This was done to a 3rd gen by Scott (aka Boosted Maxima). While taking the heads off and such he noticed that the fuel rail looked quite well... poorly made. Here is a writeup and pictures on what he did to cure the issue. Most likely this will apply to any other gen Maxima if the rails are designed the same way.

 

looks good

just to clarify you have the stock FPR holowed out correct

 

pretty sure he does

 

looks good I will more than likey do the same when I switch injectors this week end.

 

Nice job Scott! That looks like it would take care of any front/rear bank differences in fuel. Was it the front bank that would have a tendancy to go lean? On mine, the fuel enters the rear and exits the front, so I would assume it was the same for you, but I'm not positive.

 

the back was the issue. VG's enter from the front and go to the back so if the rail design on the VE is the same (crappy crimps), the same would be true but in reverse.

 

VG or VE would have the same issue(s). As it looks like they are fed the same. Cool idea.

 

i'll go down to Elkhart in about a month so we can work on an adaption for the 4th gen.

 

how do you know if fuel is going to both ends equally?

 

you'd probably just have to run it a while then inspect the plugs and see if one bank is running richer/leaner than the other. that's what scott did in the first place to find out the problem even existed. he noticed the front was a lot richer than the rear.

 

so he is running the original feed and the original return both as return lines into a t fitting?

 

that or he's running them to the aftermarket fpr, which i believe he bought one just like mine which has two inlet ports for the return. he could run individual hoses from the previous inlet and the outlet to the two inlets of the fpr. if you only had one inlet for the fpr you could use a t fitting.

 

I do have a Aeromotive FPR with duel inlets and single return to tank. My stock FPR is hollow.. just allows fuel to flow freely.
You can run a T or Y fitting to the FPR or get another fitting for duel return.. your choice..
When I took the ends off the fuel rail I noticed that they were crimped down to 1/4 inlets at every connection! So It has to make it through the inlet (1/4) then feed all the front injectors go through another (1/4) then hose then another (1/4) fitting before feeding the rear cyls. I could understand if it were all 3/8 there would not be a volume problem but trying to feed the rear 370cc Inj at 5000rpm with 12psi could be a problem in my car!
GN fuel rails have similar main tube diamater but it's a horse shoe or a U setup where its all the same size around 1/2 fuel rail. The inlet's 3/8 outlet 5/16 and plenty of fuel volume in the U shaped rail to feed it.
One of you asked how I'd know if each side would get even fuel.
By doing this procedure your increasing the volume of fuel avalible to each side by a larger inlet and less restrictive ends leading to the rails. Both get the same feed pressure and volume this way. Unlike before with just one side being fed and the other getting what's left over if any..
Be glad to help anyone with this or turbo charging their max.
I'm kinda anxious to make a crossmember for these cars after seeing the carnage that was in the other thread!!!
Thanks for posting Mark!
~Scott

 

very cool, Ive been considering this on my 4th gen.

 

This is proably the cheapest thing on the To Do list.. It's a 20.00 investment in a more solid fuel system.
Glad to help,
Scott~

 

Yeah I agree! When reading my plugs it seems that the rear back is a lot leaner than the front bank. Witch All my cylenders run lean right now but the back bank is alot worst.

 

Most of you people should be concentrating on converting to returnless fuel systems.

 

what would be the benefit of going returnless compared to a return fuel system?

 

Return style systems heatup the fuel in the rail and return the heated fuel to the tank. Fuel temps in the tank can reach over 100º. Having a returnless system is much like having a cool can because the fuel temps stay low. And lower fuel temps assist in making more engine power.

 

ahh... i always thought they returned the fuel to keep it cool. interesting.

 

That is a great mod and all but I was wondering. I know the VE's and VQ's have A/F feedback on banks 1 + 2. Now the VE might be alittle different since it only has 1 o2 sensor, but the VQ has one for each bank. The computer will know if one side is leaner than the other and it will compensate to get its target AFR. Although that is a nifty idea.

 

Alot of the new GM's Dodges ect have gone to a returnless fuel system. I usto run carbs that were "dead headed" or returnless with holley regulators and it would always creep FP on me and not work right. With a big fuel pump like a A1000 Aeromotive pump and a small cell I could see there being a problem with fuel temps. I doubt that in a stock tank with a 225lr/hr pump there is much of a issue. If it were all the camaro/mustang/GN crowd would be looking for a alternitive way to feed the injectors and it just has not become a issue.
Nismo.. If both banks have a O2 I agree it should be able to make both the same A/F ratio.
I'm going to put a bung in the rear bank and the front bank of my engine when it go's back together to see what the difference is between the two. Should be very close to the same now.
~Scott

 

the computer goes into open loop under wide open throttle so the O2 sensor doesnt do anything unless crusing where this wouldnt be a problem

 

Humm.. you have a point there subs... Better to be safe than sorry on feeding a good size injector. Stock's proably ok.... Much after that I'm betting there's starving going on.
~Scott

 

Then again ssuming this is a VQ it wouldn't be a problem at WOT anyway. For one even at WOT the STFT goes to 0.0% while the LTFT might be around 5% -/+ for both banks.

 

Hi.
How I can see photos of the modification fuel rail?
Thanks.