Topic: Carter fuel pump identification

[677litre]

I believe that I can help throw some fuel on the fire here.

I actually do have most every Ford MPC for many eras of Ford production throughout the years. I even learned to read and understand the books over the many years that I was a parts manager for Ford and Lincoln-Mercury dealers.  I just looked up the pump in question in the 1964/1972 Ford truck book and, of course, it is not listed there. From what I have been able to ascertain, the 4008-SA number seems to be a service replacement number but the date code on the pump does not fit that scenario. The M section of the 4008-SA number will only be found on a Carter box and I believe that the M relates to mechanical as compared to electric.

I encourage constructive criticism here as I am always open to learning new things.


-Fred-

I agree that it appears to be a over the counter service replacement number.  I'm guessing it might be a really early rebuilt unit perhaps?  Did they rebuild old units and resell them back in the day or could you buy new replacement pumps over the counter back in 67?  When did the Carter with just USA not made in USA under it start casting?

I guess my next question is what are the PSI and GPH fuel requirements for the dual quad 428? 

I'm curious if this one could be modified to better output?  Just the internal diaphragms that are different from a 3909SA 3910SA unit?

[J_Speegle]

I agree that it appears to be a over the counter service replacement number.  I'm guessing it might be a really early rebuilt unit perhaps?  Did they rebuild old units and resell them back in the day or could you buy new replacement pumps over the counter back in 67? 

Both rebuilt and new were available

[Bob Gaines]

677litre can you post a side shot picture showing your complete fuelpump?

[RoyceP]

The high volume pumps have a stiffer spring and more check valves to provide a greater flow while maintaining the same pressure. Not sure if there ever was a high volume pump in that style. A skilled machinist could create pockets for additional check valves on any of these pumps and substitute the stiffer spring. The diaphragms are the same regardless.

I agree that it appears to be a over the counter service replacement number.  I'm guessing it might be a really early rebuilt unit perhaps?  Did they rebuild old units and resell them back in the day or could you buy new replacement pumps over the counter back in 67?  When did the Carter with just USA not made in USA under it start casting?

I guess my next question is what are the PSI and GPH fuel requirements for the dual quad 428? 

I'm curious if this one could be modified to better output?  Just the internal diaphragms that are different from a 3909SA 3910SA unit?

[flyingfred]

The crimp together pumps use the same built in return spring on the internal diaphragm regardless of application. I have personally checked the spring pressures from both Hipo and standard original pumps that I have restored. I was surprised myself that there was no difference in spring pressure and I had checked quite a few. The Hipo 289 pumps added the extra external spring to help keep up with the higher RPM.

On a similar thought regarding engine RPM, at 6,000 RPM your pistons are moving up and down inside your cylinders 100 times per second. Your valves and fuel pump are moving 50 times per second. 6,000 RPM is not totally crazy until you realize the strain you are putting on your engine components. How does this all hang together most of the time? And this is only 6,000 RPM!! Sometimes it does not. So think about this when you beat on your vintage serial numbered and date coded components. One of my regular customers just lost his original date coded and VIN stamped Hipo 289 to pieces that did not hang together and at less RPM.

-Fred-

[RoyceP]

Agree - I do not think there ever was a high volume crimp together pump.

The crimp together pumps use the same built in return spring on the internal diaphragm regardless of application. I have personally check the springs from both Hipo and standard original pumps that I have restored. I was surprised myself that there was no difference in spring pressure and I had checked quite a few. The Hipo 289 pumps added the extra spring to help keep up with the higher RPM.

On a similar thought regarding engine RPM, at 6,000 RPM your pistons are moving up and down inside your cylinders 100 times per second. Your valves and fuel pump are moving 50 times per second. 6,000 RPM is not totally crazy until you realize the strain you are putting on your engine components. How does this all hang together most of the time? And this is only 6,000 RPM!! Sometimes it does not. So think about this when you beat on your vintage serial numbered and date coded components. One of my regular customers just lost his original date coded and VIN stamped Hipo 289 to pieces that did not hang together and at less RPM.

-Fred-

[677litre]

The crimp together pumps use the same built in return spring on the internal diaphragm regardless of application. I have personally checked the spring pressures from both Hipo and standard original pumps that I have restored. I was surprised myself that there was no difference in spring pressure and I had checked quite a few. The Hipo 289 pumps added the extra external spring to help keep up with the higher RPM.

On a similar thought regarding engine RPM, at 6,000 RPM your pistons are moving up and down inside your cylinders 100 times per second. Your valves and fuel pump are moving 50 times per second. 6,000 RPM is not totally crazy until you realize the strain you are putting on your engine components. How does this all hang together most of the time? And this is only 6,000 RPM!! Sometimes it does not. So think about this when you beat on your vintage serial numbered and date coded components. One of my regular customers just lost his original date coded and VIN stamped Hipo 289 to pieces that did not hang together and at less RPM.

