Recall fix was performed today---Melting Evap Canister!!! Please read!!

[jcthorne]

I am betting the 2014s will be the same basic underpinnings but with some different outer body work features to manage / improve air flow inside the engine bay. If we are lucky, some of the updates may be applicable to earlier bikes.

 

[jerpinoy]

I hope this will fix the 2013 issue.

 

[ARtraveler]

Is this ailment just common to the 2013 or are others affected?

Cannisterectomy has been a subject from day one.

 

[boborgera]

What are the legal ramifications of altering the emissions system? I've always understood that to sell the vehicle, it must meet EPA. (I know that most folks wouldn't think to check before buying, but my question is one of legality, not practicality)

Would you have to reinstall the canister before selling it?

Read the emissions section of your manual, I think theres a part about tampering with a emissions part.
And no dealer in his right mind will remove one for you...

 

[Bob Denman]

:agree: Yup! This is a job for the backyard mechanics... :thumbup:

 

[jcthorne]

What I don't get in all of this is why the EPA has not gotten involved. Gasoline vapor emissions are a big deal and thus the reason for the non-functional vapor canister system that is woefully undersized to deal with the volume of fumes generated by this gasoline boiling design. The bikes that vent large amounts of vapor when hot are NOT emissions compliant. Not even close.

 

[jcthorne]

Cannisterectomy has been a subject from day one.

I still do not get what is trying to be accomplished with removing the charcoal canister. It's job is to CONTAIN the vapors so they do not vent. Yes, its undersized with the volume of vapors being generated but removing it will make the problem worse, not better. Unless I am missing something. Just don't see the advantage of removing it. Cars have had these since the 70s.

 

[BajaRon]

I still do not get what is trying to be accomplished with removing the charcoal canister. It's job is to CONTAIN the vapors so they do not vent. Yes, its undersized with the volume of vapors being generated but removing it will make the problem worse, not better. Unless I am missing something. Just don't see the advantage of removing it. Cars have had these since the 70s.

The purpose of the canister is to temporarily store fuel vapor until they can be disposed of through the combustion process. I'm not sure why you think the canister is too small. It's actually pretty good size. More than adequate to take care of the fuel vapor generated by the Spyder.

I know a lot of people are up in arms about the 'Boiling' of fuel. But this happens in a lot of vehicles, including motorcycles. You're not nearly as likely to get boiling when the fuel tank is full. Normally this happens when the tank is much lower.

The problem with the canister is not fuel vapor, it is raw, liquid fuel which overwhelms it. The canister is not designed to deal with raw fuel. There are many theories as to how raw fuel gets into the canister but the bottom line is, once you have a volume of raw fuel in the canister, it's toast. It needs to be replaced to fix the problem. You will get a constant fuel smell and you have a possible fire hazard situation (though it is very rare to actually get a fire).

If done properly, removing the canister eliminates all of the related problems completely and permanently. No more worries about overfilling your tank, melting or having the canister catch fire, purge valve issues or fuel smell.

I see this as an advantage. Others may not.

 

[cjackg]

The purpose of the canister is to temporarily store fuel vapor until they can be disposed of through the combustion process. I'm not sure why you think the canister is too small. It's actually pretty good size. More than adequate to take care of the fuel vapor generated by the Spyder.

I know a lot of people are up in arms about the 'Boiling' of fuel. But this happens in a lot of vehicles, including motorcycles. You're not nearly as likely to get boiling when the fuel tank is full. Normally this happens when the tank is much lower.

The problem with the canister is not fuel vapor, it is raw, liquid fuel which overwhelms it. The canister is not designed to deal with raw fuel. There are many theories as to how raw fuel gets into the canister but the bottom line is, once you have a volume of raw fuel in the canister, it's toast. It needs to be replaced to fix the problem. You will get a constant fuel smell and you have a possible fire hazard situation (though it is very rare to actually get a fire).

If done properly, removing the canister eliminates all of the related problems completely and permanently. No more worries about overfilling your tank, melting or having the canister catch fire, purge valve issues or fuel smell.

I see this as an advantage. Others may not.

I resisted doing the Canister removal for a long time but finally gave in and did it... It did not completely solve the fuel odors and I have heard the same thing from other Spyder owners that have removed it. As long as there is boiling fuel at shutdown, those fumes & odors have to go somewhere!

