Leaking fibreglass tank

hi all

My latest issue with my flat tracked 1976 Yamaha xs 650 is a now leaking fibreglass tank ! ( due to ethanol mix in modern fuel ?) . So... What is the best way forward in choosing getting a new one ? (It leaks at the lug hole fixing to the seat end , I don't imagine a repair is neither feasible or practical ? ) I feel that I need to offer up a tank to the bike first to see how it looks ...right ? As opposed to ...ordering online Then not being happy and returning paying postage ...? Surely not sir .

Then there is ..new in steel £400 ...eBay £10 old , dented requiring refurbing etc and repainting and a lot less for sure ...best way forward I think in practical and monetary terms.

Am I right in saying that most tanks sit to the frame by way of the tank seating on the lug/bungs on frame with its elephant ears on the tank ( as what mine doesn't).

Could you make up a load of resin and swirl it about the inside of the old one?

You'd lose a bit of capacity but so long as you cleaned it thoroughly you should get good adhesion and be petrol-tight.

get one made in alloy using current tank as pattern as fibreglass tanks are now illegal for road use i think

I am liking the resin idea Mr fro thankyou and yes Mr eastanglianbiker they are not dot legal and reading up on it the reason is that whereas an alloy would bend on impact the fibreglass just cracks and potentially spills the fuel !! Not good

The bloody fuel will eat through anything mate. You need to get a good ( IE non rusty) steel tank. Its a shame but everyone I know who has fibreglass tanks is suffering. Even after trying various liners. Its also eating fuel lines and petrol taps and given most people who run older vehicles issues with non starting and gumming up the fuel systems.

Its f**king crap this so called petrol. It doesn't even smell like petrol now.

I have heard that draining the fuel and leaving it to dry out for a while (like a couple of months) helps stabilise the fibre glass and then may allow you to seal it.

The bloody fuel will eat through anything mate. You need to get a good ( IE non rusty) steel tank. Its a shame but everyone I know who has fibreglass tanks is suffering. Even after trying various liners. Its also eating fuel lines and petrol taps and given most people who run older vehicles issues with non starting and gumming up the fuel systems.

Its f**king crap this so called petrol. It doesn't even smell like petrol now.

I have heard that draining the fuel and leaving it to dry out for a while (like a couple of months) helps stabilise the fibre glass and then may allow you to seal it.

Do you not remember the experiment I ran a while back?

The ethanol percentage needs to be significantly higher than that in normal fuel to have an impact on rubber parts etc.

Do you not remember the experiment I ran a while back?

The ethanol percentage needs to be significantly higher than that in normal fuel to have an impact on rubber parts etc.

and im still running my lawnmower on fuel that's nearly two years old...

So if I counter you 2 happy people in this thread with 2 who are not happy then we will call it a draw. But hey a leaking petrol tank is the reason this thread started and I know of 3 others who have the same issue. The tanks are blistering up from the inside.

Try looking through any old vehicle magazine, forum , or ask at any meeting where people with old vehicles meet. If after you hear some of the horror stories of carbs failing, petrol pipes splitting and failing, tanks rotting through from the bottom then you are still not convinced than what more is there to say.

I know there is a problem when old tank liners which has been fine for years like Petseal is flaking off inside tanks and the only change is to the fuel make up. I know of at least 6 people in my small circle of friends and club mates who have had this issue including me. I know of a 2002 W650 which suddenly would only run on 1 cylinder. It was taken to a bike shop and has had to have a new petrol tap and carb needles and they had disintegrated .

I can't use original cork sealed petrol taps anymore as they swell up and disintegrate and then start leaking, So I have had to buy an ethanol proof one ( and god knows how long this is going to last).

here is some reading for you

http://www.groups.tr-register.co.uk/wessex/ethanol-update.html

http://www.mag-uk.org/en/campaignsdetail/a6973

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/classiccars/9108430/The-ethanol-threat-to-classic-cars-and-bikes.html

But if you don't think there is a problem then thats fine . Lets just agree to differ . But to say there is not an issue in a thread about a leaking tank is rather ironic.

Interesting how you've managed to turn the OP's question in to a statement to suit your purpose.

Funnily enough, having owned a number of classic and vintage vehicles, I have never suffered the perils of "nasty ethanol". I'm sure that you're aware that rubber/rubberised parts perish with age, mild steel rusts with time, etc, etc so it's all too possible that some may mistakenly attribute the ageing process to something other than an item's frailty.

I naturally base my opinion on fact, not anecdotal evidence. I (a scientist) conducted a scientific experiment in laboratory conditions using a number of variables and controls. I used instrumentation with accuracy +/-1 nanolitre and +/-10 microgram so have more confidence in my results than something some bloke (probably bearded and drinking real ale) down the pub reckoned happens.

I'm happy to address your previous observation as to why "It [petrol] doesn't even smell like petrol". It's the same reason why bacon doesn't taste like bacon and tomatoes don't taste like tomatoes these days although cannot be associated with the inability to leave one's backdoor open at night without fear of opportunistic burglary. Sadly, this is the age related degeneration of your olfactory system. I can link you a number of peer-reviewed scientific journals and papers to cover this but fear it would be a waste of my time as one tends not to see much in the way of scaremongering in these publications.

Also, irony is to use words to express something other than their literal intention. I find none in this thread.

Haha, Mr Fro. Repeat the experiments but this time throw in some real ale and beard trimmings. Maybe thats the key!

FACT: Real Ale does not rot fibreglass petrol tanks!

FACT: Real Ale mixed with petrol does not taste good, nor does it enhance the performance characteristics of a petrol engine!

FACT: Real Ale does not rot fibreglass petrol tanks!

FACT: Real Ale mixed with petrol does not taste good, nor does it enhance the performance characteristics of a petrol engine!

not even once the beard trimmings are added al?

Funnily enough, having owned a number of classic and vintage vehicles, I have never suffered the perils of "nasty ethanol". I'm sure that you're aware that rubber/rubberised parts perish with age, mild steel rusts with time, etc, etc so it's all too possible that some may mistakenly attribute the ageing process to something other than an item's frailty.

I'm happy to address your previous observation as to why "It [petrol] doesn't even smell like petrol". It's the same reason why bacon doesn't taste like bacon and tomatoes don't taste like tomatoes these days although cannot be associated with the inability to leave one's backdoor open at night without fear of opportunistic burglary. Sadly, this is the age related degeneration of your olfactory system. I can link you a number of peer-reviewed scientific journals and papers to cover this but fear it would be a waste of my time as one tends not to see much in the way of scaremongering in these publications.

 

I rebuilt my Ural about 7 years ago. Now as a matter of course and as you well know one of the things you do when running older vehicles or rebuilding them is replace fuel and oil lines. So with that fact in mind I replaced all the petrol pipes on this with new stuff. So even you would admit that given that I replaced all the pipes 7 years ago then I should be ok.

But no 3 years later the tank balance pipe underneath the tank split in numerous places when I took the tank off one day. This is the only petrol pipe on the bike which has got petrol in it constantly. So I have now replaced it with ethanol "proof" pipe. Also the splitter that I use to save draining the tank everytime I take it off seals with a rubber O ring. I have to replace this O ring everytime I split the joint as it swells up and distorts and wont fit back in the hole to seal the joint again.

So do you think 3 years for rubber pipes to disintegrate is ok then?

Oh but wait it can't be the fuel as My Fro says so.

I also replaced the petrol tap on my Panther when I rebuilt that with another new tap fitted with a cork bung. As have been used for years. That lasted a week before the cork gave up the ghost and I had to buy a new tap which is ethanol "proof". Now cork has been used to seal petrol taps on old bikes for around 90 years. But all of a sudden it doesn't work anymore. Ditto the rubber cap seal. That distorted out of shape and I have had to replace that as well.

As to why the fuel smells different well that easy mate. its got ethanol in it so it will smell different. Just as it doesn't burn as well and gives less MPG. Dodgy nose or no dodgy nose.

Then as I posted above the 2002 W650 kwak that had to have new petrol tap fitted as the old one disintegrated along with some of the carb bits like the main needle.

Are you buying cheap Chinese pipe?

Nobody else replaces fuel pipes as often as you do.

If all fuel pipes failed after just three years, the majority of road users would be changing fuel pipes on a regular basis! But they are not, so yours seems a uniqure experience.

Are you buying cheap Chinese pipe?

Nobody else replaces fuel pipes as often as you do.

If all fuel pipes failed after just three years, the majority of road users would be changing fuel pipes on a regular basis! But they are not, so yours seems a uniqure experience.

my fuel lines on my bike are 14 years old and still going strong

my brothers fuel lines are 19 years old and the same pipes and 8 of those years where owned by me and I never once changed them

nor have I ever had to replace any seals that comes in to contact with fuel

Oh but wait it can't be the fuel as My Fro says so.

Easy now Trekkie - I know you've got a soft spot for me and I'm flattered that you should feel that way but my bread just isn't buttered that side. I'd prefer it if we could just stay friends.

Replacing your lines is a prudent move but as Joeman says; if you don't pay for quality, you can't expect these things to last long.

