gas tank is giving me fits.....

Discussion in '1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech' started by LILCBRA, Mar 26, 2006.

  1. Not much clearance between the tank and the springs for exhaust. Where are you planning to run the pipes?
  2. They are going to dump in front of the axle.
  3. Sal,

    I'd be careful about mounting a drop-in seems to me to be a bad idea to make your gas tank into a structural member in the rear of a car as small as a Mustang. I would at least use something like the "tank armor" product that I've seen for the early Mustangs.


    I'm a little late for your project, but I finally managed to lay an old '76 tank out next to a '78 tank. They appear to be the same size until you look more closely...the tank straps line up, but the inlet and outlets are slightly different, and the top of the tanks are slightly different. The '78 tank was also about 1 inch wider in the front-to-rear dimension.

    I can get pictures of the 2 tanks side-by-side if anybody needs them.
  4. Yes, I found that out too. I got my original tank from my mom's garage about a week or so befroe I started with this Fox install. I used it to get the filler hole location and pick-up to weld into the Fox tank. The difference between the two II tanks is in the top. I don't think the other differences you mentioned would hurt too much, except for maybe exhaust hangers and such. But the top of the 78 tank does have an angle on one side compared to the older tank, therefore not fitting my 78. If anyone wants pics, I can also share some for a while, at least until I scrap the old tank out. If anyone wants a useable older tank, let me know....I will basically give it away. It is dented up some, but I didn't see any holes anywhere. Again, pics by request.
  5. Bringing this one back from the dead due to my tank issues of late. I was refered to a place in Greenburg,Pa that does tank restoration, and has a lifetime guarantee that the tank will not rust out. Quoted at 175, plus my cost of getting the tank there. Considering there are no new tanks out there I thought it was a good price-I've seen new tanks for foxes priced around there I'll post pics of the tank when I get it back.
  6. On the tank replacement issue, I wrote someone at 1AAAuto ( several years ago about the possibility of them adding a MII tank to their line and received a very polite reply to the effect of...'there's not enough interest to warrant purchasing the licenses', and 'there's a liability issue'. They did spill the name of their tank supplier though:

    The "interest" part just won't be solved until everyone of us calls or e-mails "The Paddock", "Mustangs Unlimited", and other suppliers to inquire about the availability of a new gas tank. That most likely means a hundred or more separate e-mails...

    The "liability" issue is pretty much BS as these suppliers also sell '65-'70 tanks which are *really* dangerous.

    I came across this website which has a sobering accessment of Mustang gastank safety:

    I realize the following about this article:
    1. The site is hosted by a lawfirm that profits from these sort of cases.
    2. Ford has known about this problem since the early '60's and didn't change the tank location in the Mustang until 2005.
    3. No matter where you place a gas tank, someone is going to crash hard enough to crush it.
    4. If you can walk away from an accident you should not be burned to death in it.
    5. This is a *really* good reason to not put any part of your fuel system inside the car, i.e. tank, fuell fill tubing, etc.
    6. I had no idea that the SN-95 Mustang still had a fuel tank safety issue. It would be great to know the relative forces required to damage the tanks in each of the Mustang models. I would imagine that the MII wouldn't be the worst.

    Still it really makes me think again about going to a fuel cell before letting my daughter in the car. Unfortunately a real race tank with a steel shell and rubber bladder is out of my price range. I wonder if you could have a decent steel shell made to surround one of the cheaper plastic "fuel cells"?

    Have you thought any about the upcoming hydrogen fuel systems with their tanks full of liquid hydrogen compressed to hundreds of PSI? A crushed tank or a fire in one of these cars could require the evacuation of an entire city block!
  7. I have reviewed the gas tank comments and feel that the logic used is flawed. They state that Ford still uses the gas tank in the crush zone of the Cown Vic and Mustang. I am not sure where else they may put it on a rear wheel drive vehicle. Front wheel drive vehicles generally have the gas tank under the rear seat and ahead of the rear suspension, which by it's location deeper into the car would be safer, however this is not feasible for a rear wheel drive vehicle. The Ford Crown Vic is the most rear ended vehicle in the world because of the obvious exposure of having the emergency vehicles stopped on freeways being used as shields to protect police officers doing their job. It is unfair to use it as an example unless one puts it into context with other vehicles facing the same exposure. If for instance Ford drops the Crown Vic and Chrysler takes over as the major supplier of police vehicles with the rear wheel drive Charger, then there may be a database created to compare these two vehicles.
    In reading the above posts, I am concerned about the use of modified fuel system setups for the II. I believe that the first generation Mustangs had the tank as a structural member of the rear of the vehicle because it was in the trunk, whereas the II fastback is a hatchback and therefore required the tank to be outside the compartment. Again in reading the article about the gas tanks it was stated that the Mustang II was not subject to the same recall as the Pinto. It was my recollection ( I worked at a Ford dealersip from 77 through 81) that there was a Campaign on the II as well. I have seen several pics of Mustang II undergear that did include the plastic shields between the tank and the rear end housing that were part of the recall.
    I share the concern for the II gas tank. I have three of them now, one newer one that was located in some old stock in a gas tank supplier, however, it does have the slightly different vent hole on top as well as the shape of the top section is slightly different where it would meet the rear crossmember. The other two are rusted and hopefully they will be able to be restored. i have not blasted them yet.
  8. Ford finally changed the gas tank design in the 2005 Mustang to a "saddle" configuration over the rear part of the driveshaft. You'd pretty much have to crush the entire car to damage the tanks.

    The MII tanks may not have faced the same recall as the Pinto, but may have been upgraded as a running factory change. Both of my '78's have the same plastic shields on the front of the tank that the Pinto was retrofitted with, but I don't recall one on my '76 MII gastank. It would be interesting to check the NHSA safety recalls for the mid-70's to see if the MII was involved.

    Makes you wonder why other small cars from the '70's weren't involved...i.e. Toyota Corolla, Chevy Vega, anything from Opel, etc. Did they all have better tank designs?

    Ironically the 8" rear was smooth on the back and I recall the problem with the Pinto was that the tank would get pushed into the differential in a hard impact and would split on a sharp edge...hence the plastic shield. Only the 6.75" rear axle had the sharp edges due to the rear inspection plate.

    One more good reason to upgrade to an 8" rear. :)
  9. That is what I did except for the Remote release.