the vac petcock's input tube. Experience has taught us that the resulting gas flow does not always meet the needs of the engine, and the engine gas starves and can die on you in traffic. Now Routy will say something and somebody else will say something and our second most favorite endless debate will go on unimpeded for as long as anybody will respond to the last thing said ..... ;) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Gyrobob on 09/27/11 at 19:26:58 I wonder what it is about the Savage petcock that generates such passion. The last 11 motorcycles I have owned all had vacuum-operated petcocks. None ever had a problem. Some of those bikes were fairly old, too. One had 80,000 miles on it. No petcock malfunctions. Ever. Maybe Suzuki subcontracted the petcock contract to a fuel systems vendor that had unionized labor. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/27/11 at 20:17:07 Actually, it is the SAME vac petcock that was used on a lot of Suzuki bikes from the same era -- inline4s, big V twins -- engines that offered more vac and a more steady vac to run the thing. Bill makes the point he owned a few of these with the same vac petcock and had no issues with them. However, if either of you will state the bike and the year you think is flawless enough to hold up your point then 5-10 minutes on the net going to the applicable bike fan site might find some discussions of vac petcock issues that you were unaware of with those same "flawless" bikes. I'd be surprised if any vac petcock that depends on a "gasoline soaked on one side/vac on the other side" style cloth/rubber diaphragm isn't going to have some long term issues with stiffening and cracking. I think ours is just very noticiable because we lack an oversuppy of vacuum to operate it and the marginal conditions bite us in the ass more than on other V engined or inline4 engined bikes .... Plus, that constant big single intake pulsation actuation has got to fatique the rubber/cloth matrix more than say a inline4 would do. And all that big single pulse based constant flexing back & forth between open and shut has got to be hard on the vac petcock valve/seat too ... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Routy on 09/27/11 at 20:34:59 142A213C313C31530 wrote:
Simple answer, .....ignorance, brainwashing, and the suckers that fall for it all. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 09/27/11 at 21:02:13 And, all you ignorant, brainwashed suckers out there on the list say ..... ?? :-? |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by RidgeRunner13 on 09/27/11 at 22:42:57 I got my first Savage in 1988. I quickly learned that it popped less & ran better with the petcock set on prime. If I ran in the on position I could tell when I was getting low on gas because it popped more on decel. I've also had a 2000 & still own a 2001. The '01 is the only one to get the raptor because the stock p/c started leaking. The vacuum p/c would probably work better IF they had used a vacuum reservoir. When you run one hard & pull a trailer like I have, there is just not enough vacuum to keep full fuel flow to the carb. Believe what you want but that vacuum p/c is responsible for the bike running even leaner than the factory intended. Like I said, I've had 3 Savages going back to '88 & ran everyone in prime until recently when I put a raptor on the '01.I've never had one flood like you worry so much about. If the needle & seat in the carb are working correctly, It WON'T leak gas. Running an inline fuel filter will help insure you won't have a problem. BTW, I'm a professional mechanic & have maintained all my bikes going back to 1967. I've also worked on whatever bikes my friends own, including the Hyusong 650 one of them owns. If you run up on one of them, be prepared to be out run cause they are way faster than the Savage. 8-) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Bubba on 09/28/11 at 07:47:24 If/when I crash I'm not gonna be thinking about if my petcock is gonna be leaking... I'll be more concerned about where I'm gonna be leaking...just sayin' |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Sunchasers on 10/11/11 at 21:03:12 In the end, everyone has to make their own decision based on their particular problems and preferences whether to Raptorize or keep the stock vac petcock.... "to each their own" persay. All I know is that installing the Raptor solved the problems I was experiencing with fuel starvation on my '88. Could have rebuilding the stock petcock done the same thing?....probably so, but now I don't have to consider petcock vacuum issues with future troubleshooting. My preference is for the old standard of ON-OFF-RES petcock and I am willing to risk other possible "dangers" that may come with it. For me, I prefer manually shutting off / turning on the gas and it's second nature as part of my startup or shut down routine. The great thing about this mod or change is that it's not irreversible. You can always change back if you choose to do so, or if you decide to sell and the buyer wants the stock vac petcock. