Solved FINAL RESULTS ARE IN!!! Flow test of all LPFP options currently available...

[ecoboost_xsport]

Finally getting around to conducting tests on all the different LPFP setups...

OEM, DW300c, Hellcat (Walbro 525) and my custom dual pump setup.

I tested various voltages to simulate results for those wishing to use a boost-a-pump. Fluid being used for the test was e85 as that would be the likely candidate fuel for the dual pump setup.

Keep in mind these results are based on flows THROUGH the LPFP module (not the pump by itself), fuel filter, all fittings and bends, and with THIS particular test setup. The important numbers to look at are IMPROVEMENT over OEM, as flow within the vehicle could differ slightly. This test is an apples to apples comparison, trying to minimize variables. I'm unable to test thermal output (how hot they get while running), which would be another valuable data point (though AMP draw could be used to infer some generalizations of thermal output). My thermal imager took a dump on me a while back...

Bottom Line Up Front:
1) Everyone should ditch the OEM as soon as you can and replace it with the DW300c, not for any flow increase, but for lower power consumption and more consistent tuning. The DW300c doesn't really flow any more than OEM, it just does it better.
2) I'm now hesitant to recommend the Walbro 525 because of it's power consumption and inability for the jet pump to keep up.
3) The dual pump is the way to go, but still requires further installation verification as well as finding ways to make it cheaper. It's currently just a one-off prototype. Stay tuned for a separate write-up and video for this.

The attached chart and graph images are available for download in PDF format from here:
LPFP test results in PDF format.

Here are some graph comparisons:

Pros & Cons:

OEM:
Pros:
- Comes with the vehicle so no purchase is necessary.

Cons:
- Very inconsistent at all test points.
- Flowed nothing over 100PSI at any voltage in test setup.
- Not ideal for a boost-a-pump application.

DW300c:
Pros:
- Very consistent across all test points, making for better tuning.
- Relatively low cost.
- Only minor modification to fuel module.
- Easy to return to stock.
- Ideal for a boost-a-pump applications

Cons:
- Flowed nothing over 100PSI at any voltage in test setup.
- Flows about the same as OEM, so no significant increase in flow.

Walbro 525:
Pros:
- Increase of flow on average 49% across all test points.
- Very low cost.
- Highest dollar-to flow-increase gain.
- Easy to return to stock.

Cons:
- Flowed nothing over 100PSI at any voltage in test setup.
- Not ideal for a boost-a-pump application.
- Pump gets extremely hot.
- Moderate modification required to fit pump into fuel module.
- Draws significant current, heating power wire to dangerous levels.
- Jet pump is unable keep up, especially when the fuel level goes below the bucket. Must have a full-to-half tank at all times or modify the module.

Dual Pump:
Pros:
- Increase of flow on average 89% across all test points.
- Highest flowing capacity.
- Low current draw.
- Ideal for a boost-a-pump application.
- Only pump to flow past 100PSI in test setup.

Cons:
- High cost.
- Significant modification to fuel module.
- Requires “cloning” of FPDM signal.

 

[Rick]

Nice data! Thanks.

I just added 3 months to your Elite membership for your post.

 

[Odrapnew]

Nice testing and writeup.
As you stated, that Walbro is pulling some significant current.

Question: Do you know what the Explorer runs for (rail?) pressure before HPFP? I ask as I'm curious how important the higher pressures are (70psi+)

Going back to my Mustang days, my fuel pressure regulator is an OE 1:1, so 1psi boost = 1psi fuel pressure rise over base.
With my supercharger installed and running 12psi boost, I was hitting roughly 51-52psi fuel pressure.
I know these are quite different, so just curious how they compare.

 

[ecoboost_xsport]

Nice testing and writeup.
As you stated, that Walbro is pulling some significant current.

Question: Do you know what the Explorer runs for (rail?) pressure before HPFP? I ask as I'm curious how important the higher pressures are (70psi+)

Going back to my Mustang days, my fuel pressure regulator is an OE 1:1, so 1psi boost = 1psi fuel pressure rise over base.
With my supercharger installed and running 12psi boost, I was hitting roughly 51-52psi fuel pressure.
I know these are quite different, so just curious how they compare.

I've seen the low pressure side spike as high as 108psi or so on a WOT pull. According to tuners, this platform is happy around the 80psi mark. If it means anything to you, the internal FPV (Fuel Pressure Relief Valve) is rated for ~90psi. So yeah, it's definitely higher than some other platforms. I'm assuming that is because this is direct injection.

 

[Odrapnew]

Thanks again.
I'm sure the direct injection has something to do with it.

If you think about it, the fuel system in my mustang is pretty archaic.
A pump that runs full power all the time and a regulator that recirculates extra fuel back to the tank after it travels through the rails.

 

[ecoboost_xsport]

Thanks again.
I'm sure the direct injection has something to do with it.

If you think about it, the fuel system in my mustang is pretty archaic.
A pump that runs full power all the time and a regulator that recirculates extra fuel back to the tank after it travels through the rails.

Yeah, older style return system. Most stuff these days, especially the direct injection stuff, is returnless PWM-controlled.

 

[san~man]

Good stuff bro