1st Generation Specific (1979-1985) 1979-1985 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections

Charcoal canister. Ever needs replacing?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-03-06, 05:37 PM
  #1  
7-less

Thread Starter
 
85 FB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: No. Virginia, USA
Posts: 2,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question Charcoal canister. Ever needs replacing?

Already did a search, like a good boy should , and came up with nothing relevant to my question.

While cleaning and painting various engine bay pieces, I came across what appeared to be two charcoal canisters. On the 13B, one canister is located under the air filter assembly (that IS a charcoal canister right?), one big hose going in one end, and another hose coming out the other end. The other I have found is next to the washer fluid container, with two small vacuum tubes on the top.

Now, what I'm wondering is, are these things that EVER need replacing? And, when my car last went in for emissions, it passed easily (A friend who used to be a mechanic said that those would only need to be replaced if I failed emissions).

So, 1). That one under the air filter, is that a charcoal canister?
and 2). Do either of these two ever need replacing?
Old 06-03-06, 05:45 PM
  #2  
Super Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
gsl-se addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lynchburg, VA
Posts: 5,088
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
The 1st thing you are talking about is not a charcoal canister. It is the air silencer, if I understand what you are talking about correctly. Any air from the air pump that is not injected into the cats or the exhaust ports exits through that chamber. Just a muffler, really.

The 2nd thing is the charcoal canister. I have never heard of someone needing to replace (unless they get clogged up or something). I suppose they may become less effective with time. Basically, it just captures fumes from the gas tank. The fumes are then routed into the intake when the car is running. It should have no influence on the emissions out of the exhaust. Car companies do need to do things like this to control other sources of emissions (fuel vapors).
Old 06-03-06, 09:41 PM
  #3  
Old Fart Young at Heart

iTrader: (6)
 
trochoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: St Joe MO
Posts: 15,145
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
I've seen them needing replaced on some piston engines, due to emission/carb issues, but have only heard of 1 case on the forum. With all of them that get tossed, a decent used one shouldn't be hard to find if you ever need one.
Old 06-03-06, 09:49 PM
  #4  
kiwi from downunder..

iTrader: (4)
 
blwfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: springfield,oregon
Posts: 3,423
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
so its important to retain it or could be route the gas tank fumes to the carb?
Old 06-03-06, 10:16 PM
  #5  
Senior Member

 
Randokuky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I ditched mine.
Old 06-03-06, 10:24 PM
  #6  
kiwi from downunder..

iTrader: (4)
 
blwfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: springfield,oregon
Posts: 3,423
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Randokuky
I ditched mine.
when i had run my car with out it i could see fume vapours comin from the tubes
it could cause a fire with out it
Old 06-03-06, 10:31 PM
  #7  
Senior Member

 
Randokuky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
oh really? well ****. I threw it away......what if I put a hose that connects the 2 holes.
Old 06-03-06, 10:50 PM
  #8  
kiwi from downunder..

iTrader: (4)
 
blwfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: springfield,oregon
Posts: 3,423
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
then i think vapours go tot he crank case iv forgot
Old 06-04-06, 12:38 AM
  #9  
FB+FC=F-ME

 
steve84GS TII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 3,353
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Theres no good reason to remove the canister.Its not heavy and it has no impact on HP.There are safety issues with fuel tank pressure and fuel vapors,but many dismiss them and prefer to have a simplified engine bay.

The main cause of problems with the charcoal canisters is from overfilling(topping off) the fuel tank.Liquid gasoline can get into the vapor lines and foul up the insides of the canister,which is designed to only handle vapors.They should last the life of the car,in normal circumstances.
Its a very simple and passive system.Except that on the rotary,the fuel vapor recovery and the crankcase vapor recovery systems are intermingled.This makes them different,but not much more complex,than a typical piston engine's vapor recovery systems.

Last edited by steve84GS TII; 06-04-06 at 12:40 AM.
Old 06-04-06, 01:08 PM
  #10  
Rotary Enthusiast

iTrader: (1)
 
Nicholas P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,415
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
people will remove a **** to get 0.01 hp. its kinda rediculous. but some people just do it to make more room in the engine bay.
Old 12-17-06, 09:04 PM
  #11  
Senior Member

 
mattreeve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Richmond, B.C
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, and power to weight is a big factor when talking 7s

I removed mine along with the steel tube going to the crankcase and just pinched the one going to the gas tank
Old 12-17-06, 10:16 PM
  #12  
backyard tuner

iTrader: (1)
 
Paradox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
if you remove it, drill a small hole in the gas cap so the pressure from the tank has a place to release itself.
Old 12-17-06, 10:50 PM
  #13  
Turbo widebody FB

iTrader: (1)
 
Dan_s_young's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 3,733
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by steve84GS TII
Theres no good reason to remove the canister.Its not heavy and it has no impact on HP.There are safety issues with fuel tank pressure and fuel vapors,but many dismiss them and prefer to have a simplified engine bay..
Couldn't agree more, no reason to remove it.
Old 02-01-10, 02:24 PM
  #14  
Stu-Tron Get Yo Groove On

iTrader: (4)
 
Jeezus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Huntsville AL
Posts: 8,405
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
Instead of making a new thread, I will bump this quite old one with my question.

I have removed my canister before, and the hardline was left running into the engine bay. Well,
now I will be removing the hard line. I am sure that there is a rubber hose that connects the
hard line to a nipple on the tank... Should I pinch/block that off? I am leaning more towards just
sticking one of those itsy-bitsy filters people put on the oil tube nipple. Would this be adequate?

Old 02-01-10, 04:56 PM
  #15  
Old Fart Young at Heart

iTrader: (6)
 
trochoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: St Joe MO
Posts: 15,145
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Should be fine and will keep the vapors out of the engine bay.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
t-von
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
9
09-10-15 01:56 PM
Blk 93
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
11
09-09-15 10:56 AM
Frox
General Rotary Tech Support
2
09-08-15 08:36 AM
Enzo1944
New Member RX-7 Technical
2
09-06-15 08:57 AM



Quick Reply: Charcoal canister. Ever needs replacing?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:14 AM.