-Fred-

Thanks for the input guys, I'm just trying to learn all the correct stuff.  Trying to build the motor the way the factory did just for my own piece of mind.    Just for looks I'd like to restore and use this pump, if possible, since I have it but if it's not going to be able to handle a healthy 428 with dual 600 Holley's it's not worth it.  FYI, Sunday show car, it's not a race car but obviously want it to live up to the 428 name.

So we know a canister pump was used on the GT500 428 in 67 at least.  Would it have been just a regular rated pump used on some other model 428s? Appears some Thunderbird and Galaxies 428s in 67 came with this, some didn't depending if it was dual carb or not.  Man Ford did some confusing stuff. 

Here are some pics I sent Royce who has some good insight, I'm just open to all opinions.    It really needs a good clean up but the internals check out so far from the little I could test it.  It's not bent or anything, the one pic is just on an angle.

[flyingfred]

677litre, keep in mind that back in the day, we used electric pusher pumps back by the fuel tank if we had concerns for fuel volume. Also keep in mind that todays fuels will find any weakness in your fuel pump, and usually when you least expect it or need the issue. The handy thing about these pumps is the location of the breather hole for the diaphragm. It is facing towards the exhaust so make sure that you carry a fire extinguisher in case the diaphragm ruptures.  I am just trying to point out a potential issue and I am not really trying to make light of a potentially serious situation.

-Fred-

[Bob Gaines]

Thanks for the input guys, I'm just trying to learn all the correct stuff.  Trying to build the motor the way the factory did just for my own piece of mind.    Just for looks I'd like to restore and use this pump, if possible, since I have it but if it's not going to be able to handle a healthy 428 with dual 600 Holley's it's not worth it.  FYI, Sunday show car, it's not a race car but obviously want it to live up to the 428 name.

So we know a canister pump was used on the GT500 428 in 67 at least.  Would it have been just a regular rated pump used on some other model 428s? Appears some Thunderbird and Galaxies 428s in 67 came with this, some didn't depending if it was dual carb or not.  Man Ford did some confusing stuff. 

Here are some pics I sent Royce who has some good insight, I'm just open to all opinions.    It really needs a good clean up but the internals check out so far from the little I could test it.  It's not bent or anything, the one pic is just on an angle.

Like I said before the FE canister fuelpumps were used mainly on trucks and not typically on passenger cars other then the 67 GT500. The other passenger vehicles had a fuel filter at the carburetor so no need for the filter at the fuel pump. Also the pump you have appears to have a 3/8 inch inlet which indicates it is a 1968 and later unit. The 3/8 is better for fuel volume but the smaller 5/16 is what was used in 1967 model year. It would be a next best alternative fuelpump to the genuine IMO. 

[flyingfred]

Thanks for the input guys, I'm just trying to learn all the correct stuff.  Trying to build the motor the way the factory did just for my own piece of mind.    Just for looks I'd like to restore and use this pump, if possible, since I have it but if it's not going to be able to handle a healthy 428 with dual 600 Holley's it's not worth it.  FYI, Sunday show car, it's not a race car but obviously want it to live up to the 428 name.

So we know a canister pump was used on the GT500 428 in 67 at least.  Would it have been just a regular rated pump used on some other model 428s? Appears some Thunderbird and Galaxies 428s in 67 came with this, some didn't depending if it was dual carb or not.  Man Ford did some confusing stuff. 

Here are some pics I sent Royce who has some good insight, I'm just open to all opinions.    It really needs a good clean up but the internals check out so far from the little I could test it.  It's not bent or anything, the one pic is just on an angle.

Your pump does have a bend in it where the canister base attaches to the rest of the fuel section. I have repaired them with a much greater bend but you need to be careful that you do not crack the base piece above the canister. You are fortunate that you have a 5/16" inlet nipple as that is correct for 1967. As Bob stated if it was 3/8" it would be for 1968 and later.

-Fred-

[Bob Gaines]

Your pump does have a bend in it where the canister base attaches to the rest of the fuel section. I have repaired them with a much greater bend but you need to be careful that you do not crack the base piece above the canister. You are fortunate that you have a 5/16" inlet nipple as that is correct for 1967. As Bob stated if it was 3/8" it would be for 1968 and later.

-Fred-

Fred,it looks like a 3/8 68 pump to me. It can of course be hard to tell without holding it in your hand at least for me.  I think so because the 5/16 inlet opening is about the same size as the opening on the outlet side. The 3/8 on the other hand is bigger when compared to the outlet opening as seen in the OP's picture. I took a picture of a 5/16 pump (lower) and place a 3/8 SB pump above so as to illustrate the difference. Sorry I don't have a 68 style FE 4008 pump for a direct comparison .

[rcgt350]

So when did the later version 4314-S fuel pump on a 67 GT500 start month wise?
I have an assembly line version dated 27F6A, isn't that June27/66 first shift?