Fuel level sender.

[Grizzly]

Hi all.

I've been having some issues with my Fuel gauge working when it felt like it so after allot of messing i found the gauge had a bad terminal inside.

So during all the messing about i had the Sender wires connected together so the gauge would go to full, the problem is now i have the gauge working and connected the sender back up it still shoots off to max? (only has a gallon or so of fuel in it)

So is it possible to fit the fuel sender upside down? or some thing like that? or would you say its got a fault?

Can't believe some of the bad luck i'm getting with this car at the moment, its almost like it doesn't want to go back together.

[mbell]

I'd get a multimeter out and measure the resistance of the sender with the arm in different positions (full, empty, mid etc) and post here. Hopefully someone will be able to tell you if they look sensible.

I think I read that there was a swap of senders and gauge at some point on the Elan that flipped whether the high/low resistance for full or empty. So it maybe your gauge and sender aren't matched.

[ericbushby]

Yes the sender will fit in upside down, mine was when I got the car. I thought it was great because the further I drove , the more fuel there was left in the tank.
I seem to remember that the sender is stamped (top) on the mounting plate. A torch and a mirror may allow you to see this.
Eric in Burnley
S3SE DHC

[types26/36]

A faulty voltage stabilizer can give you a full reading.

[AHM]

Depending on the construction of the gauge the terminals may be marked T tank (sender) and B battery.

If they ar,e and they are the wrong way round the gauge will read full.

[Grizzly]

Well the gauge its self doesn't have any markings saying which way they should go but then i have just tried it both ways and get the same result.

The Voltage Stabilizer is new (Solid state) and it give a solid 10v which i assume is the correct voltage?

Finally the Sender is going to be a pain, i have tried to have a look at it with a mirror and a torch but not having much joy, i can tell you though that the signal terminal is at the bottom and Negative top (is that the right way round?)

[john.p.clegg]

You may have the wires on the wrong terminals,one is for fuel level the other is for low fuel lamp..and if I'm not wrong there is also an earth terminal there...

John

[Chancer]

Its been d?cades but the bimetallic voltage stabilisers fitted to Fords etc were 5v as far as I can recall.

[types26/36]

You may have the wires on the wrong terminals,one is for fuel level the other is for low fuel lamp.

John,
I believe the car is a Sprint and we two seater drivers dont have the luxury of a low level lamp......we use a piece of wood dowel to check for a low fuel level

[john.p.clegg]

"Chris Lee
Hence the nickname and nothing to do with my appearance pre coffee in the morning

70/71 S4-Sprint
71 +2 S130"

could be either?

John

[Grizzly]

Sorry i did mean the Sprint.

I don't think you can get the connections mixed up on the Sender end? May be wrong but one spade connector is smaller then the other.

[AHM]

Chris,

Have you measured the resistance across the sender? that will indicate if the problem is at the gauge end.

Also try earthing the tank, as one of the connections is earth.

[Grizzly]

Chris,

Have you measured the resistance across the sender? that will indicate if the problem is at the gauge end.

Also try earthing the tank, as one of the connections is earth.

No not yet, i was assuming there was very little resistance so the gauge was showing full.

[billwill]

Its been d?cades but the bimetallic voltage stabilisers fitted to Fords etc were 5v as far as I can recall.

I've only ever seen them described as 10 volt.

[gherlt]

>Its been d?cades but the bimetallic voltage stabilisers fitted to Fords etc were 5v as far as I can recall.

Its been decades now since cars changed to 12V ...