Ahhh ok thats exactly what I needed to know thanks! I'll try to get pictures of the rail tomorrow, hopefully you guys can come up with a simple fix that involves a screwdriver and no alcohol lol

 

So AZ, I've got a 92 5.2 that's going into an '89 Dak. I have a performance PCM for a 92-93 5.2 I want to use, and I have a '94 tank with the fuel pump module in place. I thought I'd stick with the return type system that the motor's fuel rail is meant for, but I've been unable to get my hands on one of those return-type fittings you used in your fuel pump. I could just pick up a return-less fuel rail and go that way, but I don't know if the '92 perf.PCM will like that.

Where did you find that return-style fitting? I've made numerous JY trips and haven't found one yet. Unfortunately the pic-n-pull yard here pulls the tanks from the vehicles and all but a few fuel pumps seem to vanish.

 

Why don't we just trade rails? You already have to right parts to use returnless, my returnless rail has the fitting and a small bit of snipped fuel line still attached.

And the pcm doesnt care what system you use, if you try to run return on your setup you will have 2 regulators. As stated earlier the 94 has the regulator in the fuel pump assembly, so your all set to go that route.

 

keilkravec, right now my preference is to go with a return system. That little plastic fuel module fitting that AZ pictured in his earlier post replaces the regulator. It's a return fitting with two nipples, one in, one out, and no regulator. With that I'd be golden for a return system.

I have a '92 HP PCM, which may or may not work well with a returnless system:

I haven't ruled out the returnless system yet, I just need to satisfy myself that the '92 PCM will be happy with it. I'm going to research it a little more tonight and then I'll get back to you here about the fuel rail swap.

 

Buy a new fuel tank module for a '92-'93 V8 Dakota and it will come with the fittings you need. The reason I got the return fitting (out of the junk yard for a '92-'93 fuel pump module) for MY fuel pump module is because I just bought it for the '94. It was brand new so I made it work.

You are not going to want to run your '92 PCM with a returnless system. Performance or otherwise. It's meant to see higher fuel pressure under load (no vacuum). You'll go lean. I tried a '93 Mopar Performance PCM in my '94 with the returnless system and it pinged like a bastard even with 91 Octane (the best we have around here).

 

New fuel modules are pricey. I'd rather not have to buy a new fuel module if I can use the 92-93 in/out fitting to replace the regulator fitting in the module my '94 tank has. It's a low mileage tank and module so I'd really like to use it. Is there any meaningful difference in the pumps themselves going from 92-93 to 94?

If I can locate a used 92-93 module I guess that'd be fine, but if it's got more miles on it than my 94, I'd like to just pull the fitting from it. I must admit though, finding a used 92-93 fuel module (or the fitting) hasn't been easy so far.

 

Either find the fitting in the junk yard or buy the module, those are your options. The part you are replacing with the duel fitting part in the '94 module IS the regulator/filter. There is no way around it. If you leave the '94 regulator/filter in the module you are going to have the '94 static fuel pressure which isn't going to agree with your '92-'93 PCM. There is no difference in the pumps, it's that regulator you need to get around. I spent money on junk yard regulators and time dismantling them to find a way around them. The way around IS that dual fitting part. Either heed my advice/experience or blaze your own trail. I already did the R&D. I gave you the solution. Do as you will.

 

I'm not looking for a way around the regulator, just verification that using that dual fitting in place of the regulator and fitting in my '94 fuel module can essentially turn it into a '92 return-style fuel module. That should give me the '92 return setup that I'm looking for: i.e. a '92 PCM, '92 fuel rail (w/regulator), and a '94 fuel module backward-converted to a '92 return-style module.

Seems I managed to get you a little ticked, so I'll just leave it here. Thanks much for answering my question, and I do appreciate the effort I know you put into your solution.

 

You didn't tick me off, I'm just trying to get through that there are only two options. I apologize if I came across that way. I don't want to discourage you or anybody else from asking questions. That's how we all learn.

 

If I could piggy back upon this thread.

I have a 90 vert I'm preparing to make a 360 swap into. I'll likely have a 94/95 dakota V8 donor truck for parts. I will be using a mopar performance crate 5.9L magnum for the swap (if all goes well...lucked upon one new).

If I understand your information, AZ, the 94 5.2L dakota was a returnless style system and its PCM/injectors will be tailored as such. So, my options are:

Swap the 94 gas tank/fuel pump/fuel lines/manifold/injectors/fuel rail into the 90 along with the PCM and call it day...

OR

Keep the return style and add the intrepid regulator? The second option I'm a bit unclear on what I'd have to do keeping it return style, and if there are any advantages?

Lastly, if I go with a 93 donor truck instead which is return style, would I do the same wholesale swap of manifold/injectors/PCM but keep the fuel system the same, and all is good? My concern is the injector change between 93 and 94. I couldn't find any flow specs on the two styles...Was it purely to accommodate pressure differences or is the lb rating different?