# do i need a fuel return line?



## busaben (Oct 30, 2008)

hey guys, do i need a return line on my 67 lemans with a 400? my aftermarket fuel pump does not seem to have any provisions for one, and my new tank does not have one, but i could have swore my car used to have one( but then again, everything has changed on the car since i started 3 years ago)


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

They help. A more efficient set up is to run the return line off of the fuel filter, as done on the '66 and early '67 cars. They weren't run off of the pump. Running the return off of the filter keeps the fuel up near the carb that much cooler. You'll need the filter, lines, hoses, and bracket. If you are not experiencing vapor lock issues, though, you'll be fine without the return.


----------



## lars (Sep 28, 2004)

I've posted a bunch of info and photos on this over on the Corvette Forum. Follow my posts and links from here:

Edelbrock 1721 Fuel Pump conversion HELP - Corvette Forum

Lars


----------



## busaben (Oct 30, 2008)

many thanks, i ran a new supply and return when i had the chassis apart, started putting things together, then saw my sending unit only had one line (supply) do they make another sending unit that has a return?


----------



## Topkat (Sep 9, 2010)

I have a 67 GTO and had the fuel return line deleted. The new tank sending unit didnt use it. The shop plugged the return line on my pump and everything works great!
good luck my man


----------



## 05GTO (Oct 6, 2004)

You can delete the return line without any problems, just keep the fuel line inside the frame thru the engine compartment and exit the line in the front of the cross member just under the fuel pump to protect it from the exhaust manifold heat. The return vapor line was used on cars with A/C to correct the vapor lock problem.

JMHO


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

In Oregon, where Topkat lives, no worries. It's nice and cool. I had the fuel return bypassed on my '67 for years when I lived in the SF Bay Area, on the coast, with no problem. When I went on trips through the hot desert regions and when I moved to nice sunny Central California,though, BIG problem. I restored the fuel return and the car runs great in hot weather now (no hesitation or fuel percolating issues). So, it depends on where you live: how hot it is and how volatile the fuel you're using is. The older stuff seemed much less prone to boiling and evaporating.


----------



## busaben (Oct 30, 2008)

thanks guys, i went ahead and ordered the sending unit with a return, and am going to put on a correct fuel pump. whats a few more parts when the hard part (new return line) is freashly installed? at least it should not be a broblem lingering in the back of my mind


----------



## Shooter (Nov 7, 2015)

*Correct Fuel Pump for This set up?*

Geeteeohgy,
I'm trying to identify the correct fuel pump for my '67/400 and now have entered into the "well, do you have a return line or not?" discussion. Hmmm. For the configuration you're suggesting with the return coming off the fuel filter, I would need a fuel pump without vapor return/vent (Ames part #N128PH ) versus a fuel pump with vapor return (Ames part #N128PJ ), correct? So what fuel filter would I purchase that has an outlet for the return? or do i splice the fuel line at some other point and put a tee in it with a return to the tank?

"They help. A more efficient set up is to run the return line off of the fuel filter, as done on the '66 and early '67 cars. They weren't run off of the pump. Running the return off of the filter keeps the fuel up near the carb that much cooler. You'll need the filter, lines, hoses, and bracket. If you are not experiencing vapor lock issues, though, you'll be fine without the return?

Shooter


----------