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Arizuno on 10/28/11 at 16:42:54 Oh, boy. A month ago yesterday I chimed in on this thread with some questions. A couple of weeks after that, cruising at 50-55 MPH my engine went silent. Thought it might be low fuel, so switched to Reserve, restarted bike (with more than usual cranking to get going), rode 8-10 miles to nearest gas station - and put in all of 1.7 gallons. Since low fuel clearly wasn't the problem, I concluded I must have inadvertently hit the kill switch whilst changing my grip (and didn't note at the time the position of said switch before I restarted). Took a quick +/- 150 mi. round trip to Seligman (living monument to Route 66) today. Once each way had the above-described experience of sponaneous silence, only this time no question of low fuel or kill-swiktch activation. And each time it took a few extra cranks to get fire up. Dry carb? I'll cop to being among the least mechanically adept members of this forum, so: 1. Raptor time? 2.. If so, good on-line source? 3. Routy, I admire and respect you, but if a simple fix will eliminate the problem, I'm goin' with it. (But thanks!). And thanks to all who humor me in my sometimes-vacuous (couldn't help it) contributions to the great forum. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Serowbot on 10/28/11 at 17:00:09 Ariz... This is not the only possibility for your problem... I've had similar random engine cuts caused by a bad kickstand or clutch lever cut-out connector... try disconnecting and reconnecting those... If you decide it's the petcock... ...check for any fuel leakage in your vacuum hose... if you don't have any,.. it's likely that just replacing that hose and clamping it down well, will fix the problem for $2... 'till the hose goes again in a year or two... ... or a Raptor will fix it more permanently,.. and make tank removal easier... your choice... ;)... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by built2last66 on 10/28/11 at 17:09:47 Can Sea Foam or a louder muffler help your petcock? ;D |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Arizuno on 10/28/11 at 17:50:54 Serowbot: Thanks. The reason I suspect the petcock is the number of spins it takes to re-start after each episode, much more than any other time, which I'm inclined to think is caused by a temporary absence of combustibles. But I'll check per your suggestions. built2last66: Thank you, too, but I only use Sea Foam in my turn signals. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Serowbot on 10/28/11 at 18:31:02 Prolly right... I have to offer other possibilities and options for political reasons... ;D... :-?... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by ziggy on 10/28/11 at 18:36:18 Suzuki Savage has been around for a long long time so how is it possible that they can't come up witrh a trouble free vacuum petcock if thats what they want to use? Whats safe about fuel leaking down a vacuum line because the diaphragm is shot in the petcock?Bike manufacturers should be at their best if they want to keep their customers and deal with ongoing problems quickly and yes they are giving my wife a free Vacuum operated Petcock for her 2010 under warranty but that doesnt solve the issue.We ride 20,000KM every year and i'm not doing that with a Suzuki Vacuum Operated Petcock.I have already broke down once a thousand miles from home and i will not break down a 1000 miles from home over a Vacuum Operated Petcock or i'm the idiot! |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 10/28/11 at 18:41:02 I don't -- but I be well known to be politically inkerect and often iggnoraunt. :-? (but too too often right, so woe is you if you heed not ... ) Sounds like Ziggy has done figured it out and has him the right pirate mindset. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Serowbot on 10/28/11 at 19:01:05 Ziggy,... if you do a Google search for "vacuum petcock" , you'll see, it's not just a Savage or Suzuki problem... Yamaha's, Harley's, Honda's, Kawa's... it's just the nature of the beast... Anything that adds complexity, usually adds to failures... Raptor is simple... simple is why I ride a thumper... ;)... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by verslagen1 on 10/30/11 at 14:09:52 Here's a test for those of you that have access to both petcocks... Use the same trick we use to check the float level. Attach a clear line to the bottom of the bowl... Run the line up at least as high as the vent tubes... Run it along side the carb so you can see if the level of gas is at the gasket for the bowl. Of course the trick is to check the level while going flat out. 'bot, this would be a good application of that key fob camera. as soon as I can get some line I'll give it a try. [smiley=thumbsup.gif] |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by bill67 on 10/30/11 at 16:34:58 I've had a lot of bikes mostly Suzuki's never any trouble with the petcocks.I think because I keep them in a garage their alway dry and don't get the night moisture and dry during the day,Also if you live in the south with the high temperatures its probably rough on the hoses,Never had to replace a hose either. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Johansson on 10/30/11 at 16:53:45 Never had a petcock problem? The last time I looked virtually every motorcycle made has the gas tank higher than the motor. That is why there is a shutoff valve for the fuel, so that the gas won't leak into the motor. To the best of my recollection, I have had a problem with the petcock on every bike I've owned. Forget to shut the gas off and you think that your float valve needle seat is protecting you? Right. Leave it over winter like that once. Trailer your bike, leave that petcock on. Really, you're ok, you have float protection. Thats foolish. The gas flow has to be shut off every time the motorcyle is parked. The float can stick at anytime and the float should not ever be relied upon to stop fuel leakage. Petcocks go bad, manual or vacuum. Every vacuum operated valve I have had has gone bad. Most of the manual valves I've had needed a rebuild or two, yea, they'll leak too. Or just plumb wear out, or the handle breaks off. I don't care to rely on factory petcocks if I am keeping the bike. I buy a pingel valve at the first sign of petcock problems for my peace of mind. On my Savage, which was purchased with a bad petcock, I installed a small stainless steel ball valve inline, run the stock petcock on prime, plugged the vacuum ports and it runs fine. I fill up everytime the odometer rolls over at hundred miles so not having reserve is not a problem. This works well for me as I only ride this bike around town. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Serowbot on 10/30/11 at 19:15:45 43454E53454D4C13260 wrote:
Reminds me of that,... "You know you're a redneck if..." "your working TV is sitting on top of your non-working TV"... No offense intended... it works... Just thought it was funny... PS... and I currently have my working guitar amp, sitting on top of my non working guitar amp... P'ownd myself!... ;D ;D ;D... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by justin_o_guy2 on 10/30/11 at 23:50:09 3127302D35202D36420 wrote:
Reminds me of that,... "You know you're a redneck if..." "your working TV is sitting on top of your non-working TV"... No offense intended... it works... Just thought it was funny... PS... and I currently have my working guitar amp, sitting on top of my non working guitar amp... P'ownd myself!... ;D ;D ;D... [/quote] I had a friend who just never quite managed to do allright. He had a 4 year degree from UT Austin. He was an accountant. He had 2 TVs when he died, One, had audio, the other had a picture. One sat on the other, with a newspaper covering the screen. Stylin Baby! |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by bill67 on 10/31/11 at 05:32:23 I have noticed that people with college degrees are clever like that,I guess it wasn't a waste of time. |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 10/31/11 at 06:36:22 756671706F6264666D32030 wrote:
============================ Verslagen is in personal possession of a Raptor petcock now and is ready to do some comparative analysis --- Routy, do you have one yet so you can do the same thing? Unless you have both or have used both, how can you ever form a real opinion? ;) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by verslagen1 on 10/31/11 at 07:27:14 0E2D2527242D2D2433410 wrote:
============================ Verslagen is in personal possession of a Raptor petcock now and is ready to do some comparative analysis --- Routy, do you have one yet so you can do the same thing? Unless you have both or have used both, how can you ever form a real opinion? ;) [/quote] Why? did you send me one? Hasn't come in the mail yet. got a tracking number? 8-) |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by Oldfeller on 10/31/11 at 11:39:38 "as soon as I get some line (fuel line?) I'll give it a try." Inference is that you have both on hand now .... |
|
Title: Re: Fuel Starvation vs. Petcock Post by verslagen1 on 10/31/11 at 11:44:07 183B3331323B3B3225570 wrote:
Ahhh... and the call out to 'bot to test his didn't infer something else? Still stock, and working w/o any trouble with the new engine. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |