Exploding Gas Tanks--We should talk about it.

[PNewitt]

I know that most of you know about this, or have seen the ads for the metal "shields", and "tank armor", to reduce the impact and fire from a severe rear-end collision.

Some years ago, CBS did a report on this, and included was a film of a crash test that Ford did with a '67 coupe, filled with water. The rear end was slammed, with dummies in the back seat. The results were not good. the problem is not too far from the old Pinto problem--the filler neck in the trunk gets sheared off in a rear-ender, and gas flies everywhere.

In this CBS program, they interviewed Iaccoca, and he basically said: "buy up", (meaning, "buy a newer car", and get out of "unsafe" cars (not a quote, I'm just paraphrasing)). That, at the time, didn't go over too well with Mustangers. Many letters were sent to Mustang Monthly at the time.

I've seen some folks buy a racing fuel cell, and drop it into the same spot, one was seen in a '68 GT-500KR convertible.

I thought that since we're in the group of potentially serious accidents in this area, what are your thoughts about it. Are you concerned" Are you planning to install a shield? Tank Armor? Will that work? So, do you, at least drive more carefully to avoid being hit in the rear?

This is something I'll won't be getting into in the book, so I thought I'd address it here.

Thanks, Paul.

 

[Mosesatm]

Here's a thread from a couple years ago that we can use as a starting point.

http://www.californiaspecial.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1717&highlight=gas+tank

 

[p51]

Thanks for bringing this up. The old thread refered to above seems to have some good pointers...

 

[PNewitt]

Part of why I brought this up was to let folks know about this potential problem, and to advise on what can be done about it.

I also would like to help owners know about upgrading their (almost) 40 year old car for today's traffic. At least all the driver (pre-'70) Mustangs out there, GT/CS or not. This would include disc brakes, taillights, etc., and gas tanks.

Paul N.

 

[69convert]

I put in the led rear lights, leds in the turn signals. I put in 71 seats with tjhe high back so my neck won't get broken. I have bought the metal divider and disk brakes, just haven't put then on yet.
I drive with plenty of distance between me and the car in front. Give advance signals when I know I am about to turn, avoid driving during storms, put on the brakes to start slowing down before I need to, avoid peak rush hour, etc.

 

[CougarCJ]

I have a friend that has been contemplating either a fuel cell or tank armor for both his 1970 Mach 1 and his daughters 1967 Coupe restomod.
They had a 1969 coupe that took a very hard hit to the rear end on the freeway. Fuel tank ruptured and spilled fuel on the freeway, fortunately no fire.

He researched the fuel cells first. Found out that they are very expensive, and I think less fuel capacity?, and the internal bladders have a short life.

He likes the idea of the tank armor better than the seat divider. Seat divider leaves the package tray area vulnerable.
Last I heard he was going with tank armor for both cars. Welding the armor in place. I suggested mounting the fuel tank from the bottom for any future removal or service.

Paul, your comment about the shearing off of the filler neck is a good point.

I like both the 1967's and the 1968's. I lean towards 1968's due to the increased safety features.
Collapsible steering columns, front shoulder belts, non-protruding window cranks (ever bash your knee on one of those?), and headrest option.

 

[rvrtrash]

I thought about this when I was restoring mine but decided to leave things as they were. Here's why. If you use the seat shield, you would have to caulk all the way around the edge to keep fuel from leaking past it and then you still have the possibility it could leak in from the package tray and past the wheel wells into the quarter panels. It would be almost impossible to completely seal the passenger compartment. If you covered the top of the gas tank cavity, you would also have to fabricate something to cover the filler hose that fit tight so you could seal it and then you have to cut holes in the floor so any spilled gas or whatever got in there could drain away. Since I don't use my CS as a daily driver, I will just roll the dice and drive more defensively.

Steve

 

[p51]

The question is what give you 80% of the protection at 20% of the price. Seems like the seat shield does this. Sounds like the "tank armor" doesnt protect against the shearing off of the filler tube...

