Fuel Line Return Question/Configuration
Racer
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 389
Likes: 1
From: Sarasota Florida
Originally Posted by seaboltm
i saw no "uncomplimentary" remarks above; Lars made a challenge to breathial as to information, and there was a response.
breathial's response was met by being called a "flaming azzhole".
come on.
Lars wants to lay down a gauntlet, let Lars defend it. Lars is NOT god.
i have a doctorate in physics, so anyone who wants to lay down a serious thermodynamics argument, feel free. i am listening, both Lars and breathial.
and aussiejohn, just because you drank beer with Lars in Colorado doesnt mean a DAMN thing. Lars can still be wrong, breathial can still be right, and Lars DID lay down a challenge. let Lars defend it.
breathial's response was met by being called a "flaming azzhole".
come on.
Lars wants to lay down a gauntlet, let Lars defend it. Lars is NOT god.
i have a doctorate in physics, so anyone who wants to lay down a serious thermodynamics argument, feel free. i am listening, both Lars and breathial.
and aussiejohn, just because you drank beer with Lars in Colorado doesnt mean a DAMN thing. Lars can still be wrong, breathial can still be right, and Lars DID lay down a challenge. let Lars defend it.
Tech Contributor
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,380
Likes: 6,391
From: At my Bar drinking and wrenching in Lafayette Colorado
Some of the statements and assumptions made by Eric are factually incorrect, and they do not constitute a thermal analysis. Although non-return systems can be perfectly functional, there are better ways to design fuel systems.
I was teaching fuel/induction systems at GM when fuel return systems were being introduced and installed by the factory. We received a lot of questions about the usefulness of the return systems on the new cars by the students in the classes, and many questioned the need for the systems, as well as the practical usefulness of the return line – comments very similar to Eric’s. We found that there was resistance to the new “complexity” of the fuel systems, when a single supply line had been in use, successfully, for the past 50+ years. There were several reasons for the return line systems, and these reasons still apply:
1. Fuel supplied to the carb is kept cooler using a fuel return system. As opposed to the statement made that under car temperatures are very high, the fact is that under car temps in the area of the frame rails (where the lines are routed) are actually 50 to 100 degrees below the temperature in the engine compartment (between the radiator and the cylinder head). GM found that by circulating the fuel through the frame-mounted fuel lines, and reducing heat soak into the slow-moving fuel in the fuel line in the “hot” areas (near exhaust components and forward of the firewall), that vaporization of fuel in the line between the pump and the tank was almost eliminated, and fuel inlet temperature to the carb was significantly reduced. Enough so that customer warranty complaints about vapor lock type drivability problems were cut by over half following the introduction of return line systems in 1971 (some high performance vehicles – such as the Corvette and GTO – received return systems prior to ’71 in order to reduce the same problems). Return line systems do not prevent fuel boil-off problems after hot engine shutdown, but they are effective in reducing drivability issues related to fuel vaporization while driving. GM, and the aftermarket, has used reflective heat shields and insulating gaskets under the carb to reduce hot shutdown vaporization problems.
2. The closer the return line is located to the carb, the more effective the system becomes in reducing vapor-related problems. GM installed the return line at the outlet of the in-line filter on the Vette & GTO (very close to the carb) for this reason. On vehicle systems not using an in-line filter, there was not a practical or economical way to install a return line close to the carb (Q-Jet), so the return was designed into the fuel pump. Although a compromise, it was still highly effective in reducing fuel temperatures (and warranty claim problems). In over-the-bowl return systems in racing applications, we have measured noticeable reductions in fuel inlet temp and bowl temp from the circulating fuel – this type of system has become the standard in racing fuel systems (it's not "my" system - it's used on virtually every racecar on the circuit) for this reason. Contrary to the comment made, the system does, in fact, provide cooler fuel to the carb, and it lowers bowl temperatures, providing the carb is protected from excessive radiant and convection heating. We have actually measured it using an IR gun to validate the system. Modern factory fuel systems now do exactly the same thing: Fuel is flowed to the injectors and circulated through the fuel rail and returned to the tank through a return-style regulator system, keeping cool fuel circulating over the tops of the injectors at all times. It would be much easier – and cheaper – to regulate pump pressure at the tank and eliminate the return line, but that is not done: The return system is effective in reducing vapor-related problems, even with a tank-mounted pump, so this system is used on all new cars today. Simply maintaining line pressure (controlling saturation pressure) does not solve the problem.
