Engine Swap Everything about swapping an engine into your Third Gen.....be it V6, V8, LTX/LSX, crate engine, etc. Pictures, questions, answers, and work logs.

charcoal canister

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 25, 2004 | 03:27 PM
  #1  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
charcoal canister

i swaped a 95 LT1 into my car. do i need to somehow hook up the charcoal canister?
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2004 | 07:31 AM
  #2  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Re: charcoal canister

Originally posted by sinner
i swaped a 95 LT1 into my car. do i need to somehow hook up the charcoal canister?
You need a way to vent pressure from the gas tank. Before charcoal cannisters, cars just had vented gas caps. If you cap off the vent line, and run your stock unvented cap, the tank will build pressure and become unsafe.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2004 | 12:17 PM
  #3  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
the fuel line is still connected to the canister, but there is no longer the line going to the engine.

do i need to restore that connection?

is there a way to eliminate the canister if its not being used?
(a filter or something?)
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2004 | 05:34 PM
  #4  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
You want to give the fumes a safe escape route, if the LT1 has an evap inlet you could connect that to your cannister.

My cannister was electrically-controlled, and the LS1 I was installing had an evap solenoid on the intake...had to pick one or the other as the switch.

So...I hit the junkyard, found a G-body car that had a cannister same size as mine but no controls...just an inlet and outlet. That works great w/ the LS1 evap solenoid, same size hose fittings and everything.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2004 | 07:52 PM
  #5  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
mine used to be electronicly controlled too. hmm, so i need to find an LT1 guy to ask....so like, hmmm...where to look, what to doo....hahahahahahahaa:lala:
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2004 | 06:03 PM
  #6  
Spdfrk1990's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
So is there a way to eliminate this cause i rather not have it if i dont have too.
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2004 | 08:30 PM
  #7  
OutLaw305's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
From: South East MI
Car: 1992 Camaro RS AKA Big Nasty
Engine: Carbed '79 350 block, 360hp/380ftlbs (flywheel)
Transmission: 6speed from an unidentified 4th gen. ask me, ill tell you.
you think we could just use vented gas caps?
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2004 | 10:48 PM
  #8  
25THRSS's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,740
Likes: 3
From: Glen Allen, VA
I got rid of the entire thing. Canister, vent line, everything, and then capped off the vent line from the tank. I then removed the stock pressure relief valve and replaced it with a K&N breather with a stud that mounts right where the pressure refief valve did. Looks factory
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2004 | 11:00 PM
  #9  
Spdfrk1990's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
Hmm sounds like a good idea work good so far? Possibly get some pics.
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2004 | 11:02 PM
  #10  
25THRSS's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,740
Likes: 3
From: Glen Allen, VA
Originally posted by Spdfrk1990
Hmm sounds like a good idea work good so far? Possibly get some pics.
Works great, but no pics as of now. Possibly in the not so near future though.
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2004 | 11:05 PM
  #11  
Spdfrk1990's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
Yeh i would like to see that did you just get rid of that 1 vent line then and put a filter where that valve is by the rear brake line?
Reply
Old Nov 28, 2004 | 11:06 PM
  #12  
25THRSS's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,740
Likes: 3
From: Glen Allen, VA
pretty much
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 04:20 AM
  #13  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by 25THRSS
I got rid of the entire thing. Canister, vent line, everything, and then capped off the vent line from the tank. I then removed the stock pressure relief valve and replaced it with a K&N breather with a stud that mounts right where the pressure refief valve did. Looks factory
So...you're venting gas fumes under the rear of the car, right near the exhaust?

One backfire during a hot restart, after the car's been sitting a while and built up a nice vapor cloud, should invoke a Darwin award.
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 04:40 AM
  #14  
Spdfrk1990's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
So hmm I need a way to get rid of this thing lol.

Last edited by Spdfrk1990; Nov 29, 2004 at 04:44 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 08:49 AM
  #15  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
A vented gas cap would minimize the problem I raised above...it would vent vapors above the car, where they would dissipate.