 

[franklinair]

Fuel tank vulnerability

I opted for the metal partition AND a 3rd stop light in the rear window.
Concourse? No. Added safety? Yes
The metal partition is not a cure-all, but would minimize (to some degree) the fuel hazard. There's no easy answer for the fuel filler tube. If it is sheared, you have in effect a 3" hole in the fuel tank. I have also thought of fabricating a metal plate to cover the rear shelf. Again, no cure-all, but a deterrent.
Metal trunk partitions are on E-Bay, about $50.
Neil Hoppe

 

[Mosesatm]

It seems to me that it would be fairly easy to install a back-flow valve in the gas tank fill hole. Just some sort of rubber flapper, like in a toilet tank, might work.

It can't make a perfectly tight seal because the tank needs to breathe but it could stop 99% of the flow. Could also seal it up tight and install a vent tube.

 

[BroadwayBlue]

Good Thread...

I've been contemplating a number things for the past few years. Some I've considered before I even purchased my first classic Mustang.
Most have been metioned already but here are my thoughts on options in no particular order:

Shield for the backseat (While not 100%, it's better than nothing at all in my mind - it could give passengers a few extra seconds they need to get out - just my opinion) - will probably do this sometime this year.

LED Rear Lights. I was behind a Shelby on a sunny day once and could barely see his brake lights. Easy mod - just a little costly - will do this year or next

Tank Armor - considered this but if I go this route will wait until I work on a restore and replace the tank

Fuel Cell - really thought this would be the way to go but as someone mentioned - very costly.

In the meantime - keep my distance from the car in front of me. Brake well in advance (as someone else mentioned) and always seem to drive with 1 eye on the rear view mirror. Subconciously or not - I think this is something that's always on my mind when driving my CS so that's why I'm always watching the rear. IF someone if following to close I let them go past or when possible ... push down the pedal and lose 'em.

Gas Tank issues or not I think I'd still so do most of the defensive type driving above regardless - I always take into account traffic, road conditions, time of day ... keep in mind, in addition to no power steering I also have no power brakes- so I'm concious about needing extra distance to stop.

 

[J_Speegle]

Let us all remember that this is the same "news" source that had a similar program on Chevy trucks and it was found that a flare was placed on the gas tank (in that demonstration) before the staged accident that was shown.

That being said... far be it for me to suggest that some one not try and improve the safety of their car even if its just the feeling of being safe. After being professional firefighter and someone that spent ALLOT of time in wrecking yards I have to report that n 30+ years I never heard of a vintage Mustang bursting into flames nor did I find more than one such car in a wrecking yard that had been burnt from a rearend accident.

Lets also consider the larger IMHO potential issues of the steering column (in earlier Mustangs) , the drum brakes, the lack of decent seat belts, poor seat design where the backs commonly break in an rearender.

Just hate all the merchandizing of fear that takes place in our society.

 

[Midnight Special]

Let us all remember that this is the same "news" source that had a similar program on Chevy trucks and it was found that a flare was placed on the gas tank (in that demonstration) before the staged accident that was shown.

That being said... far be it for me to suggest that some one not try and improve the safety of their car even if its just the feeling of being safe. A.

Just hate all the merchandizing of fear that takes place in our society.

...Ditto...

 

[gt bandit]

I installed my own sheet metal shield , not for exploding gas tanks never new about that) More for noise reduction and its just plain weird having a flimsy piece of cardboard between the backseat and the trunk IMHO.
My local sheet metal guy knocked it up in a few hours cost me a Slab of beer and $20bucks for the metal.

 

[Mosesatm]

My local sheet metal guy knocked it up in a few hours cost me a Slab of beer and $20bucks for the metal.

Damn, I'll bet that hurt......even after a slab of beer!!!

 

[Mustanglvr]

Ha, ha, very funny Arlie.:rofl:

 

[PNewitt]

Like a hushed family secret, I wanted to bring this topic out into the open. This is why I brought up the subject.

Here are two websites I think that everyone should first get a close look at:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/05/17/60II/main47539.shtml

and...

http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=96&did=478

What I hope to do is educate and make everyone aware of the POTENTIAL of what can happen with our gas tanks in a severe accident. I don't mean to be alarmist, or pass judgement, or "go after" Ford on this--but to just direct you to this information. Many '68 GT/CS cars have passed hands since 1999, and new owners may not know about this topic.

The Registry has not been notified of a gas-tank explosion accident, but that doesn't mean "it's never happened". I've known of a lot of rear-enders, broken fiberglass, dented rear quarters, etc. So--in the law of averages, one could say "it doesn't happen". Granted, it's well known that our litigous society sues from fast-food coffee burns, and there are literally thousands of lawsuits annually to the auto industry, some legit, some not. Deep pocket lawsuits are very common...but--using the media and lawyers as a reason to at least, "not" look into this, I feel (personally) is irresponsible.

When this first surfaced in 1999, there were letters to Mustang Monthly saying how the media was 'hyping" this, and My response was that there was some "denial" in regards to the problem.

But--regardless of what lies between the "truth"; lawyers, and corporations, WE NEED TO LOOK OUT FOR OURSELVES, if it means upgrading and modifying our own Mustangs, so be it. Although this is an individual decision, I felt as Registrar, that it's my responsibility to bring it to your attention; for you to make an informed choice. Just if I had heard about bad brakes, faulty engine parts, seat backs, wiring, etc...("IF" it were the case with these items).

You'll read in the CBS article that there were no standards or tests for gas tank-crashes back in the late 1960s. As a side note, read some of Iaccoca's comments about safety, and "that old Mustang".

I have this episode on tape, and have seen the Test #301. If you saw the gas (they used water) force its way into the back seat, you'd do something, too. Perhaps this video is on the net.

I also would like to know what the people that make "Tank Armor" have to say about the filler-neck-shearing-off problem and how their product protects people. Not that I doubt that it works, but you still have the filler neck there after you install their product.

Arlie's valve idea has merit. I wonder if you could remove the filler neck completely, and fill the tank like they did with the Trans-Am cars, with a cap right on top of the tank (you would have to open the trunk). BUT...that has it's own problems, with gas vapors, spillage, etc...

With all the pre-'71 Mustangs on the road, I'd think some sort of present-day retrofit could be designed. A stock-looking Mustang/Cougar fuel cell still hasn't been produced, and at a reasonable price. If something like that could be made, they'd sell thousands.

Paul N.

 

[BroadwayBlue]

I've read numerous things on this and can't say I'm 100% convinced either way. In my mind ... it's not a big effort and I'm not worried about concourse ... why not do some of these things. Just my opinion.

Keep in mind ... I haven't done any of these things ... just on a long list of future improvements but they're not at the top of the list yet. I'm still driving around with it as is.

Question on the filling of the tank Paul mentioned and eliminating the filler neck. Doesn't the fuel cell essentially do that? Or Paul, were you looking for a cheaper option that does the same thing?

Tank Armor doesn't really address the filler neck
http://www.tankarmor.com/

We can always just go this route... :icon_pani

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-az9vxJghs

 

[Mustanger]

... A stock-looking Mustang/Cougar fuel cell still hasn't been produced, and at a reasonable price. If something like that could be made, they'd sell thousands.

Paul N.

Paul,

Mustangs Plus does sell it:

http://www2.mustangsplus.com/catalog/fuel_07.pdf

... although I wouldn't call it a reasonable price (approx. 10x more) ...

 

[Mustanger]

(cont.) ...

... Here are some more traditional fuel cells with "traditional" pricing ...

http://store.summitracing.com/egnsearch.asp?N=700+4294839036+4294920243+115+4294908348

... yes, it does not have to cost you an arm and a leg ...