3. The Vega was the only GM car at the time using an electric fuel pump mounted at the tank. It, too, used a return line. The reason for the return line was due to the design of electric pump: Electric pumps are vane-type positive displacement pumps. When this type of pump is dead-headed, the amp draw increases dramatically. The increased amperage increases the temperature of the pump, which puts heat into the fuel. It further reduces the life of the pump itself due to this excessive load and the associated heat. By using a bypass, returning fuel to the tank, the electric pump sees lower power draw, longer life, and vapor related problems are reduced due to lower temperature of the fuel since the pump itself runs cooler. Alternator life is also extended since its output requirement is lowered by reducing fuel pump amp draw. Every new car you buy today uses a fuel return line for this reason: You don’t want to dead-head an electric pump if you’re providing warranty on a new car. Performance enthusiasts can take advantage of this type of design for the same reasons.
A single-line system with no return can be made to work just fine. Every manufacturer from 1900 to 1970 used a single line system with only modest problems. In the quest for improvement, every vehicle on the road now uses a return system for the reasons noted, and many of us design and install return systems into the custom and modified cars we build to gain the added advantage of reliability and trouble-free operation. In a competitive environment where every advantage (and tenth of a second) counts, we use the best parts and the best designs – not stuff that’s 100 years old.
…and who ever said I was “selling” fuel systems..? My livelihood has nothing to do with Vettes or cars. Do you just make this stuff up..? And I’ve sure as heck never proclaimed to be “God” (comment not made by Eric). I provide solid tech advice about things that I have some knowledge about (as opposed to some others) based on 40 years of car building experience to people who request assistance. I have no other motivation, and I sure don’t make any money off the time I pour into this hobby. I have opinions about what works and about what doesn’t, and those opinions are based on factual observations and experience gained from building custom cars and racecars since the early ‘70s. I give away that information for free to those who request it. If you really think return systems are complete BS, you should contact the automakers: You could save them millions by getting them to eliminate those costly ineffective BS systems, use some wood parts, and they would surely reward you handsomely.
Gotta go now – I have a return-line system to build for a racecar. I’ll post up some photos and technical info as soon as I'm done for those interested in building nice fuel systems.
I was teaching fuel/induction systems at GM when fuel return systems were being introduced and installed by the factory. We received a lot of questions about the usefulness of the return systems on the new cars by the students in the classes, and many questioned the need for the systems, as well as the practical usefulness of the return line – comments very similar to Eric’s. We found that there was resistance to the new “complexity” of the fuel systems, when a single supply line had been in use, successfully, for the past 50+ years. There were several reasons for the return line systems, and these reasons still apply:
1. Fuel supplied to the carb is kept cooler using a fuel return system. As opposed to the statement made that under car temperatures are very high, the fact is that under car temps in the area of the frame rails (where the lines are routed) are actually 50 to 100 degrees below the temperature in the engine compartment (between the radiator and the cylinder head). GM found that by circulating the fuel through the frame-mounted fuel lines, and reducing heat soak into the slow-moving fuel in the fuel line in the “hot” areas (near exhaust components and forward of the firewall), that vaporization of fuel in the line between the pump and the tank was almost eliminated, and fuel inlet temperature to the carb was significantly reduced. Enough so that customer warranty complaints about vapor lock type drivability problems were cut by over half following the introduction of return line systems in 1971 (some high performance vehicles – such as the Corvette and GTO – received return systems prior to ’71 in order to reduce the same problems). Return line systems do not prevent fuel boil-off problems after hot engine shutdown, but they are effective in reducing drivability issues related to fuel vaporization while driving. GM, and the aftermarket, has used reflective heat shields and insulating gaskets under the carb to reduce hot shutdown vaporization problems.
