1970 Mustang Gas Tank - Vintage Mustang Forums
Vintage Mustang Forum
HomeForumGalleryClassifiedsAbout UsAdvertiseContact Us
» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
Go Back   Vintage Mustang Forums > General Discussion > Vintage Mustang Forum
Vintage-Mustang.com is the premier Ford Mustang Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-03-2012, 04:48 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 16
Default 1970 Mustang Gas Tank

Been finding a number of articles referencing catastrophic consequences from rear end collisions ffor certain model years. Does anyone know of a safer tank that could be placed in that model year to decrease the chances of such an outcome?
marios5469 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-03-2012, 05:03 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 182
Default

You can try tankarmor.com.
__________________
Ed
pete389 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 05:20 PM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,654
Default

Unless it's a racing fuel cell, I doubt there would be much difference.
Klutch is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 05:34 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bartl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: West Rutland, Vermont, USA
Posts: 18,040
Default

I can't recall, if ever, the last time I heard of a vintage Mustang erupting in flames after a rear end collision. Heck, even the Crown Vic, with its fuel tank mounted IN FRONT of the rear axle had a bad rep for a while. My philosophy is that when it's your time.....

Best thing about owning a vintage Mustang is that it's an attention getter so people see them before other cars. If you want a matching pickup, buy a '73-86 Chevy with their tanks mounted outboard of the frame rails right under the side of the bed.
__________________


6F09A 63A 8 26 09D 71 1 5
bartl is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 06:52 PM   #5 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 10
Default

I’m pretty sure NPD sells a factory located fuel safe tank that has a bladder, but they are pretty expensive if I remember correctly.
coryevangelou is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 07:03 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 185
Default

You could always use one of these: Mustangs Unlimited - The Premier Source for Mustang, Shelby and Cougar Parts and Accessories

I'm not sure about 1970 model but the 65/66 had a cardboard divider and the steel one is an upgrade.
__________________
64 1/2 D code coupe
289 4 speed toploader
MrKevin64.5 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 07:08 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
1966notch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western WI
Posts: 556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartl View Post
buy a '73-86 Chevy with their tanks mounted outboard of the frame rails right under the side of the bed.
IIRC, I thought later on after GM had made the payouts, they found that the news agency reporting on this "helped" the crash test of those to be more dramatic than they really were. It made for more captaving news.
__________________
'66 coupe 347 4spd toploader
1966notch is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 08:28 PM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1966notch View Post
IIRC, I thought later on after GM had made the payouts, they found that the news agency reporting on this "helped" the crash test of those to be more dramatic than they really were. It made for more captiving news.
Well, that's an understatement. They ignited a model rocket motor between the frame and gas tank to guarantee fire would result, and got caught by sharp-eyed viewers. Basically, the so-called "test" was a fraud.

I studied the whole "Mustang gas tank will kill you" thing a few years ago, and statistically you are much greater danger of being killed by shark bite, or lightning strike.
__________________
Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.

Last edited by 22GT; 07-03-2012 at 08:30 PM.
22GT is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 08:39 PM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bartl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: West Rutland, Vermont, USA
Posts: 18,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKevin64.5 View Post
You could always use one of these: Mustangs Unlimited - The Premier Source for Mustang, Shelby and Cougar Parts and Accessories

I'm not sure about 1970 model but the 65/66 had a cardboard divider and the steel one is an upgrade.
The rear seat divider does absolutely NOTHING about fuel/fire coming up through the package tray nor over the tops of the outer wheelhouses into the space behind the quarter trim. Probably the best solution would be Tank Armor, and you still have to deal with the filler neck.
__________________


6F09A 63A 8 26 09D 71 1 5
bartl is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 09:00 PM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
soutex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Austin, Texas area
Posts: 249
Default

My club racer members tell me Fuel Safe is the best. It has a check valve to keep the gas in if the filler gets separated from the tank. Also, the bladder keeps the gas in when the tank gets deformed. You can shop the price but those tanks only very a few $100 from retailer to retailer. http://www.fuelsafe.com/pdf/mustang.pdf

Then there is this well known story from 2009 where a kid gets cooked:
Mustang: A Classic Danger? - CBS News

I have tank armor and it is a very heavy (40lb) steel plate with 1/4 inch bolts which replace the sheet metal screws. I would move up to 5/16" if I had to do it over.
soutex is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-04-2012, 11:30 AM   #11 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 16
Default

Thanks for the info guys. I know the likelihood is slim, but I have a 14 y/o daughter, and I am looking for a '69 convertible to build out for her to have when she gets her license. Even thought the statistics are low, some things...I am am not willing to gamble with. Particularly my little girl.
marios5469 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-04-2012, 11:37 AM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marios5469 View Post
Thanks for the info guys. I know the likelihood is slim, but I have a 14 y/o daughter, and I am looking for a '69 convertible to build out for her to have when she gets her license. Even thought the statistics are low, some things...I am am not willing to gamble with. Particularly my little girl.
If you're concerned about safety, I must say a modern car spanks all over a classic car. You might consider a newer Mustang convertible with anti-lock brakes, air bags and improved impact absorbing panels.
Klutch is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-04-2012, 01:29 PM   #13 (permalink)
I won a special award
 
Maxum96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 6,437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marios5469 View Post
Thanks for the info guys. I know the likelihood is slim, but I have a 14 y/o daughter, and I am looking for a '69 convertible to build out for her to have when she gets her license. Even thought the statistics are low, some things...I am am not willing to gamble with. Particularly my little girl.

If you're concerned about her safety, don't put her in a vintage Mustang, let alone any vintage car. Accident rates of teen drivers is astronomically high, no matter how good and responsible they are. It's due in large part to inexperience. Secondly, modern cars (even little Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, etc) are far safer than any vintage car made. There have been a couple of members on this forum that found out the hard way that vintage Mustangs are not good first cars for kids after they restored cars only to have their kids wreck them. Luckily I don't think the kids were seriously hurt.

Don't get me wrong. I love vintage Mustangs. But in stock form they don't stop or handle anything like a modern car. And they don't have the safety features that even the cheapest cars on the road today have. But as a 15 year veteran law enforcement officer (for the last few years I've been doing major accident investigation and reconstruction) and having been to hundreds of wrecks, I'd put my kid in a modern car long before I'd have them tooling around in a 40+ year old car with 50 year old technology in it.


Here's a great video. It shows exactly what I'm talking about. The video is a big tank 1959 Bel Air being crashed head on into a little 2009 Malibu. Which car would you want your kid in?

__________________
1970 Fastback (to be finished outside as a Boss 302 clone)
393 Windsor AFR 205 heads with 11.5:1 compression
Tremec TKO 5 Speed
Link to my Hub Garage and blog about my car http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/maxum96






Last edited by Maxum96; 07-04-2012 at 02:32 PM.
Maxum96 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-04-2012, 01:40 PM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bartl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: West Rutland, Vermont, USA
Posts: 18,040
Default

No way would I put ANY kid in a '58-64 full-size GM car with "X" frame. I'd like to see that test re-run with a '59 Ford and '59 Mopar full-size.

PS: And what's been said about young drivers in vintage cars is absolutely true.
__________________


6F09A 63A 8 26 09D 71 1 5
bartl is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-04-2012, 02:01 PM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Greg'66 5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ledyard, CT
Posts: 1,868
Default

I am putting a 1970 tank in my 1966 - not because it is any safer, but because it holds about 6 more gallons of gas. For additional protection, I am putting a steel shield over the tank just like the Tank Armor. I thought that Tank Armor was a little overpriced for what you get, so I went to a local steel fabrication place and gave them the dimensions to bend a piece of 1/4" plate so that it fits over the tank. It won't keep the tank from rupturing, but what it should do is keep the tank from rupturing upwards into the car and spraying gas all over the inside of the trunk. The plate should help deflect the spray downwards so that any spilled gas goes on the ground outside the car. It is still a huge fire hazard, but no more sore than a modern car - hopefully it would at least buy the occupants some additional time to get out of the car.

I don't remember exactly what it cost me for my steel plate, but I think I paid about 50% of what the Tank Armor price was and the 1/4" steel is much heavier gauge than what the Tank Armor is.
__________________
'66 Emberglo Coupe - Restoration COMPLETE!
Modifications:
5.0 EFI conversion
TwEECer EFI tuning
T56 6-speed
Rod & Custom Motorsports IFS
TCP subframe connectors
Vintage Air Heat & AC

'99 Black Cobra - Daily driver
http://i887.photobucket.com/albums/a...psdd2caa40.jpg
Greg'66 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.