I'm also confused about your O-rings, you've said previously that "nasty fuel" dries, embrittles, shrinks and makes your rubber items crack. Now you state that your rubber items are swelling. A contradiction, surely.

I currently run a 9 years old bike that is completely standard, haven't changed a single thing apart from filters - no sign of iffy hoses. My track bike is 20 years old - I had the carbs off again just a week ago and they were lovely and clean - no oxidation - all needles, shims, tubes, floats, seals and jets in tip-top condition. I can only suggest "user error" on your behalf - you're not using some sort of additive are you?

Just as it doesn't burn as well and gives less MPG.

Oh, and that should be fewer mpg. Did you do a proper comparison to make such a claim or just guess it?

couple of days ago, i got my KTM out from hibernation. its not been started for over a year. its got a plastic tank, rubber fuel lines and little fuel tap with rubber seals inside.

All i did was remove the spark plug, squirted in some WD40 to lube the bores a little, hand cranked it a couple of times, replace the spark plug, turned on the fuel tap, pulled the choke and it started second kick and ran sweet as the day it went into hibernation.

So thats a 10 year old bike with a highly tuned two stroke racing engine with premixed petrol that's been in the plastic petrol tank and in the carb float bowl, for over a year without leaking out, starting second kick on stale fuel... how do you explain that??

but anyway, back on topic, i would cut out the leaking part of the tank and make sure the hole was big enough to get my arm in to spread resin over the rest of the inside of the tank.

I'd then rebuild the missing part with fiberglass filler, sand it all off, prime and paint. maybe even swirl some paint about inside the tank (not sure about that)

if you take your time, you'd never know the difference, and it would last another 30+years

Oh but wait it can't be the fuel as My Fro says so.

Easy now Trekkie - I know you've got a soft spot for me and I'm flattered that you should feel that way but my bread just isn't buttered that side. I'd prefer it if we could just stay friends.

Replacing your lines is a prudent move but as Joeman says; if you don't pay for quality, you can't expect these things to last long.

I'm also confused about your O-rings, you've said previously that "nasty fuel" dries, embrittles, shrinks and makes your rubber items crack. Now you state that your rubber items are swelling. A contradiction, surely.

I currently run a 9 years old bike that is completely standard, haven't changed a single thing apart from filters - no sign of iffy hoses. My track bike is 20 years old - I had the carbs off again just a week ago and they were lovely and clean - no oxidation - all needles, shims, tubes, floats, seals and jets in tip-top condition. I can only suggest "user error" on your behalf - you're not using some sort of additive are you?

Just as it doesn't burn as well and gives less MPG.

Oh, and that should be fewer mpg. Did you do a proper comparison to make such a claim or just guess it?

Err isn't less MPG the same as fewer MPG. Or am I missing something obvious?

If I thought you would actually bother to read about it I could post info about how this fuel burns less well ( or should that be fewer?) and how it gives less (fewer) power and therefore less (fewer) MPG .

But if you go to decent motor factors and buy the correct petrol pipe that they sell over the counter then should I expect it to last longer than 3 years. I got my original fuel pipe from Parkers the large motor factors. Just as I have purchased the ethanol proof stuff from them as well. That's lasted 4 years so far.

And No I am not using some sort of additive as I don't agree with trying to fix shit that been put in petrol by adding more shit. I have never used lead replacement additive either. But the only bike I have had valve seat regression on is my current BMW and that is a know issue if you use them at high speed for a lot of miles. Mine did 400 miles in a day at 70 to 90 MPH and it killed the seats.

But I have had the seat replaced and its all fine now. Its a shame that the year after my bike was made they changed the seats anyway.

But as I said above mate. You are happy with this stuff and lots of people aren't. I can never convince you that your wrong and you can't convince me that your right. To be honest I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have had issues with the fuel you and others haven't.

the point is more people havent than more people have!

think of the millions of cars and bike are out there running on this "shit" fuel

you don't see many of them sat at the side of the road pissing out fuel due to a split pipe

also everyone would be complaining about it not just a handful

but hey we cant change your mind about this shit fuel

Err isn't less MPG the same as fewer MPG. Or am I missing something obvious?

No, you are definitely missing something obvious. One should use "fewer" when dealing with discrete variables, i.e. something that may be counted.

Aside from advanced grammar - I read your posts with great interest Trekkie-wekki. You didn't say you went to a large motor factor to get your pipe, I can't believe you fell for the old "ethanol proof pipe" jape. Next thing you know they'll be offering you tartan paint, left handed spanners and a reacharound.

How old is your BMW? Not made for leaded was it? That'd certainly explain why you lost the seats.