2. The closer the return line is located to the carb, the more effective the system becomes in reducing vapor-related problems. GM installed the return line at the outlet of the in-line filter on the Vette & GTO (very close to the carb) for this reason. On vehicle systems not using an in-line filter, there was not a practical or economical way to install a return line close to the carb (Q-Jet), so the return was designed into the fuel pump. Although a compromise, it was still highly effective in reducing fuel temperatures (and warranty claim problems). In over-the-bowl return systems in racing applications, we have measured noticeable reductions in fuel inlet temp and bowl temp from the circulating fuel – this type of system has become the standard in racing fuel systems (it's not "my" system - it's used on virtually every racecar on the circuit) for this reason. Contrary to the comment made, the system does, in fact, provide cooler fuel to the carb, and it lowers bowl temperatures, providing the carb is protected from excessive radiant and convection heating. We have actually measured it using an IR gun to validate the system. Modern factory fuel systems now do exactly the same thing: Fuel is flowed to the injectors and circulated through the fuel rail and returned to the tank through a return-style regulator system, keeping cool fuel circulating over the tops of the injectors at all times. It would be much easier – and cheaper – to regulate pump pressure at the tank and eliminate the return line, but that is not done: The return system is effective in reducing vapor-related problems, even with a tank-mounted pump, so this system is used on all new cars today. Simply maintaining line pressure (controlling saturation pressure) does not solve the problem.
3. The Vega was the only GM car at the time using an electric fuel pump mounted at the tank. It, too, used a return line. The reason for the return line was due to the design of electric pump: Electric pumps are vane-type positive displacement pumps. When this type of pump is dead-headed, the amp draw increases dramatically. The increased amperage increases the temperature of the pump, which puts heat into the fuel. It further reduces the life of the pump itself due to this excessive load and the associated heat. By using a bypass, returning fuel to the tank, the electric pump sees lower power draw, longer life, and vapor related problems are reduced due to lower temperature of the fuel since the pump itself runs cooler. Alternator life is also extended since its output requirement is lowered by reducing fuel pump amp draw. Every new car you buy today uses a fuel return line for this reason: You don’t want to dead-head an electric pump if you’re providing warranty on a new car. Performance enthusiasts can take advantage of this type of design for the same reasons.
A single-line system with no return can be made to work just fine. Every manufacturer from 1900 to 1970 used a single line system with only modest problems. In the quest for improvement, every vehicle on the road now uses a return system for the reasons noted, and many of us design and install return systems into the custom and modified cars we build to gain the added advantage of reliability and trouble-free operation. In a competitive environment where every advantage (and tenth of a second) counts, we use the best parts and the best designs – not stuff that’s 100 years old.
…and who ever said I was “selling” fuel systems..? My livelihood has nothing to do with Vettes or cars. Do you just make this stuff up..? And I’ve sure as heck never proclaimed to be “God” (comment not made by Eric). I provide solid tech advice about things that I have some knowledge about (as opposed to some others) based on 40 years of car building experience to people who request assistance. I have no other motivation, and I sure don’t make any money off the time I pour into this hobby. I have opinions about what works and about what doesn’t, and those opinions are based on factual observations and experience gained from building custom cars and racecars since the early ‘70s. I give away that information for free to those who request it. If you really think return systems are complete BS, you should contact the automakers: You could save them millions by getting them to eliminate those costly ineffective BS systems, use some wood parts, and they would surely reward you handsomely.
Gotta go now – I have a return-line system to build for a racecar. I’ll post up some photos and technical info as soon as I'm done for those interested in building nice fuel systems.
Pro
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh PA
Originally Posted by lars
Some of the statements and assumptions made by Eric are factually incorrect, and they do not constitute a thermal analysis.
As to being "factually inaccurate," it would be really enlightening to see you substantiate your claim. It is YOU, who seem to have a problem with facts... As I will demonstrate.
Originally Posted by lars
I was teaching fuel/induction systems at GM when fuel return systems were being introduced and installed by the factory. We received a lot of questions about the usefulness of the return systems on the new cars by the students in the classes, and many questioned the need for the systems, as well as the practical usefulness of the return line – comments very similar to Eric’s. We found that there was resistance to the new “complexity” of the fuel systems, when a single supply line had been in use, successfully, for the past 50+ years.
So, let's go down your list... one by one, shall we...?
