engine bay hoses 1.8 L Jet, colors, arrangements etc Options

[wonkipop]

this topic arose in the thread concerning hose colors for D Jet cars.

i've started a new topic so it does not mess the other thread.

first thing to say is that the factory manual is more scant on L-Jet information than for D-Jet. There are no hose schematics with the clarity of the D-Jet layouts for the L-Jet. Secondly some of the information on the L-Jet is misleading.

First thing.

car 1974 1.8.

Green vacuum line from Distributor.
Seems to be the same as the D-Jet cars.

There is a green vacuum (retard) line out of the distributor body to the throttle body.
I think i am right saying its the retard side (sometimes gets dyslexic on that).

The green line in this photo is an original vacuum line. Along with the crankcase vent hose these are the only two lines i did not replace on my car. The crankcase line is moulded to an S - shape and we decided to stay with the original. its still sealing ok.
Same with the distributor line. We checked and still pliable and it was sealing so it stayed. We cleaned it up a little. I also left the intake manifold seals on as we did not go that far in - requires disassembly of the intake manifold. They are still in good sealing condition though looking a little aged.

There is a black vacuum (advance) line out of the distributor to the throttle body.

The green line from the distributor was the only colored line still apparent on my car.

[Van B]

I rerouted my hoses and frankly it looks dumb and I hate it lol…. My first thought was exactly what Jeff said about poor vapor flow.

Also, the hose from my fan shroud to the canister is really old so, it may not be original route but the car has very likely spent most of it’s life with the logical set up.

I’ll be putting it back to the conventional arrangement tomorrow.

[wonkipop]

I rerouted my hoses and frankly it looks dumb and I hate it lol…. My first thought was exactly what Jeff said about poor vapor flow.

Also, the hose from my fan shroud to the canister is really old so, it may not be original route but the car has very likely spent most of it’s life with the logical set up.

I’ll be putting it back to the conventional arrangement tomorrow.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

yes, you could never accuse the 1.8 of having a sano engine bay.
i kind of like the criss cross - general tangled look they seemed to be going for! if the vacuum hoses etc were a haircut it would be bob marley's. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer.gif)
i like showing off the engine bay to 356 dudes with their twin carbies and watch them roll their eyes in horror.

EDIT.
if i had to make an educated guess i would say that VW were concentrating on the static state of the can.
after the engine is switched off and the car is standing.
perhaps explains the logic of their plumbing.
max distance (and charcoal surface area) from fuel vapor line in and fan bleed blower line (unregulated opening to atmosphere)?

when the can is purging the hoses could go at either end. its an airflow through the can whether you think its pushing/pulling air/pressurizing. makes no practical difference to the can in the end. will work both ways?

thats the way i think of it when i look at the VW logic.
1) percolation flows at very low velocity.
2) drawn higher velocity flows at purge.