Charcoal Vapor Canister Delete - Page 2 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums
 

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
Log In 


1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks

Charcoal Vapor Canister Delete

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #16  
Old 03-31-2012, 06:59 PM
V10man's Avatar
V10man V10man is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Mesa
Posts: 3,683
V10man is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.V10man is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Gas is almost $4 a gallon here. I want every last drop. Even if it is vapor. Speaking of vapor I hope you do something safe with the line. Gas goes BOOM real pretty like.
__________________
2002 F250, V10, 3.73, longbed, supercab, 4x2, Jones Max Flow muffler, Doug Thorelys coming soon
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-31-2012, 07:48 PM
BrianDguy BrianDguy is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 178
BrianDguy is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBGrif91 View Post
If this is just FUEL VAPOR, what exactly is the point of having the canister? Why couldn't the vent line run direct from the tank to the TB? And, further more, if this were the case, why would a purge valve solenoid be necessary? Why couldn't the canister and the purge valve be eliminated altogether and just have a line running straight from the tank to the TB?
The function of the canister is to store vapor to be used by the engine at a later time. The function of the purge solenoid is to allow the engine to use the vapor when told too by the computer. They cannot be bypassed in the manner you speak because engine vacuum would create negative pressure in the tank, and suck raw fuel into the engine.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-31-2012, 09:06 PM
DBGrif91's Avatar
DBGrif91 DBGrif91 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Des Moines
Posts: 1,811
DBGrif91 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.DBGrif91 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianDguy View Post
The function of the canister is to store vapor to be used by the engine at a later time. The function of the purge solenoid is to allow the engine to use the vapor when told too by the computer. They cannot be bypassed in the manner you speak because engine vacuum would create negative pressure in the tank, and suck raw fuel into the engine.
Thank you for the simple & direct explanation. Rep point 4 you.

I did not know [or realize, because it seems an obvious problem] that the engine vacuum would cause that to happen.
__________________
"Official Project Stages: (1) Uncritical Acceptance. (2) Wild Enthusiasm (3) Dejected Disillusionment. (4) Total Confusion. (5) Search for the Guilty. (6) Punishment of the Innocent. (7) Promotion of the Non-participants."
-Unknown
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-21-2015, 04:18 PM
DrZoom's Avatar
DrZoom DrZoom is online now
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Boston, KY
Posts: 239
DrZoom is starting off with a positive reputation.
Just came across this thread and thought I'd resurrect it and add an interesting perspective. I am a chemist in the rubber industry, and a lot of what we make goes into gaskets. The reason the a lot of car companies are using charcoal canisters is because the acid that is formed when ethanol is burned causes the valve cover gasket and head gasket to harden and crack. My absorbing the vapors, the gaskets are being protected from acidic vapors. The original design may have been for environmental concerns, but it turns out that it is also necessary if you're burning ethanol diluted gas. On the other hand, if you go with FKM or HNBR gaskets, they are not susceptible to acidic hardening.
__________________
-1987 F250, 460, ZF 5 Speed, 4x4, 33"BFG, SC Longbed
-2004 Explorer, V6, 4x4, Daily Driver
-1969 VW Beetle, 1600cc original show quality
-2009 Mazda 3, 2.3L for when I need groceries FAST
http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/13...l#post15336975
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-21-2015, 05:55 PM
ncranchero's Avatar
ncranchero ncranchero is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: E.Lincoln County, NC
Posts: 3,178
ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.
steve.mckellop
Unhappy

So, does this affect condoms too?

My apologies. I just couldn't help myself.
__________________
Steve,
'94 F150 4x4 4.9L/M5ODR2/3.55(H9) 160K miles
'02 Escape XLT 3.0L DOHC/auto 165K miles
'14 TRANSIT Connect 2.5L DOHC

How to post pics
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-21-2015, 06:09 PM
DrZoom's Avatar
DrZoom DrZoom is online now
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Boston, KY
Posts: 239
DrZoom is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncranchero View Post
So, does this affect condoms too?

My apologies. I just couldn't help myself.
Absolutely. Make sure you use modern FKM rubbers when you're jammin' it up the tail pipe. Might also want some heat tape, but that's a different issue.
__________________
-1987 F250, 460, ZF 5 Speed, 4x4, 33"BFG, SC Longbed
-2004 Explorer, V6, 4x4, Daily Driver
-1969 VW Beetle, 1600cc original show quality
-2009 Mazda 3, 2.3L for when I need groceries FAST
http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/13...l#post15336975
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-21-2015, 07:51 PM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski Conanski is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 21,891
Conanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud ofConanski has much to be proud of
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBGrif91 View Post
If this is just FUEL VAPOR, what exactly is the point of having the canister? Why couldn't the vent line run direct from the tank to the TB? And, further more, if this were the case, why would a purge valve solenoid be necessary? Why couldn't the canister and the purge valve be eliminated altogether and just have a line running straight from the tank to the TB?
The fuel tank has to be vented otherwise the fuel pump won't be able to pull fuel from it, but if that vent is connected directly to the engine it will could pull too much at high vacuum and particularly when the tank is full and pull liquid fuel into the engine and cause a runaway or flooding problem. The charcoal canister and purge valve create a storage system and allow a controlled venting of vapor into the engine when conditions are favorable.. low vacuum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DBGrif91 View Post
Let's ignore the fact that eliminating them will trigger codes. I want to know what the practical effect on the engine is [performance or otherwise] if this were to be done. And I want to ignore the codes part because some pre-computer engines also have charcoal canisters, so for my part I am not concerned about the computer aspect of it.
If done properly eliminating the vapor collection system will have no effect on engine operation, but why would you.. this is fuel that will combust and make power so you would be just throwing away some of the value of each tank of gas and negatively affecting gas milage.
__________________
Paul (Conan) O'Brien

2006 E250 4.6L 4R75w 4.10, 2004 Ranger 3.0L 5-sp X-cab 4.10, 1994 Ranger 3.0L 5-sp x-cab 3.45, 2004 Subaru Legacy 2.5L 5-spd
1996 Kawasaki ZX11D, 2002 Honda VFR800,
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-22-2015, 10:11 AM
rugermack's Avatar
rugermack rugermack is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sonoita Hills, AZ
Posts: 1,764
rugermack is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.rugermack is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I paid $56 for my charcoal canister, from rockauto
__________________
Patrick
1988 F150, XLT Lariat 4x4, 302, c6, 4" lift, 35" Generals, Build Thread http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/13...ld-thread.html
2000 F250, Lariat, 7.3, SC, SB, auto,
2005 f350 6.0, 4x4, crew,
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-23-2015, 12:38 PM
OklahomaGreyBeard OklahomaGreyBeard is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 3
OklahomaGreyBeard is starting off with a positive reputation.
Had a 96 Cherokee that had not one, but two steel tanks implode because the yahoo owner before me bypassed the system and ran the vacuum line direct to the tank return line. Running down the highway at 70 and the thing dies, get out and am looking around under the hood and hear this loud bang and see fuel pouring out from under the back.

Second time around, I removed the entire fuel system on one from the scrapyard just to see what was different and found mine was missing the canister.
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
looking for eec valve name standardtransonly Fuel Injection, Carburetion & Fuel System 1 10-18-2014 11:38 PM
Excessive Vapor Smell from Charcoal Canister - 6.8 V10 TheRedBeast01 Modular V10 (6.8l) 12 06-30-2014 11:09 AM
Question about the vapor canister Turtle Carton 1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks 5 06-27-2014 10:58 AM
Part No. for Vapor Canister? GuitarJesus 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 0 03-24-2014 01:03 PM
Vacuum Lines eureka16 Performance & General Engine Building 0 08-24-2013 02:44 PM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Older, Classic & Antique Trucks > 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks

Tags
1994, 2003, 302, 68, canister, carbon, charcol, delete, f250, ford, light, older, paint, pics, purge, ranger, truck, vapor

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 AM.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Fordģ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup