TankArmor - Vintage Mustang Forums
 11Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-17-2019, 02:31 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 429
TankArmor

I'm installing a 22 gal fuel tank in my '68.
I am considering adding this product: Tank Armor

Has anyone install TankArmor and can provide any feedback. Anyone think it's necessary or helpful?
CJM68GT390 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-17-2019, 09:06 PM
Senior Member
Supporting Member
 
FE1967GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Peoples Republic of New Jersey
Posts: 262
CJM,
I installed the “Tank Armor” in my 67 Fastback. I did not install a new 22 gallon tank, but did install a new standard tank with drain. The Tank Armor (TA) installed very easily and was spot on with exact centering of the bolt holes (Identical with the stock holes). I did the install, mostly with added safety in mind, as the gas tank top is the floor of the trunk, and any rear end collision of some force could rupture the tank and engulf the trunk area and everything forward of it with gas. The TA, in effect, places the gas tank external to the interior and predominantly under the car after installation. The unit is well made and probably gives additional rigidity to the rear end of the car. The company advertises that they fired a 9mm into it and it didn’t penetrate the TA (I didn’t try that however!). I would rate the addition of the cover a plus, and assume it might give a bit more weight over the rear wheels for traction, albeit minimal-along with the mentioned safety factor. I hope this helps!
Picture of the installed TA - trunk not yet final painted at the time:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg M1C.jpg (317.1 KB, 62 views)
Huntingky and Fastang68 like this.


67 S-Code GT

Last edited by FE1967GT; 03-17-2019 at 09:11 PM.
FE1967GT is offline  
post #3 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-17-2019, 09:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by FE1967GT View Post
CJM,
I installed the “Tank Armor” in my 67 Fastback. I did not install a new 22 gallon tank, but did install a new standard tank with drain. The Tank Armor (TA) installed very easily and was spot on with exact centering of the bolt holes (Identical with the stock holes). I did the install, mostly with added safety in mind, as the gas tank top is the floor of the trunk, and any rear end collision of some force could rupture the tank and engulf the trunk area and everything forward of it with gas. The TA, in effect, places the gas tank external to the interior and predominantly under the car after installation. The unit is well made and probably gives additional rigidity to the rear end of the car. The company advertises that they fired a 9mm into it and it didn’t penetrate the TA (I didn’t try that however!). I would rate the addition of the cover a plus, and assume it might give a bit more weight over the rear wheels for traction, albeit minimal-along with the mentioned safety factor. I hope this helps!
Picture of the installed TA - trunk not yet final painted at the time:

This pretty much mirrors my opinion and experience. Primarily done for safety.



1966 Convertible restomod in progress
cruising68 is online now  
 
post #4 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 06:41 AM
Senior Member
 
glmarker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Winter Haven, FL
Posts: 112
I also installed the Tank Armor after a rear end collision which split open my old tank. I installed the Tank Armor over the 22 gallon tank and had no problems. Gave me a great deal of comfort knowing that if I ever got hit in the rear again, the tank was not in my back seat

Highly recommend it.

Gary
glmarker is offline  
post #5 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 08:44 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 429
Thanks for the replies.
I'll be ordering mine this week.
CJM68GT390 is offline  
post #6 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 08:56 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Burlington area, VT
Posts: 22
So, this brings up a question I've had about this product. What exactly does it do that improves safety ?

The problem as I understood it, was the tank in our cars (and the Pinto), was drop-in mounted. A safer way is to mount underneath with straps and a full floor separating the tank from the passenger compartment.

The Tank Armour certainly protects the top of the tank from damage, but attaches to the tank and it is still a drop-in.

How does it help in collision ?
vtgearhead is offline  
post #7 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 11:38 AM
Senior Member
 
65coupei6_2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S.F., CA
Posts: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtgearhead View Post
So, this brings up a question I've had about this product. What exactly does it do that improves safety ?

The problem as I understood it, was the tank in our cars (and the Pinto), was drop-in mounted. A safer way is to mount underneath with straps and a full floor separating the tank from the passenger compartment.

The Tank Armour certainly protects the top of the tank from damage, but attaches to the tank and it is still a drop-in.

How does it help in collision ?
I would like to know this as well. But, just from reading their website. I guess it adds structural support. If you get hit in the rear, the tank might get crushed or split. With Tank Armor installed this is less likely to happen. Or if the tank does split it would mostly empty out from the bottom of the car and not inside the trunk.

I would like the same thing built but replaces the cardboard behind the rear seat. This would really section off the trunk.

...Marco

'65 Mustang Inline 200. CI Aliminum Head, Holley 350,
Schneider 264/274 cam, Headers, Recurved DSII, MSD 6A, and a whole lotta other stuff!
65coupei6_2 is offline  
post #8 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 11:57 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Burlington area, VT
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by 65coupei6_2 View Post
I would like the same thing built but replaces the cardboard behind the rear seat. This would really section off the trunk.
That they have:
https://www.npdlink.com/product/divi...mproved/152145

Most vendors sell it.
But with screw attachment, I am wondering about the benefit. Now if it was welded in and sealed that may work.
But they still don't have something for fastbacks.
vtgearhead is offline  
post #9 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 12:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Huntingky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Central Kentucky
Posts: 3,082
Provides some impact resistances and helps block up splash in the case of split tank. Definitely provides some separation of the tank from the rest of the car. If you search around, there are some horrifying videos of some rear impact tests where fuel splattered forward into the passenger compartment. Ford paid out dearly to settle some lawsuits where people were very badly scarred or died from fire. Not Fords finest design.

