The cab tanks have been fine for many years, no doubt. But, in my opinion, so have most rear mounted tanks. Most cars had the tank in the back for many years. The Pinto was quite a bit shorter than an F1. A Pinto gas tank was about 1 foot behind the back seat, and they had a defective design as Number Dummy has pointed out. But I really never heard of that being a problem with the Mustang, maybe there was another reason too. I have an aluminum tank, made of 1/8" thick aluminum plate, and welded together. Got it from Classic Performance Products with a sending unit, gauge, and filler tube that you fit to the rear fender. My tank needed to be replaced anyway, and I want the extra room in the cab for some of my tools. Not to mention that I like to fill up on the drivers side. A little pricey at about 600, but I think worth it when dealing with a gas tank.

 

I found it. On pages 8 and 9 of the 1953 full color all series dealer book they have this:16 reasons why the all new Ford "Driverized" Cab is so much better. Reason #13: "New Gas tank location outside of left frame well under cab, permits larger and quickly accessible storage space behind cab for tools ICC Kit and other items."

So there is the reason for moving it from the cab in 53. Now does Ford give a reason for moving it to the cab in 56?

 

Well in the Pinto's defence (since I was a real heavy Mustang II guru) the early skinny bumper Pintos were the subject. In '74 the huge 5mph bumpers pretty much solved the issue. I'm not 100% sure but since the Pinto and Mustang II chassis' are very much similiar I'd say the Pinto tank is probably mounted similiar to my II. My gas tank is approx 5"-6" away from the pumpkin of the rear axle. And because hte tank hangs down a bit and the axle sits up in the floor a bit, the tank would have a square full-on direct hit with the rear axle. However there is alot of real estate between the bumper and the tank itself, at least in my II. I'd say there is a good foot, maybe less. Here's a cruddy pic of the rear portion of the gas tank in my II.


I looked and looked and cannot find any other pics of the tank area of my car. What I can tell you is that I have a 3" exhaust pipe crossing from the drivers side to pair up with the passenger side and it's in that small space between the rear axle and the gas tank. Of course, there is a heat shield there on the tank.

 

I kept my tank in the cab, but plugged the bottom feed and coverted it to a top feed. I added a rollover valve/tank vent and ran the line outside the cab. I can now run a non vented cap. I don't think you gain much room by moving the tank, the seat hits the back of the cab first. I also run a full sized spare under the bed.

 

Ah, another factor for me to consider while I'm in the process of puchasing a 1961 Ford F100. The truck is California built, I believe San Jose according to the Vin Tag. This vehicle did not have a hearter in it--now being installed by seller with an after market kit. I have asked many questions about this truck on this forum and NumberDummy/Bill and others have politely answered them. Looking at this thread reminded me that the 1961 truck I am interested in has the gas tank behind the bench seat. Having so many other questions I never considered the danger aspect of this arrangement--it should have been my first concern. Now, after reading this thread it seems that most of you responding think that it is safe. I hope your right! Also, since this truck initially did not have a heater how does adding a heater affect the radiator Thermostat if in fact it even has one--since I've been told that trucks and cars built in hotter climates sometimes did not have a thermostats installed.

 

These gas tanks have been installed in the cabs for decades...if they weren't safe you would have been hearing about them on the 6 o'clock news. Emperical data carries far more weight than "hope".

No matter where you mount a container filled with combustable liquid on a vehicle you will have risk...there are pros and cons to every gas tank mounting location. The Pinto didn't have a gas tank mounted in the "cab"...

 

The '58 F600 on the farm would puke gas out the filler after a fill up. If you really filled it up, the gas would expand as it warmed--you can guess the rest.

Gas does not have to be in the cab to cause big trouble if the tank ruptures. Where ever the tank is, the protection of it and the soundness of the filler and fittings are probably your best defense.

As for hazards associated with this vintage truck, how is the steering colum designed? Is there a joint in that shaft, or is it an impaler? That and decent seat belts might be a place to concentrate efforts if the tank is otherwise sound.

