Jump to content

Evap Vent Valve Location

nharrel

By nharrel
in Ask A GM Technician

 Share

Recommended Posts

nharrel Enthusiast

nharrel

Posted
Posted

i have a 2006 sirra 1500 slt shortbed and i cant find the Evap Vent Valve, the chilton manual is no help either. does anyone have any pictures on where it is at, or can give me some detailed instructions on were it is at. thanks

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

odayflor
odayflor

***IMPORTANT INFORMATION YOU MUST READ*****   Ok everyone, listen up....If you have a 04 and newer silverado, with a failed evap vent solenoid, you have to read this info. Do not pay $100+ for this

IndyDingo
IndyDingo

Ian -   I have the '06 Chevy version of your truck (crew cab Z71) - but I can't seem to locate the canister. I've looked at the pics that have been posted here - crawled under the truck yesterday

evallade
evallade

I just put the 214-2149 on my 07 Sierra (new body). It also has 40k on it. $31 all in. I bought 3' of 5/8 heater hose and had 18" left over. Cleared the code with a code reader, and so far it has

Posted Images

minibike132 Senior Enthusiast

minibike132

Posted
Posted (edited)

It's in between the cab and the bed on the bed side all the way at the bottom left (driver side)just above the frame rail. Search is your friend there are pictures here somewhere. Welcome to the site.

Edited by sparkstech
matthuber1 Enthusiast

matthuber1

Posted
Posted

I replaced mine yesterday... and it was not where alldata or chiltons said it was... Mine was BEHIND the fuel tank. Its a cylindrical plastic part that has a 5/8" plastic hose connected to it. You will need 5/8 heater hose and hose clamps to replace the valve.

 

My 2005 had a TSB that added a remote vent location.

  • 1 month later...
JA_Silverado_04 Enthusiast

JA_Silverado_04

Posted
Posted

It seems that for different years and truck configurations the location is different. My '04 Reg Cab Long Bed has it located where SparksTech described - between the Cab and Bed above and outboard from the gastank. I can actually see mine if I look down between the cab and the bed out toward the drivers side. I think its easier to get at if its behind the gas tank (from looking anyways).

 

If you have the replacement part it might not look exactly the same - since they are using and upgraded part now.

Phillip Enthusiast

Phillip

Posted
Posted (edited)

Got to replaced the evap vent value in 2005 Silverado 2 door 4x4. how hard is to do (may do it myself)? Also got a price at a dealership on the part $160.00 and $40.00 for labour (Canadian) is this a good price?

 

 

Thanks

Edited by GM4X4V8
  • 1 month later...
  • 7 months later...
ACAMK067 New Member

ACAMK067

Posted
Posted
Got the part for 160.00 and installed myself. fixed problem.

 

 

my son and husband are both pretty good at doing mechanical stuff. Son totally rebuilt a classic and works on jeeps all the time. Is replacing the Evap Vent Solenoid very difficult-between 1-10, 10 begin extrememly Five star Tech hard, what would you say?

Yotaman Enthusiast

Yotaman

Posted
Posted

I just replaced the one in my 06 GMC CC. I had code PO449. I bought the new designed solenoid vent valve from GM Partsdirect for 94.00 shipped. I also had to buy 4 hose clamps and 8 feet of 5/8" heater hose to relocate the inlet filter. Do a search on the site for Evap vent valve and you will learn alot about this issue.

