Kawasaki Versys Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
800 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I really hate that stuff. i is easy to remove. I just did on 300x, and Klx 230. getting rid of so many hoses and cleaning the top of the engine from all that bs is just one of many benefits
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Yup, it is super easy to remove. I had a vacuum problem from the factory which was difficult to diagnose, so as part of the process I removed the evap canister. The only trick is to keep the wiring in place for the solenoid. Without it the check-engine light comes on and it throws a code. The vacuum lines can be just capped off, or if you have the bike apart you can can cap it off at the throttle air box.

The OEM parts to convert to the non-Cali version are very cheap.

The mounting bracket is quite a handy place to mount things.

However, imho, the evap canister doesn't do any harm at all to how the bike runs, and it does prevent fuel vapors from getting into the atmosphere, so really there is no reason to pull it off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
800 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I just like to remove what I can. there are just too many hoses, wires, in the modern bikes. actually, yesterday, I opened the engine to check valve clearance in my girlfriend V300x, and incidentally, after 10000km, all the exhaust valves were tight like hell, at the very minimum in the specs. While the 650 is pretty clean under the tank, and easy to access the top engine cover, the 300 is very difficult to access, as it has the main frame bar just above the engine, and there are like million other things around. So I removed the EVAP and blocked with epoxy the Pair Valve ( a couple of hoses less). What puzzles me is that SmartMoto sells an additional resistor; I see no problem with keeping the solenoid to prevent the error code; it rather unobtrusive. anyway, here are their instructions:

 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
20,212 Posts
Try SEARCH - I know that I posted a thread about removing that stuff back in '11 or '12.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
800 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Try SEARCH - I know that I posted a thread about removing that stuff back in '11 or '12.
thank you. yes, there are several threads on the subject that I can see. what i am still not getting is which line should remain open for the ventilation? is it the overflow line? i have the 3rd generation V.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
The fuel tank parts diagram shows what you need to do to convert it to non-CA. The front evaporative parts diagram shows what you have now.



If I understand the drawings correctly, the front/upper nipple on the fuel tank is an overflow, and the rear/lower nipple is a vent. The front/upper has the line that goes to the evap canister. From the canister there is an outlet line that goes to the solenoid, and then another line that goes to the throttle box. It is that last line which you have to cap off. Keep the wiring plugged into the solenoid.

The line that comes out of the tank to the canister will now just vent to the environment. You could run a line down to the bottom of the frame to drain. The correct configuration is to install part 14069 onto that front nipple, then the rear/lower nipple has a line that goes to that little part (a small plastic tank), and then that tiny tank has a line that goes down to the bottom of the frame to drain. Thus both of those lines can dump fuel into the tiny tank and then it dumps onto the ground.

I can't find my before pictures to see what that rear/lower tank nipple went to in the original CA configuration. My guess is you could run a line from that to the ground, too, since it is some kind of drain or vent. I preferred to put it into a factory configuration with that tiny tank. The cost was very minimal for the parts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
800 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The fuel tank parts diagram shows what you need to do to convert it to non-CA. The front evaporative parts diagram shows what you have now.



If I understand the drawings correctly, the front/upper nipple on the fuel tank is an overflow, and the rear/lower nipple is a vent. The front/upper has the line that goes to the evap canister. From the canister there is an outlet line that goes to the solenoid, and then another line that goes to the throttle box. It is that last line which you have to cap off. Keep the wiring plugged into the solenoid.

The line that comes out of the tank to the canister will now just vent to the environment. You could run a line down to the bottom of the frame to drain. The correct configuration is to install part 14069 onto that front nipple, then the rear/lower nipple has a line that goes to that little part (a small plastic tank), and then that tiny tank has a line that goes down to the bottom of the frame to drain. Thus both of those lines can dump fuel into the tiny tank and then it dumps onto the ground.