Venting under the car, where the vapors can accumulate, is dangerous.
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 04:37 PM
  #16  
Spdfrk1990's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
I dont think it would pass echeck with one would it.
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 08:05 PM
  #17  
OutLaw305's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
From: South East MI
Car: 1992 Camaro RS AKA Big Nasty
Engine: Carbed '79 350 block, 360hp/380ftlbs (flywheel)
Transmission: 6speed from an unidentified 4th gen. ask me, ill tell you.
E-check. Whats an E-check?
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 08:19 PM
  #18  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
ya we dont have those either

so anyhoo, i guess from all this i still dont know what to do.

do i remove the canister and put a filter on the line from the tank or do i find somewhere on the motor to hook up the canister?

if so where?
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 09:14 PM
  #19  
TexasLT1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 3
From: Angleton, TX
Car: '92 RS
I was under the impression the charcoal canister only functions after the car is shutoff to recover fuel vapors left in the intake tract. When the car is started the next time, the canister is purged and the vaoprs are burned.
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2004 | 10:57 PM
  #20  
25THRSS's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,740
Likes: 3
From: Glen Allen, VA
Originally posted by kevinc
So...you're venting gas fumes under the rear of the car, right near the exhaust?

One backfire during a hot restart, after the car's been sitting a while and built up a nice vapor cloud, should invoke a Darwin award.
The factory put the pressure relief valve right there. I highly doubt if it was so dangerous that they would do that. The exhaust doesn't get anywhere near hot enough that far towards the rear to ignite anything.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2004 | 06:49 PM
  #21  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by 25THRSS
The factory put the pressure relief valve right there. I highly doubt if it was so dangerous that they would do that. The exhaust doesn't get anywhere near hot enough that far towards the rear to ignite anything.
The factory did not intend for it to be venting at atmospheric pressure, full time, such as the design above would do.

It's not exhaust pipe heat that would trigger an explosion, it's a tailpipe backfire during startup.

I'm not saying not to do it and I'm not too interesting in arguing beyond what I've posted...if that risk isn't enough to sway opinion, then by all means go for it. Darwin candidates have rights too.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2004 | 07:05 PM
  #22  
25THRSS's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,740
Likes: 3
From: Glen Allen, VA
Originally posted by kevinc
The factory did not intend for it to be venting at atmospheric pressure, full time, such as the design above would do.

It's not exhaust pipe heat that would trigger an explosion, it's a tailpipe backfire during startup.

I'm not saying not to do it and I'm not too interesting in arguing beyond what I've posted...if that risk isn't enough to sway opinion, then by all means go for it. Darwin candidates have rights too.
No, they just intended it to open under extreme pressure and vent a large amount of fuel vapors at an excelerated rate. Quit being an ***.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2004 | 08:02 PM
  #23  
TexasLT1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 3
From: Angleton, TX
Car: '92 RS
and how often are you going to get a tailpipe backfire on start up with enough fuel vapor underneath the car to start a fire or explosion?
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2004 | 08:41 PM
  #24  
OutLaw305's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
From: South East MI
Car: 1992 Camaro RS AKA Big Nasty
Engine: Carbed '79 350 block, 360hp/380ftlbs (flywheel)
Transmission: 6speed from an unidentified 4th gen. ask me, ill tell you.
once in a lifetime? but still, would you risk it?
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2004 | 09:25 PM
  #25  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
so...again..what do i do here? how do i resolve this issue?
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 03:23 AM
  #26  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by 25THRSS
No, they just intended it to open under extreme pressure and vent a large amount of fuel vapors at an excelerated rate. Quit being an ***.
...says the guy who can't spell 'accelerated' but still feels qualified to give out advice...

With a functioning charcoal can, you will never, ever build enough pressure at the tank to open that vent. It's a safeguard to prevent the tank from popping in the event of a failure.

Last edited by kevinc; Dec 1, 2004 at 03:34 AM.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 03:30 AM
  #27  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by TexasLT1
and how often are you going to get a tailpipe backfire on start up with enough fuel vapor underneath the car to start a fire or explosion?
Check back w/ us on that when your Opti-Spark lets go.

I'll take a swag and say neither GM nor the NHTSA have done failure mode effect analysis on the combo of hacked-up fuel systems and exhaust backfires, so there's not likely any statistically-valid data on that.

Gasoline in vapor form trapped under the car's body is incredibly dangerous stuff, just one flicked cigarette or brake pad worn down to metal-on-metal and you have an ignition source.

Again, this is one of those hacks that only puts the driver and occupants of the car at risk, so I'm not totally against it.

Last edited by kevinc; Dec 1, 2004 at 06:09 AM.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 06:08 AM
  #28  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
*double post*
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 08:13 AM
  #29  
TexasLT1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 3
From: Angleton, TX
Car: '92 RS
Originally posted by kevinc
Check back w/ us on that when your Opti-Spark lets go.

I will. 80K+ miles and going strong. I'm not too worried

And the Opti is a known problem.

Fuel vapor under the car in large enough quantities to excite an explosion due to a rapid venting of built up pressure in the fuel tank during startup when a tail-pipe backfire occurs, not a known problem.

Last edited by TexasLT1; Dec 1, 2004 at 08:16 AM.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 08:40 AM
  #30  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by TexasLT1


Fuel vapor under the car in large enough quantities to excite an explosion due to a rapid venting of built up pressure in the fuel tank during startup when a tail-pipe backfire occurs, not a known problem.
Can't argue that, but it seems a safe assumption that ignition of captive fuel vapors is a real risk.

May or may not happen during startup, true.

If it were me, and I absolutely had to ditch the charcoal can, I'd cap the line and use a vented gas cap. That way the vapors are vented above the car where they can't be captured in underbody spaces.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 01:38 PM
  #31  
25THRSS's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,740
Likes: 3
From: Glen Allen, VA
Originally posted by kevinc
...says the guy who can't spell 'accelerated' but still feels qualified to give out advice...

With a functioning charcoal can, you will never, ever build enough pressure at the tank to open that vent. It's a safeguard to prevent the tank from popping in the event of a failure.
Oh no, not another spell checker. Get over it. You are right, it is a safeguard. One that operates exactly how I described. If it was a risk at all, it would have been put somewhere else on the car. Anyways, I thought you weren't, "interested in argueing beyond what you have posted?"

Last edited by 25THRSS; Dec 1, 2004 at 01:40 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 08:04 PM
  #32  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4


ok guys im lost. it seems to me we have moved past what i was asking to a fun argument. can someone with an LT1 please share with me what they did on thier car?

i wanna remove it if i can, because it isnt doing anything. if there is a way to hook it up and use it, ill do that.

im not gonna vent it under the car, if i do, i am going to put a filter inder the hood. if i do that? what filter do i need to use?
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 08:48 PM
  #33  
TexasLT1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 3
From: Angleton, TX
Car: '92 RS
I got rid of it. Shouldn't be a problem to hook it up if you want to keep it. The solenoid on the canister is the same one used on the LT1 I believe, I think it was just mounted on the intake for the 4th gens.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 09:06 PM
  #34  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
so did u just put a filter on the line when u removed it?
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 09:12 PM
  #35  
TexasLT1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 3
From: Angleton, TX
Car: '92 RS
no filter. not even real sure what we did with the line now its been so long since we did it.
Reply
Old Dec 1, 2004 | 09:25 PM
  #36  
bulletboy29's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
From: Hattiesburg, MS
Car: '87 Camaro SC
Engine: 305 LG4
Transmission: 700r4
I don't have an LT1, but I did get rid of my charcoal canister. I just poked a couple of holes in my non-vented gas cap. Don't drill holes all the way through it, just puncture the diaphragm from the inside.
Reply
Old Dec 2, 2004 | 10:43 AM
  #37  
David Petersen's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: Las Vegas, NV
Just my opinion but why wouldn’t you just keep the charcoal canister? It doesn’t cause any performance hindrance and keeps the fuel system closed loop, is safer, will allow you to pass any smog test and keeps the air cleaner. If you have the LT1 set up you can mount the canister out of site as the canisters are designed to be mounted in the rear of the car if cosmetics are an issue. Is there a flaw in my thinking?
Reply
Old Dec 3, 2004 | 07:52 PM
  #38  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by David Petersen
Just my opinion but why wouldn’t you just keep the charcoal canister? Is there a flaw in my thinking?
Only one flaw in your thinking...you're assuming everyone has common sense.
Reply
Old Dec 3, 2004 | 08:44 PM
  #39  
Spdfrk1990's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
It makes the engine compartment look bad same reason im relocating the battery.
Reply
Old Dec 3, 2004 | 08:47 PM
  #40  
sinner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: umatilla county, or.
Car: 1992 Camaro Z28
Engine: 1995 Camaro LT1
Transmission: 700R4
well, im under the idea that if it isnt doing anything i dont want it there, i could move my air filter over there and make my own cold air setup. that was the idea anyway..the canister isnt wired in, and the vacum line that is sposed to go to the motor isnt goin anywhere..so my question was:
a: how do i hook it up
or
b: how do i safely remove it?
Reply
Old Dec 4, 2004 | 01:26 AM
  #41  
TexasLT1's Avatar
Supreme Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 3
From: Angleton, TX
Car: '92 RS
Originally posted by kevinc
Only one flaw in your thinking...you're assuming everyone has common sense.

Or...we do have common sense, and realize its not that big of a deal.
Reply
Old Dec 6, 2004 | 04:41 PM
  #42  
kevinc's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 3
Car: 1982 Z28
Engine: LS1
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by TexasLT1
Or...we do have common sense, and realize its not that big of a deal.
You've evidently never experienced a gas explosion firsthand.

When you do, you'll have more respect for fuel vapor (if you live).

(kevinc signs off this thread)
Reply
Old Mar 20, 2006 | 11:49 AM
  #43  
Jeremysyty's Avatar
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: Western PA
I know this is an old thread, but I have to put in my .02 cents. I was at the track yesterday and had fuel slosh out my vented cap during hard cornering. It created a siphonage effect that ran down the side of the car and inside the car on the fuel filler hose down to the exhaust. It ignited a huge ball of flame either during a downshift or when I hit the rev limiter. Scared my buddy that was in hot pursuit. But no major problems other than that. I plugged the cap and no longer had the issues.
Reply
Old Mar 21, 2006 | 12:14 PM
  #44  
Jeremysyty's Avatar
Junior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: Western PA
Amazingly I found a video of my car at the track from someone behind me when the gas ignited.

Notice the fuel spill around the corner. Lots of mulla on the track Glad no one was hurt. Good to keep the fuel system a closed system!

http://www.trackvisions.com/track2.wmv
Reply
Old Mar 21, 2006 | 12:56 PM
  #45  
WillSpeedy's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: Central Alberta,Canada
Car: 88 Iroc Vert/ 1980 Z28
Engine: 305 TPI/ 350
Transmission: 700R4/ TH350
Axle/Gears: 2.73posi/ 3.08 Open
nice video but listening to that whining honda makes me want to barf
Reply
Old Mar 21, 2006 | 02:48 PM
  #46  
ljnowell's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,935
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by kevinc

(kevinc signs off this thread)

The best contribution he has made to this thread yet!
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Quzyle
DIY PROM
13
Oct 15, 2015 03:35 PM
skinny z
Carburetors
11
Sep 29, 2015 11:25 PM
Racerx974
Tech / General Engine
7
Sep 19, 2015 10:16 AM
ndndndnd
Carburetors
2
Sep 16, 2015 04:13 PM
TBRays98
Tech / General Engine
6
Sep 6, 2015 05:05 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:59 PM.