Pennock's Fiero Forum
  Technical Discussion & Questions
  DW 200/300 Fuel Pumps

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version


next newest topic | next oldest topic
DW 200/300 Fuel Pumps by hnthomps
Started on: 04-07-2013 04:27 AM
Replies: 25 (850 views)
Last post by: diabloroadster on 07-03-2013 10:02 PM
hnthomps
Member
Posts: 5434
From: Columbia, SC
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score:    (18)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 50
Rate this member

Report this Post04-07-2013 04:27 AM Click Here to See the Profile for hnthompsClick Here to Email hnthompsSend a Private Message to hnthompsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
How many people have used this fuel pump in an 88 Fiero tank and were the results acceptable for an upgraded engine (3800 SC Series II with 3.4 pulley). I am particularly interested in whether the universal fit version is relatively easy to install in an 88 tank. Did the universal install kit allow a quick installation in the Fiero tank?

Nelson
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
DimeMachine
Member
Posts: 778
From: Eastern Metro, Minnesota, USA
Registered: Sep 2011


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post04-07-2013 10:22 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DimeMachineSend a Private Message to DimeMachineEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by hnthomps:

How many people have used this fuel pump in an 88 Fiero tank and were the results acceptable for an upgraded engine (3800 SC Series II with 3.4 pulley). I am particularly interested in whether the universal fit version is relatively easy to install in an 88 tank. Did the universal install kit allow a quick installation in the Fiero tank?

Nelson


Justinbart and dark horizon swear by these pumps. I will be getting the DW300 shortly as I am leaning towards trying E85 this summer and these pumps have worked super for DH and JB.
IP: Logged
MstangsBware
Member
Posts: 11509
From: TEXAS
Registered: Mar 2002


Feedback score:    (108)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 459
Rate this member

Report this Post04-07-2013 07:14 PM Click Here to See the Profile for MstangsBwareClick Here to Email MstangsBwareSend a Private Message to MstangsBwareEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I swapped in an 88 tank into an 86 today with a DW300 pump. Swapped over sending units with no issues at all. The filter is a little odd on it cause it comes off the side but didn't make it difficult to install.
IP: Logged
hnthomps
Member
Posts: 5434
From: Columbia, SC
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score:    (18)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 50
Rate this member

Report this Post04-08-2013 12:11 PM Click Here to See the Profile for hnthompsClick Here to Email hnthompsSend a Private Message to hnthompsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by MstangsBware:

I swapped in an 88 tank into an 86 today with a DW300 pump. Swapped over sending units with no issues at all. The filter is a little odd on it cause it comes off the side but didn't make it difficult to install.


Do you have any recommendations wrt the pump (200 or 300) for a stock 3800 SC Series II with a 3.4 pulley? It appears that the 200 will work for the stock engine and I do not have any real plans to upgrade the engine further. Is it worth the extra $60 for peace of mind?

Nelson
IP: Logged
darkhorizon
Member
Posts: 12193
From: Flint Michigan
Registered: Jan 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 450
Rate this member

Report this Post04-08-2013 12:22 PM Click Here to See the Profile for darkhorizonSend a Private Message to darkhorizonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
It is always a good idea to upgrade wiring when going to these high output fuel pumps.

I might not run a 300 unless you plan on making north of 350whp. The 200 or even the big GM/delco pumps are probably a better bang per buck.
IP: Logged
GraterFang
Member
Posts: 1369
From: Corvallis, OR
Registered: Feb 2008


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post04-08-2013 01:42 PM Click Here to See the Profile for GraterFangClick Here to Email GraterFangSend a Private Message to GraterFangEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I'm running one of these as well now. Much better than the walbro I had in there before (which after only 1.5 yrs was already giving me fuel starvation issues at WOT). Even simply in terms of noise its a vast improvement and I expect it to last longer as well. Install was simple for me as the pump was almost identical in terms of physical dimensions and wiring.
IP: Logged
hnthomps
Member
Posts: 5434
From: Columbia, SC
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score:    (18)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 50
Rate this member

Report this Post04-09-2013 05:04 AM Click Here to See the Profile for hnthompsClick Here to Email hnthompsSend a Private Message to hnthompsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:

It is always a good idea to upgrade wiring when going to these high output fuel pumps.

I might not run a 300 unless you plan on making north of 350whp. The 200 or even the big GM/delco pumps are probably a better bang per buck.


Thanks for the recommendation. This engine will stay stock except for the 3.4 pulley. The last dyno indicated 258 hp and 300 ft/lbs torque at the wheel on this engine so it looks as if the DW 200 pump will work well for this application. This sucker has been eating fuel pumps (3 so far) and I think that it must be the alcohol chewing up the pump seals. Since the DW 200 is supposed to work on high alcohol fuels, I will give it a try.

Nelson

edited to correct HP typo.

[This message has been edited by hnthomps (edited 04-09-2013).]

IP: Logged
DimeMachine
Member
Posts: 778
From: Eastern Metro, Minnesota, USA
Registered: Sep 2011


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post04-09-2013 07:51 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DimeMachineSend a Private Message to DimeMachineEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Edited - no longer applies.

[This message has been edited by DimeMachine (edited 04-11-2013).]

IP: Logged
olejoedad
Member
Posts: 14015
From: Clarendon Twp., MI
Registered: May 2004


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 188
Rate this member

Report this Post04-09-2013 08:12 AM Click Here to See the Profile for olejoedadClick Here to Email olejoedadSend a Private Message to olejoedadEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by DimeMachine:


Not to be a weenie, but how does a 240 hp engine with a 3.4 pulley (adds about 30 hp) end up with 358hp? I come up with about 270ish...AT THE CRANK...

Look at the torque number - its probably a typo....
IP: Logged
hnthomps
Member
Posts: 5434
From: Columbia, SC
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score:    (18)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 50
Rate this member

Report this Post04-09-2013 10:56 AM Click Here to See the Profile for hnthompsClick Here to Email hnthompsSend a Private Message to hnthompsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

Look at the torque number - its probably a typo....


You are most correct and that is what sometimes happens when I type very early in the morning. If you substitute a 2 for the 3, then 258 hp is much more reasonable for the mostly stock engine.

Nelson
IP: Logged
Joseph Upson
Member
Posts: 4908
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post04-09-2013 07:06 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Thought some of you might be interested in seeing this. I recently swapped out my ailing in tank Walbro for an OE pump from a GM 8100 V8 that pushes 30 lb/hr injectors at about 50 psi. I left the inline Walbro in place but disconnected power wise. The 8100 pump was apparently used in trucks with up to 325 hp and ~455 lb/ft of torque. I was also tired of the noise from the Walbro and although I had been looking at the DW300 for more than a year decided to use the pump I already had on hand.

Here are some snapshots of my final base pulse width under both circumstances demonstrating to a small degree given the other parameters that were changed affecting delivery but not mentioned the effects of pressure and volume. I have 60 lb/hr injectors which were giving me a hard time tuning in OBD I for closed loop idle. I decided to set them at factory test specs by lowering the fuel pressure to that used to rate them at 60 lb/hr and then calculated percentage wise what my base pulse constant should be relative to the stock 8F code 24 lb/hr injectors.

That along with adjusting the voltage offset table helped get closed loop idle under control eliminating the hunt and stalls.

BPC=40 and fuel pressure = 40 psi with the 8100 pump in place:




Same as above except with both Walbro pumps working together:



This one is significantly different and was taken before the above with a BPC = 35 and fuel pressure = 50 psi with both Walbro pumps running.



Despite being nearly double the boost level the BPW is near the range of the other snapshots taken up to about 6.5 psi.

It appears the 8100 fuel pump is a standard flow OE pump but with high volume rating as opposed to high pressure. I'll have to turn on the inline Walbro pump to see if my AFR bottoms out to confirm it as I did need to increase the boost multiplier fuel upon installing this pump and turning off the inline pump.
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
sco77
Member
Posts: 711
From: MD
Registered: Nov 2011


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post04-09-2013 07:22 PM Click Here to See the Profile for sco77Click Here to Email sco77Send a Private Message to sco77Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I installed DW200 pump last month to prep for 3800.

I cut a small notch in the bottom of the sending unit cradle for the sock to fit on (I DON'T think this is going to stay on due to tight clearance in the tank, I recommend finding a stock type sock that will fit or mount it so it faces the opposite direction of this picture)




It did install like this but it's a very tight fit, almost feels like you're going to break the sending unit. No problems so far though, and the pump is whisper quiet, even quieter than the stock pump it replaced.