I can't find my before pictures to see what that rear/lower tank nipple went to in the original CA configuration. My guess is you could run a line from that to the ground, too, since it is some kind of drain or vent. I preferred to put it into a factory configuration with that tiny tank. The cost was very minimal for the parts.
Thanks a lot. I will try to order the breather (part 14069), but I cannot see the small plastic tank you mentioned in the diagram. is there anything else to order? I cannot see...

but assuming that the breather part is not available. in case like that, should I just keep the two nipples open with lines attached to them, or cap the upper nipple?

I also plan to remove that box from my V1000 where it has a weird location below the dashboard. this can be perhaps a bit more challenging. Kawasaki Versys 1000 LT Parts and OEM Diagram | BikeBandit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
What's so horrible about that box? I see so many people dying to cancer, yet a box which prevents you from inhaling toxic gas vapors - horrible?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Thanks a lot. I will try to order the breather (part 14069), but I cannot see the small plastic tank you mentioned in the diagram. is there anything else to order? I cannot see...

but assuming that the breather part is not available. in case like that, should I just keep the two nipples open with lines attached to them, or cap the upper nipple?

I also plan to remove that box from my V1000 where it has a weird location below the dashboard. this can be perhaps a bit more challenging. Kawasaki Versys 1000 LT Parts and OEM Diagram | BikeBandit
14069 is the "little tank". It is just a hollow bulb of plastic. You could probably just T the 2 lines together, though I suspect there is some good reason they didn't do that from the factory.

I wouldn't cap either of those nipples simply because the factory does it the way they do, and I'm not smart enough to know the possible problems it might cause to do it differently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
What's so horrible about that box? I see so many people dying to cancer, yet a box which prevents you from inhaling toxic gas vapors - horrible?
You're taking a leap of faith with that position. I'd argue that it is not actually intended to prevent people from inhaling toxic vapors, but it is intended to comply with laws that claim to prevent those vapors from reaching the atmosphere. And I live in California, so I'm not hating on those laws, just saying that environmental laws often have better intentions than actual effect.

Unless you can point to some concrete evidence that it actually does this significantly, I could argue that for all we know removing the weight and aerodynamic impact of the Evap control unit might actually serve earth better than capturing whatever vapor might be emitted.

In many (maybe all) parts of the US, the law requires gas pump nozzles to have vapor boots for the same reason, but to fill up a motorcycle tank, you have to pull the boot back (and allow the vapor to escape). I assume, if you are so adamant that the Evap system remain in place, that you never fill your tank all the way to the neck and allow the vapor to escape, is that correct?

To prove my point, if it was really better for it to be there, Kawasaki would've put it on all its bikes, not just ones that are shipped to the western US to comply with CA law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
that canister adds ~0.5% to the weight of your versys. Having a good lunch before you ride impacts your acceleration to much greater extend :ROFLMAO:
It adds zero aerodynamic impact as it's hidden under the fairings.
Also, I've read that people who removed these boxes reported that they started to smell gas in their garage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
that canister adds ~0.5% to the weight of your versys. Having a good lunch before you ride impacts your acceleration to much greater extend :ROFLMAO:
It adds zero aerodynamic impact as it's hidden under the fairings.
Also, I've read that people who removed these boxes reported that they started to smell gas in their garage.
It wasn't hidden under my fairings. And you didn't provide the proof of any positive effect offsetting the .5% weight anyway, except for some complaints about gas fumes in people's garage. Well, it's a garage. I don't know what to say. I smell fumes when I use WD-40. If the canister had a positive effect, why did Kawasaki decide not to design it in for everybody? Oh because Kawasaki also sees less benefit than the cost of the parts, if any benefit at all. So, the only reason some have it is because the law says so, and there is still no proof that it actually does any noticeable good. Got it.

