The Stovebolt Site Forums The Parking Lot '60-'66 Trucks Fuel tank relocation '61 C20

There's not much room under the '61 Fleetside bed due to the sheer bulk of the '60-'62 torsion bar suspension, so none of the common refits people do with '63-'66 look like they'll fit. Anybody have a solution to getting the tank out of the cab without ordering a custom welding job?

Why do you want to move it?
Scott

Safety and volume. I have a 4.56 rear end and will be thirsty.

i had to end up making one for my 61 gmc .put it behind the rear Axel in between the frame rails .i made it out of galvanneal steel 14 gauge ,it came out to about 28 gal .i don't want to be sitting on a bombe ! of course i have a flat bed on it .

Safety isn't an issue with an in cab tank that's in good shape. I don't think anyone has ever heard of a fuel tank blowing up or harming the occupants in anyway. If there's a collision that blows an in-cab tank (that you are just inches from), you were already dead. A tank hanging from the rear frame rails is much more apt to get hit or damaged. I don't think you could blow a fuel tank like a bomb just by hitting it any way. It survived 48 years in the cab.................
Too many urban myths,
Scott

Safety isn't an issue? Urban Myth's? Wow, with all due respect on a subject this important lets not throw out such careless statements. This has been discussed many times here on the Stovebolt and actual first hand accounts have been shared of the carnage that can occur as a direct result of a fuel tank in the passenger compartment of a vehicle.

Relocate that tank to be between the frame rails, out of the cab. Check out this link: https://www.stovebolt.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=492803#Post492803

But first read the following "re-post" from the following forum thread: https://www.stovebolt.com/ubbthread...n&topic=0&Search=true#Post497930

Opinions vary but it seems like a good old dose of common horse sense needs to be applied here?

The best place for the fuel tank is between the frame rails where there is structural steel around the tank to protect it, not a sheet metal body.

I am floored every time someone says that a gas tanks in the cab is safer than an external tanks? (You are riding in an enclosed area with 20 gallons of fuel right behind you.)

Check out the first post on this link. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=322241

As bad, or maybe worse, than the in cab tank is an external frame mounted saddle tank. Check out this link http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2001/04/20/018916.html

But don't rely on the car companies to keep you safe.

It wasn't until the 60's when whistleblowers and lawyers first started to pressure car companies to make safer cars. Remember Ralph Nader and the Corvair?

When it comes to safety and car companies I think Lee Iacoca answered this question best back in the mid 1970's. When he was in charge of Ford Motor Co. and his engineers told him that the Pinto's fuel tank would rupture in a rear end colision and fill the cabin of the car with gas and gas fumes he said "Safety doesn't sell cars".

Check out this link http://www.autosafety.org/pinto-madness

"Almost seven years after Miller's testimony, a woman, whom for legal reasons we will call Sandra Gillespie, pulled onto a Minneapolis highway in her new Ford Pinto. Riding with her was a young boy, whom we'll call Robbie Carlton. As she entered a merge lane, Sandra Gillespie's car stalled. Another car rear-ended hers at an impact speed of 28 miles per hour. The Pinto's gas tank ruptured. Vapors from it mixed quickly with the air in the passenger compartment. A spark ignited the mixture and the car exploded in a ball of fire. Sandra died in agony a few hours later in an emergency hospital. Her passenger, 13-year-old Robbie Carlton, is still alive; he has just come home from another futile operation aimed at grafting a new ear and nose from skin on the few unscarred portions of his badly burned body. (This accident is real; the details are from police reports.)"

I guess to sum this up each person needs to do what they think is best when it comes to safety in their vehicle.

For me, the tank is out of the cab in my '65 C10 and moved to the back https://www.stovebolt.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=492803#Post492803 and seat belts are going in next.

