GM Side Saddle Gas Tank Defect

[Gomer]

Everyone should take a few minutes and read this report.
The attachments contain some very interesting facts, including internal reports and recommendations from GM engineers as well as Chrysler engineers. In short, fuel tanks located outside of the frame are unacceptable.
I believe that the 20/20 segment, because of its disingenuous portrayal of a firey crash, caused people to believe that the there was no problem. 20/20 should have made it clear that this was a simulation of what can happen. They did not and they were wrong. Deceptive journalism has created many skeptics and that is unfortunate.

Take a little time to read this article and attachments.
http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=94&did=504

Gomer

[old Rusty C10]

aw hell if i get killed in my truck ill make the ex wife happy for once and shell be a rich woman lol i cant worry about it i got a better chance of hitting lotto

[ItsNotABlazer]

I got 2 of the $1000 certificates back a few years ago but since I have not used them yet I think they are worth $1000 for both of them now. May be using them soon since they have the 0% interest rates still.

Brad

[houston6]

I can appreciacte your concern for this.I had a side impact crash in
one of my former trucks,not explosion or fire but i do understand it is a possiblity.if you or anyone is truly this concerned and still wish to drive one of our trucks simply relocate a feul cell its easy
to do and not that expensive really not considering the peace of
mind it would give you.i would also like to add that in my wreck i had full tank of gas and was hit at around 35mph it did damage the tank and feul did spill out.but im not going to add a feul cell to any of my current trucks but that is just me.

[swervin ervin]

I agree, if you or your friend are this concerned about the fuel tanks, either buy a newer or older truck, or install a fuel cell or Blazer tank where the spare is. There's no way to replace it with anything better persay. You can't relocate it to the inside the frame.

[Captkaos]

All vehicles have risks if you are willing to drive them. The trucks at the time of construction met federal safety standards apparently or they would have stopped production. The most common thing all wrecks have regardless of model is a human driver. If safety is your highest concern you will be a safe driver. Compare these trucks to what the general concensus is about motorcycles. They should be banned based on the amount of deaths they are associated with. Don't blame the vehicle, blame the less than cautious driver.

I understand your concern, but even if you move the tank to the rear, you are still at risk. Most pickup I have seen (auto's on general for that matter) are from front and rear impacts, not side. It isn't everyday you see a side impact, and when it occurs, 99% of the time, the driver dies. Back 30 year ago, no one wore seatbelts at all, and before that, they were an option. I think all the new "safety" devices that are out there cause people to be less cautious of their driving, and less responsible on the road. I am getting off this topic, but if you are that concerned about these models, by all means don't buy one. I like them regarless, so this information is irrelevant to me, and I think this applies to alot of people on here, as most of us are 73-87(91) enthusiast and we like these models despite what the flaws are.

[apstguy]

If you get hit on the side that hard, you'll probably be dead anyways.

[gchemist]

My advise, don't run a red light and always look out for red lighters. I've seen more 88-2002 trucks catch on fire than 73-87 truck!!! I actually feel safer in my truck and my Dakota over any new model. Both of my trucks have some of the best rated crash numbers for trucks. My worry is just other drivers and teenagers.
BadBow has already driven off from two fullsize Rams rearendings. The damage repair cost to my truck was probably less than 1/4 for the repairs to the two full size Rams.

[1FaastC10]

i'll take my chances... they're so purty.

[78chevstepside]

I got my saddlebag tank certificate 2 years ago. I bought a 02 silverado extended cab lt 5.3. Iam almost certian that the time limit on the class action lawsuite is now expired. In fact i had a hard time getting my certificate(i bought the truck before recieving it and had a IOU from the dealership). After recieving the certificate and showing my title for the 78 stepside the dealership claimed i needed to wait for a check from chevrolet not them. Apon them recieving the money they would write me a check. It took six months to get the certificate(many hours on the phone). Well i went down there 4 times in 2 weeks (with certificate,title and IOU)and they were trying to brush me off and make me just go away. I then called customer service(headquarter) and complained. The dealership didnt like this he calls me right away and says come get your check.Well i show up in my wifes new blazer extreme. The head nut at the dealership hands me a check . HE then asks why i didnt buy the blazer from him. I reply maybe IF YOU WERNT SO DAMB CHEAP AND GAVE ME MY 1000 dollar rebate WIN I BOUGHT THE TRUCK NOT 6 MONTH LATTER. jay

[mike reeh]

i would be honored to burn to death in my GMC.. ok not really but there are a lot of things I would change if I was designing the truck today.. the saddle tanks dont really bother me at all.

mike

[stlaser]

You live and die. Only God knows when the latter will take place and how. If my death is dealt through a gas tank that has caused 1800 deaths so far so be it. But the fact is it'll probably be cancer of my butt that does the deed and either way I'm right with the man upstairs so who cares. Peace and Good luck with your gas tank blues.