Originally Posted by lars
There were several reasons for the return line systems, and these reasons still apply:
1. Fuel supplied to the carb is kept cooler using a fuel return system. As opposed to the statement made that under car temperatures are very high, the fact is that under car temps in the area of the frame rails (where the lines are routed) are actually 50 to 100 degrees below the temperature in the engine compartment (between the radiator and the cylinder head).
1. Fuel supplied to the carb is kept cooler using a fuel return system. As opposed to the statement made that under car temperatures are very high, the fact is that under car temps in the area of the frame rails (where the lines are routed) are actually 50 to 100 degrees below the temperature in the engine compartment (between the radiator and the cylinder head).
I ASK these questions, because (as I noted before) vapor-lock only occurs at low-speed, high-temperature conditions. With little or no air-flow under the car, heat soak WILL occur... and become even more pronounced as Tamb and Teng increase. Depending on the car, the engine, cooling system, engine compartment configuration... any one of a dozen variables can effect that magnitude (and even the significance) of such tests.... Citing such a number, given nothing else, is either insulting or amusing (depending on how one looks at it).
Originally Posted by lars
GM found that by circulating the fuel through the frame-mounted fuel lines, and reducing heat soak into the slow-moving fuel in the fuel line in the “hot” areas (near exhaust components and forward of the firewall), that vaporization of fuel in the line between the pump and the tank was almost eliminated, and fuel inlet temperature to the carb was significantly reduced.
Originally Posted by breathial
Wanna' avoid heat soak? A simple method: use an electric pump as close to the tank as possible (dump the cam-driven one), run the fuel line(s) as far away from the exhaust and engine as possible.... Even insulate them with asbestos (or whatever) insulation to minimize heat-soak, you pretty much solve the problem with boiling in the lines....
Originally Posted by lars
GM, and the aftermarket, has used reflective heat shields and insulating gaskets under the carb to reduce hot shutdown vaporization problems.
Originally Posted by lars
2. The closer the return line is located to the carb, the more effective the system becomes in reducing vapor-related problems. GM installed the return line at the outlet of the in-line filter on the Vette & GTO (very close to the carb) for this reason. On vehicle systems not using an in-line filter, there was not a practical or economical way to install a return line close to the carb (Q-Jet), so the return was designed into the fuel pump. Although a compromise, it was still highly effective in reducing fuel temperatures (and warranty claim problems).
Jeez... don't you GET IT???
I've neither time, equipment nor inclination, to go out of my way and prove to you, what common-sense and logic (and, as you stated, even General Motors AND the aftermarket car-parts industry) already know...
Originally Posted by lars
In over-the-bowl return systems in racing applications, we have measured noticeable reductions in fuel inlet temp and bowl temp from the circulating fuel – this type of system has become the standard in racing fuel systems (it's not "my" system - it's used on virtually every racecar on the circuit) for this reason. Contrary to the comment made, the system does, in fact, provide cooler fuel to the carb, and it lowers bowl temperatures, providing the carb is protected from excessive radiant and convection heating. We have actually measured it using an IR gun to validate the system.
The issue is about vapor-lock at idle and low-speed, and hot-start problems... Trying to support your claims by comparing completely different cars (in every way that matters) doesn't really help you...
Originally Posted by lars
Modern factory fuel systems now do exactly the same thing: Fuel is flowed to the injectors and circulated through the fuel rail and returned to the tank through a return-style regulator system, keeping cool fuel circulating over the tops of the injectors at all times. It would be much easier – and cheaper – to regulate pump pressure at the tank and eliminate the return line, but that is not done: The return system is effective in reducing vapor-related problems, even with a tank-mounted pump, so this system is used on all new cars today.
Originally Posted by lars
Simply maintaining line pressure (controlling saturation pressure) does not solve the problem.
The addition of the pressure regulator downstream of the fuel rails accomplishes two things, simultaneously: it assures a consistent fuel-injector inlet pressure, and eliminates the possibility of vapor-lock. Yes, it also allows cooler fuel to the injectors, but that is simply a happy byproduct of design requirements (mainly having consistent pressure at the injectors).
