Fuel Accumulator canister removal

[joenorthcarolina]

Ok, my truck started spilling fuel from the Fuel Accumulator canister. I guess thats what its called, at least thats what I've read. Any how, I've attached is a example photo of the thing. So, since I've already replaced the in-tank pump with a Walbro 190 and detached the 2nd frame rail pump (filter in its place) I figure I don't need the Accumulator any more. Actually, the Walbro may be what made the accumulator leak . Now my new problem is I'm not 100% sure which hose is which on the canister. Let me rephrase that, the top of the canister has 3/8" quick connect on one side and a 5/16" quick connect below that one. On the other end of the canister the quick connect nipples are flipped... the 5/16" quick connect is on the top and the 3/8" quick connect is on the bottom. That being said, does the canister reduce the hose or does it just seem that way ? In other words, when I install the adapter of some sort do I buy a 3/8" to 5/16" reducer quick connect or a straight 3/8" to 3/8" tube ?
Thanks for any help
Oh, its a '88 2.3L that may become a turbo Ranger ;-)

 

[Mikel89us]

If I'm not mistaken, which I might be, that is part of your evaporative emission system. Which is not connected to the fuel pump. These fill up when the evap system stops working and the vapors fill up the cannister.

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

^^^ I disagree. On my 86 ranger that accumulator was connected to the fuel system. The 3/8" is fuel to the motor, the smaller is fuel return. So 3/8's to 3/8's.

 

[joenorthcarolina]

Yeah, definitely connected to the fuel pump ! Don't feel bad, seems several people don't know what it is either. It took me some searching on the web to find a reliable source which called it a "Accumulator". The low pressure pump fills the canister to keep the high pressure pump supplied at all times.

^^^ So 3/8's to 3/8's.

Thats what I was thinking but this old thread sort of confused me. Its seems like this guy said he used a reducer type repair kit.
http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132119

Just in case any one else needs this thread, I found these cool adapters after A LOT of searching. It seems Ford people call these "Quick Connectors" , Chevy guys call them "Push Connectors" and some plumbing guys call them "Stem Connectors" .
http://www.leadfootautoparts.com/index.php/undercar/fuel/steel-fuel-repair-lines.html

http://www.leadfootautoparts.com/in...-lines/5-16-x-4-male-quick-connect-union.html


http://www.leadfootautoparts.com/in...r-lines/3-8-x-4-male-quick-connect-union.html

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

It doesn't make sense to go from 5/16 to 3/8 or the other way. Fuel supply to the motor should be more than the return as the motor uses some fuel while running.

 

[tomw]

I am pretty sure that 'canister' is the housing for the fuel filter. If you have EFI, replacing the pump closest to the engine with a filter will reduce the fuel pressure to the injectors, and you will likely have a loss of power... if it will run at all. That pump is the 'high pressure' pump, putting out over 40psi, reduced to ~40 by the regulator with normal engine vacuum being the 'adjuster'.
tom

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

I am pretty sure that 'canister' is the housing for the fuel filter. If you have EFI, replacing the pump closest to the engine with a filter will reduce the fuel pressure to the injectors, and you will likely have a loss of power... if it will run at all. That pump is the 'high pressure' pump, putting out over 40psi, reduced to ~40 by the regulator with normal engine vacuum being the 'adjuster'.
tom

True, but

since I've already replaced the in-tank pump with a Walbro 190

the walbro is a high pressure pump.

 

[joenorthcarolina]

I am pretty sure that 'canister' is the housing for the fuel filter. If you have EFI, replacing the pump closest to the engine with a filter will reduce the fuel pressure to the injectors, and you will likely have a loss of power... if it will run at all. That pump is the 'high pressure' pump, putting out over 40psi, reduced to ~40 by the regulator with normal engine vacuum being the 'adjuster'.
tom

I've been running it like this for the past year with out any issues.
I filled the tank up to the rim/spilled out the filler neck. Leaving the store I drove about 3 miles to K-mart to pick up a chair for a friend. When I got out the canister was dripping in the parking lot. I'm going to replace the 2nd filter at some point. It was a quick patch and it hasn't hurt performance, It runs fine.

 

[tomw]

Joe:I've been running it like this for the past year with out any issues.

So, the Ford guys put in a pump they didn't need? Did I mis-understand what was done? I have an 85 with EFI, and it has a 'lift pump' (low pressure) in the tank, and a second pump on the frame rail, or at least I *think* it does.
I have not been able to replace the fuel filter inside the 'canister' for ~30 years now, and the parts stores keep trying to give me a sealed filter that is definitely not what is installed. I have the impression that the first year of EFI got some 'different' parts installed than what became the 'standard' later on. Leftovers?
Any way, good to hear it runs, but I am not ready to try that mod on mine.
tom

 

[joenorthcarolina]

Joe:I've been running it like this for the past year with out any issues.

So, the Ford guys put in a pump they didn't need? Did I mis-understand what was done? I have an 85 with EFI, and it has a 'lift pump' (low pressure) in the tank, and a second pump on the frame rail, or at least I *think* it does.
I have not been able to replace the fuel filter inside the 'canister' for ~30 years now, and the parts stores keep trying to give me a sealed filter that is definitely not what is installed.
tom

I have a '85 carb'ed Ranger 2.3 that I use for parts. It has just about 100,000 miles and rotted out floor boards. If it has that canister I'd be glad to sell it for CHEAP. But like I said its carb'ed, it may not have one on it. My inline filter is just below the E-brake, on the frame rail. About 8 inches from that towards the tank is the Hi-pressure pump if you have one. Yeah, I don't understand Fords logic behind the 2 pump deal. I think I read some where that having two pumps was supposed to be a fail safe so the truck could limp home.

 

[Mark_88]

There was a thread on this canister not too long ago...someone else thought it was a filter and removed it and I think that resulted in his truck not starting...but it could have been something else.

I have/had an 88 carbed Ranger and it did not have a fuel pump in the tank...not needed...they used an engine mounted manual pump for those...or, like mine, I replaced that with a 4.5 PSI electric pump that lasted about 8 years...not bad for a $50 part...

I still have all that if anyone is interested....but the shipping would be expensive unless you live in Ontario Canada....

 

[SenorNoob]

It seems the OP knows this so for the lurkers:

I think from what I've seen, that accumulator is the most accurate name for that part. It's purpose seems to be to keep the high pressure pump (on the frame) from trying to use more fuel than the low pressure (in-tank )under heavy load.

It also may or may not have a filter inside. Not likely unless you have a carbureted model with the in-tank electric pump.

My guess is that with the high pressure pump in the tank, you could run straight lines except for one of the metal filters.

 

[Mark_88]

You are invisible...your button is red...but I can see your name on the bottom showing who is viewing this thread...

I will cover my eyes and make you invisible now...lol

Anyway...just wanted to say that the carb version of the 2.0 in 1988 doesn't actually have any electric in-tank pump...only the motor mounted manual...I added an external (to the tank) electric pump for my application because the block I acquired did not have the key access for the manual pump...although I could have cut one out and mounted it if I really wanted too...(no, I didn't really wanted too hack away at the side of the block)...

I only added this information because someone might read this some day down the road and bring the thread back to ask a question...

 

[joenorthcarolina]

When it sprung a leak, it leaked from the seam that circles the canister. It appears that is where it unscrews, but I couldn't turn it because my hands were really greasy. I decided to try and bust it open with a hammer. Let me tell you, that thing is built Ford Tough ! I tattooed it with dimples from the hammer and not even a crack. Either I get the sledge hammer or drill a hole in it next time. Oh, and I also read it has a filter inside. That info came from a extremely reliable source which I believe to be a moderator on a Ranger/Bronco Forum with about 8,000 post/replies.

 

[joenorthcarolina]

I finally got the canister open. As it turns out I barely cracked it the other day with a hammer. I punched a screw driver through the crack to enlarge the hole on the side of the can which is barely visible in the picture. Sorry, but its a iphone photo and the sun was blinding me. I twisted the bottom half off in about 3 full turns. Guess what ? No filter ! Either the previous owner took it out or it didn't have one from the factory. It seems as if it should have one because I also discovered the fuel flow path using compressed air. First, the fuel enters the 3/8" (Big) quick connect. Then it exits the off set hole inside the canister. From there it re-enters the center straw-port that you see sticking up about 3 inches. After that it exits the 3/8" quick connect towards the engine. So remember, if you disconnect it and use a adapter, you need to connect 3/8"-to-3/8" (Big-Big) nipples.
Last, on the way back to the tank (Fuel return) it skips the internal canister by entering the 5/16" (small) quick connect then straight out the other 5/16" nipple. So, small to small If your saying to yourself, I only see two nipples (Quick Connects). Thats because I broke them off when I slammed the damn thing down on the pavement.
I hope this clears up all the mystery.