Aluminum Fuel Tank by Boyd Welding

[wleehendrick]

Thanks. Looks like we need two 3/8NPT with 5/16" hose barb

Yup, unless you install fancier hose and connectors (braided SS and anodized fittings) like some have done.

[dougkirkbride]

Yes, the 818 assembly manual shows to use the Subie filter (p176), however I plan to use something smaller and nicer looking.

Doesanyone know where this filter is located. My donar was a 2006 wrx wagon and i swear it didnt exist. if i remember correctly all the documentation i had on the maint manual said there was a filter in the tank but i sure would hate to change it.

[longislandwrx]

05+ only had the in tank filter.

[STiPWRD]

Doesanyone know where this filter is located. My donar was a 2006 wrx wagon and i swear it didnt exist. if i remember correctly all the documentation i had on the maint manual said there was a filter in the tank but i sure would hate to change it.

The stock fuel filter is located in the engine bay near the washer fluid tank. It's not in the fuel tank. As others have mentioned, it can be replaced with a better looking aftermarket filter.
fuel filter.jpg

[STiPWRD]

05+ only had the in tank filter.

Interesting, didn't know that! I'm using an 02.

[metros]

For those interested in finding a nicer looking fuel filter option, take a look at Golan fuel filters. They're pricey up front ($85 IIRC) but they're also serviceable, so you'll get to keep the nice appearance without shelling out that much cash each filter change. They also have options that are E85 capable if anyone is planning a corn build.

[bompus]

There's also RobbMc filters. Does anybody have experience with either RobbMc or Golan filters?

[wleehendrick]

The RobbMc looks great. I would think the small 10um filter (75GPH) would be perfect to put in the fuel line. Thanks for the info!

[AZPete]

Thanks, guys. Just ordered the RobbMc 10 micron, up to 75 GPH filter - PN 1072.

[metalmaker12]

The stock fuel filter is located in the engine bay near the washer fluid tank. It's not in the fuel tank. As others have mentioned, it can be replaced with a better looking aftermarket filter.
fuel filter.jpg

There might be some confusion, the wrx has a filter in the engine bay and on the top fuel pump sock. This is prob were it got messed up.

[FFRSpec72]

Seems Boyd is using the wrong sender and sender ohm range so the sender that Boyd supplies will not work with the stock Subaru gauge cluster. See http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...nder-ohm-range

[wallace18]

Seems Boyd is using the wrong sender and sender ohm range so the sender that Boyd supplies will not work with the stock Subaru gauge cluster. See http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...nder-ohm-range

I would disagree. I bought the 3rd tank made and other than the float was on the wrong side it works perfect with my 2002 WRX cluster. JMTCW.

[FFRSpec72]

I would disagree. I bought the 3rd tank made and other than the float was on the wrong side it works perfect with my 2002 WRX cluster. JMTCW.

Seems you are not using the optional Centroid sender as Centroid does not use a float, just look at Boyd site "Sending Unit Flange: Yes (0-90 Ohm Sending Unit Optional)" Subaru use 90-0 ohm.

[K3LAG]

Seems you are not using the optional Centroid sender as Centroid does not use a float, just look at Boyd site "Sending Unit Flange: Yes (0-90 Ohm Sending Unit Optional)" Subaru use 90-0 ohm.

The Boyd provided sender is not a Centroid. It is a basic float type sender. As shipped by Boyd it reads backwards, but 5 minutes with a screwdriver to reverse the float and it's fine.

[Wayne Presley]

Yes, the sender can be reversed by moving the float to the other side.

[AZPete]

Guys, I'm confused about my Boyd tank. It came with the Aeromotive Stealth 340 pump and a 0-90 Ohm sending unit. I've seen the build thread of Wallace18 (post #82) but could someone please post detailed instructions of the required fix - hopefully with before and after photos? Thanks!

[wallace18]

Guys, I'm confused about my Boyd tank. It came with the Aeromotive Stealth 340 pump and a 0-90 Ohm sending unit. I've seen the build thread of Wallace18 (post #82) but could someone please post detailed instructions of the required fix - hopefully with before and after photos? Thanks!

Pete, It is simple. Look at the float. Just move the unit so the wiper reads opposite it is now. I do not have photos. I know you can do it bro. Check with your ohm meter and should be 90-0 when done. It is not rocket science.

[Xusia]

So 90 is when it's full or when it's empty?

[FFRSpec72]

So 90 is when it's full or when it's empty?

Here you go

2002WRXServiceManual 449.jpg

[Goldwing]

I need to check mine when I get home to see if the more recent tanks are setup properly. Just in case the photo link goes dead on a later date, I read that as near 0 ohms full and near 90 ohms empty.

[Goldwing]

Ah, which reminds me. I remember being confused as to why some had talked about using a 5 ohm resister in series in the circuit to ensure the displayed fuel level was more accurate at empty. After Reading the picture I get it now, adding the two fuel level sensors listed in the manual would be 92-96 (not 90) ohms when empty. So the Boyd sender by itself may not reach a high enough resistance to get the cluster to read fully when the tank is empty. (False sense of security anyone?, lol). Since most fuel gauges can read a few needle widths above full and below empty, I bet there is a sweet spot of say 3 or 4 ohms that gets the gauge to read ON full when full, and ON empty when empty, but with a priority on getting the "empty" reading accurate of course.