Coyote build in 65 GT Fastback in body work https://forums.vintage-mustang.com/b...e-powered.html and on Facebook @65gtmustang
F150 SCREW Ecoboost as my daily
66 Emberglow Coupe first car,71 Torino GT, 82 Fastback slooooow 6 banger, 71 Boss 351, 85 GT all long gone
Huntingky is offline  
post #10 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 01:13 PM
Senior Member
Supporting Member
 
FE1967GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Peoples Republic of New Jersey
Posts: 262
Quote:
So, this brings up a question I've had about this product. What exactly does it do that improves safety ?
The problem as I understood it, was the tank in our cars (and the Pinto), was drop-in mounted. A safer way is to mount underneath with straps and a full floor separating the tank from the passenger compartment.
The Tank Armour certainly protects the top of the tank from damage, but attaches to the tank and it is still a drop-in.
How does it help in collision ?
The Tank Armor does become "a full floor separating the tank from the passenger compartment". The TA bolts to the same frame area that the gas tank does-it is a strong steel barrier that is bolted to the framing of the car completely covering the gas tank and seals the gas tank from the inside of the car. The improvement of safety is that it minimizes the chance of occupants inside the car from being covered in gasoline in the event of a very high energy rear impact.


67 S-Code GT

Last edited by FE1967GT; 03-18-2019 at 01:16 PM.
FE1967GT is offline  
post #11 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 01:34 PM
Senior Member
 
pprince's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Ontario
Posts: 10,125
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by FE1967GT View Post
The improvement of safety is that it minimizes the chance of occupants inside the car from being covered in gasoline in the event of a very high energy rear impact.
To be killed by the spear-o-matic steering column after breaking their necks from the whip lash.

Lol...seriously their are many safety problems in an early Mustang. Fixing one is like the Dutch boy putting his finger in one leak of the dike

Paul
1965 Mustang 2+2
1968 Mustang California Special

Last edited by pprince; 03-18-2019 at 01:36 PM.
pprince is offline  
post #12 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 01:43 PM
Senior Member
 
LeeFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,493
It's a good thing Kelly and Jane didn't burst into flames when she was rear-ended at 45mph.
Kelly_H likes this.



I've started a blog about my car and adventures: http://65mustangfun.blogspot.com/

1965 Fastback, 289, Toploader 4 Speed, owned by me since June 1980. Originally a C-code with a C-4. 5R09C16****
LeeFred is online now  
post #13 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 01:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 981
I have TankArmor and I believe it does help otherwise I wouldn't have installed it. However the area where the hose connects to the tank is still unprotected. Hopefully if you're hit and the tank gets smashed then the hose will stay connected and push any gas out the cap rather than into your trunk.

david
JeffTepper likes this.

69 Winter Blue 302 Fastback w/ Original Paint

Moodster is offline  
post #14 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 01:56 PM
Senior Member
 
myfirstcar66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Auburn University, Alabama
Posts: 1,559
Garage
I got hit in the left rear corner in 1992 and my exhaust punctured the corner of my tank. Considering the Tank Armor AND a steel trunk divider, along with shoulder belts and headrests for my son's 66. How about collapsible steering column like a 68? Or a two-piece shaft? . . .What if the Tank Armor were bolted on top and the flange of the tank were bolted up from underneath? Or how about a safety fuel cell instead of the steel tank? Or a puncture resistant bladder for the stock tank? It could be done... I could be driving more dangerous OR less dangerous vehicles. Metal dash with knee-killing knobs, no face-fluffing airbags, elbow-shredding door and window handles, a giant cast metal brain-bashing glove box door, a huge gut-goring shift handle, no spleen-saving beams in the doors? I accept certain risks. If I go out in some violent, fiery, metal-twisting Mustang crash, I'm an organ donor and the kids would part-out my ride. Win-win I guess.

My 1st car...
'66 Tahoe Turquoise/ Aqua coupe
•289 / 4100 •C4 Auto •Disc Brakes
•Dual Exhaust •Quick Manual Steering
•Rally Pac •Console •Deluxe Belts
•LOTS of Rotunda accessories

Older son's 1st car...
'66 Emberglo / Parchment deluxe coupe
•289 / 2100 •C4 Auto
•Dealer A/C • Console
•Dual Exhaust • Power Steering

Younger son's 1st car...
'66 Nightmist / Blue & white deluxe coupe
•289 / 2100 •C4 Auto
•Factory A/C •Console
WAITING FOR RESTORATION

myfirstcar66 is offline  
post #15 of 33 (permalink) Old 03-18-2019, 02:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 697
I look at it more like increasing your odds of survival for a reasonable price. Plenty of things on this car can kill you in an accident. When I was discussing this project with my mother and step-father they had a list of safety things they wanted like power disc brakes, better power steering, better suspension, along with any reasonable safety improvements. They were still concerned about driving a car that old and the safety standards at the time. I explained to them that they could spent a ton of money to make it as safe as they wanted but what were the odds they ever got in a serious accident in it. Neither of them had been involved in a serious accident their whole lives. Not to say it won't happen but I would say the risk is low.


Having said that, I have watched the videos of older cars and newer cars in crashes. I figure if I ever get in a bad wreck in the Mustang I will just kiss my butt goodbye


1966 Convertible restomod in progress
cruising68 is online now  
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:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



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

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome