I moved this here because it is a good conversation and better deserves to be in tech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmrman
If there is no work being done, hardening is a non issue.
|
That is not what work hardened means. Simple vibration is what does it. Engine running, driving, etc. And PSI is not part of the issue here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmrman
It is period correct and it's what I am using. Thank you everyone for your concern. All connections are double flared. Compression fittings are ugly and have no business on a car.
The truck will hopefully see over 3000 miles a year. First planned trip is in April. 400 miles round trip. See if its ready in time.
|
IMO you are asking for a fire if you plan to drive it that much. Too many people much smarter than I am have told me that. If that is a risk you are willing to take then fine. But be aware of the potential consequences. I think there is a reason GM said do not do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drmrman
Aluminum was my other option... But I guess thats no good to use by everyones standards here right? Even though that's what they use on a majority of the hydraulics on aircraft...
|
I'm not a fan of aluminum on a street car either, but not for the same reasons. It's abrasion/puncture resistance issues. I have personally had an aluminum line - an OE coolant line - punctured by road debris. It didn't even mark the steel floor it hit too. So I have BTDT. There is a reason OE fuel lines were steel with rock guard (that spring covering). The newer 'plastic' (not the right term) are also fairly strong and covered in sensitive areas.
I am fairly certain that the aluminum grade used in airlines is not the same as the stuff you buy at jegs, etc. And those lines are not exposed, they are inside the fuselage, wing, etc. So from where I stand it is a poor comparison.
Now if you fuel lines are totally out of harms way - which means not exposed anywhere under the car, sure you can do that. But not a lot of vehicles are setup that way.