[FFRSpec72]

Ah, which reminds me. I remember being confused as to why some had talked about using a 5 ohm resister in series in the circuit to ensure the displayed fuel level was more accurate at empty. After Reading the picture I get it now, adding the two fuel level sensors listed in the manual would be 92-96 (not 90) ohms when empty. So the Boyd sender by itself may not reach a high enough resistance to get the cluster to read fully when the tank is empty. (False sense of security anyone?, lol). Since most fuel gauges can read a few needle widths above full and below empty, I bet there is a sweet spot of say 3 or 4 ohms that gets the gauge to read ON full when full, and ON empty when empty, but with a priority on getting the "empty" reading accurate of course.

I doubt the Boyd sensor has slosh control as that why the Subaru has 2 sensors in series.

[K3LAG]

I doubt the Boyd sensor has slosh control as that why the Subaru has 2 sensors in series.

It's damped by the electronics in the cluster. When bench testing my cluster it took over 30 seconds for the needle to move from one end to the other when the input was changed from 0 ohms to 90 ohms.

The reason there are two sensors is because the tank is divided into two compartments.

From the factory service manual:

All models are equipped with two fuel level sensors. These sensors are installed in the fuel tank,
one on the right side and the other on the left side. Two sensors are necessary because the fuel
tank is divided into main and sub tank compartments.

[FFRSpec72]

The reason there are two sensors is because the tank is divided into two compartments.

The tank is not physically divided into to 2 separate tanks, it is compartmented to reduce slosh and the summed sensors are averaged. if there are senders at both ends, ideally an increase in ohms at one end as it goes more empty will be negated by a decrease in ohms at the other end as it goes more full, with the sum of the two approximately unchanged despite the tilt.

[AZPete]

Pete, It is simple. Look at the float. Just move the unit so the wiper reads opposite it is now. I do not have photos. I know you can do it bro. Check with your ohm meter and should be 90-0 when done. It is not rocket science.

Geez, you say it's simple, but I read the resistance before I did anything as 9.1 Ohms - see photo #1. Is that close enough to zero?
Sender 1.jpg


Then, I removed the sender and it reads 7.8 Ohms. Photo #2.
Sender 2.jpg

I loosened the pivot screw and reinstalled the float on the other side so it matches the photo in Wallace18's build thread, post #82 - see photo #3.
Sender 3.jpg
The resistance was 94 Ohms in the empty position and 7.8 in the full position - not 90 - 0, but okay? However, when I went to remount the sender into the Boyd tank the float rod hits the side wall and round top mount with 5 holes will only go one way. Should I also remount the sender mechanism 180 degrees on the top circle mount? Or, move the lower mechanism to the other side of the vertical piece? This may be handy for others following, also.

[K3LAG]

I loosened the nuts and rotated mine 180 degrees.

[Erik W. Treves]

x2 did the same thing on mine..works great!

[CU9DZ]

I just installed my Boyd Welding tank and have a question on the fuel level sender. Some people are saying I have to reverse the lever on the sending unit. Does anybody have before and after pics? Also what should it read for resistance before and after?
Dave

[AZPete]

Dave, that confused me also but I eventually got it right, with help from others. See Post #42 in the Tips thread:

http://thefactoryfiveforum.com/showt...dd-yours/page2

[CU9DZ]

OK I just read the posts above and found the answer. I will do a resistance test after lunch.
Dave

[CU9DZ]

OK I just read the posts above and found the answer. I will do a resistance test after lunch.
Dave

[CU9DZ]

I tested it before I changed anything. 7.8ohm empty and 94.9ohm full. Then I reversed the float like the pics and swiveled the top round piece that screws to the tank. Now I get about 1.4ohm no mater what I do. Did I break the variable resister or the white wire? Dave

[CU9DZ]

OK Today was a better day. I loosened the nuts on the center post of fuel level sensor and then re-tightened. Now the resistor seems to be working so I installed it in the Boyd tank. Can't test anything further until I get wiring, fuel lines and cooling system in. Thanks for the help.
Dave

[billjr212]

Reviving an old thread - how are people enjoying their Boyd tanks? Have there been any revisions since V1? Any revival in the interest to make a larger tank filling the entire space, rather than leaving a gap to the firewall or having to re-bend the firewall?

I have reached the point of fed up with my leaking original tank and just priced out the new one from FFR at nearly the same price as the Boyd tank. Before I plop down over $600 on the new Boyd tank though, I'd like to hear how it's working out for people.

[Wayne Presley]

They work great, was a slight revision but they are really good.

[wallace18]

Reviving an old thread - how are people enjoying their Boyd tanks? Have there been any revisions since V1? Any revival in the interest to make a larger tank filling the entire space, rather than leaving a gap to the firewall or having to re-bend the firewall?

I have reached the point of fed up with my leaking original tank and just priced out the new one from FFR at nearly the same price as the Boyd tank. Before I plop down over $600 on the new Boyd tank though, I'd like to hear how it's working out for people.

Boyd tank is well worth the money. I used 1 in my 33 and 1 in my 818.

[D Clary]

Does anyone have fuel starvation when cornering? How much usable fuel is in the tank?

[JeromeS13]

Does anyone have fuel starvation when cornering? How much usable fuel is in the tank?

Yes, on right hand turns and < 25% fuel.

[D Clary]

That would reduce the usable fuel to around 7 gallons.

[JeromeS13]

That would reduce the usable fuel to around 7 gallons.

Perhaps on track, yes. Around town, it's fine. I think I've had it all the way down to like 2 gallons or so? Even then, I didn't notice any sputtering with normal driving.