It's true what you say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks any more than you can convince a Daily Mail reader of a fact by showing them empirical data.

I look forward to reading your next post, I'll be keeping an eye out for it.

Err isn't less MPG the same as fewer MPG. Or am I missing something obvious?

No, you are definitely missing something obvious. One should use "fewer" when dealing with discrete variables, i.e. something that may be counted.

Aside from advanced grammar - I read your posts with great interest Trekkie-wekki. You didn't say you went to a large motor factor to get your pipe, I can't believe you fell for the old "ethanol proof pipe" jape. Next thing you know they'll be offering you tartan paint, left handed spanners and a reacharound.

How old is your BMW? Not made for leaded was it? That'd certainly explain why you lost the seats.

It's true what you say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks any more than you can convince a Daily Mail reader of a fact by showing them empirical data.

I look forward to reading your next post, I'll be keeping an eye out for it.

There are 'left-handed ADJUSTABLE spanners, just as there are left-handed scissors. Pease do not generalise or you will never win the argument. Now, as to 'tartan paint' - did they not withdraw that from production due to the ethanox content?

Err isn't less MPG the same as fewer MPG. Or am I missing something obvious?

No, you are definitely missing something obvious. One should use "fewer" when dealing with discrete variables, i.e. something that may be counted.

Aside from advanced grammar - I read your posts with great interest Trekkie-wekki. You didn't say you went to a large motor factor to get your pipe, I can't believe you fell for the old "ethanol proof pipe" jape. Next thing you know they'll be offering you tartan paint, left handed spanners and a reacharound.

How old is your BMW? Not made for leaded was it? That'd certainly explain why you lost the seats.

It's true what you say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks any more than you can convince a Daily Mail reader of a fact by showing them empirical data.

I look forward to reading your next post, I'll be keeping an eye out for it.

 

There are 'left-handed ADJUSTABLE spanners, just as there are left-handed scissors. Pease do not generalise or you will never win the argument. Now, as to 'tartan paint' - did they not withdraw that from production due to the ethanox content?

no gog it was due to the emergence of the bay city rollers and the paint maker trying to distance itself from them

The AA

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/news/biofuels.html

Ethanol’s energy density is about 2/3 of conventional petrol so fuel consumption will be a little higher and volatility is increased which can contribute to higher evaporative emissions.

Critically Ethanol has higher solvency causing compatibility problems with rubbers and can cause corrosion in aluminium, zinc and galvanised materials, brass, copper and lead/tin coated steels.

Ethanol picks up water and contributes to corrosion and phase separation where ethanol and any water held in solution can separate out into distinct layers under certain conditions. Ethanol can also cause starting problems at low temperatures.

 

university of Illinois

http://web.extension.illinois.edu/ethanol/vehicles.cfm

However, engines that were built before ethanol blends became commonly available may have fuel system gaskets, seals, and fuel lines made of materials that are not compatible with ethanol.

Mitsubishi Motors official site

http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com.au/customer-assistance/alternate-fuels

If your vehicle has a carburettor fuel system built before 1991, we don't recommend you use ethanol-blended petroleum. Your vehicle may experience hot fuel handling concerns and may experience a lower level of durability in some fuel system components.

Ethanol has a lower energy content that petrol, therefore fuel consumption will generally increase when using fuel blended with ethanol. At a 10% ethanol content, it is estimated that fuel consumption will increase in the order of 3%, but actual degradation will be influenced by specific engine technology.

Australia's Federal chamber of automotive industries.

http://www.fcai.com.au/environment/can-my-vehicle-operate-on-ethanol-blend-petrol

Vehicles made before 1986 vehicles were predominantly equipped with carburettors and steel fuel tanks.

The use of ethanol blended petrol in engines impacts the air/fuel ratio because of the additional oxygen molecules within the ethanol's chemical structure.

Vehicles with carburettor fuel systems may experience hot fuel handling concerns. This is because the vapour pressure of fuel with ethanol will be greater (if the base fuel is not chemically adjusted) and probability of vapour lock or hot restartability problems will be increased.

As a solvent, ethanol attacks both the metallic and rubber based fuels lines, and other fuel system components.

Ethanol also has an affinity to water that can result in corrosion of fuel tanks and fuel lines. Rust resulting from this corrosion can ultimately block the fuel supply rendering the engine inoperable. Water in the fuel system can also result in the engine hesitating and running roughly.

I can post more if you want.

But I don't expect you to change your mind.

This has kinda drifted from the original question........so, let's try to get it back on track please.

By all means continue this discussion........but start a dedicated thread, eh........