HR John, thanks for the detailed and "passionate" reply. You sold me on relocation; however, I'm an Intel analyst (History major) and don't have the gear or expertise to fabricate the solution on my own. I know there's a common relocation of a late 80's Blazer tank, but for '63-'67 with a lot more space to work with back between the rails. What I've never seen is how to do it for the '60-'62 other than a complete scratch design and fab. I can google all day and look dozens of tanks that just replaces the original behind my seat. I hope it's not unrealistic to think somebody might pop up and say "I have the same truck. A '73 X-Mobile tank fit right in and I just needed to make brackets and a fill tube. I won't be rolling for at least another month, and daily driving until fall, so I have some time. Thanks again for a thorough discussion.

I did the swap on my 65 shortbed last winter. Check this link: https://www.stovebolt.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=492803#Post492803

and check my webshots http://community.webshots.com/user/lakeroadster

The problem with the higher capacity tanks is they hang down real low. That why I used a 15 gallon chevy passenger car tank.

I am a Design Engineer and enjoy the challenge of things like this. If you go to my webshots link I have some drawings I made of the gast tank arrangement I utilized on my truck as well as pictures of the install / fabrications. Do you have any pictures of the frame area behind the rear axleon your truck? I would like to see the space constraints, maybe we can figure something out?

Thanks and IMHO you are making the right decision in relocating the tank out of the cab.

I'm gonna have to go with Scott on that one, John, you own a '65, you know good and well if that steel in the back of the cab ever buckles, you have better things toworry about then the gas tank, like the fact that a CSX train is pushing you down the railroad tracks!

I'll third Scott - ridiculous to say the tank behind the seat is more dangerous than any other place, especially right at the rear of the truck, considering a large number of wrecks are rear enders .... ALL these ol trucks had the tank inside pre 70's, and and you don't find a string of disaster stories as a result - in fact I've yet to see anyone come up with a single case where a fire or explosion was specifically due to an inside tank - note HRJ cites the Pinto case with the tank under the rear, and you'll find piles of crumpled rear ends on all kinds of vehicle in yards everywhere, frames are not resistant to high impact even from full size cars let alone from semis .... your driving is what will keep you safe

Bill

You guys are kidding, right?

Bill, you say it is ridiculous to say having the tank inside the cab is more dangerous? So if you knew you were going to have a bad accident today and had (2) identical trucks, one with a gas tank in the cab and one wiht the tank mounted in the rear between the frame rails, you would jump in the truck with the gas tank inside the cab instead?

"1965 Chevy C10", it isn't "the back of the cab buckling" that is a concern. If you get hit from the side by any vehicle with a high profile, like an SUV or truck, there is nothing but sheet metal to take the impact. If the gas tank ruptures you are sitting in an enclosed area with gasoline and gasoline vapors.

You say you prefer that? That is actually what you want? Compared to having the gas tank outside the cab, where if it does rupture, you are in an enclosed area away from the gasoline and gasoline fumes?

Hey, I love these old trucks but there are aspects of them that can be improved. They were built before the strict safety standards and testing that are required today. They require crash testing now, they didn't back when these trucks were designed. How many vehicles are built today with fuel tanks inside the passenger compartments? The reason gas tanks are now put between the frame rails of vehicles is safety.

I am all for personal choice. If you want to keep your truck all original, including the cab mounted fuel tank, that is certainly your option.

I for one want to be as far away from the fuel tank as possible in an accident. Not sitting in an enclosed area with it. But that's just me I guess?

Ralph Nader and all of those safety freaks also got caught staging alot of those "explosions" and so-called problems. A full tank of gas can get nailed by a train and not explode, it's the vapors that blow. The cab mounted tanks are vented! If you feel it's a hazzard, move it. I still can't remember ever hearing of any problems from cab tanks and they've been around for a hundred years.
Good luck with keeping the external tank safe! I've seen more external tank problems due to the fact they corrode and leak and can get hit by road debris or other vehicles. But, each to there own,
Scott

Ok guys, the original question was not which option was safer, but if anyone had an easy option to move it. We all have our opinions, but none of us will convince each other which is better. Lets try to address what we can (the install options) and let the safety discussion rest. Have a great weekend!!

Safety is relevant to the discussion. The question was presented as follows:

Nomad 02 wrote: Anybody have a solution to getting the tank out of the cab without ordering a custom welding job?

48bigtrucks (Scott) asked: Why do you want to move it?

