Older GM 5.7L engine with mechanical fuel pump

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: clinebarger
The original 265 didn't have the bolt hole tapped for this "GM" procedure or any small journal small block I have ever seen


Hey do it which ever way you want, these pumps use a short arm making it difficult to "kick the push rod up with the lever", The GM procedure called for using heavy grease on the push rod to hold it but that didn't work very well, so they came out with another trick in a service bullitin.
The 265 did have a bolt that could be removed and replaced temporally with a longer bolt.

265 Chevy pump discussion



Its difficult to kick it up out of the way with that little stub.

 

[Robenstein]

I have done the grease (or vaseline) trick and it always worked for me. Have to do it on a cold engine though...the colder it is outside, the better it works too. I also had a pair of surgical clamps (hemostatic forceps) I could use to hold the rod up out of the way until I could sneak the pump arm underneath. Between the two I never needed the bolt trick.

 

[Donald]

The initial issue was the fuel pump was not pumping. The fuel tank had been cleaned by adding E10 gas and siphoning in out via fuel line. So I was pretty sure things were good up to the fuel line. The pump had oxide in it from old gas so a new pump was installed. Did not work. Thus the thought of the pushrod. An electric fuel pump was installed and works fine.

 

[Trav]

That's the easiest and probably the best thing to do anyway.

 

[demarpaint]

I'd put an electric pump in and and be done with it. You can buy a plate to cover the opening for the mechanical pump for about $5, and an electric pump and be done with it.

 

[Donald]

The issue with the electric fuel pump is not the pump, but the extra sensor and relay to run the pump at engine startup and shutdown the pump should the engine stall. And the gas overflow tube from the carb. (boat engine)

 

[Trav]

Just install an oil pressure sender from a 69 (a few other years also but this one for sure) Buick Riviera, it has an extra terminal for the electric fuel pump shut off.
A lot of parts books show a sender with only 1 wire but this is incorrect the one wire is for the mechanical fuel pump model found in the Electra, the Riviera had an electric pump and used a 3 wire sender.

Wire 1 oil pressure wire 2 12v wire 3 12v to fuel pump, if the engine stalls the oil pressure drop causes the 12v to the pump to disconnect.

 

[Donald]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Just install an oil pressure sender from a 69 (a few other years also but this one for sure) Buick Riviera, it has an extra terminal for the electric fuel pump shut off.
A lot of parts books show a sender with only 1 wire but this is incorrect the one wire is for the mechanical fuel pump model found in the Electra, the Riviera had an electric pump and used a 3 wire sender.

Wire 1 oil pressure wire 2 12v wire 3 12v to fuel pump, if the engine stalls the oil pressure drop causes the 12v to the pump to disconnect.


And what about startup with no oil pressure yet? You would need a 15 second timer like cars have.

 

[Trav]

No not at all, cranking pressure is enough to kick the pump circuit closed.
IIRC these are the same threads as the 350.
This not a very sophisticated system, simple electro/mechanical device but it works like a champ.

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: clinebarger
The original 265 didn't have the bolt hole tapped for this "GM" procedure or any small journal small block I have ever seen


Hey do it which ever way you want, these pumps use a short arm making it difficult to "kick the push rod up with the lever", The GM procedure called for using heavy grease on the push rod to hold it but that didn't work very well, so they came out with another trick in a service bullitin.
The 265 did have a bolt that could be removed and replaced temporally with a longer bolt.


First of all....I didn't mean to come off as rude, But I am a mechanic as well & been working on these engines a long time, I understand the hole is tapped for a bolt, But some early castings did not have the hole go into the push rod cavity, I have seen it first hand, But I don't go around checking every block either.

I have a 1961 Tri-Power 348 on a engine stand at the shop, The fuel pump, push rod (angle), & plate are identical to a Small Block Chevy, It does not have the hole tapped at all, Using a Cast Lever Carter Fuel Pump, I was easily able to kick the push rod up & seat the pump several times. I have to admit that the Cast Lever makes it a little more difficult too grab/get a bite on the push rod vs a Stamped Lever that has a sharper edge.

I also tried a different approach... I took my pair of round nosed (Needle Nose) pliers, Pushed the push rod up, And held the push rod with my index finger & got the pump lever under the push rod, let go of the push rod & seated the pump, But without doing it in a vehicle....I don't know how practical this would be.

I know this is a moot post/point as the OP used a electric pump, I thought the point of discussion forums was too discuss things, Even different procedures that don't conform to service manuals or TSB's.
Assembling the geartrain on a TH400/4L80E is a good example, The FSM calls for dropping the entire unit assembled up to the Center Support into the Case at one time using a special tool too grip the Mainshaft, Where dropping the Center Support & Sungear Shaft in separately is easier & requires no special tool.
And to add too the fuel pump discussion...That bolt is not always easy to access namely on 80's vehicles with a smog pump, Or Dual Smog Pumps like my old '85 C20 Suburban, You don't even want to deal with holding the push rod up with a longer bolt on that particular vehicle.

 

[Trav]

The 348 was a W big block engine (348, 409, early 427 Z11) so why would it have the same hole as the small block? It didn't use the front mount like on the original small blocks.
The hole wasn't put there for this reason it just happens to be tapped through to the pump rod.

My point is if it becomes a PITA to get the pump in because of a falling push rod whats the problem with making the job easier.
Some of the smaller bodied GM cars with small blocks could be a real pain because of limited space.

Edit: Not to be a **** but posting pictures of a big block to prove the early small block doesn't make sense. If you want to show the engine your working on start a thread.
Do you want me to post pics of 265, 283, 302, 327, 307, 305, 350 and 400 small block with the hole.

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted By: Trav
The 348 was a W big block engine (348, 409, early 427 Z11) so why would it have the same hole as the small block? It didn't use the front mount like on the original small blocks.
The hole wasn't put there for this reason it just happens to be tapped through to the pump rod.

My point is if it becomes a PITA to get the pump in because of a falling push rod whats the problem with making the job easier.
Some of the smaller bodied GM cars with small blocks could be a real pain because of limited space.

Edit: Not to be a **** but posting pictures of a big block to prove the early small block doesn't make sense. If you want to show the engine your working on start a thread.
Do you want me to post pics of 265, 283, 302, 327, 307, 305, 350 and 400 small block with the hole.

You win, It's just an engine on my stand that has the exact set-up as a small block, I wasn't trying to prove anything besides the fact you don't need the hole to stab a fuel pump.