astontr6 Posted May 29, 2021 Report Share Posted May 29, 2021 2 hours ago, RogerH said: Hi Folks, you seem to be scare mongering. The investigation report has not been compiled yet from the manufacturer via Rimmer. The hose in question is rated at in excess of SAE 100/R6 what ever that means. Bearing in mind that that worst it will get is E5 in the UK at present and typically 0% Ethanol The manufacturer is a world class supplier/manufacturer of oil and petrol piping. Please do not get your knockers knickers in a twist until the final report is posted. Roger Roger! The Spec SAE J30 defines Type R6 as low pressure synthetic rubber hose rated at 50 psi ??? and the Permitivity @ 600g/m2/day. Therefore it is not in the same ball park as R9 @ 15 g/m2/day and working pressure of 100psi Bruce. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvtrian Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 12 hours ago, astontr6 said: Roger! The Spec SAE J30 defines Type R6 as low pressure synthetic rubber hose rated at 50 psi ??? and the Permitivity @ 600g/m2/day. Therefore it is not in the same ball park as R9 @ 15 g/m2/day and working pressure of 100psi Bruce. 6 Hi Bruce - Roger quoted SAE 100/R6 rather than SAE J30, a quick search on the web shows significant differences, and "low pressure" applications easily within many multiples the PI system capability, (and compatibility with fuels and oils). Compared with industrial hydraulic industry, perhaps the Lucas PI system is considered a low pressure application? As Roger stated, the original hose manufacturer is a world class company with many years in their industry, who are experts in their products and applications We do need to wait for the report about the failure from Rimmers, who should have the items in question soon (which Inge has despatched to them), which they will need to return to their suppliers, who should then analyse the failure and report back............... Ian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 13 hours ago, astontr6 said: Roger! The Spec SAE J30 defines Type R6 as low pressure synthetic rubber hose rated at 50 psi ??? and the Permitivity @ 600g/m2/day. Therefore it is not in the same ball park as R9 @ 15 g/m2/day and working pressure of 100psi Bruce. 6 I firgot to press the 'submit/ button yesterday on this reply. Iab has read my mind. Hi Bruce, Haven't a clue what all the numbers mean but it states on the pipe Exceeds SAE 100/R6 up to a working pressure of 400psi. The manufacturers tested a hose to destruction and it failed at 2600psi. I think we need to ensure that all the numbers are like for like. Wait for the investigation report. Roger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 2 hours ago, cvtrian said: Hi Bruce - Roger quoted SAE 100/R6 rather than SAE J30, a quick search on the web shows significant differences, and "low pressure" applications easily within many multiples the PI system capability, (and compatibility with fuels and oils). Compared with industrial hydraulic industry, perhaps the Lucas PI system is considered a low pressure application? As Roger stated, the original hose manufacturer is a world class company with many years in their industry, who are experts in their products and applications We do need to wait for the report about the failure from Rimmers, who should have the items in question soon (which Inge has despatched to them), which they will need to return to their suppliers, who should then analyse the failure and report back............... Ian Hi Ian! The reason I am querying the use of SAE100 R6 is that it is a Hydraulic Oil Hose Spec and not a gasoline/ petrol spec. Could it be that the wrong spec. hose was used? Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 On 5/11/2021 at 7:05 PM, ijonsson said: A friend with a TR6 PI, just escaped from an incident that could have gone very wrong. In the beginning of this year he bought some new tubing and hoses for the fuel system from Rimmers. Yesterday he took the car out for a test drive and ended up not far from his house with petrol flooding all over the engine bay, 100 psi pressure gives a substantial flow. What had happened was that the brand new flexible hose before Metering unit had come loose from the nipple in the lower end. When we looked at it it was a common textile reinforced hose just pushed on the nipple, nothing at all like the old steel reinforced hose. It was also much lager internal diameter. We will of course contact Rimmers, but would like to issue this warning in case someone else has one of these hoses. In comparison you can see in the pictures the old hose we cut open and the new one. What spec. was printed on the outside of the Rimmer supplied hose? Also how long was it installed for before it burst? Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Waldi Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 Bruce is probably correct. As I stated earlier, I could not find data that SAE100R6 is suitable for petrol, let alone E5/E10. Waldi Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 43 minutes ago, Waldi said: Bruce is probably correct. As I stated earlier, I could not find data that SAE100R6 is suitable for petrol, let alone E5/E10. Waldi Hi Waldi, we have few facts to go on a present as we are still awaiting the investigation report - and that may take quite some time. However in the mean time have some bedtime reading here. It clearly states ' used in the petrochemical and water industry. SAE 100R6-06 - the 06 denote the OD apprx 15mm. When it refers to low pressure it means not normally in the 1000's of psi. The sample I looked at on Friday stated 400psi (20+ bar) Roger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Waldi Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 Hi Roger, I’m glad the PQI team are taking an active approach, thanks for that. “Petrochemical” is not very specific, off course. I could not find evidence for suitability for SAE 100 R6 with petrol (only for diesel, but not for bio-diesel). I can try to find the information directly from SAE 100. Cheers, Waldi Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvtrian Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 More bedtime reading about SAE 100 R6 https://www.satigroup.it/en/products/industrial-rubber-hoses/oil-and-fuel-hoses/sae-100-r6/ https://www.thehosemaster.co.uk/pub/media/wysiwyg/hosemaster/tech/R6.pdf http://www.control-gear-catalogue.co.uk/TechSheets/TS5010.pdf It would appear that the SAE 100 R6 spec includes petroleum fuels and significantly exceeds the application for Lucas PI systems, I am no expert, and it would be unreasonable to jump to any conclusions. As has been stated, the manufacturer is a well known worldwide expert in these items, they know what they are doing, so we need to wait for their findings Ian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijonsson Posted May 30, 2021 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, astontr6 said: What spec. was printed on the outside of the Rimmer supplied hose? Also how long was it installed for before it burst? Bruce. Can't say because the hose has been sent to Rimmers for investigation. As you can see in the picture, the hose had became enlarged and split in the end and didn't look as it was much compatible wit 5% ethanol. We did a 6 mile test run to check out the PI system, then the car was left for a week and when he used it the next time he only came a mile before the hose came off. The jubilee clamp seen at bottom right was used just to bring the car back home. Edited May 30, 2021 by ijonsson Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 8 minutes ago, ijonsson said: Can't say because the hose has been sent to Rimmers for investigation. As you can see in the picture, the hose had became enlarged and split in the end and didn't look as it was much compatible wit 5% ethanol. We did a 6 mile test run to check out the PI system, then the car was left for a week and when he used it the next time he only came a mile before the hose came off. The jubilee clamp seen at bottom right was used just to bring the car back home. Thanks for your response. I was expecting to see swelling of the tube. Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ntc Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 Confused why the bend at the bottom? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mike C Posted May 30, 2021 Report Share Posted May 30, 2021 Could be the rubber's incompatible with your fuel. I installed a fuelling diaphragm from Rimmers in my MU- lasted about an hour before it swelled and leaked along the shaft. These TR6 parts suppliers help us a lot with parts but I'm afraid to many of them black rubber is black rubber- they miss out on many of the material subtleties. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijonsson Posted May 31, 2021 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 (edited) 11 hours ago, ntc said: Confused why the bend at the bottom? I guess he bent the hose to be able to take a photo of the end of the hose, it wasn't the end at the MU that came off. Quite flexible hose compared to the original one. Edited May 31, 2021 by ijonsson Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ntc Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 The pipe should be a vertical joint Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Richardtr3a Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 Just read this thread, which is a coincidence because I noticed a drip under my TR3 chassis. It was the flexible from the cut off valve to the fuel pump. My preferred supplier identified stock in Rimmers. After the failure of customer services at Rimmers over two items, exhaust and throttle connection, I would rather have my car off the road for a week than use Rimmers again. They have two answers " we have sold many and never has a complaint" and " this conversation is now closed". These answers must be part of the in-house training scheme for call handlers. The new hose is now on order from the TR shop who have sold me many parts since I lived nearby in 1976. It is the quality that counts not the price or availability. Good luck Richard & B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ntc Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 Until the outcome is found out it’s not good for the club or anybody knocking any suppliers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijonsson Posted May 31, 2021 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 5 hours ago, ntc said: The pipe should be a vertical joint It is, I know because I bent the new copper tube fuel line to position and fitted the hose up to the MU, the hose had only a slight curve to accept some movement of the engine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 2 hours ago, ntc said: Until the outcome is found out it’s not good for the club or anybody knocking any suppliers +1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ntc Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 1 hour ago, ijonsson said: It is, I know because I bent the new copper tube fuel line to position and fitted the hose up to the MU, the hose had only a slight curve to accept some movement of the engine. Post a pic of the other end as is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijonsson Posted May 31, 2021 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 1 hour ago, ntc said: Post a pic of the other end as is. The hose is sent to Rimmers, the fuel pipe was also bought from Rimmers ready with nut and flared end. It is finished vertical, just as original. New hydraulic hose fitted with the fittings of the original hose, and the car is 80 kms away from me , so sorry, no pics at the moment. I've done same piping on the PI I used to own and 2 other PI cars, and they are working OK, so ....? /Inge Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ntc Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 Your picture clearly shows the pipe horizontal at the bottom end and I question that.so Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijonsson Posted May 31, 2021 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 1 hour ago, ntc said: Your picture clearly shows the pipe horizontal at the bottom end and I question that.so OK, I get it. In the picture the hose is actually bent 180 deg, the other end not seen is attached to the MU. The hose end seen in the picture was attached to the fuel pipe coming from the tank and the fitting it was pressed on is still at the end of that pipe (not so obvious as it can't be seen in the picture) Funny thing that is so difficult to explain the whole situation when the image is so clear in your own head . By the way, both sets of MU:s and injectors you refurbished for me still works fine, so clearly you understood years ago what materials to use with ethanol in the fuel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ntc Posted May 31, 2021 Report Share Posted May 31, 2021 7 minutes ago, ijonsson said: OK, I get it. In the picture the hose is actually bent 180 deg, the other end not seen is attached to the MU. The hose end seen in the picture was attached to the fuel pipe coming from the tank and the fitting it was pressed on is still at the end of that pipe (not so obvious as it can't be seen in the picture) Funny thing that is so difficult to explain the whole situation when the image is so clear in your own head . By the way, both sets of MU:s and injectors you refurbished for me still works fine, so clearly you understood years ago what materials to use with ethanol in the fuel. Thank you that explains my question and I am not Krs but he is a good friend of mine and knows his stuff Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvtrian Posted June 1, 2021 Report Share Posted June 1, 2021 The supplier has asked for the hose to be returned, which Inge has done. Rimmers have been in dialogue with their supplier and they await return of the hose for investigations into the failure. Inge has confirmed that Matz used 98 RON fuel with up to 5% ethanol which is standard in Sweden. Until the facts and evidence are analysed by the experts (and the manufacturer is a leader in this field) everything else is speculation, which unfortunately is adding more heat than light. Unfortunately we are all still governed by Covid restrictions, including our suppliers, and everything is taking longer than would be ideal ntc is spot on, until the outcome is known, it is unfair to knock any supplier. Rimmers are undertaking the process you would hope any responsible supplier would do, and Inge has managed to do just that without any help from Roger or myself, although he is not Rimmers direct customer as Matz (whose car it is and who bought the hose) is not as fluent in English. We need to wait for the outcome of the investigation Ian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.