------------------
86 Fiero GT 4spd - (pending L67 swap)
98 GTP - Some mods

[This message has been edited by sco77 (edited 04-09-2013).]

IP: Logged
hnthomps
Member
Posts: 5434
From: Columbia, SC
Registered: Jul 2003


Feedback score:    (18)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 50
Rate this member

Report this Post04-10-2013 09:38 AM Click Here to See the Profile for hnthompsClick Here to Email hnthompsSend a Private Message to hnthompsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
All good information to have. Thanks,

Nelson
IP: Logged
darkhorizon
Member
Posts: 12193
From: Flint Michigan
Registered: Jan 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 450
Rate this member

Report this Post04-10-2013 12:29 PM Click Here to See the Profile for darkhorizonSend a Private Message to darkhorizonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:
bla bla bla bla


I have no idea what you are ranbling about but I know it has nothing to do with fuel pumps. If anyone is trying to get anything out of this post information wise they are wasting their time decifering the rambling.
IP: Logged
Joseph Upson
Member
Posts: 4908
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post04-10-2013 01:00 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:
I have no idea what you are ranbling about but I know it has nothing to do with fuel pumps. If anyone is trying to get anything out of this post information wise they are wasting their time decifering the rambling.


Okay, and what took you so long to speak for everyone else. I can see where it might help someone trying to decide between a DW200 or 300 in terms of high volume and low volume/ high pressure pumps, based on intended application. Whatever the case, you would have responded in the manner that you so often do regardless of what I posted and that's fine with me. Have a good day.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 04-10-2013).]

IP: Logged
darkhorizon
Member
Posts: 12193
From: Flint Michigan
Registered: Jan 2006


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 450
Rate this member

Report this Post04-10-2013 04:36 PM Click Here to See the Profile for darkhorizonSend a Private Message to darkhorizonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:


Okay, and what took you so long to speak for everyone else. I can see where it might help someone trying to decide between a DW200 or 300 in terms of high volume and low volume/ high pressure pumps, based on intended application. Whatever the case, you would have responded in the manner that you so often do regardless of what I posted and that's fine with me. Have a good day.



In no case would it ever help anyone decide anything. You didnt offer any fuel pump data, just meaninless information on your quest to "tune" your car.
IP: Logged
Joseph Upson
Member
Posts: 4908
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post04-10-2013 05:14 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:
I have no idea what you are ranbling about but I know it has nothing to do with fuel pumps. If anyone is trying to get anything out of this post information wise they are wasting their time decifering the rambling.


 
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:
In no case would it ever help anyone decide anything. You didnt offer any fuel pump data, just meaninless information on your quest to "tune" your car.


It's gotta be worth more than any of that to someone. I asked you once before to restrict your complaints regarding me to PM for the sake of others who at least have the courtesy of not doing what you've done above. Consider it, as the above is your opinion. If you don't like what I posted it's okay, ignore it.

IP: Logged
BV MotorSports
Member
Posts: 4807
From: Panama City, Fl
Registered: May 2001


Feedback score:    (7)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 187
Rate this member

Report this Post04-11-2013 01:09 PM Click Here to See the Profile for BV MotorSportsClick Here to Email BV MotorSportsSend a Private Message to BV MotorSportsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I have the Areomotive 340lph "stealth pump". Turns out, this isn't recommended for a street car per ZZP. Something about the pump overheating.....
IP: Logged
Justinbart
Member
Posts: 3259
From: Flint, MI
Registered: Sep 2009


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 119
Rate this member

Report this Post04-11-2013 01:23 PM Click Here to See the Profile for JustinbartSend a Private Message to JustinbartEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I took some pictures on the last DW300 install I did using the "universal" kit.




------------------
Turbo 3800 E85 F23 5spd spec5
11.17@132.6

IP: Logged
BMFB
Member
Posts: 22
From: Davison, MI, US
Registered: Jan 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post04-11-2013 03:19 PM Click Here to See the Profile for BMFBClick Here to Email BMFBSend a Private Message to BMFBEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:

stuff about pumps.


So, this is information in regards to your IPW while idling with respect to three different pump configurations? This is very useful information to me, as I have been having issues deciding on which pump configuration to go with. Those different numbers on those charts have swayed me in my decision. Thank you for posting this.
IP: Logged
Joseph Upson
Member
Posts: 4908
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post07-02-2013 07:58 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I've decided to purchase one of these pumps and after talking with a DW rep decided to go with the 200 series after some calculations to decide if it would be able to support my fueling requirements.

Listening to the rep thinking out loud, it appears he did the following estimation:

Pump litres/hr (DW200 = 255L/hr = ~404 lb/hr) compared to the estimated fuel demand as follows:

number of injectors x maximal flow of injector x maximum duty cycle the motor may require
.

In my case I run 60 lb/hr injectors at 40 psi static pressure for an estimated maximal fuel delivery of 60 x 6 = 360 lbs/hr which is 44 lb/hr of fuel per hour less than what the pump is capable of. Multiply 360 lbs/hr by the duty cycle the motor is commanding which in my case as far as I have pushed the motor to this point is about 30% and my fuel requirement is
an estimated 360 lb/hr x (.30) = 108 lbs/hr a little over 25% of what the injectors are able to support at my static fuel pressure and still even less percentage wise than what the pump can provide, so as he stated it's more than enough pump for my engine requirements.

This goes back to the history table snap shots I posted above. I have not actually calculated the relationship of my BPW (base pulse width) and injector duty cycle recordings relative to what their actual representation of % duty cycle is for precise calculation. In other words whether or not the 27% value showing up in a snapshot at 15 psi and 4800 rpm translates directly to 27% duty cycle. I know the true percentage is on time ratio to off time.

Whatever the case it's a good base line approach I believe to making a pump decision.

I went to the DW site and noticed the pump applications only differ by the pump screen offered within a given series. It looks like pump #9-201s-1005 or 9-301s-1005 with a 360 degree circular pump screen aimed straight down and pump #9-201s-1007 and #9-301s-1007 with a centered rectangular screen would be the best arrangements for our sending units as they allow for unimpeded fuel entry from directly below the pump inlet. Just a thought.

I also think with these it would be a good idea to try and angle the return fuel away from the pump screen as I observed air-ration in my liquid air intercooler pump when the return water splashed near the water pump located inside the water tank and I bet that can happen in this application if one is not careful with positioning of the pump screen which is already close to the return fuel outlet.

Here is a screenshot of the boosted area of my history table. I still haven't pushed the motor to the peak rpm output yet but the general trend shows the injector duty cycle increasing and although 14.7 psi is the max pressure the 2 bar MAP is able to measure according to my log I saw the boost gauge bound past 15 psi up as high as 18 psi by 4800 rpm before settling back down to 15-16 so the maximum value reached to date can't be shown in the log yet because the MAP sensor and code limits can't measure the values under those conditions although they are present. I estimate a maximum of about 40 will be reached if the motor is run to 6000 rpm and 18 psi, I'll be switching to code59 which can measure in that range to find out for sure.



Here are the pump screens I mentioned.



[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 07-02-2013).]

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
1fast2m4
Member
Posts: 513
From: Frederick, MD (U.S.A)
Registered: Feb 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post07-03-2013 11:57 AM Click Here to See the Profile for 1fast2m4Send a Private Message to 1fast2m4Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by BV MotorSports:

I have the Areomotive 340lph "stealth pump". Turns out, this isn't recommended for a street car per ZZP. Something about the pump overheating.....


i have the same pump, I contacted Aeromotive about the issue and was told over the phone that the the pumps tend to fail in retunless systems that are run in traffic / spend a lot time with a low fuel demand. with a return system the fuel keeps the pump cool. Made sense to me so I rolled with it. I was SHOCKED how quiet it is though.

------------------
1986 SE 3800SC/4t65eHD (12.871@104.96) I'll Sell it if you like
1985 GT 3800SC (swap in progress)

[This message has been edited by 1fast2m4 (edited 07-03-2013).]

IP: Logged
Joseph Upson
Member
Posts: 4908
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post07-03-2013 12:35 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by 1fast2m4:
i have the same pump, I contacted Aeromotive about the issue and was told over the phone that the the pumps tend to fail in retunless systems that are run in traffic / spend a lot time with a low fuel demand. with a return system the fuel keeps the pump cool. Made sense to me so I rolled with it. I was SHOCKED how quiet it is though.


