Here is a 180 liter (47.5 gallon) Long Ranger tank in the Museum's VDJ200 from Australia. I believe it has it's own pump.
Tembo / Exel 15 gallon Aux Tank Installation
- Thread starter Forrest Murphy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aux installation tank
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Here is a 180 liter (47.5 gallon) Long Ranger tank in the Museum's VDJ200 from Australia. I believe it has it's own pump.
Yeah, but is that gravity fed? Seems that in order for gravity feed to work there needs to be an elevation drop. Just wondering if the Tembo kit sacrificed some potential volume in order to accommodate the spare wheel.
It has a pump.
- Thread starter
- #24
I think so, It looks like one might be able to make a tank that extends further to the rear. As far as deeper you would connect the gravity feed lower to the main tank. e.g. the main tank would sit at half full until the Aux tank is drained. When talking to Tembo the thinking of the size of the tank is to the keep it inline with the OEM sub tank to lessen the negative impacts to the evap system/Software. The total fuel load is a couple of gallons more than the tundra's optional larger 38-gallon tank. Base on some research the URJ200 5.7 and the tundra seem to use the same pollution controls systems. I could not find anything that stated the 38-gallon Tundra has a different EVAP system than the smaller tank option.
my 2 cents if one desires to go larger it might make sense to go the transfer tank route. When considering long ranger option I end up coming to the conclusion, I would isolate the aux and main as much as possible. e.g. installing a sperate fuel fill for the transfer tank in order not cut the OEM fill line up, install a check value on the transfer line to isolate the transfer tank from the main, install a time relay to auto shut off the transfer pump, etc. Further, the petrol long ranger comes with a secondary evap canister that is isolated from the main for the transfer tank.
I went the Tembo/Exel gravity feed route for the KISS factor.
my 2 cents if one desires to go larger it might make sense to go the transfer tank route. When considering long ranger option I end up coming to the conclusion, I would isolate the aux and main as much as possible. e.g. installing a sperate fuel fill for the transfer tank in order not cut the OEM fill line up, install a check value on the transfer line to isolate the transfer tank from the main, install a time relay to auto shut off the transfer pump, etc. Further, the petrol long ranger comes with a secondary evap canister that is isolated from the main for the transfer tank.
I went the Tembo/Exel gravity feed route for the KISS factor.
Last edited:
This is just awesome.
So the major obstacle of moving the EVAP has been proven. Which opens up the opportunity to do various subtanks.
I do think a gravity fed setup is ideal. More capacity without too much complexity. 40 total gallons is just about perfect in my mind. It's all about balance. More is more, until it's too much (weight/complexity/cost/etc).
So the major obstacle of moving the EVAP has been proven. Which opens up the opportunity to do various subtanks.
I do think a gravity fed setup is ideal. More capacity without too much complexity. 40 total gallons is just about perfect in my mind. It's all about balance. More is more, until it's too much (weight/complexity/cost/etc).
And only works with the Diesel engines because of it.
That is the trick. Really stoked on your results thus far. Just pondering the possibilities given the parameters in which we are working.
It could be configured as a transfer pump. However 47 extra gallons of gasoline may easily overpower the evap system.
Several have tried and failed. There's a reason why the simple elegance of this gravity fed system is so exciting.
- Thread starter
- #30
I am very optimistic about this solution... Keep in mind, E0 and E10 gasoline evaporates faster as the ambient temperature increases. E10 evaporates at a slower rate than E0 gasoline.(1) The temperature has been pretty mild in the Midwest this week. Once, the ambient temperature climbs the EVAP system will be pushed a little harder. That being said, I am confident that EVAP system will work as designed.
Due this thing called work I was not able to pick up the rig this afternoon. (insert sad face). The shop is exercising the truck today, and the craftsmen that performed the work is taking it home tonight. He has about a 90 mile round trip to and from the shop. They have been able to put about 300 miles on it. So tomorrow the shop is going to refuel the truck and perform another series of validation testing before picking it up.
On last check-in no codes. They have kept a scan tool logging while accumulating miles.
(1) "In two-hour tests at temperatures near 70°F, during which 4.5 to 5.3 wt% of initial fuel samples were evaporated, E10 fuels lost an average of about 5% less gasoline than their base fuels. A similar result was obtained for a one-hour test, during which about 2.4 to 2.5 wt% of the initial fuel samples were evaporated." source: Gasoline Evaporation–Ethanol and Nonethanol Blends Ted R. Aulich , Xinming He , Ames A. Grisanti & Curtis L. Knudson
Due this thing called work I was not able to pick up the rig this afternoon. (insert sad face). The shop is exercising the truck today, and the craftsmen that performed the work is taking it home tonight. He has about a 90 mile round trip to and from the shop. They have been able to put about 300 miles on it. So tomorrow the shop is going to refuel the truck and perform another series of validation testing before picking it up.
