[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [New Search]
On 9 May 2006 at 5:42, Big Al wrote: > Jim, I don't know what to say, but I am in posession of a round filler > port tank without a vent. So the Bently manual is not 100% correct. > > this tank is saying that in 1969 the filler changed, but the vent was > not added. I'm not exactly sure what you mean here, since I believe that all of the tanks had a vent port (the medium sized port, maybe 12mm.) IIRC, the location of that port moved in mid-'68. There were additional small, 3mm, ports that varied more over the years. Those include the ports for the EEC. If you have a tank that has a round filler port plus a medium port, then that is probably a late 68 or 69 tank where the actual tank vent comes off a Tee in the medium port line and there is no other port. Later systems used that same Tee together with a small port, and then a second small port was used for the overflow cannister under the LF fender that went with the charcoal cannister & EEC system. There were a number of variations, so I may not be remembering this exactly right. OTOH, as good as the Bentley manual is, we know it isn't perfect. Nevertheless, i should probably look at the photos there to refresh my memory. > I have a tank that the return port does not align with the hole in the > cup at the bottom of the tank. there is only 1/4 of the return tube > visible. The cup was welded off-center. > > With this new 69 tank, it's also misaligned, but the tube is just up > against the side of the hole. Fuel seems to flow smoothly, so I'm > going to try to use it anyway. > > 2 out of the 4 T3 tanks I've worked on these past weeks were misaligned. > I have no idea if I'm just that lucky or if that could be an actual > percentage of misaligned tanks. *Your tank may vary. Okay, gotcha. Yeah, I was outta town. I haven't noticed this, but you may be right that they varied a lot. That seems odd, however, since I would expect that the "jet pump" action of the returning fuel would only be effective if the alignment was pretty good. > oh, I understand your suggestion Jim. What I should have said is that > in a pinch, he could also use back to 69 with the round filler port and > not have to change out the filler neck hose. Okay, fair enough. > Since the charcoal canister probably isn't doing him any good by now > anyway, at least he could get back on the road with an earlier tank > without the vent. I agree. -- Jim Adney jadney@vwtype3.org Madison, WI 53711-3054 USA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List info at http://www.vwtype3.org/list | mailto:gregm@vwtype3.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~