 

[Knarfoh]

My recall service was done today. The MC cap was fine, but the evap canister had started to melt. The dealer did not have one, so they robbed one from a new Spyder and installed it on mine.

What are the legal ramifications of altering the emissions system? I've always understood that to sell the vehicle, it must meet EPA. (I know that most folks wouldn't think to check before buying, but my question is one of legality, not practicality). Would you have to reinstall the canister before selling it?

It's just me; but I'd sure put it back before selling the bike...

The recall did include wrapping the "charcoal canister". My purge valve had gone bad and the dealer did not replace the canister so it was most likely full of fuel.

i was told besides the stupid heat tape they are going to install the dealer also said they were going to move or replace the canister i am getting old but i know he mentioned it

The EPA emission regulations impact manufacturers, distributors, dealers, OEMs, repair shops, rental centers and, as a result, end users.

All of these requirements are rolled into Title 40 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations under Sections 40 CFR 1054 and 40 CFR 1060. But, let’s face it, who has time to weed through and make sense of it all? To really understand what it all means, let’s break that down into something a little easier to digest.

What It’s About

To really understand how this affects consumers, it’s necessary to first take a look at what the regulation impacts: evaporative emissions. When liquid gasoline turns into a vapor, which happens when it’s warmed, evaporative emissions result. Everyone has smelled gas while filling a car’s tank or opening a fuel container on a warm day; that smell is the vapor.

The regulations aim to control running losses and permeation losses from fuel systems. Many people are surprised to learn just how much fuel vapor passes through the walls of untreated plastic fuel containers alone. Permeation is just one way in which fuel vapors are emitted, though. Evaporative emissions occur when an engine is running as well as through diurnal loss, when the engine isn’t running, due to daily temperature changes.

What It Looks Like

Some manufacturers have been ahead of the game in improving products to meet the standards. Those manufacturers employ a number of methods to control evaporative emissions, from special hoses to fuel caps on sealed fuel tanks to carbon canisters and vapor control valves. Here’s a breakdown of what that looks like inside any new equipment a consumer may purchase.

Hoses that come in direct contact with liquid gasoline must now be special low-permeation fuel hoses, which are manufactured specifically to limit the amount of fuel vapors that permeate through the hose wall. The hoses need to be kept free of kinks and obstructions to ensure good working order.

Most fuel systems are now sealed, and vented fuel caps have been primarily replaced with sealed caps to prevent evaporative emissions. When a sealed cap is used, there will be different hose connections. In addition to the normal fuel hose connection at the bottom of the tank, there also will be a connection for the vapor hose at either the top or bottom of the tank.

There’s one exception to the sealed fuel cap on some small engines, though. In those cases, the fuel cap self-vents through a carbon canister. The canisters come in different shapes and sizes and may be anywhere on the equipment, which makes it difficult to identify. The best method for locating a carbon canister is to first look for the spot where the vapor hose connects to the engine intake system, and then work backward toward the fuel tank. If the vapor hose connects directly to the tank, there will be no carbon canister. If the vapor hose appears to first go to a box, that is most likely the canister.

The carbon canister works to absorb diurnal vapors. When the engine runs, an intake vacuum draws any vapor from the tank into the engine, where it is burned. After the engine is shut off, vapors continue to be emitted into the atmosphere due to temperature changes throughout the day. The carbon canister absorbs those vapors, and when the engine is started again, the engine intake vacuum will draw in fresh air through the carbon canister’s vent port and thus purge the stored vapors.

Some engine manufacturers also are incorporating optional vapor control valves in new systems. These devices prevent liquid fuel from getting into the vapor system. Originally developed to prevent fuel leakage during rollover accidents, these also might be referred to as “rollover valves.”

What’s Now Required

Beyond making the adaptations to the new systems to limit evaporative emissions, OEMs must complete several steps to ensure adherence to the EPA’s regulations. This includes registering through the Verify system, labeling engines according to the standards, and providing emissions-related warranties. This all effects the look of new equipment, as well as adding new warranty guidelines of which consumers should be aware.

The EPA’s Verify information system collects data on emissions and fuel economy compliance for all sizes of engines. Each manufacturer must register with the EPA and apply for evaporative certification for its equipment through Verify.

Under the regulations, manufacturers also will need to place an approved evaporative emissions label on the equipment. This label must be permanently affixed or engraved on the engine and will include the heading “EMISSION CONTROL INFORMATION.” It will be followed by the manufacturer’s corporate name and trademark, the EPA’s standardized designation for the emission family and the date of manufacture. The EPA also requires that the label include the emissions compliance period, in hours, over which the engine exhaust emissions system was tested. A statement certifying that the engine meets exhaust emission regulations also must be included. While more information can be added, the above is what’s required on any engine-operated equipment now manufactured and sold in the United States, so expect to see it on any new purchases.

Each piece of new equipment also must come with an approved evaporative emissions warranty statement. Under this requirement, consumers purchasing the equipment, along with each subsequent buyer, will know that the engine, along with all of the parts of its emission control system, meets two conditions. First, at the time of sale the engine is designed, built and equipped to meet EPA regulations and, second, that there are no defects in the workmanship or materials that would keep the engine from meeting emission standards.

The EPA requires a minimum two-year emission-related warranty, although exceptions are made for some engines. The warranty covers any component that, should it fail, would increase the engine’s emissions of a regulated pollutant. Manufacturers will spell out all of the warranty details in the owner’s manual and provide a toll-free phone number and email address so that consumers can quickly file a warranty claim and have authorized repairs made so that they are not without their tools for long.

What Can’t Be Done

With these new standards in place, it’s no surprise that some things now can’t or shouldn’t be done.

First and foremost, don’t tamper or attempt to modify engines designed to meet EPA standards. Not only is it illegal and comes with civil penalties, but it can cause a host of problems. For example, removing an engine’s vapor control valves presents a fire hazard and can cause liquid fuel in the vapor system to severely damage the carbon canister.

Knowingly disabling an emission control system component, from tweaking the fuel or exhaust system to altering the engine’s performance, will violate the EPA regulations. Installing a part that differs from that originally on an engine that meets EPA standards also may bring penalties for tampering.

Even without EPA penalties, it would be foolish to attempt to make changes. This equipment has been manufactured to be the best for not only the environment, but the long haul. With basic maintenance, it’ll run long into the future and provide a great return on investment as the latest technology is powering the generator, pump or other piece of equipment. Normal maintenance (replacing air filters and spark plugs) and routine servicing, adjusting the fuel mixture within the allowable range or replacing jets for high altitude operation are still perfectly acceptable.

Finally, don’t try to replace a carbon canister cap with a standard cap. Equipment that meets the so-called “50 state” product distribution guidelines — meaning it meets CARB standards and can be sold in California — may have a special fuel cap with a self-venting carbon canister built in. Replacing these caps with a standard cap, or replacing a sealed cap with a canister cap, violates EPA regulations.

What Can Be Done

The manufacturer should provide a list of any critical emission-related maintenance. This might include any adjustment, repair, replacement or cleaning of the components used to control emissions. Other recommended maintenance and the corresponding schedules also will come from each manufacturer.

In terms of the warranty, each new engine sold will offer at least two years of warranty coverage on its emission components. The warranty covers the repair of emission-control-related parts that are found to be defective within the first couple of years of service. Each manufacturer will include a phone number and email address in the operator’s manual to ensure quick, easy access to filing a warranty claim. Ensure none of these parts are tampered with since that may void the warranty, but know that things will get repaired quickly when needed.

Follow a manufacturer’s maintenance schedule closely for new equipment, as well. Generators and other small-engine equipment will last even longer than anticipated when routine care and maintenance are performed according to the operator’s manual. Be sure to seek out qualified engine technicians for assistance on more advanced tasks to ensure the engine will continue to meet EPA standards and run smoothly into the future.

This overview of the EPA’s standards still may not make fun fodder. Understanding the component parts involved in reducing emissions will make it easier to perform basic services and preventative maintenance. Knowing the do’s and don’ts under the standards will ensure warranty claims are a breeze and that the equipment runs at peak performance, both of which are sure to maximize the investment.

 

[Bob Denman]

Ron,
I agree with you about boiling fuel not being an issue that is solely associated with Spyders.
2002 and 2003 Yamaha Grizzlies fought with the same issue. They had to put a heat shield between the top of the engine and the fuel tank, and open up some vents in the side bodywork to put an end to it...
(does this sound a all familiar?)
So we're not the first to deal with it...
We're just dealing with it RIGHT NOW! :shocked:***



*** My bike is behaving itself, but others have not been so lucky!

 

[jcthorne]

The purpose of the canister is to temporarily store fuel vapor until they can be disposed of through the combustion process. I'm not sure why you think the canister is too small. It's actually pretty good size. More than adequate to take care of the fuel vapor generated by the Spyder.

I know a lot of people are up in arms about the 'Boiling' of fuel. But this happens in a lot of vehicles, including motorcycles. You're not nearly as likely to get boiling when the fuel tank is full. Normally this happens when the tank is much lower.

The problem with the canister is not fuel vapor, it is raw, liquid fuel which overwhelms it. The canister is not designed to deal with raw fuel. There are many theories as to how raw fuel gets into the canister but the bottom line is, once you have a volume of raw fuel in the canister, it's toast. It needs to be replaced to fix the problem. You will get a constant fuel smell and you have a possible fire hazard situation (though it is very rare to actually get a fire).

If done properly, removing the canister eliminates all of the related problems completely and permanently. No more worries about overfilling your tank, melting or having the canister catch fire, purge valve issues or fuel smell.

I see this as an advantage. Others may not.

I think there are 2 different problems here being lumped into one. First you speak of a contaminated canister with liquid fuel in it. This case will result in fuel vapors around the bike EVERY time it is warmed up and parked. The other is the boiling fuel problem that only happens on pretty hot days or the bike reaches the point of boiling the fuel. Eliminating the canister will get rid of the first set of symptoms but will make the second worse. My comment about undersized canister is that it is no where near large enough to handle the boiling fuel vapors. Since the boiling fuel is a design 'feature' the evap emissions control is under designed to accommodate it. In reality its the fuel boiling that is the real problem, not the canister. The fuel boiling and the resultant fuel vapor emissions happen during a normal driving scenario, not outside of operating norms. Therefore my conjecture that the system is not compliant with EPA regs. as designed. Removing the canister only makes the problem worse. I had the unfortunate experience of the fuel boiling issue on the ride home from the dealer with a brand new bike with approx. 80% full tank. It was a trip of about 40 miles in stop and go traffic over about 2 hours on a hot (96deg) day. Its a real issue. The fuel smell sitting at lights was intense. At home in the garage it was several hours to dissipate. Several trips since have not resulted in this same issue, but they were all shorter and no where near as hot. As its not likely to be a safety concern the NHTSA will not get involved, if we want the boiling fuel issue researched and resolved, it is likely to come as part of an emissions recall by the EPA, not a safety one.

 

[jcthorne]

The EPA emission regulations impact manufacturers, distributors, dealers, OEMs, repair shops, rental centers and, as a result, end users.

All of these requirements are rolled into Title 40 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations under Sections 40 CFR 1054 and 40 CFR 1060. But, let’s face it, who has time to weed through and make sense of it all? To really understand what it all means, let’s break that down into something a little easier to digest.

What It’s About

Thanks for the information. It is appreciated. Any idea how to get The EPA and BRP working on this issue? It NEEDS solving.

 

[quickster47]

Any idea how to get The EPA and BRP working on this issue?

Probably nothing short of a miracle is gonna make that happen.

Carl

 

[Huddleston]

2nd Spyder with a melted Evap Canister

Apparently, I'm not the only one with a melted Charcoal Canister. See Post #28 in the following thread: http://www.spyderlovers.com/forums/showthread.php?57765-Recall/page2

 

[Questions]

gas boiling in tank,,,,,

:agree: Yup! This is a job for the backyard mechanics... :thumbup:

did you ever saw gas boiling on stove,,,,,, or eslwhere,,, i am pretty sure you will say ,,no!!! and you will say it is crazy to boilled gas,,,, so why do we spyder owner are telling brp and dealer that we saw gas boiling,,and none of those bozo are doing anything,,,,,

did you ever relised that we are sit on a bomb of 6 gall of gaz and that bomb is leaking,,,,,,boiling,,,,

94,oookm on it now,,, no fire yet, but lots of gas fume in my lungs,,,,,

 

[wftb]

i had a 2003 grizzly 660 , bought from new .never had any boiling gas and never got any recall notices .it is not that hot around here even in summer (80 F is a hot day here ) .the rad fan would cycle on and off while i was using it for yard work .it also had a plastic gas tank .pretty good natural insulating qualities .i dont know of any manufacturer that would accept boiling gas as a design feature .this is a mistake that slipped threw the testing and certification process , and it is a miracle that we have not had more fires and a huge amount of bad publicity .another member on here got his dealer to insulate his gas tank while he had the recall done .in my opinion that is the smartest improvement that any one has come up with so far .