Dual Fuel Tanks?

[straycat]

I still don't buy that argument. The BIIs got their 23 gallon tanks put in that area and the F-series trucks with dual tanks all got the tank put behind the rear axle in the "spare tire" area. I haven't seen any of them turn into fireballs.

I have, however, seen Jeeps turn into fireballs because of a defective fuel tank design...

And more on the subject... my dad had a 1989 F-350 dump with dual tanks (and no rear bumper, just a hitch) and had someone in an old boat of a car (back when they made them with heavy steel bumpers) slam into the back of him. Crushed the car up to the windshield and did it damage the fuel tank on the dump? Was there a big fireball? Nope. Just bent up a mudflap bracket and took a chip out of the paint on the tailgate.

I have seen a lot of Fords burn down to the ground as well as other vehicles. Gas tanks are just safer to add in front of the rear axle of course. Like I said...If the tank is well protected it should be ok. I just would not add a tank in the spare tire location. Now....a fuel cell...that would be different...but they are not all that cheap as finding a good used tank in a scrapyard.

As for the incident with your father he was lucky that day. I saw a really neat lifted 92 F250 get hit in the rear by a U-Haul 20 ft truck up in Ocala three years ago on the interstate. The F250 caught fire at the rear and I helped put it out. I always carry 2 fire extinguishers on the road. The owner of the truck told me he had added another gas tank just in front of the rear bumper. He told me he wished he had not done that. But...could be luck of the draw. At least nobody was hurt...just shook up.

 

[97RangerXLT]

I think the key to putting in the tank and being safe on it is to look at Rangers with a dual tank set up, B2's with their rear tank and add all of the protections that those vehicles have for that tank. reinforce the rear bumper/ frame/ as well, it wouldn't hurt.

As for fire extinguishers in the truck, it wouldn't hurt to have one in every car you own, not just the truck.

AJ

 

[wildbill23c]

The earlier 80's ford rangers had a dual fuel tank factory option, my 84 Ranger had dual fuel tanks, the spare tire was installed in a bracket in the truck bed, and the rear fuel tank was installed right where the spare tire would have been. Its not any more dangerous than any car's fuel tank location in the exact same area. I don't remember for sure but I don't think my ranger had skid plates, most likely not it was a 2WD base model.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

As for the incident with your father he was lucky that day. I saw a really neat lifted 92 F250 get hit in the rear by a U-Haul 20 ft truck up in Ocala three years ago on the interstate. The F250 caught fire at the rear and I helped put it out. I always carry 2 fire extinguishers on the road. The owner of the truck told me he had added another gas tank just in front of the rear bumper. He told me he wished he had not done that. But...could be luck of the draw. At least nobody was hurt...just shook up.

Dad's '80 F-350 has one there from the factory...

 

[ZMan]

I have seen a lot of Fords burn down to the ground as well as other vehicles. Gas tanks are just safer to add in front of the rear axle of course. Like I said...If the tank is well protected it should be ok. I just would not add a tank in the spare tire location. Now....a fuel cell...that would be different...but they are not all that cheap as finding a good used tank

As for the incident with your father he was lucky that day. I saw a really neat lifted 92 F250 get hit in the rear by a U-Haul 20 ft truck up in Ocala three years ago on the interstate. The F250 caught fire at the rear and I helped put it out. I always carry 2 fire extinguishers on the road. The owner of the truck told me he had added another gas tank just in front of the rear bumper. He told me he wished he had not done that. But...could be luck of the draw. At least nobody was hurt...just shook up.

It was lifted and got blasted by a uhaul..something tells me those 2 things together were the reason for a fire. That's the only reason crown vics caught on fire, because patrol cars on the side of the highway were getting blasted by unattentive drivers. The big story that made the pinto a running joke was one that got blasted by a Cadillac while it was sitting on the side of the highway. I imagine the same goes for the jeeps that they're recalling now. Accidents like that just aren't common enough to actually worry about it.

 

[MastuhWaffles]

My 88 F-150 had the dual tanks, eventually the switch broke and I never got it fixed.

 

[straycat]

It was lifted and got blasted by a uhaul..something tells me those 2 things together were the reason for a fire. That's the only reason crown vics caught on fire, because patrol cars on the side of the highway were getting blasted by unattentive drivers. The big story that made the pinto a running joke was one that got blasted by a Cadillac while it was sitting on the side of the highway. I imagine the same goes for the jeeps that they're recalling now. Accidents like that just aren't common enough to actually worry about it.

Don't forget about the Fords rusting/failing gas tank straps/leaking gas tanks that have been recalled lately and all the electrical fires that had Ford do the recall on. Too much outsourcing!!!! OUCH!! Crown Vics had gas tank recalls as well in case you forgot about that.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Crown Vics had gas tank recalls as well in case you forgot about that.

The CV recall was for police cars because a gunrack of unknown quality did not have the same reinforcment value that the spare tire did that Ford designed the car with.

That compounded with the fact that drunk drivers are attracted to red flashing lights so they were getting slammed into at highway/interstate speeds wasn't a good deal.

The fix for the Jeep recall is a free receiver hitch to those that don't have one...

I would rather have the fuel tank straps recalled than the frame of the truck... they all outsource and it bites them all in the butt from time to time.

 

[adsm08]

You Bros are killing me…lol. I really feel that he should not add a tank in the spare tire area. That area seems a bit exposed to hazards. If he has a really huge super strong custom rear bumper and puts a huge skid plate to protect the tank….maybe. Just too risky to me.


http://www.autosafetyexpert.com/defect_fueltank.php


http://www.denverpost.com/auto/news/ci_23395963?source=rss

When you consider all the vehicles that have had tanks there over the years, and the low number of instances of fire/death from rear end collisions I really don't think it is as dangerous as you make it out to be.

Mustangs, from job one through the fox body had AOA tanks.

All BIIs did, some Rangers did, Crown Vic cars did, Mustangs did, 90 some percent of the F-series trucks, from the early 80s through the last 96 MY made had them. Nova's had them, Chevells had them, pretty much every sports car and small SUV GM ever made had them. The 90s GM full-size vans had them. And those are just the ones I am sure of.

This represents millions upon millions of vehicles that had AOA tanks and were not routinely bursting into flames from getting rear ended. If you add the Pinto in then we are still probably looking at less than 1% of the total population.

 

[ZMan]

F series had tanks in the back after they were moved out of the cab, so it goes farther back than the 80s.

 

[adsm08]

I know you could get twin-tank F-150s earlier than the 80s, but they weren't as common as they were in the 80s and 90s.

 

[ZMan]

I know you could get twin-tank F-150s earlier than the 80s, but they weren't as common as they were in the 80s and 90s.

I mean as the only tank. The ones I've seen have all had them back there.