JerryCan vs "Gasoline" JerryCan?

Page 1 of 2  
This is obviously the Real Deal for gasoline storage: http://tinyurl.com/n8v99sk
But these guys http://tinyurl.com/k5owomy look virtually identical, even down to the numbers stamped on the handle and the interior coating.
They come with the admonition "For non-potable water only" and the web page specifically cautions that federal law prohibits storage of gasoline in them.
Does anybody know what, besides color, the diff is?
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/21/2013 6:24 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

And what's the difference with these - other than the price.
http://www.lexingtoncontainercompany.com/Nato-Jerry-Cans.html
Can't take credit for finding this site; someone else posted it in reference to the thread on the idiots in Washington making everyone's lives miserable by screwing around trying to improve gasoline storage containers.
Thinking of picking up four of these myself. For less than the price of two of those from Amazon that ARE legit for fuel storage, I'll get four. Pick a color, any color<g>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per Unquestionably Confused:

What I've read so far is that you have to watch out for knockoffs that look superficially the same, but do not have the lining or the quality of welding.
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Unquestionably Confused wrote:

It says this.
*Note: Federal law prohibits the use of this container for the storage of fuel and California law prohibits the sale of any this jerry cans to California residents

--
Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per willshak:

But the question is "Why?".
Could it be just the color? The can appears to be identical in all other respects to the red ones that are specifically sold for fuel.
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I imagine it does not have the CARB approved spout
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 18:33:05 -0500, Unquestionably Confused wrote:

I have to say the problem with the "idiots" (most of whom are actually in California), isn't that they screwed around with the can storage (it actually stores gasoline rather well).
The containers meet the required spec that the gasoline stays *in* the can; it's just that they never specified how (easily) the gas should come *out* of the can.
The cans only meet 1/2 the consumer spec.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/21/2013 6:24 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

Just that and that they don't include an EPA-compliant spout which is why they're non-compliant and must have the disclaimer. I don't know how long the blatant subterfuge will last before somebody in charge gets their hackles up but power to 'em as long as they can.
Me, I've got a supply of about 20 old 5-gal metal screw-top cans from hydraulic oil, grease and various other products from the years before the plastic switch and then the EPA. They'll outlast me so I'm set...the collection may be one of the most valuable assets in the estate auction, who knows??? :)
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/21/13 7:17 PM, dpb wrote:

There might be fights over good ones with the double circle COOP logo.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The difference is vapor containment system. That is, the "water" ones don't have any. The "water" cans and their spouts are the very same ones that were sold for gasoline use before the EPA changed the regulations.
You'll note that California prohibits the sale of those cans to CA residents. That's because the bureaucrats and activists know full-well that people are going to buy the "water" cans and put gasoline in them, just like they used to.
Hey guys, suck it up. You voted for those idiots. TWICE.
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per Tegger:

The sealing looks identical to me: same gasket, same cam-operated cap.
I guess I should pour a cupful of gas into the suspect one, seal it, leave it in the sun for a few hours, and then crack to cap to see of there's an audible sound of vapor release.
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(PeteCresswell) wrote:

Hmm, And if it goes boom burning your face or hands? There is no such thing as over safety. I wouldn't keep my gas in non-designated can. Even at that it is not 100% safe.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:50:07 -0600, Tony Hwang wrote:

It's not a safety issue.
It's (mostly) a pollution issue.
That's why the California air resource board (CARB) is the one who makes the specs.
Both cans (old and new) are as safe (well, except for the child safety stuff that we all just cut off upon receipt).
Actually, we all spill more gas with the newer spouts, so, I'd argue they're even less safe than the older ones.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/22/2013 04:43 PM, Danny D. wrote:

Type II safety can.
No spill and the filler spout and flame arrestors in both openings are non-sparking brass designed for flashback protection.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 21:53:56 -0400, Red Hymen wrote:

I wonder what non-sparking brass is?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/22/2013 11:44 PM, Danny D. wrote:

Wonder no more.
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/safety_haz/hand_tools/nonsparking.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:10:23 -0400, Mike Homes wrote:

After reading that nice explanation, I've come to realize that there must be *three* kinds of sparks we'd be concerned with (for gasoline) (only two of which were covered in that Canadian OSHA article):
1. Sparks created *by the tool* (e.g., hammering concrete); and, 2. Sparks created chemically (e.g., hammering rust); and, 3. Sparks created elsewhere (e.g., static buildup) given *to the tool*.
From that description, a non-sparking brass is actually a low-incendive metal with respect to the first type only, it appears.
So, for example, if you were to strike a steel hammer against concrete, you'd get a high-incendive sparks; whereas if your hammer were made of low-sparking brass, you'd get (I guess) less incendive sparks.
The problem I see with low-incendive brass is that it still carries electrical current; so, it seems (to me) do to nothing to prevent ignition by static-electricity, which is likely a large cause of portable gasoline can fires.
(Actually pouring gasoline on a BBQ is probably the biggest cause of gasoline related fires!).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/23/2013 10:44 AM, Danny D. wrote:

There's no safety device in the world that can prevent an idiot from doing that. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:20:32 -0400, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

When I had called the CARB 800-242-4450, I spoke to Angus 916-445-4686 about gasoline cans; he told me they *weigh* them after a period of something like 120 days (I had posted at the time the exact spec) and they can't lose anything. There is also an accelerated test.
Interestingly, he said there is a spec for a can with a second opening, but, that none of the six companies approved for California sales has ever submitted a can for certification that has that second opening (i.e., a vent).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Federal law says gas cans have to be red. You can have an identical yellow can for diesel and it is illegal to put gas in it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.