Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

so I decided to remove my carbon canister and after a bit of research on internet I found various information on how it is done .

At the end this lead to confusion so below is how I have done it, is this correct ?

Take the canister out which has three pipes plugged into it , 1 from manifold vacume , one coming from drive firewall(along with brake lines) and one from passenger firewall.

I removed the canister and connected the line from driver side to the line from passenger side thus loop it back in, I guess this is ok as by the time fuel vapours or pressurise , then it takes the route back to the tank so reducing the pressure?

I initially left both of those pipes to vent to air and could smell strong fuel vapour every now and then .

I have seen some saying then remove both cables all the way to the tank and simply leave a small filter on it on the tank , but which side? which one is return ?

in addition , I have changed my vacume rubber lines with silicon line bought from ebay .

I have replaced the vacume lines that are circled in red and all of it goes back to the manifold.

The picture below is not from my car and it is missing the port sticking out on the inlet pipe which I have circled in red.

I think all of them are simply vacume pipe and not fuel/oil but want to get your view. one is connected to the fuel pressure regulator vacume port i think as per the picture below .

15i9gur.jpg

Many thanks for your help

Edited by stranger12

Why are you removing the carbon canister? What's after the noisy bov - replace the factory air cleaner with a cheap pod filter?

I'll say this only once then I'll leave you alone...If you don't know exactly what you are doing and why then do some extensive research first on here or Google the questions and make sure you know exactly what the various components you are dealing with are supposed to do so that you can be sure any modification is a step forward rather than backwards.

Here's three suggestions from me (all relatively expensive as useful mods usually are):

Fit a three inch turbo back exhaust.

Front Mounted intercooler (no FFP required)

Depending on where you are ... a Nistune chip for your ecu and a good tune.

have the three inch pipe, front intercooler at home and ready to install soon

re nistune, I am going to get link this year so no money spent on that

re carbon canister I want to free some space up as most other people do hence why I removed it .

any view on my questions above :)

any view on my questions above :)

My view? Removing the carbon canister is foolish. The canister is the single most inoffensive emissions control device ever invented. It does a wonderful job of stopping some pretty serious emissions of hydrocarbons to the atmosphere, which is actually a pretty desirable thing. And it does it with essentially NO cost to performance. The amount of room "freed up" by the removal of the canister is almost inconsequential.

Now contrast that with the likely response of a police officer, who, upon lifting your bonnet, looks inside and sees that you have foolishly removed the most obvious piece of emissions gear in the car. He is going to rub his hands together with joy, because anyone silly enough to do that is going to be silly enough to have done other things that he can defect you for. And when he is done defecting you for the dozen or so silly things (think of that stupid atmo BOV as an example) you are going to want to sell the car rather than subject yourself to the pain of trying to put it all back right so it will go over the pits.

Granted, once you put a Link ECU in it then the carbon canister won't work anyway, because this is an R34 and the Neo engine has a tricky little solenoid that is run by the ECU to make the charcoal system work and the Link won't do that and no-one ever thinks about these things....but nevertheless, even a non-functioning carbon canister doesn't look like a removed carbon canister.

Freeing up space is a poor excuse IMO. I have everything in my bay (A/C etc) along with aftermarket shit like catch can, bigger turbo, external gate and the carbon canister still easily fits. Granted i have FFP but the return flow cooler kits take up no more room

I also run 3" cooler piping and a 4" intake which is bigger then most so im sure you can find the room

20140119_103121_zpst7g7tgdy.jpg

Edited by 89CAL

Is it possible to vent these gas outside rather than burning it up in the motor. Doesnt this method cause a build up of black muck in the whole intake system. (Including turbo)??

Is it possible to vent these gas outside rather than burning it up in the motor. Doesnt this method cause a build up of black muck in the whole intake system. (Including turbo)??

No. As I have already stated, carbon canisters are totally benign and only do good things. Black muck comes from EGR, or from direct injection due to not having fuel in the intake tract to wash the creep off.

Hmm i was referring to the pcv valve not the egr. I've yet to see an rb with an egr valve. The pcv (positive crank case ventilation) from what i seen is nasty stuff that carries oil particals as well.

Plumbing this back in wouldn't kill power as its pre burnt gas? I know it leaves a light film of nasty, what ever you want to call it, all over the intake system. I have attached a photo of where the canister vents a very very small amout of this gas if not burnt completely. It vents it in the chasis. Now that can be nice and oil. Lol. Protects from rust.

post-37293-14338953254664_thumb.jpg

PCV gasses get sucked into the plenum with vacuum.

What we are talking about is the carbon canister, it sucks the fumes from the fuel tank and pumps them into the engine, rather than out into the atmosphere.

The nasty oil film is coming from the breathers, and that's why people put oil catch cans on them.

  • Like 1

Understand. Mixed the two up. ^_^

How do drag cars deal with it using a fuel cell for exsample. On like 100% Of fuel cells have two lower out let and two on the top. How do you control the vacuum that the fuel pump will creat sucking the fuel out.

Ive always wondered about this. Keeping in mind fuel vapors. Im thinking some kind of one way valve. Just a guess though.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • The water pump is know to leak as well. So if the coolant is low checking that first as well as hoses. 
    • Reading your posts Josh, sometimes I feel like I've gone in a time machine back to the 90's when everyone was doe-eyed and figuring things out for the first time.  I've lost track of how many single turbo GTR's I've seen on track that haven't burnt down lol. Everything has been figured out a long time ago. These things are at the point now where its essentially turn-key to go single turbo. 
    • Among other things yes. Making sure to either use an oil pressure regulator or the right restrictor size for your oil pump/range of oil viscosities you intend to run, making sure you plumb the lines correctly, turbo should be placed such that it siphons properly even when the water pump isn't turning so you don't boil coolant in the turbo after shutdown, oil return should be low resistance and also preferably picking the one that is most likely to return to the pickup as opposed to some other irrelevant part of the pan. It's far from impossible to figure this out but I have seen people really, really struggle and if that's the case it's easier to just take the path of least resistance. To me, bolt-on twin turbos are a fixed cost whereas single turbo is almost unbounded.
    • Latest round of updates on the car. I purchased and installed a SWS clutch slipper to help with 60ft times and got some second-hand good condition 275/40R17 Hoosier DR2 radials. Test and tune in November showed the tyres were an upgrade over my over 15 year old mickey Thompson's and I got a 1.8 second 60ft and pb et of 11.71 but even then, that run wasn't great due to rain and driver error (the event got called off 10 minutes later fast forward to the weekend just gone 25th of Jan and there was finally a break in the weather to let racing happen. The first run the track was slippery and only managed a 12.1@129 Second run the track was better and got a new pb et and mph: 11.54@131   Lith and I then worked out that I installed the previously mentioned clutch slipper incorrectly and its never been working, and I had just been dumping the clutch the entire time, we also noticed it was on street boost and not race boost. So I lined up for a third run with the car turned up in the first two gears, but the passengers side axle objected to clutch dumps and left the chat which stopped my weekend.   so there will be another attempt in the future once I replace the tyres as they rubbed and are stuffed now. but a low 11 should be on the cards.
    • Ceramic coating and heat shielding, you mean?
×
×
  • Create New...