Their rational doesn't make sense, the pump can't tell the difference between the two because it has to push the same fuel pressure regardless, a returnless (misnomer) fuel system keeps the bypass fuel cooler by it not traveling through the warm to hot fuel rail and creating more fuel vapor in the tank with the heat it would bring back from the rail. I'd put money on the real problem being that the pump has a high torque wiring format to support its fuel delivery capability and as a result runs much hotter than the average pump and therefore can not endure long term continuous use very well except in the presence of a considerable quantity of fuel to help dissipate the heat. Low fuel demand also means less fuel flowing through the pump to help cool it as well.


IP: Logged
1fast2m4
Member
Posts: 513
From: Frederick, MD (U.S.A)
Registered: Feb 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post07-03-2013 01:02 PM Click Here to See the Profile for 1fast2m4Send a Private Message to 1fast2m4Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Joseph Upson:


Their rational doesn't make sense, the pump can't tell the difference between the two because it has to push the same fuel pressure regardless, a returnless (misnomer) fuel system keeps the bypass fuel cooler by it not traveling through the warm to hot fuel rail and creating more fuel vapor in the tank with the heat it would bring back from the rail. I'd put money on the real problem being that the pump has a high torque wiring format to support its fuel delivery capability and as a result runs much hotter than the average pump and therefore can not endure long term continuous use very well except in the presence of a considerable quantity of fuel to help dissipate the heat. Low fuel demand also means less fuel flowing through the pump to help cool it as well.



You sir are a ding bat!

I'm sorry that was my inner child coming out.

3 things

#1 "the pump has a high torque wiring format to support its fuel delivery capability" Yes it's a 340LPH in tank pump

#2 "can not endure long term continuous use very well except in the presence of a considerable quantity of fuel" Correct

#3 "Low fuel demand also means less fuel flowing through the pump to help cool it as well" Really that's exactly what they said
Also with a return system fuel flow through the pump won't really change much if at all.


So in your opinion they should have scratched the 340LPH version and brought a much smaller pump to market?
------------------
1986 SE 3800SC/4t65eHD (12.871@104.96) I'll Sell it if you like
1985 GT 3800SC (swap in progress)

[This message has been edited by 1fast2m4 (edited 07-03-2013).]

IP: Logged
Joseph Upson
Member
Posts: 4908
From:
Registered: Jan 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 88
Rate this member

Report this Post07-03-2013 01:23 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joseph UpsonClick Here to Email Joseph UpsonSend a Private Message to Joseph UpsonEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by 1fast2m4:
You sir are a ding bat!

I'm sorry that was my inner child coming out.

3 things

#1 "the pump has a high torque wiring format to support its fuel delivery capability" Yes it's a 340LPH in tank pump

#2 "can not endure long term continuous use very well except in the presence of a considerable quantity of fuel" Correct

#3 "Low fuel demand also means less fuel flowing through the pump to help cool it as well" Really that's exactly what they said
Also with a return system fuel flow through the pump won't really change much if at all.


So in your opinion they should have scratched the 340LPH version and brought a much smaller pump to market?


"Returnless systems" is a qualifier suggesting the same pump under the same conditions will be less prone to failure in a return system like that of a stock Fiero and various other first design conventional systems. My point is the fuel in a returnless system will generally run cooler than in the old conventional system where the rail raises the temp of the fuel. That being the case, a returnless system should be better for it and that's not the scenario that was presented. Probably because the pump is not designed or intended for street use regardless of the fuel system.

Fuel is always returned to the tank, a returnless system is better called a bypass system as excess fuel bypasses the rail.

Whatever the case, I always hope for constructive dialogue here that EVERYONE can either use or appreciate. Good luck with your inner child.

[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 07-03-2013).]

IP: Logged
diabloroadster
Member
Posts: 269
From:
Registered: Jan 2011


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post07-03-2013 10:02 PM Click Here to See the Profile for diabloroadsterSend a Private Message to diabloroadsterEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Here is another affordable option that just has been released: https://sdparts.com/details/aem/50-1200
IP: Logged

next newest topic | next oldest topic

All times are ET (US)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery | Ogre's Cave
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock