DIY: EVAP canister removal for sedan owners

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old Oct 30, 2010 | 08:09 PM
  #16  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
I have a significant update to this thread. Must read for every member who removes the canister.


First off I apologize to anyone who has followed this guide and had problems. There are problems if done improperly like I described in this thread at first. After the box is removed the EVAP system has to be closed under the hood on the passenger side because it will cause a vacuum leak which will alter the air/fuel ratio and also cause the motor to crank longer after sitting for a few hours because the motor will have problems maintaining vacuum at the initial crank because of the leak. Because of the leak, there will also be a SES CEL light for the air/fuel ratio sensors on both banks, 1 and 2. There will also be subtle power surges at wide open throttle across the entire RPM range as the ECU tries to maintain the target air/fuel ratio because of the leak. Probably only noticeable on MT cars.

These are pics of how to close the EVAP system under the hood. There is also no need anymore to run any hoses from the gas tank into the subframe like I had. Simply pulling the hoses off and leaving the gas tank pipe ends open is fine.
At this point there are 0 problem with this mod as long as the EVAP CEL is disabled with Osiris to be able to pass emissions.

More weight can be saved by removing the hardline under the car and all hoses.




 

Last edited by Andrei; Oct 30, 2010 at 10:57 PM.
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2010 | 07:40 PM
  #17  
Playa24_7's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Ontario, Canada
I still don't understand why any of you are going to the trouble of doing this "mod" if you want to even call it that. Taking off a part of the car that was put there for a reason, to "save" weight, just doesn't many any sense to me. None of you are racing your cars, and the amount of weight you're going to be taking off isn't going to be noticeable at all, so the questions remains, why?
 
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 12:33 PM
  #18  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
Well that's why you cant take on a stock 335i or an E46 M3 and I can. That's also where the differences between me and 90% of the members here begin because I do the absolute best that I can with the car that I got in terms of performance and if it means that I save 4-5 pounds by removing the canister, brackets, hoses, bolts, rear tow hook and hardline, I'll do it.

Again if anyone does not like this mod no one is forcing anybody to do it.

Also another quick update. I blocked off the EVAP system at the throttle body. It's better this way since EVERYTHING can be removed.
 

Last edited by Andrei; Nov 1, 2010 at 03:37 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 12:40 PM
  #19  
Playa24_7's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by Andrei
Well that's why you cant take on a stock 335i or an E46 M3 and I can. That's also where the differences between me and 90% of the members here begin because I do the absolute best that I can with the car that I got in terms of performance and if it means that I save 4-5 pounds by removing the canister, brackets, hoses, bolts, rear tow hook and hardline, I'll do it.

Again if anyone does not like this mod no one is forcing anybody to do it.
You can do what you want, I'm not disputing that.

I was just wondering why people would do this, and now I know it's to shead a few lbs for the hell of it, so cool. I got what I was wondering.
 
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 12:56 PM
  #20  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
I just weighed the canister and hoses I was using. It's 5 lbs just for that. Not counting the hardline, other hoses, rear tow hook, bolts, canister brackets and canister cover it's undoubtedly around 10 lbs+ of weigh savings which is very good.









 
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 01:13 PM
  #21  
Playa24_7's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Ontario, Canada
Not bad.

The G35 sedan's power to weight ratio is 13.4lbs. So for every 13.4lbs you gain 1HP essentially (3,472lbs / 260hp = 13.4lbs).

Everything helps I guess.
 
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 02:25 PM
  #22  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
Well I removed a lot more than that with other mods. I estimate I'm at 3400lbs even BUT I make additional power with the mods. I estimate over 300++ (325-330+) brake horse power for my Revup sedan at 298bhp stock. Maybe 275-280ish+ at the wheels on a DynoJet. I also have no doubt that I have a better power to weight ration than a E46 M3.

Custom dual 3" exhaust w/ quad tips. Stock exhaust is all gone except stock headers. Saved a lot of weight here and made power.
AAM throttle body spacer
90mm CAI. Just a pipe instead of a Z tube. Felt gains when I installed it.
Oil warmer delete. 5lbs here at least. Heat soak problem solved.
Idle pulley delete. 5lbs + here.
EVAP delete. 10lbs+ here.
Complete coolant bypass. Some weight saved. Heat soak.
Unknown aftermarket clutch/light weight flywheel. A lot of weight saved here.
 

Last edited by Andrei; Nov 1, 2010 at 03:35 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 4, 2010 | 01:12 PM
  #23  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
Here is the 2005 M3 "Competition Package" I cant justify the price on it for the performance or the price of ownership/parts/maintenance. http://www.insideline.com/bmw/m3/200...w-m3-ever.html I'm topping that now and still for about $10k less.


Key specs.
Base Price: $47,300
Price as Tested: $55,840

Displacement (liters): 3.2
Engine Type: I-6
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 333 @ 7900
Torque (ft-lbs @ rpm): 262 @ 4900

Curb Weight (lbs): 3415

0 - 60 (sec): 5.5
0 - 75 (sec): 8.0
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 13.72 @ 105.36
30 - 0 (ft): 111.85
60 - 0 (ft): 28.34
 
Reply
Old Nov 4, 2010 | 01:25 PM
  #24  
Heist.'s Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (31)
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 59
From: 714
Andrei always found your posts to be very interesting keep it up! I'm going to do this once when I send my ECU to get flashed.