On last check-in no codes. They have kept a scan tool logging while accumulating miles.
(1) "In two-hour tests at temperatures near 70°F, during which 4.5 to 5.3 wt% of initial fuel samples were evaporated, E10 fuels lost an average of about 5% less gasoline than their base fuels. A similar result was obtained for a one-hour test, during which about 2.4 to 2.5 wt% of the initial fuel samples were evaporated." source: Gasoline Evaporation–Ethanol and Nonethanol Blends Ted R. Aulich , Xinming He , Ames A. Grisanti & Curtis L. Knudson
- Thread starter
- #31
Picked up Finnbhennach-
The main had a needle more than a 1/4 tank remaining. The tech and I went to the top of the aux/main- it took 31.1 gallons. I know, I know I should have taken a picture of the pump display for posterity. Top of the head math seems that 31.1 gallons to be about right- 15.8 Aux and most likely 15.5-16 gallons in the main. We did find that one sort has to slow down fuel filling around 17 gallons for the displaced air to vent out, so we paused for a moment and continued to fill the fuel storage to the 31.1 gallons.
NO CODES-
Justin stated it had taken about 210 miles before the fuel gauge needle moved off full. He must drive a little lighter than I do as he was squeaking about 12.8 MPG on the Hwy. The distance to empty readout does not function, but that was expected. It sits at 208 Miles to Empty and then funky calculations ensue.
First a photo of the track bar and the Kings- because I know that is really what everyone wants to see...
Photo of the main tank removed and the EVAP system removed.
Main tank being prepped- tank skid, evap, OEM tire retractor-
Showing the removal of the EVAP and Spare tire Retractor
The main had a needle more than a 1/4 tank remaining. The tech and I went to the top of the aux/main- it took 31.1 gallons. I know, I know I should have taken a picture of the pump display for posterity. Top of the head math seems that 31.1 gallons to be about right- 15.8 Aux and most likely 15.5-16 gallons in the main. We did find that one sort has to slow down fuel filling around 17 gallons for the displaced air to vent out, so we paused for a moment and continued to fill the fuel storage to the 31.1 gallons.
NO CODES-
Justin stated it had taken about 210 miles before the fuel gauge needle moved off full. He must drive a little lighter than I do as he was squeaking about 12.8 MPG on the Hwy. The distance to empty readout does not function, but that was expected. It sits at 208 Miles to Empty and then funky calculations ensue.
First a photo of the track bar and the Kings- because I know that is really what everyone wants to see...
Photo of the main tank removed and the EVAP system removed.
Main tank being prepped- tank skid, evap, OEM tire retractor-
Showing the removal of the EVAP and Spare tire Retractor
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #32
Installation of the Exel spare tire retractor replacement bracket:
Removal of the fuel fill piping...
Fuel fill and venting-
Modified per instructions, the fuel fill and vent reinstalled
Retractor installed, and area primed, and the tough dog pan hard (again I know it is what people are looking to see)
Removal of the fuel fill piping...
Fuel fill and venting-
Modified per instructions, the fuel fill and vent reinstalled
Retractor installed, and area primed, and the tough dog pan hard (again I know it is what people are looking to see)
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #33
Evap relocation bracket, Nutserted to the frame rail, rear passenger wing
Evap and Tank installed:
Alignment of the retractor using the OEM jack tools:
Evap and Tank installed:
Alignment of the retractor using the OEM jack tools:
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #34
Connections from the Aux to the Main
Connection Aux to fill line and vent:
Connection Aux to fill line and vent:
- Thread starter
- #35
Gravity Feed from Aux tank, EVAP skid plate fittment:
Aux to Main Gravity feed:
EVAP and wiring harness routing:
Aux to Main Gravity feed:
EVAP and wiring harness routing:
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #37
No more Rotopaxs on the roof...
Nicely done! Your pioneering is greatly appreciated. I think this really opens another chapter for many of these subtank mods to happen.
Wonder if Expedition Overland will take your lead and install one of these to their new LC200.
Wonder if Expedition Overland will take your lead and install one of these to their new LC200.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2003
- Threads
- 69
- Messages
- 4,593
- Location
- Sunnyvale, CA
- Website
- www.george4wd.taskled.com
I may be totally confused here.... but are auxiliary tanks that gravity feed a main tank even LEGAL in the US??? From my understanding it is illegal to have an auxiliary tank that feeds petrol out from a bottom bung, i.e fuel must be pumped from the top of the tank to transfer it.
Not sure if any of you folk care, but just raising a concern if you have a) inspections and/or b) have a major leak at some point and insurance is involved...
cheers,
george.
Not sure if any of you folk care, but just raising a concern if you have a) inspections and/or b) have a major leak at some point and insurance is involved...
cheers,
george.