Also, I never said there is a performance benefit to removing it. There is not. There is a benefit to using the space for other purposes, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
because kawasaki does not care about your health and ecology. If not government regulations, people would still die in a 30mph car accident. US is the only developed country I know which does not enforce ABS in motorcycles, despite it decreases fatality rates by 30%. So kawasaki still sells bikes without ABS and will continue to do so until it is FORCED to install ABS on every motorcycle. They don't give a sh*t if you die, if you sick - they just need your money
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
you people are so lucky to live in US where you can breathe normally and where most of people don't die of cancer before they are even retired. You can take a trip to China or even to my home country Ukraine and experience how cool it is to breathe all that smog because there is no evil government to force manufacturers to install these evil emission boxes :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
Get off your soapbox. The plastics used to manufacture the evap canister probably have more harmful effects on the environment (not to mention that they cause cancer) than the positive effects they intend to serve. Heck, even recycling those plastics causes more environmental harm than letting the carcinogens leak into a landfill. Where does it end? You are fighting the good fight, but there are places where the fight might bring bigger returns (or any returns). Geez.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Evap canisters work really well to trap hydrocarbon vapors, which are then pulled into the engine and burned when started. The canister does not do anything to change the engine performance. They do reduce smog in busy metro areas.

Is it a net environmental benefit to installing evap systems? Maybe a better question is what are the environmental priorities, and how does the evap system fit into that? For those in crowded urban areas, air quality is a lot more important than most anything.

Why doesn't Kawasaki make every bike with the evap system? Because for every dollar they don't spend, they increase profit. Kawasaki isn't in business to do anything other than make money. If they can cut costs $10 per bike by not installing an evap system, they increase profits by millions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
In crowded urban areas full of SUVs, muscle cars, and exotics, motorcycles are already a more environmentally-friendly alternative. They are smaller and lighter and use fewer resources to manufacture and are less taxing on the transportation infrastructure, they require less operating time because I can get from A to B more quickly (particularly where lane splitting is legal), and are overall more fuel efficient.

Now I agree that air quality is more important in urban areas, but I'm not necessarily sure it's more important than most anything or else people would leave those urban areas based on that priority. More importantly though, the benefits of evap are marginal (at best) relative to the benefits of riding a bike generally and I've yet to see evidence that having it causes a net benefit, or that 5% of people removing it (and most of those the same people who take the time to do proper maintenance and keep things running smoothly and efficiently) causes a net detriment. Theory is one thing, but there are SO many variables at play. And frankly the fact that more vapor escapes into the air on filling the tank than is captured by the canister is hard for me to get around.

Some manufactures throw in evap systems that are downright dangerous just to comply with California laws. The evap on my last bike would actually cause vapor lock in certain conditions without warning, which is potentially dangerous. The Kawasaki evap system might work better but it's still an afterthought. If it were designed into the product better, I'd have less care about it, since it's not inhibiting performance or function. But it is ugly and in the way. I removed to to make room for crash bar installation and for easier access to the top end of the engine. That's also a great location to install a louder horn. And maybe removing it creates more airflow for my regulator which is mounted further back under the seat of my bike.

My real beef is with people who get bent out of shape over others doing whatever they want with their own things, particularly as nit-picky as this. There are bigger fish to fry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
800 Posts
Discussion Starter #20 (Edited)
14069 is the "little tank". It is just a hollow bulb of plastic. You could probably just T the 2 lines together, though I suspect there is some good reason they didn't do that from the factory.

I wouldn't cap either of those nipples simply because the factory does it the way they do, and I'm not smart enough to know the possible problems it might cause to do it differently.
Fly-Sig, yes you are right. the upper nipple is for vapour pressure release and the lower for fuel overflow. this can be clearly seen from the diagrams I attached. unfortunately, in Thailand they do not have the 14069 breather, so I just ordered some plastic T-nipples; even though I suppose there is no harm in two lines hanging separately.

What puzzles me is that most the members here seem to be from US, and the US models come without the evaporative emission box. So are you guys just removing the box that isn't there? :). I assume that US does not follow the Euro's annoying restrictions just out principle... :). Maybe it is different in California though. Asia - India, Thailand - seems to follow all the Euro regulations religiously.

as to the environment pollution, I believe that as I am stopping smoking, I will contribute more to the environment
keeping that ugly box :)

One more thing, let's suppose that I leave that upper nipple open or cap it with a small rubber cap and puncture a small hole in it - is there is a danger from dust or water getting in??


tank1.jpg
tank 2.jpg
than by
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top