Hi Achim,
It probably is too far out.
I did compare the two necks but I didn’t want to beat a dead horse so I kept the original discussion pretty simple. The originaI tank neck was fine. I remember it being like the one you posted, but definitely not so short that I could not install the grommet. I also searched every Pagoda photo I could find on the web (many, many), but like everything else on the web, there are few details and the photos are not quite high enough resolution nor taken from close enough to really see detail.
Most of them become pixelated when zoomed.
Regarding the old and new tank and neck comparison, I’ve attached another copy of that photo with lines showing that it was still about 10 mm shorter than the original. The upper yellow line is a copy of the lower yellow line. That’s about the best I can do with my tools (a camera and MS Paint). I tried to eliminate as much parallax as possible when I took the original photo. The red lines are pretty parallel except for the center of the upper end of the neck, so it really is still just a little shorter.
HOWEVER, I did take into consideration that I would have to “eyeball” the cap location and am able to move the cap either closer or farther from the grommet. The location in the previous photo is with the grommet against the inner end of the cap cam sleeve. In the new photo below I have moved the neck end closer to the body and the grommet is actually resting on the outer diameter of the cap cam sleeve about 6 mm from the cap gasket surface. I tried to make it as much as possible like the photo you posted.
Regarding the photo you posted being correct and untouched, I think I would have said it is original and untouched. There is probably a range of correct positions. I would suggest that because there are sheet metal stampings, weld studs and slotted holes involved in the tolerance stack-up between the cap location and the three tank to body attachments, the production cap location tolerance is likely to be at least plus or minus 2 mm.
I sometimes question whether Daimler-Benz engineers are as anal about their cars as we (or at least, I) tend to be.
And finally, yes, the rubber hose is a Gates 24713 (the number denotes the 57 mm ID and 45 degree elbow shape), and is designed as a fuel filler hose. Here’s what Gates says about this series of hoses.
Fuel Filler Neck Hose
• Designed specifically for auxiliary gas tanks on recreational vehicles. Excellent replacement for passenger cars and trucks where a straight hose with a minimal bend is required.
• Suitable for use with gasoline, gasohol blends of ethanol, methanol, ethers , diesel and biodiesel to B20 (up to maximum concentrations allowed by the EPA).
• Smooth oil resistant cover, tough textile cord reinforcement and petroleum-resistant nitrile tube.
• Non-wire reinforced
• Meets SAE 30R6 specifications.
• Temperature rating: -40°F to +212°F (-40°C to +100°C)
• Biodiesel (B20) temperature rating: -40°F to +212°F (-40°C to +51°C)
• CAUTION: Not recommended for marine gasoline applications
I'm using 9 mm slotless stainless steel clamps with stainless steel screws with two per neck-piece. I am paranoid, but I am also experienced.
If the tank had not been damaged on arrival or if I had been closer to the shipper, I would never have thought to repair it. The last thing I wanted to do was start redesigning the sheet metal of the tank to fit my car.
As I tend to say about the old cars I’ve owned, “I tend toward being a purist, but I’m not a masochist.”
Tom Kizer
