19 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHFuel sending unit issue
Leading reported evidence
Replace sending unit last year due
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
I replaced the sending unit last year due to a broken vent nipple.
Leading evidence: 'Replace sending unit last year due' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace sending unit last year due' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Has anything been added to the gas at all or did you just run standard 93 octane?
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
19 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T011819Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Anyone seen this happen. I replaced the sending unit last year due to a broken vent nipple. It kinda looks like it melted but there is nothing there that can get hot? I never had any fuel spillage but i was getting a large evap leak code. The electrical connections r perfect.
Suppose to look like this.
The fuel tank area is sealed with that gasket and the battery sits above that pan.
Its possible that the pan gasket was in the sender...but i still dont see how it could have got hot like that and melted away? Friction (static) burn but i would think i would see it in the gasket?
Looks to me like something dissolved the plastic, only obvious thing is if the battery got some acid down there, but it�s a leap�..I am assuming gas won�t dissolve those parts�..
-Eric
I tend to agree but with no heat damage to the gasket its really strange. U can see the indent in the gasket just above the "E" so i think it was touching the sender.
Deff not battery acid, see pick of cover plate. No residue and deff sealed from the tank area.
Some race fuels are very corrosive and easily ignited. But chemical melting wouldn't have the burnt looking black/brown edges in your pics. Looks like fire/combustion possibly happened in there.
Wonder if a small amount fuel/vapor got caught up in that vent hat well and spontaneous combustion, or a static spark or some other form of ignition ignited it. Since valving mostly closes vent off to the tank, no further combustion happened..??? Not sure where the ignition source came from, but something set it off.
jmo
Its deff a strange one. Sent pics to a few mechanic friends and still cant come up with a reasonable explaination.
so $10 and i fixed my old sender. Should have just done this the 1st time.
Whoa that's pretty crazy looking and glad you caught it in time. It seems like there could have been a leak from the top connector? Has anything been added to the gas at all or did you just run standard 93 octane? Some chemicals can slowly eat away at a plastic but still hard to believe looking at the photos.
Yeah, I can conceive how some flamable vapor or liquid being in that location could cause that damage and a strong cross-wind extinguish the flame and also create the backwards heat pattern without the heat damaging the battery tray and gasket . The mystery is what ignited the flamable vapor or liquid ? Possibly a spark came up from the road for some reason...( a cigarette butt or dragging metal? )..
The only thing i can think of is static electricity. Im gonna add an extra ground to the battery try. The gasket insulates but the bolts ground it. Mine r corroded and maybe it arced? Im really grasping at straws here.
Where the sender is in a c2 i cant imagine any external ignition source getting to it but who knows.
Yeah, static electricity /spark is hard to dupicate and only certain materials rubbing together can produce it.
But it is possible that that particular gasket material rubbing on the nylon fuel sender ( during bumps) created a static electricity spark? Whouldn't that be a hoot !!
Edit :: I think I would make my own gasket from a different matterial, just to be safe....