Nomad02 answered: Safety and volume.

Here is an excellent article that shows the history of how gas tank safety was being discussed by the big 3 as early as 1964: http://www.autosafety.org/history-gm-side-saddle-gas-tank-defect

Here are some outakes from the article...

Like Ford and Chrysler, GM made pickups with gas tanks inside the cab in the 1960's. Because of concerns about the safety of placing the gas tank inside the passenger cab, the Big Three auto makers all considered relocating the tank outside the passenger compartment in the early 1970's.

GM engineers reached a similar conclusion in their early assessments with Chevrolet engineer Alex Mair recommending in 1964 that the fuel tank of the next generation pickup must be mounted outside the cab and as near the center of the vehicle as practical.

Oh, and for Scott who stated "I still can't remember ever hearing of any problems from cab tanks and they've been around for a hundred years." Here is an article about a couple who just this month were severely burned as a direct result of an in-cab fuel tank: http://www.fireengineering.com/news...=HOME&id=177502&publicationId=25

John,
Neither example you just posted said the tanks exploded on impact. They just leaked out fuel when the filler is pointed down in a roll over, just like any style of fuel tank would.

An in-cab tank only has it's profile pointing toward a potential impact with another car. It's also protected by the door pillar and door. It's also mounted above the frame inside the cab where it's protected from the weather and road debris.

A rear frame mounted tank could possible be opened up just by backing over something (seen it first hand), not possible with the cab style. Anyway, enough of the [censored] match. I did move my in cab tank to the rear of the frame on my 63 but not for safety reasons. I did it to add stereo equipment. Also, this truck sits about 3 feet off the ground and will not be driven daily. The weather won't have an effect on it at all. It's also encased in a class 3 receiver hitch to help in a rearend collision, or if a trailer would happen to come loose and start stabbing at the tank. It may even get a skid plate before it's done too.
There's my "common horse sense", whatever THAT is,
Scott

Horse Sense:
Nineteenth century horsemen noticed how cautious free horses naturally were. Horses voluntarily take no unnecessary risks. So horse sense means thinking before acting and taking the cautious approach.

Common Sense
sound practical judgment.

Common horse sense: think before acting and use sound practical judgement

Example: If you have the option don't sit in an enclosed area with 20 gallons of gas at your back.

John,
To each there own.

BTW, my tank is only 16 gallons.

At least it's not a VW with the tank in your lap!

I'm glad you feel safer having your tank mounted at the rear! I don't want anyone to ever feel unsafe while enjoying our old truck hobby!
Scott

48BigTrucks makes the statement: "They just leaked out fuel when the filler is pointed down in a roll over, just like any style of fuel tank would". This statement is incorrect.

A properly designed fuel tank system incorporates a non-vented filler cap and a roll over vent valve. By design this set-up will not leak, regardless of the orientation of the tank in an accident. The roll over valve has a ball check in it that seals if fluid backs up into the tube. Thus fumes vent out, but not liquid.

Here is a link to an article about a rear pick-up tank install where they show the use of a roll over valve:
http://www.customclassictrucks.com/...k_rear_mount_gas_tank_install/index.html

And here is a link to Tanks. For a custom installation, or retrofit, they have all the parts to install the tank and vent it correctly: http://www.tanksinc.com/index.cfm/p...ory_id=62/home_id=62/mode=prod/prd98.htm

Thanks

Give it a rest! That's all aftermarket and only works if it were to stay intact in an accident. You are not going to convince me and I don't care if I convince you. Each and every accident is different and no system is fool proof,
Scott

The basis of this website is to share information so others can learn from reading these threads. When an incorrect statement is made we are each obliged to correct it, not give it a rest.

This thread is about about moving the tank out of the cab for safety. If that is done a roll over vent valve should be used. It is a $11.00 item that could save a life. Even if the stock tank is left in the cab a rollover vent valve would be a good addition.

While your statement that no system is foolproof is correct, providing data on options to make the fuel tank safer is good information for our Stovebolt readers. What they choose to do with the information is just that, their choice.

I think I will go take a rest now.

John