Originally Posted by lars
3. The Vega was the only GM car at the time using an electric fuel pump mounted at the tank. It, too, used a return line. The reason for the return line was due to the design of electric pump: Electric pumps are vane-type positive displacement pumps. When this type of pump is dead-headed, the amp draw increases dramatically. The increased amperage increases the temperature of the pump, which puts heat into the fuel. It further reduces the life of the pump itself due to this excessive load and the associated heat. By using a bypass, returning fuel to the tank, the electric pump sees lower power draw, longer life, and vapor related problems are reduced due to lower temperature of the fuel since the pump itself runs cooler. Alternator life is also extended since its output requirement is lowered by reducing fuel pump amp draw. Every new car you buy today uses a fuel return line for this reason: You don’t want to dead-head an electric pump if you’re providing warranty on a new car.
Originally Posted by lars
Performance enthusiasts can take advantage of this type of design for the same reasons.
All new cars use a fuel return, because all new cars use electric fuel pumps!!! Your logic- that you must not dead-head an electric fuel pump, was exactly correct... But you neglected to mention that all new cars are fuel-injected...! The LAST car I saw running a carburator (as a new model) was a 1996 Dacia... in ROMANIA!!!
When I was in Russia this past July, I noticed that even the new Llada (the Russian state-owned car company) models all have EFI...
Originally Posted by lars
A single-line system with no return can be made to work just fine. Every manufacturer from 1900 to 1970 used a single line system with only modest problems. In the quest for improvement, every vehicle on the road now uses a return system for the reasons noted,
Originally Posted by lars
...In a competitive environment where every advantage (and tenth of a second) counts, we use the best parts and the best designs – not stuff that’s 100 years old.
Originally Posted by lars
I provide solid tech advice .......
Drifting
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 12
You know what, I don't know enough to tell who's telling the truth BUT just by the tone and way of writing, I'd say Lars is probably right. I'm a computer guy and I know forums and you know what, breathial sounds like a 
Go take a hike.
Go take a hike.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Racer
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
From: Thief River Falls Minnesota
Return or non-return is turning into the new O-Ring vs. Lip seal debate 
That said I'm casting my vote with Lars and return style 
I like my new electric fuel pumps, and I really don't want to see them burn out. I really don't see why a person couldn't use return style and insulate their lines and put in a heat shield for their carb to really get cool fuel 
I do not understand why you (Brethial) say at one point that if you want to avoid heat soak to put an electric pump as close to the tank as possible, and later concede that Lars is right when he says that pump life and alternator life are reduced significantly when using an electric pump and a dead head type regulator? Believe it or not, when you say that all cars now use return style regulators only because they are fuel injected and use electric pumps, carburated cars can and do have electric pumps too, so in turn are you actually arguing that Lars is right and everyone with an electric pump should use a return style regulator? And did you not say that to avoid heat soak a person should install an electric pump? So anyone that wants to avoid heat soak should install a return style regulator? Just need you to clarify that point for me 
That said I'm casting my vote with Lars and return style I like my new electric fuel pumps, and I really don't want to see them burn out. I really don't see why a person couldn't use return style and insulate their lines and put in a heat shield for their carb to really get cool fuel I do not understand why you (Brethial) say at one point that if you want to avoid heat soak to put an electric pump as close to the tank as possible, and later concede that Lars is right when he says that pump life and alternator life are reduced significantly when using an electric pump and a dead head type regulator? Believe it or not, when you say that all cars now use return style regulators only because they are fuel injected and use electric pumps, carburated cars can and do have electric pumps too, so in turn are you actually arguing that Lars is right and everyone with an electric pump should use a return style regulator? And did you not say that to avoid heat soak a person should install an electric pump? So anyone that wants to avoid heat soak should install a return style regulator? Just need you to clarify that point for me
Last edited by 76custompaint; Dec 4, 2005 at 12:03 AM.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 832
Likes: 1
From: Breckenridge Colorado
LOL, this was a very informative and interesting thread. I personally like debate between informative people on forums as long as it can be kept civil. I just got my 76 vette and it was built by a company called Speed innovations in Denver and it was built with no return fuel line. I have been wondering about this ever since I got the car. The return fuel line was just plugged at the very end. There was a new Hi-VOL fuel pump installed at the time it was built. The only problem that I have noticed with it was that they did not plug the end of the return line very well and it came loose while I was driving it and was pouring fuel out as I was driving and was REAL close to the exhaust headers. I was lucky the car had just been started and it had not heated up yet or I would probably have been sitting in a very large gas fire. I enjoyed the thread and learned way more than I every wanted to about return fuel lines......but I still do not know if I should get one installed. I seem to lean towards Lars thinking, but it is obvious that Breathial does have some experience with this or it would not have gotten into as heated of a debate.
