• Welcome to ClassicBroncos! - You are currently viewing the forums as a GUEST. To take advantage of all the site features, please take a moment to register. It's fast, simple and absolutely free. So please join our community today!
    If you have problems registering or can't log into your account, please contact Admin.

Fuel sender rear tank

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
So, I received my rear fuel sender, and it looked short. So, I matched it to a friends, and it seem wrong to me, but on the box, it says it fit's a 66 to 76, Here are some pictures of the new one to my friend's. The float arm and suction tube and filter seem short, or is this what they are now.
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    121.1 KB · Views: 32
  • s-l1600 (1).jpg
    s-l1600 (1).jpg
    116.5 KB · Views: 29

billh1289

Contributor
Full Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
398
Loc.
Jackson, NJ
I never compared side to side when I changed tanks but I think the aux and rear senders have different part numbers. 77 rear sender has a different number too at least at a couple vendors. Not sure what the difference between them is though. Maybe it was boxed wrong. Do have the old one to compare it to?
 
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
I never compared side to side but I think the aux and rear senders have different part numbers. 77 rear sender has a different number too at least at a couple vendors. Not sure what the difference between them is though.
That's what I was thinking, but looking at different venders, some use the same for both tanks and some have different part numbers, but the pictures look the same. What sucks is the one I received works perfected with my gauge. What I'm wondering is that inch difference in the tube is that big of deal or not, So confusing.
 
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
I looked at two venders and one had the long version and the other sold the short version for the rear tank. So, it looks like the one I got should work?
 

Broncobowsher

Contributor
Total hack
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
33,601
I would be ohming out the senders. From the pictures it looks like the sender has travel below the level of the pickup screen. That isn't useful. You would need to ohm the sender in the useful range, not just the limits of travel.

My modern late model truck was built with a crazy amount of reserve capacity. So I pulled the sending unit and adjusted the float arm to bring the gauge more in touch with reality. Wouldn't surprise me if you have to do the same with your new parts.
 
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton

Hey Broncobowsher, the sender float travel is not below the pickup screen. What I'm wondering is the short arm and the shorter pick-up screen on the new one compared to my friend's sender, if it makes a difference, the pics above. Here is a picture of the new sender float level.​

Dave
 

Attachments

  • DSCN2829.JPG
    DSCN2829.JPG
    108.4 KB · Views: 21
  • DSCN2830.JPG
    DSCN2830.JPG
    171.6 KB · Views: 21

MarsChariot

Contributor
Planetary Offroader
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
2,335
Loc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico
I am so tired of the whole replacement fuel sender thing. My new rear tank sender seemed short and worse yet, when I did a study of the ohms, here is what I got. Bacically, the new sender can bever read full and the ohm range is out of wack.
 

Attachments

  • gas_sender_comparo.jpg
    gas_sender_comparo.jpg
    85.6 KB · Views: 24
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
I am so tired of the whole replacement fuel sender thing. My new rear tank sender seemed short and worse yet, when I did a study of the ohms, here is what I got. Bacically, the new sender can bever read full and the ohm range is out of wack.
I checked the ohms and this sender is pretty close at 10.6 for the full ohms and 79.6 for the empty mark, I'm more concerned on the short float arm and shorter pickup.
 

Quick & Dirty

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
784
I dug an original out of the useless junk stash, seems to be about the same as your new one. 2-3/4" drop from center of tube to lowest part of filter, float does not reach bottom. I guess that gives you a little reserve when it reads empty.
WMyfY8R.jpg
 
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
I dug an original out of the useless junk stash, seems to be about the same as your new one. 2-3/4" drop from center of tube to lowest part of filter, float does not reach bottom. I guess that gives you a little reserve when it reads empty.
WMyfY8R.jpg
How long is the arm, from the pivot point to the star of the curve for the float.
 

Quick & Dirty

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
784
If anyone was wondering what is inside;
The arm pivot has a spring metal arm with a contact that rides the resistor wire and grounds it. Interesting how the resistance is non-linear. I'm getting from 10 to 87 ohm where I see contact wear. 100 from rivet to rivet.
ny3KTtd.jpg
 
Last edited:

MarsChariot

Contributor
Planetary Offroader
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
2,335
Loc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico
I checked the ohms and this sender is pretty close at 10.6 for the full ohms and 79.6 for the empty mark, I'm more concerned on the short float arm and shorter pickup.
That's good. As long as it swings through the whole arc of empty to full it should work, it will just be a little less sensitive with the shorter arm.
 

Quick & Dirty

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
784
Thanks, I measured from the center of the tube and mine measured 3-inch drop. The only difference is my float arm, it measures at 3 7/8.
I just pulled the sender out of an auxiliary tank, it has a 3-5/8" arm to float OD, otherwise seems to be the same as the main tank one. The longer arm has a bend in it so both arms have the same empty level, but the longer arm has 2" more up travel. If you put the short arm sender in the main tank it may read full until you use those 2" of fuel depth.
 
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
Well, I decided to send it back and order one from Wild Horses. Hoping the ohms will be pretty close to the one I'm sending back. The short float was bugging me:oops:
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
44,005
Did you ask someone to measure one for you?
Not that I don’t want you to order stuff from us (thanks a ton by the way!) but I can’t help but think most of the vendors buy from the same few sources.
And that those sources probably buy from an even smaller number of manufacturers.
Fewer and fewer of whom even care if they follow the original specifications as long as they can make them work most of the time, at an ever lower price point.

Sorry, I might have let a little cynicism slip in there somewhere, but I’d hate to see you order a new part only to find out it’s the same one you already had.

Knowhatinean?
 
OP
OP
savage

savage

Contributor
Bronco Nut
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
2,482
Loc.
Renton
Hey Paul, the reason I decided to send it back was the float arm on the new sender. It was about a 1 1/8 shorter and I was not sure if it would give me different readings. The one on your online picture has the longer float arm.
 

Broncobowsher

Contributor
Total hack
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
33,601
I am so tired of the whole replacement fuel sender thing. My new rear tank sender seemed short and worse yet, when I did a study of the ohms, here is what I got. Bacically, the new sender can bever read full and the ohm range is out of wack.
That is some sweet engineering there
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
44,005
Yep, gotcha.
But those kinds of changes often come through the pipeline unannounced, and unknown until someone at the other end brings it to our attention.
Meaning that as often as we try to keep up to date on the photos, things slip past all the time.
Heck, even when we are aware of it, sometimes it can take a week or three to get the new photos in the pipeline.

Just me being overly cautious I suppose.
Maybe we are still going through older inventory that was made to the older, longer specifications.
 
Top