It's NOT the wrong breather.

Various '70 and '71 cars used the early 4-corner gas tank venting system. Those are the cars that have the "standpipe" vapor separator in the trunk.

1. There is no charcoal canister on those cars. The bowl vent on the top of the carb connects to the port on the fuel pump. The idea was to recycle fuel vapor into the crankcase where the PCV system could evacuate it.

2. The metal hardline at the right rear by the firewall is the tank vent line. It connects to the second, smaller port on that black breather, both on Slants and V8's. Again, the purpose is to capture the fuel vapor from the tank to be consumed inside the engine.

So in essence, what you are missing is the correct carb that has a bowl vent. If you don't wish to go to the trouble of finding the right carb, then you can cap off the nipple on the fuel pump. Don't mess with the valve cover breather or the tank vent line other than to make sure it's connected.Otherwise you'll smell gas vapors.

If someone has access to a '71 Dodge FSM they can pull the exact carb number for you for the application.

_________________
1966 Chrysler 300 coupe
1968 Plymouth Valiant 100
1969 Dart Custom 273 V8

http://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php ... 6f8dae3a6d Found while searching

Thank you Tyler. That's all I was asking for.

Slant-6 engines have one large and one small hose connected to the breather. V8 cars have one large and two small hoses connected to the breather. If your Slant-6 car has a breather with one large and two small hose fittings, cap one of the small ones.

Really good carburetors have grown difficult and costly to get, but nothing runs like a new carburetor; "remanufactured" units usually don't work very well. I thought I saw one for sale somewhere the other day -- I'll try to retrace my browsing steps and find it again.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

batoven, SSD: if the car has a 198, and auto transmission, here is a link I posted for somebody elses problem, still for sale:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1970-71-Dodge-a ... 62&vxp=mtr

If it is a 225, I don't know. Hopefully SSD can point you to better options.

BTW, I don't know the seller, just had the info at hand.

_________________
/6 Dodge Charger 69
...there's nothing like using the "Search" link above to solve most of your problems...

Mine's a 225. But since many, many parts interchange between the Slants....it makes me wonder......

I might have a new correct carb to suit -- will have to dig through the shelves; please send me a PM if you'd like me to do so.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I may already have a line on one. I'm going to check it out this weekend. If it's not an acceptable unit, I'll be in touch. Thank you.

I can't see replacing a good working carb just to gain that vent. If there is something already wrong with it, sure, replace it with the correct one.

But if it's fine I can't see any gains there. And if you'd like that vent to still function then just route it to the air cleaner breather or the air cleaner itself.

_________________

Better driveability, better fuel economy, less-noxious exhaust, and less gassy smell around the parked car...some pretty good benefits there.
That would not be a wise or helpful thing to do. The smartest option is to have the system working as designed. The other option is to cap the fuel pump vent. "Run hoses to gosh I donno the air cleaner breather or the air cleaner itself and call it good because would rather guess randomly than learn and understand" doesn't really make the smart-list.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Actually Dan I do understand. I also understand that replying in a condescending and know-it-all attitude does not help anyone; including me if I am wrong in my assessment of the system.

If that hose by the OP's fuel pump is indeed a crankcase vent it will do nothing for economy and drivability to have it hooked up to the fuel bowl if it's an attempt to plumb those gases back into the fuel system. That's like saying removing the road draft tube on an older car and installing a PCV will somehow magically improve fuel economy and drivability.

And by the way, the people that engineered the PVC system didn't just say "run hoses to gosh I donno the carb base or the drivers side head light rather than try to make sense of what we're doing because it's some silly smog device that doesn't do anything."

No more than I said that above; I did not guess, I did not make anything up randomly, and I do understand my suggestion which was to passively reintroduce the crankcase gases back into the combustion process like the original system did, via a different method since the original point of entry was no longer available.

And I did it all without infantile insults and fatuous condescension.

_________________

My 2 cents:
That hose should connect the carb vent to the lower part of the engine/carter via the gas pump. When you shut the car off, the gas in the carb will evaporate. As the engine cools down it sucks the gasoline vapor, and they will dissolve in the oil.

Starting the car will heat the oil, and the gas vapors will come from the oil, to be sucked from the engine via PCV and burnt in the engine.
You should not connect the gas pump vent to the air filter or anything, better plug it if your carb has not carb gas vent and hose.

The use of the proper carb should reduce gas smell and emissions. Probably won't affect performance, but the mod was made for a reason (environmental). Now, if the OP wants a new carb or not is his problem. At least a new, not used carb will have longer life, and the advantages described above. (My wife hates the gas smell in the house after parking in attached garages)

Dan: your posts 10 years ago were less cynical. I guess you grew tired of people just patching cars to make them run without thinking, or understanding, or even explaining the consequences. In this forums we can be helped to learn, do an educated decision, or share experience. I'm happy to learn from your vast experience anyday, but sometimes is tought handling your answers. I've noticed you figured that out sometimes, and have changed posts accordingly.

For all: remember we all may be wrong sometimes, the big goal is to learn and make our cars nice and dependable. Opinions can be shared, but be open to share, teach and learn.

_________________
/6 Dodge Charger 69
...there's nothing like using the "Search" link above to solve most of your problems...

I'm just the new guy looking for answers. I thot that maybe a little attitude from guys that have been here awhile was some sort of initiation for the newb. No sweat. The skin on this bag of bones is pretty thick. Not looking to patch anything together...... I like to do things correctly. Thanks for EVERYONES input.

It's not.
Not that, either.
I can't find where anybody said that, though. Can you point out where that suggestion was made?
No, that's right, they didn't. They knew and understood what they were doing when they engineered the PCV system. I was not referring to them. You suggested that a hose be improperly connected to what looked a lot like a randomly-selected incorrect place. I was referring to you.
I was assuming your good faith. Was I wrong, and you were deliberately and knowingly suggesting incorrect hookups? I doubt that, but then the only remaining possibility is that you don't actually understand the system in question… :shrug:
You really do not appear to understand the system under discussion. It's not present on cars other than '70 California and '71 50-state/Canada; maybe that's why you haven't encountered it. You might want to hit that link provided earlier in this thread. The system is tangentially related to the crankcase ventilation system, but there's nothing wrong with the original poster's crankcase ventilation system, which is intact with its start and end points present and in use.

As for the rest…sorry you have chosen to feel insulted. Nobody will ever force you to read my posts, but if you're going to insist you know what you're talking about…and then you demonstrate otherwise…somebody might speak up about it. Might be me, might be somebody else.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Yup!
No, it's not that. People will make the repairs they make based on their needs and resources. Sometimes that's "just get it running to last til the next paycheck/til I get home/til I finish rebuilding the new engine", sometimes it's "spare no effort, spare no expense, make it perfect", and often it's somewhere in between. That's just reality.

What I grew tired of was people staring facts in the face and saying "Information? What information? I don't see any information." (That…and a few people consistently dispensing bogus bad advice backed with fairytales—no, 63Valiant, I'm not talking about you.)

My grandfather used to say "You are entitled to an opinion. You are not entitled to an uninformed opinion." I think he was right about that. Today's popular version is "Everyone's entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts". Where opinions and guesses and assumptions are different from facts and science and reality, the facts have to win, no matter how much pain is experienced by the dying ignorance, or we wind up back in caves.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.