I removed the wipers all the wiring and the giant fluid canister. The weight in cleaning solution alone had to be about a gallon so ~8.35lbs I think. Overall I'm estimating 13-14lbs.

I was thinking about relocating my battery to the trunk. Would this be beneficial to weight distribution in our sedans? I feel like the rear is really light ( mines gutted with no spare).
 
Reply
Old Nov 4, 2010 | 04:13 PM
  #25  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
I wouldn't bother relocating the battery. Slightly more weight in the front is beneficial for better acceleration because more weight will shift to the rear during acceleration reducing traction loss.
The 50/50 weight distribution claim BWM makes is just a selling point making people think they buy a superior product compared to say 53,55/47,45 on a G sedan.
 

Last edited by Andrei; Nov 5, 2010 at 12:01 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2010 | 07:35 PM
  #26  
Tollboothwilley's Avatar
Former G35driver Vendor
iTrader: (32)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 28
From: Vegas
Whats your best ETA in the 1/4?
 
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2010 | 01:33 AM
  #27  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
I have not been yet but I am DYING to go. The rear differential bushing is blown and I get EXCESSIVE wheel hop through 1st gear and part of 2nd. I have SPL F/R differential bushings and I am waiting on a friend to move his shop for him to help me with the install, might be this month.

Another issue is the clutch pivot ball which I need to change to a Nismo one and Nismo roller bearing. I also want a 850 TQ rated clutch. I will launch the car at 5-6000rpm on drag radials once I get all that done.
 
Reply
Old Nov 7, 2010 | 01:56 AM
  #28  
Junkyardspecial's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 204
Likes: 2
From: Olivette, MO
Originally Posted by Andrei
Here is the 2005 M3 "Competition Package" I cant justify the price on it for the performance or the price of ownership/parts/maintenance. http://www.insideline.com/bmw/m3/200...w-m3-ever.html I'm topping that now and still for about $10k less.


Key specs.
Base Price: $47,300
Price as Tested: $55,840

Displacement (liters): 3.2
Engine Type: I-6
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 333 @ 7900
Torque (ft-lbs @ rpm): 262 @ 4900

Curb Weight (lbs): 3415

0 - 60 (sec): 5.5
0 - 75 (sec): 8.0
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 13.72 @ 105.36
30 - 0 (ft): 111.85
60 - 0 (ft): 28.34
Those numbers are for the convertible M3 or they just had a BADDD driver. Motor trend has that car at 13.0 and I know you arent touching that. With your mods Im guessing about 14.0. I don't see you removing about 100lbs making you run with M3's. You might be able to catch a vert driver on a bad day.

Originally Posted by Andrei
I wouldn't bother relocating the battery. Slightly more weight in the front is beneficial for better acceleration because more weight will shift to the rear during acceleration reducing traction loss.
The 50/50 weight distribution claim BWM makes is just a selling point making people think they buy a superior product compared to say 53,55/47,45 on a G sedan.
Also, you need to learn some physics. Having more weight on the rear helps RWD cars in acceleration. Front weight can cause understeer in our cars as they are slightly more front heavy, that is why the engine was placed back a tad bit to aid in better Weight distribution. If you can toss any weight from the front to the back it would be beneficial to hard launches. This is my guess on why the stock muffler and resonator is so heavy, to aid in rear weight.

Also, if you look at reports done, BMW does have a very close if not perfect weight distribution on most of their cars.
 
Reply
Old Nov 7, 2010 | 08:33 AM
  #29  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
Here you go. http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2101.shtml Could still be the convertible. I have no idea. http://www.ket.org/tvschedules/episo...a=MOTK++002101
They have a professional driver BTW.
Episode description: Road tests of the BMW M3 coupe and convertible and the Mitsubishi Lancer OZ Rally Edition, plus the first drive of the 2002 Toyota Camry R. [cc]
2001 BMW M3

Engine
3.2 liter inline 6 cylinder

Horsepower
333

Torque
262 lb feet

0-60 mph
5 seconds

1/4 mile
13.5 seconds @ 107 mph

60-0 mph
112 feet

EPA Mileage
16 mpg city
24 mpg highway

Also. http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/59/BMW-E46-M3.html
Seems they got some inflated numbers.

Power 343 bhp / 256 KW @ 7900 rpm
Torque 365 Nm / 269 ft lbs @ 4900 rpm
BHP/Liter 106 bhp / liter
Power to weight 0.22 bhp / kg
Top Speed 250 km/h / 155 mph
0-60 mph 5.1 s
Originally Posted by Junkyardspecial
With your mods Im guessing about 14.0.
Well I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
 

Last edited by Andrei; Nov 7, 2010 at 08:50 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 9, 2010 | 03:05 PM
  #30  
Andrei's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 21
From: Lawrenceville, GA
Originally Posted by Andrei
This is the drive side valve cover venting to atmosphere. Like I said it does not cause any gas smell venting to atmosphere. Usually this has a hose connecting to the intake and it releases unburned gas vapors into the intake but it fouls up the throttle body.

The gas smell after I put the canister back into the subframe was simply because of a bad wideband air/fuel sensor.

I was wrong about the driver side valve cover not causing any gas and oil vapor smell inside the car with the AC on. It turns out it does.

This is how I fixed it.





 
Reply


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:58 AM.