Just wanted to say - Peace to all - And I enjoyed the thread and hopefully after I read it the 4th or 5th time I might understand some more on the topic and can hopefully make my decision.
Just wanted to say - Peace to all - And I enjoyed the thread and hopefully after I read it the 4th or 5th time I might understand some more on the topic and can hopefully make my decision.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,240
Likes: 1,013
From: Watkinsville, GA and Glen Cove, NY
Brethial, I sure do wish you would go away. If if you were right I would do the opposite just because your delivery has alot of nastiness toward a guy who has helped an awful lot of people. This is not the first post where you have taken a nasty tone. I am all for these type of technical posts to learn, but having to get past the personality you inject into discussions is tiring to say the least. Go away.
Pro
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Thornton Co
go away
brethial, I know you think you are right, and yet you are not. Lars is my friend and I will defend him for that reason alone, but he and I have disagreements about how things work as well, he is usually right, but I have had my moments. http://www.sladurana.com/free_dating/2633.html
I am sorry you can't find a date! 4 of those hits our mine out of curiosity! Sorry am married and have kids and don't want to date you!
http://hometown.aol.com/__121b_HMsUr...CMjmchz30EMw==
I know it must be tough to have to advertise yourself to get some interest in you, I feel bad that you have to do so much to get a date.
The IR readings are off of my car, with the return line and running the pump for just a few seconds cooled off my carb by 30 degrees thus making it start after heat soak with no problems. Lars helps people, he goes to different towns to tune cars out of the goodness of his heart, he makes no money on these trips. Have you helped anyone, have you even built your first engine? You say you have all the parts but have you put anything together? I have experience, I have built 11 engines so far, not all where perfect but they all ran great! Have I learned even more from Lars, yes! Dog him all you want, but he has experience which you don't, so shut the F up! When you have experience such as Johnz and SWCduke then talk all you want, but you have nothing to give this forum as I see it.
Build something, anything and maybe someone will respect you, otherwise you are a lonely man that thinks he is smart and obviously thinks he is attractive and intelligent, however the hits on your sight prove otherwise. Have a nice night brethial!
I am sorry you can't find a date! 4 of those hits our mine out of curiosity! Sorry am married and have kids and don't want to date you!
http://hometown.aol.com/__121b_HMsUr...CMjmchz30EMw==
I know it must be tough to have to advertise yourself to get some interest in you, I feel bad that you have to do so much to get a date.
The IR readings are off of my car, with the return line and running the pump for just a few seconds cooled off my carb by 30 degrees thus making it start after heat soak with no problems. Lars helps people, he goes to different towns to tune cars out of the goodness of his heart, he makes no money on these trips. Have you helped anyone, have you even built your first engine? You say you have all the parts but have you put anything together? I have experience, I have built 11 engines so far, not all where perfect but they all ran great! Have I learned even more from Lars, yes! Dog him all you want, but he has experience which you don't, so shut the F up! When you have experience such as Johnz and SWCduke then talk all you want, but you have nothing to give this forum as I see it.
Build something, anything and maybe someone will respect you, otherwise you are a lonely man that thinks he is smart and obviously thinks he is attractive and intelligent, however the hits on your sight prove otherwise. Have a nice night brethial!
Pro
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Thornton Co
Originally Posted by cannonfl
Milehigh66, I hope I never **** you off! 
Instructor
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
From: Tampa Bay Florida
Agreed...
I've been reading this forum for a year or two and have seen nothing but helpful post from Lars. I've even found his articles on the CorvetteFAQ site.
Nothing wrong with debate, but breathial ... You just got plain rude.
Drama...
I've been reading this forum for a year or two and have seen nothing but helpful post from Lars. I've even found his articles on the CorvetteFAQ site.
Nothing wrong with debate, but breathial ... You just got plain rude.
Drama...
