[bpasco]

Good thing it isn't the fuel injection. Just never worked on that before. I think I need a book.

I'm still "shopping" for the early 2 volume '65-'72 factory workshop manual, if anyonne knows where a copy can be had for cheap. Have not yet found someone with it for download.

Can anyone suggest a good book on fuel injection?

[smdubovsky]

bpasco, sent you a PM

[bpasco]

Is "hydrolock" what we used to call a flooded engine?

[michael lang]

Originally Posted by bpasco

Good thing it isn't the fuel injection. Just never worked on that before. I think I need a book.

I'm still "shopping" for the early 2 volume '65-'72 factory workshop manual, if anyonne knows where a copy can be had for cheap. Have not yet found someone with it for download.

Can anyone suggest a good book on fuel injection?

Best investment I ever made of anything I've done on my car was a "Bentley Manual". I thought at the time that it was really expensive and I thought I was waisting my money. Boy, was I wrong!

[Rick V]

Ok Hydrolock is when the cylinders get too much fluid in them for the engine to turn over. You can't compress a liquid, the piston will stop moving when Hydrolock happens. It ain't pretty, not always as tragic as it sounds, just never pretty.

Manual, look at DR's sig, click the link and download away. DR was in a good mood when he put that link there, take full advantage of it.

Most importantly, who wired that blade type fuse into the car? and what else has been "upgraded"?

[bpasco]

Huh. So hyrdolock is essentially the mother of all flooded engines. No that isn't pretty.

On manuals, Dave is worthy of beatification for including that link in his sig. It has the '72-'83 set, and the '84-'89 set, but not the '65-'71 set. I've found that the '72 set does not have all the information I look for, and presume it is in the '65 set that fills the gaps. I've been told that the '84 set can be useful for pointing in the right direction, but for someone like me that seems a high risk venture.

This car has been mine for about a year and a half -- just one owner before that, so I'm pretty clear "who." "Why" is a whole nother issue that requires the ability to delve deeply into the metaphysical. Lacking that skill, I think I'll revert to stock and not hurt my head thinking about it.

[Redroc]

Originally Posted by bpasco

"Why" is a whole nother issue that requires the ability to delve deeply into the metaphysical. Lacking that skill, I think I'll revert to stock and not hurt my head thinking about it.

Where's Cliffy when you need him???

[Trak Ratt]

What isn't in the '72 - '83 Manual that you need from the earlier ones? I have a printed copy of the original '65, but there are at least two more between it and the '72. They do have the earlier transmissions and electrical but seriously I haven't seen anything in the earlier ones that would help with your '77

[bpasco]

Mostly it is an interesting question because it exposes what I don't know. I've been under the impression that the '65-'71 manual was the foundation for the 911 line, and the '72-'83 manual updated changes to the 911, but didn't repeat things that had not yet changed, and as such if one only had the later 4 volume set, one would be missing out on the many things that were common between the years. I'm not aware of any manuals issued between the original two volumes and the latter four, although I understand updated pages were issued for both. I'd very much like to know if there are additional versions I should know about, however.

Since I've not seen the original two volume set, I confess I don't know what mysteries lie within...

I'd be quite grateful for insight you can share.

[bpasco]

Originally Posted by Rick V

Most importantly, who wired that blade type fuse into the car? and what else has been "upgraded"?

An interesting question, the merits of wiring around the stock fuel pump fuse. Saturday I cut the bayonet style fuse out of the circut and wired it back to the fuse pannel. The engine doesn't fire, but the pump is not working either, probably because I've not yet picked up a replacement relay - which looks a tad on the toasty side too. Rick V's question got me thinking, however. Just why would someone wire around the fuse box?

Dorki the oracle has all answers - but it is not always clear what the oracle's answer means...

Here'e a horror show - glad mine wasn't this bad, but it looks like the same family of problem. http://dorkiphus.net/porsche/showthr...ght=fuse+relay There, a victim of fuse box meltdown had this to say:

Originally Posted by Alan Herod

As a reliablility measure, I by-passed the fuse block located fuel pump fuse with an in-line bayonet style fuse. I also replaced the fuel pump relay and carry a spare. I think the correct fix is to replace the old fuse panels with new panels. The fuses and contacts themselves corrode and build up high resistance at the connection leading to sometimes dire consequences. Part of this could be in part because of off-gassing from a battery undercharge in a confined space with the fuse panel.

So, first question remains unanswered. Why would one wire around the stock fuse to put in a bayonet style fuse, and is it really necessary to replace the whole fuse pannel? I'd certainly not welcome causing a second melt down by wiring it back to a pannel that had already demonstrated sufficient problems that the previous owner wired around it.

Second, there is some commentary indicating that this problem is likely caused by a fuel pump on its last legs. I'm not really into just swapping out parts for fun, but I don't particularly want to have another - perhaps worse - fuse box fire right over my gas tank. Anyone have thoughts on this? My concern is that if I just swap out the relay, and the car works for a while, and then I get another fuse box fire, I won't know if the cause is high resistance in the fuse box or the fuel pump giving out.