[Mgs] Evaporative loss and anti-run on valve tubing sizes

[Joel Martin]

I too have had petrol fume smells in my trunk.  While the stainless braided hoses looked fine, I think the rubber inside had deteriorated.  I just replaced mine with fuel line hoses and the smell has gone away.  Just get a size that fits the nipples and some hose clamps.  You could also get the replacement braided lines if you want to stay strictly stock.

Regards
Joel Martin



      From: "mgs-request at autox.team.net" <mgs-request at autox.team.net>
 To: mgs at autox.team.net 
 Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2018 2:38 PM
 Subject: Mgs Digest, Vol 128, Issue 1
   
Send Mgs mailing list submissions to
    mgs at autox.team.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/mgs
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    mgs-request at autox.team.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
    mgs-owner at autox.team.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Mgs digest..."
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation  $12.75
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums

Today's Topics:

  1. Evaporative loss and anti-run on valve tubing sizes
      (William Killeffer)
  2. Evaporative loss and anti-run on valve tubing sizes
      (William Killeffer)
  3. Re: Evaporative loss and anti-run on valve tubing sizes
      (PaulHunt73)
Hi everyone,
I've decided that my next MG project will be replacing the fuel tank and its associated parts, and getting the evap loss system and ARO valve back into functioning condition. The car, a 1974 MGB, with an 18GK engine and HS4's, has smelled rather petrol-y in the boot for many years, but the last time I drove it, it seemed far worse. Like, rolling fire hazard worse. None of the evap or ARO stuff has been correctly hooked up since I've had the car. Seems like this would reduce fuel wastage due to evaporation. 
Some remnants of the evaporative loss tubing is still there, but it's hard to tell what to use for a proper replacement for the perished bits. The hose running from the valve cover to the canister seems like it's supposed to have a different inner diameter on each end. And there's also the hose that runs from the bottom of the ARO valve. I'm just ghetto enough that if I thought a piece of last summer's garden hose would do the trick, I would go that route, but I doubt it's that simple. 
Any suggestions for tubing sizes and sources would be very much appreciated at this point. 
Thank you,-William---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: William Killeffer <wkilleffer at epbfi.com>
Date: Jan 2, 2018 2:32 PM
Subject: Evaporative loss and anti-run on valve tubing sizes
To: mgs at autox.team.net
Cc: 


Hi everyone,
I've decided that my next MG project will be replacing the fuel tank and its associated parts, and getting the evap loss system and ARO valve back into functioning condition. The car, a 1974 MGB, with an 18GK engine and HS4's, has smelled rather petrol-y in the boot for many years, but the last time I drove it, it seemed far worse. Like, rolling fire hazard worse. None of the evap or ARO stuff has been correctly hooked up since I've had the car. Seems like this would reduce fuel wastage due to evaporation. 
Some remnants of the evaporative loss tubing is still there, but it's hard to tell what to use for a proper replacement for the perished bits. The hose running from the valve cover to the canister seems like it's supposed to have a different inner diameter on each end. And there's also the hose that runs from the bottom of the ARO valve. I'm just ghetto enough that if I thought a piece of last summer's garden hose would do the trick, I would go that route, but I doubt it's that simple. 
Any suggestions for tubing sizes and sources would be very much appreciated at this point. 
Thank you,-William

 Don't expect much of an improvement in mileage by eliminating vapour leaks, but definitely a good idea to do so for the other reasons.  The tank rotting through on the top is a fairly common event, but that is usually accompanied by staining down the front and sides.  With the separator in the boot that and its associated plumbing has to be favourite though.  The separator seems to use threaded fittings, but it should be possible to fit plain hose to those. Ordinarily the hose at the bottom of the ARO is only pulling in air, to scavenge the charcoal granules.  However if the float chamber valve(s) stick open then fuel will eventually run out of that hose.  But it's never going to be under pressure, or holding fuel, so anything that fits will be fine. Can't comment on the relative sizes of the rocker cover and canister ports except to say that in pictures and Parts Catalogue I can't see any reduction in hose OD between the two.  If it really is different then get something to fit the rocker cover and pad it out at the canister.  It's only pulling air and fumes through, no petrol in an overflow situation like the ARO valve lower hose, but I'd still use fuel-grade hose for it and in all the other places hose is used. PaulH.  ----- Original Message ----- 
 
   Some remnants of the evaporative loss tubing is still there, but it's hard to tell what to use for a proper replacement for the perished bits. The hose running from the valve cover to the canister seems like it's supposed to have a different inner diameter on each end. And there's also the hose that runs from the bottom of the ARO valve. I'm just ghetto enough that if I thought a piece of last summer's garden hose would do the trick, I would go that route, but I doubt it's that simple. 
_______________________________________________
Mgs mailing list
Mgs at autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/mgs


   

|  | Virus-free. www.avast.com  |

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/mgs/attachments/20180104/cd5a3d41/attachment.html>