 

Good Luck

Yotaman

  • 1 month later...
odayflor Enthusiast

odayflor

Posted
Posted

***IMPORTANT INFORMATION YOU MUST READ*****

 

Ok everyone, listen up....If you have a 04 and newer silverado, with a failed evap vent solenoid, you have to read this info. Do not pay $100+ for this part(actually $150.00 at the dealer). The following part numbers associated with this part have been gm#19207763,19152349, and AC DELCO #'s 214-2082 costing over $100.00 for the modified part. This is for the modified part, with the relocation of the filterbox, and the added hose that seperates the two. No one at Gm will tell you this, but this same part, that was origionally on your silverado, is also used in the 2006 Suburban. It will be an identical replacement for what is ON YOUR TRUCK, and the cost is $24.04 AT THE DEALER. I know this because I own a 2006 silverado, and a 2006 suburban. Looked at the suburban when the part went bad on the silverado(from overfilling the tank)and bingo, same part. Ask a parts person at GM, and they will tell you otherwise, but they are lying to you. Bought the suburban part today part # 25932571 (GM #) and everything is identical, right down to the numbers stamped on the part itself. Took the part off my silverado, put the replacement on (which gm told me is not the right part), cleared the codes, and bingo no more light after 3 consecutive starts...... Why, is it that GM feels we need to pay the price for something they did wrong???? And moreso, lie to us, telling us the $150.00 part is our only choice to fix the problem. My truck went 40K miles with the origional part, and probably only went bad because of my own stupidity in overfilling the tank, whay would I not just want to spend $24.00 to put on the same part, that will probably go the rest of the life of the truck with no tank overfills???? I say CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT FOR EVERYONE THAT HAS BEEN SCAMMED INTO PAYING THE RIDICULOUS PRICE that GM is trying to suck out of us.....Please pass this on to the world, and every forum you can...Get the word out....Let the parts people at GM know we are on to their BS, and they can't take advantage of us like they have.....

  • Like 2
  • 2 months later...
voorheisb Enthusiast

voorheisb

Posted
Posted
***IMPORTANT INFORMATION YOU MUST READ*****

 

Ok everyone, listen up....If you have a 04 and newer silverado, with a failed evap vent solenoid, you have to read this info. Do not pay $100+ for this part(actually $150.00 at the dealer). The following part numbers associated with this part have been gm#19207763,19152349, and AC DELCO #'s 214-2082 costing over $100.00 for the modified part. This is for the modified part, with the relocation of the filterbox, and the added hose that seperates the two. No one at Gm will tell you this, but this same part, that was origionally on your silverado, is also used in the 2006 Suburban. It will be an identical replacement for what is ON YOUR TRUCK, and the cost is $24.04 AT THE DEALER. I know this because I own a 2006 silverado, and a 2006 suburban. Looked at the suburban when the part went bad on the silverado(from overfilling the tank)and bingo, same part. Ask a parts person at GM, and they will tell you otherwise, but they are lying to you. Bought the suburban part today part # 25932571 (GM #) and everything is identical, right down to the numbers stamped on the part itself. Took the part off my silverado, put the replacement on (which gm told me is not the right part), cleared the codes, and bingo no more light after 3 consecutive starts...... Why, is it that GM feels we need to pay the price for something they did wrong???? And moreso, lie to us, telling us the $150.00 part is our only choice to fix the problem. My truck went 40K miles with the origional part, and probably only went bad because of my own stupidity in overfilling the tank, whay would I not just want to spend $24.00 to put on the same part, that will probably go the rest of the life of the truck with no tank overfills???? I say CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT FOR EVERYONE THAT HAS BEEN SCAMMED INTO PAYING THE RIDICULOUS PRICE that GM is trying to suck out of us.....Please pass this on to the world, and every forum you can...Get the word out....Let the parts people at GM know we are on to their BS, and they can't take advantage of us like they have.....

 

Glad to see that someone may have already found a solution to this problem. I have a 2003 Silverado. I too am guilty of "topping-off". I'm getting both PO449 and PO455 codes. How do I ensure I'm getting the right part? I'd obviously like to get the $24 version since the dealer just told me it's $80 to scan it and then depending on the issue up to $500 to fix it. Please let me know if you need further information. The difference here is that you have a 2006 and I have a 2003. My GM part number is: 19152345. The AC Delco one you mention doesn't list this part number. I just need to figure out what the Suburban version of mine is. Thanks in advance, Brian

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined

  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 439 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...