Serving suggestion, ymmv

 

Thanks to all who have responded on the issue of cab gas tanks. It has given me food for thought and although the answers were based, I would guess, primarily on compiled stats over the years and personal experience, I will phyiscally look at this tank, its connections and lines for futher evaluation. Some very logical observations were presented on the overall safety of older vehicles considering such items as steering columns and seats belts along with other features that have been improved on over the years etc. All important as factors in a collison, however, I would think that the gas tank could explode by vapor leaking form it if a cigarette or spark ignited the fumes. Less likely to happen on an external tank given air volume/wind dispursement of vapors. Leaks on external gas tanks like those of cab tanks must have an ignitor--the difference is that an internal/cab tank leak could saturate the carpet requiring replacement additionally Fumes would also be more concentrated in a smaller area. However, before it gets to that degree a noticeable odor should warn the occupants. For me, given a choice I prefer distance and protection between passengers and combustable solid,liquids or gases! Anyone familar with C-4?! ron

 

Manufacturers have long known the importance of getting an engine to operating temperature and keeping it there. Therefor I doubt if you would find a vehicle from the factory with no T-stat. Heater, yes, they were options and it was not uncommon to find a vehicle with no heater. That is why there were so many aftermarket heaters in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. It has been common knowledge that a heater can be used as an aid to cool a vehicle that has overheated. By turning the heater on there is additional heat removed from the engine cooling system. Don't sweat an aftermarket heater. Aftermarket AC can cause overheating.

 

Your local Ford dealer probably has hundreds of trucks on his lot that are capable of being rammed into a brick wall, hit from the side by a cement mixer, or rolled over without a drop of fluid being spilled, etc. You can't make an old truck as safe. If that's what you're after, see the dealer.

There are only three places an in-cab tank can leak: the tank itself, the sending unit gasket, and the fill tube. If all 3 are in good condition, you'll never get even a whiff of fumes. At least on 48 - 50 models, any leakage would drain out the bottom of the channel it sits in. I can't imagine how it would ever accumulate enough to soak the carpet.

 

Thank you Raytasch for your info. Next question involves the thermostat tempature. I would guess that a vehicle without a heater might have a thermostat that has a lower tempature setting and if so, then it would stand to reason that adding a heater would reqiure a higher tempature thermo? I mention this because at 165 degrees my car only gave off mild heat during the winter, I was told to change the thermo to 185 which did help give me hotter air. ron

 

Many years ago we had a low temperature T-stat option because an alcohol type antifreeze was sometimes used as a low cost option. Alcohol boils at a relatively low temperature so a low temp T-stat was necessary and heat output was compromised.
The addition of a heater does not mandate a different T-stat. Different engines are designed to run at different temperatures. Different locals and temperatures would suggest T-stat be different. Alaska vs FL. The trend to day is to run an engine hot for better efficiency. The T-stat discussion would probably warrant a separate thread.

 

I have a 47' ****** cj2a and the gas tank is under the drivers seat. What were they thinking? Any ways, if I would ever smell gas fumes I would certainly get out and check it out. It's kinda like sittin' on a time bomb.

 

When I first got my truck at the tender age of 16 I was worried about the tank being in the cab. After reading and researching options, we ran out of money before the tank made its way up the priority list. In the subsequent 15yrs, I have only one time had a fuel leak. The tank was topped off and gas seeped through the sending unit seal. That's when I discovered RTV was a no-no (and that was shortly after I'd first gotten the truck). I picked up a similar product labeled for gas and made sure to let it cure fully before topping the tank off. Never had a problem since. IMHO if you get in a bad enough wreck to trash the tank, you've got a lot more to worry about than the gas spill.

Somewhere I have a tech article on how to really get more leg/belly room in our trucks. At 6'4" it's number one on my wish list...but I've got other things going right now. Removing the tank won't gain you room. Rebuilding the seat back with modern materials can get you as many as three inches direct belly space. Can't do the math right now to figure out leg room...ought to be in bed at this point. Silly Gas Monkey show sucked me in. Anyway...while you're re-doing your interior, installing a collapsible column and seat belts, rebuild that seat back and get more room.

Leave the tank alone if it's good...but replace as needed.

My 2 cents,
Jim

 

Back in the day pre 50s I grew up with a 1 1/2 Chev. wrecker and those
were under the seat. Remove right cushion to put gas in just like a
Model T. Then bought a new 1950 F6 which I still have and all I got to
say= aint blown up yet even with all his cigars!!!!!!