MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Carrier Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 23-06-13, 12:46
kevin powles's Avatar
kevin powles kevin powles is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: united kingdom
Posts: 1,986
Default

Hi Rich, Etch prime and clean the internals for a few days, Put the Por 15 in, make up a blank for the take up flange, bung the ends of the vent pipes, put in the drain plug and rotate the tanks, every which way, I figured attaching to a 'childs swing' would work best, gives the kids something to do aswell!.

remove cap and blank, vent bungs, and drain plug allow excess to drain, overnight is best, keep blowing through the vent lines, avoid 'puddling' in the tank, so keep checking on it.

clean up the filler cap before the por drys.

I figured getting them galvanised, would be costly and weather you could do this due to the soldered joints, can anyone comment?.

rich, you coming to war and peace?.

kevin.
__________________
2pdr Tank Hunter Universal Carrier 1942 registered 11/11/2008.
3" Mortar Universal Carrier 1943 registered 06/06/2009.
1941 Standard Mk1 stowage Carrier, Caunter camo.
1941 Standard Mk1 stowage Carrier, light stone.
10 cwt wartime mortar trailer.
1943 Mk2 Daimler Dingo.
1943 Willys MB.
1936 Vickers MG carrier No1 Mk1 CMM 985.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 23-06-13, 15:24
RichardT10829's Avatar
RichardT10829 RichardT10829 is offline
Richard Harrison
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cullercoats Newcastle Upon Tyne United Kingdom
Posts: 3,068
Default

Never thought about the soldered joints... Yes I should be there again this year, I need to touch base with Shaun and book my room ;-) also need to sort logistics etc etc. busy selling stuff to pay for rail tickets etc :-) just found a pair of original front fenders which will be going into the for sale section shortly.
__________________
is mos redintegro

__5th Div___46th Div__
1942 Ford Universal Carrier No.3 MkI*
Lower Hull No. 10131
War Department CT54508 (SOLD)
1944 Ford Universal Carrier MkII* (under restoration).
1944 Morris C8 radio body (under restoration).
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 24-06-13, 01:24
Jim Burrill Jim Burrill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hatfield, PA, USA
Posts: 430
Default

POR has failed over time with several of my MV friends. The white teflon separates and the film gums up the tubes.

I have used a newer product called "Red Kote" -http://damonq.com/red-kote.html
RED-KOTEŽ
Red-Kote is an internal fuel tank liner designed to seal leaks and prevent further rusting. As a sealant, Red-Kote excels at sealing the often hundreds of pin-hole leaks that occur along seams or where straps wrap around the tank. Once in place, Red-Kote forms a very tough, flexible membrane that will never crack or flake as many competitive products do. Red-Kote will not plug lines or cause engine damage when used properly. Future rust will be prevented because condensation will not contact the metal. A partial list of additives that Red-Kote is resistant to includes ethyl alcohol, methyl alcohol, toluene, methyl tertiary butyl ether, isopropyl alcohol and tetraethyl lead. Red-Kote takes approximately eight hours to dry. Packaged nine quarts per case or single gallons.

I have used this on a Dingo and the Humber main and aux tanks and not problems yet.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 24-06-13, 17:22
Phil Waterman Phil Waterman is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Temple, New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 3,929
Default Failure of Gas Tank Sealants in the US

Hi Jim

Failure of Gas Tank Sealants in the US often related to our E10 gasoline. Jim raises a very good point about the white gas tank sealant as sold by Por 15 and others, having been observed to fail do to the age of the tank sealant and introduction of Ethanol containing fuel sold in the US are at least anecdotally responsible for fuel tank sealant failure.

I wonder how often these failures are the result of a less than perfect treatment of the tank or a tank design that just did not let the coating cover every surface in the tank evenly?

Jim how long as the RED-KOTEŽ been in the tanks you mention?

Cheers Phil
__________________
Phil Waterman
`41 C60L Pattern 12
`42 C60S Radio Pattern 13
`45 HUP
http://canadianmilitarypattern.com/
New e-mail Philip@canadianmilitarypattern.com
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 24-06-13, 17:32
Jim Burrill Jim Burrill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hatfield, PA, USA
Posts: 430
Default

Hi Phil,
I admit, I don't personally have a long track record with Red Kote. The dingo tank was done about three years ago and the Humber tanks done about 2 and a half years back. I also sealed about a dozen watime Brit jerry cans.

I have not seen evidence of the stuff in the fuel filter of the HAC, nor have I had any carb problems. (other than the need to hand pump the fuel pump before starting it after a couple of months. - and getting used to the way the carb used the "pull, turn, pull and hold" choke cable to start it all the time)

So far, it has been a "non -issue" for my HAC. I have not heard any complaints from Bogdan about the tank in his Dingo either.

The shop who restored my tanks ran through a recounting of his use of POR and the failures and why he shifted to Red Kote, and his happiness with it.

I intend to treat the new Carrier tanks I get from Ben with it.

Cheers,
Jim
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 25-06-13, 21:35
Andrew Rowe Andrew Rowe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manawatu , New Zealand
Posts: 567
Default Fuel Tanks

Just a thought... how come you guys don't make your tanks from stainless steel?,then you do not have to coat the in sides with any thing.
I have found there is not much cost difference in the price of the material , and you can not tell the difference when painted, and you don't have problems with rusting from condensation because of half fulling tanks. There is also the problems from rust when you solder , if you don't neualize the acid flux.
I believe the original tanks used a tin coated steel , that made soldering fittings really easy , and also stop the internal rust.. just my thoughts.
__________________
Valentine MkV
Covenanter MkIV
Lynx MKI and MKII
Loyd Carrier / English / Candian / LP.
M3 Stuart
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 25-06-13, 22:09
kevin powles's Avatar
kevin powles kevin powles is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: united kingdom
Posts: 1,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Rowe View Post
Just a thought... how come you guys don't make your tanks from stainless steel?,then you do not have to coat the in sides with any thing.
I have found there is not much cost difference in the price of the material , and you can not tell the difference when painted, and you don't have problems with rusting from condensation because of half fulling tanks. There is also the problems from rust when you solder , if you don't neualize the acid flux.
I believe the original tanks used a tin coated steel , that made soldering fittings really easy , and also stop the internal rust.. just my thoughts.
Hi andrew, agree with you 100%, been saying that all along.

Kevin.
__________________
2pdr Tank Hunter Universal Carrier 1942 registered 11/11/2008.
3" Mortar Universal Carrier 1943 registered 06/06/2009.
1941 Standard Mk1 stowage Carrier, Caunter camo.
1941 Standard Mk1 stowage Carrier, light stone.
10 cwt wartime mortar trailer.
1943 Mk2 Daimler Dingo.
1943 Willys MB.
1936 Vickers MG carrier No1 Mk1 CMM 985.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016