[nrgflow]

1800 deaths? Is that true?

[stlaser]

From 1973-2000 read the first paragraph of the report.

[navybear70]

Just a thought... out of the 1800 deaths from gastank fires, how many of those people were dead or going to die anyways? If you are fine and unhurt, you could get out before the fire kills you. (probably...maybe flame inhalation? ) Anyways, take it with a grain of salt. Much less chance of side impact than front or rear.

[1969 GMC]

well if there is a big issue about saddle tanks like that...then why isn't there an issue with the 67-72 truck's gas tank placement behind the seat? i'd think that a similar T-bone would cause 67-72's to burn just as good as the 73-87.

[ItsNotABlazer]

Quote "i'd think that a similar T-bone would cause 67-72's to burn just as good as the 73-87."

Plus the fires would start IN the cab and not under it :p Not to mention getting a leaky filler neck and inhaling gas fumes while driving. Thats gotta be safe.

Brad

[DrMaserati]

Originally posted by navybear70
Just a thought... out of the 1800 deaths from gastank fires, how many of those people were dead or going to die anyways?

That was addressed in some of the reports. It is acknowledged that 1800 is the TOTAL number and that a certain number of those people were already dead before the fire, but that fact is usually ignored or concealed. In many cases there was no effort to determine cause of death, or if death occurred before or after the fire erupted, so it is unknown how many of the 1800 can be attributed to the fires.

The bottom line is, there have not been 1800 deaths caused by fire. We will never know how many of those were the result of fire, but it probably is not a majority.

JP

[1FaastC10]

Gomer... makes me think of Gomer Pyle... lol

well GOOOOOOLLLLY Sgt Carter, them trucks aint safe.

[Gomer]

Shazam Jeremy, you took the words right out of my mouth!

[1FaastC10]

i can see clearly 2 or your 3 posts, apparently trying to prove 73-87 GM trucks as unsafe, on a 73-87 truck board to boot. dare i ask where the 3rd is?

[Gomer]

My initial thread was back on 6-19. I was inquiring if anyone had made any modifications to make the fuel tank safer. The implication that the trucks fuel tank was not safe seems to have burned a few people. Sorry about that pun. Actually has anyone tried making the shield that the GM engineers discussed at this site?
http://www.autosafety.org/GMAttH.pdf

[Lester]

There has been alot written about this issue. Real hard to say whats true any longer.

As I recall there were two shield kits. They were heck to install.

One was made from metal and the other from ABS plastic.

The metal one was available from GM for two years. It looked look surprisingly like the 4wd skid plates with with some additional hardware.

The plastic one looks like the later model plastic wrap on the trucks built late in the series.

The metal kits were about $150 each from GM, none were provided free to originl owners as was published during that period.

The plastic kits were about $100 for the pair and were available for a short period of time only. I don't think GM sold many, if any.

The odd thing about this entire issue was the fact the test to try to rupture the tanks was perfomed by more than one lab, multiple times, on many trucks and NONE of the tanks opened. An entire series of those tests was done on trucks up to 100 mph with no defects just squished tanks. As I recall, the 100mph tests succeeded in knocking the gas caps off with regularity and of course some gas was ejected. This series of tests is supposedly credited with the redesign on the cap from a twist in unit to a screw in unit.

One set of tests was supposedly based soley on what was thought to be the original accident report that started the whole thing. A train broadsided a C30 at a crossing, scattered the truck mid section with the big parts landing upside down along side the track. The truck caught fire the driver was not killed. In fact, he was not there when the train hit the truck he was a short distance away making a phone call becaue the truck quit. A trooper made a comment in the report that the gas tank appeared to have opened which led to the fire. The test train test did open the tank on the impact side.

Having these tanks outside the frame rails just does not seem like a good idea but the testing seemed to confirm GM's conclusion. I have crushed more than one of these with a 6K lb skid steer and generally they just fold up. The rusty ones will tear open or split, but the rest just collapse. Moving these things is not an easy job, but can be done.

Lester

[Captkaos]

Last comment on this... This all started in 1992. This is after the first truck that was in the suit 1970 was over 22 years old. Manufactures don't "support" a vehicle after 7 years at the most, and typically during that time it was only about a max of 5, before that the warranty was up in 3. Therefore, unless you had an 87 pickup, you had no case in my opinion. In addition, a TON of these trucks are still on the road and MILLIONS were sold. Now if you know that something is dangerous as this report makes it out to be, realistically you won't risk you life to get it. So, AFTER 1993 when it went public about the "safety" issues related to these trucks, and you bought one, they are not responsible. Plus, if you are in a wreck and you are injured, it is my personal opinion that it isn't the manufactures fault, it is yours. If I get hit in any of my trucks and it explodes like a keg of TNT, well, I should have been more careful/cautious.... I am rambling now.......

[aesj2]

You are a GOMER. ALL trucks met the FVMSS for the years they were built. Your Government said they were safe.