TRExp

Spitfire & GT6 Forum

Fuel tank options

Moss Motors
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor
AutoShrine Sponsor

JohnW63 John Williamson
Apple Valley, CA, USA   USA
Are there options or upgrades to make the fuel tank safer for a GT6 ?

Some guys gave me grief about the fuel tank in my 65 mustang being the floor of the trunk and only cardboard separating the passenger area with the trunk area. Just for added strength, I added a piece of sheet metal, cut to the same shape as the pressboard behind the rear seat of the Mustang. If I was really concerned, I would have put a fuel cell back there.

The GT6 gets you a lot more up close an personal with the fuel tank. Has anyone made anything to enclose it, or are there updated replacements for it ? It's pretty small. is a fuel cell an option ?



Home of the 1968 GT6+ MK II resurrection project

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Doug in Vegas Avatar
Doug in Vegas Douglas D
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA   USA
Today's crash standards would have rejected the fuel tank placement on the GT6. The Spitfire tank is forward of the rear crumple zone but the GT6 tank would be squished flat thus spraying fuel everywhere to ignite in a spectacular fireball.

A fuel cell is the way to go.

http://www.britishracecar.com/ScottJanzen-Triumph-GT6.htm

JohnW63 John Williamson
Apple Valley, CA, USA   USA
Given this picture, how does he fill it ? I assume the side filler is gone. Is it just the cap in the center ? It would be cool to retain the side filler cap so you wouldn't have to pop the rear door to fill it. Has anyone just run a pipe from the stock side of the body to the top of one of these ?





Home of the 1968 GT6+ MK II resurrection project

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Doug in Vegas Avatar
Doug in Vegas Douglas D
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA   USA
Looks like you have to fuel up with the tailgate up.

That can be a pain for your passenger when there's an icy cold wind.

Yellowhawk Valley Avatar
walla walla, washington, USA   USA
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Walla Walla"
1969 Triumph Spitfire "Portland"
1972 Triumph Spitfire MkIV "Spokane"
1975 Triumph Spitfire 1500 "Dayton"    & more
I would be concerned that by adding that fill neck you would be erasing all the extra safety levels that the fuel cell had provided. You will have a wide open tube to allow fuel to spray around in a high crunch rear ender. Unless, you can engineer some sort of anti-backflow valve that will not allow it to flow up the tube
Dan

Doug in Vegas Avatar
Doug in Vegas Douglas D
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA   USA
That project car at the link is amazing.



Did you see his fuel pump/regulator setup?



Fram???

.....amazing.

sparrowpi Avatar
sparrowpi Silver Member David Sherrow
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA   USA
Have to agree with Dan. Any modifications done to a fuel cell negates the safety of the cell. If it's in the cargo area, where does the spare tire live? Comparing the size of the average SUV on our roads to the Spitfire/GT6, during a crash, broken fuel tank is not high on the list of hazards.

In reply to # 1501261 by Yellowhawk Valley I would be concerned that by adding that fill neck you would be erasing all the extra safety levels that the fuel cell had provided. You will have a wide open tube to allow fuel to spray around in a high crunch rear ender. Unless, you can engineer some sort of anti-backflow valve that will not allow it to flow up the tube
Dan

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Greg1835 Avatar
Greg1835 Greg S
Rudolph, Wisconsin, USA   USA
Has there been a rash of exploding Spits or GT6's lately? I'd assume if you feel you need a fuel cell, you also will be wearing a fire suit and helmet as well? Racing is one thing but for a street car, where do you draw the line between safety and practicality? Just my opinion.

JohnW63 John Williamson
Apple Valley, CA, USA   USA
Greg,

It's not that there has been a rash of GT6s getting rear ended, but since the car is all in pieces , I have the opportunity to make any changes or improvements that are available, that did not exist in 1969. So, I'm exploring them. Given how many people drive around with their eyes on their cell phone rather then the road, these days, I thought looking at fuel tank safety would not be a bad idea. I put 3 point seatbelts in my 65 Mustang. Not because there has been an upswing in classic Mustangs getting in accidents, but because it was not an expensive option and I didn't want to face plant into the steering wheel, if someone DID do something stupid in front of me.



Home of the 1968 GT6+ MK II resurrection project

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <
Greg1835 Avatar
Greg1835 Greg S
Rudolph, Wisconsin, USA   USA
I understand completely, John. Wasn't directed at you personally. If something needs replacing, I'm all for using an improved version if available. I just replaced the tank on my Spit. If there was a fuel cell available that was plug and play and that didn't break the bank, I'm sure I would have given it a look. Just that sometimes it seems as though some folks will go through a lot of grief and expense to "improve" something that is quite adequate as is. I personally favor the KISS principle - keep it simple and inexpensive to repair.

JohnW63 John Williamson
Apple Valley, CA, USA   USA
Greg,

I've thought about simply putting extra metal around it, like a cover, to try and just contain it. I'm talking to the place that makes the fuel cell pictured above too. They say they can make it so I could retain the stock fueling location. They just need some measurements to suggest which tank. I'm not sure how much it will be, once I give them the specs, but they start at $600 or so. Not cheap, but, I may let my wife decide, since it will be her car, in the end.



Home of the 1968 GT6+ MK II resurrection project

laverda1200 Paul LeClair
Calgary, Alberta, Canada   CAN
I just stuffed the stock tank in the Spit with fuel cell foam chunks. Thge stuff comes in 6 inch, 8 inch, or 12 inch chunks, or you could get a much larger block and cut the stock tank open to install. Gives me some small piece of mind. I just pushed a bunch of chunks down the fuel filler opening, which is pretty direct on a Spit, not sure about a GT6....

https://fuelsafe.com/motorsports/fuel-cell-parts/fuel-cell-replacement-foam/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-12-05 10:13 PM by laverda1200.

Doug in Vegas Avatar
Doug in Vegas Douglas D
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA   USA
I say, "There's a difference between 'restoration' and 'reformation'."

Thus the upgrade of the brass float in the gas tank and the metal brake light switch.

In a collision it's possible the fuel tank on the GT6 will collapse and spray into the passenger cabin.

clshore Carter Shore
Beverly Hills, Florida, USA   USA
A fuel cell functions because of the ballistic nylon inner bladder and the foam inside it, not because of the strength of the container.
Many cells nowdays feature a plastic container.
Obviously, protecting the tank from direct penetration and compression is important, but the nylon bladder prevents breaches, and
acts to contain the fuel, no matter how the cell is distorted.
For anyone concerned, a hoop of rollbar material enclosing the tank at the rear can be securely welded to the chassis.

Have you examined a pro racecar fuel cell lately?
They feature filler hoses that run to the outside of the body, ie the crew does NOT open the trunk, unscrew the cap, and then pour in the fuel.
So trust me when I say that this issue has already been worked out properly.
Rather than re-invent the wheel, adopt what already works.

DerbyRam54 Neville Wardle
Branford, Connecticut, USA   USA
In reply to # 1501326 by JohnW63 I put 3 point seatbelts in my 65 Mustang. Not because there has been an upswing in classic Mustangs getting in accidents, but because it was not an expensive option and I didn't want to face plant into the steering wheel, if someone DID do something stupid in front of me.
FWIW, the steering column on a 65 Mustang is a solid rod into the recirculating ball steering box, which is attached to the "frame rail" by three bolts. I suspect in a good front end shunt you wouldn't have to worry about a face plant into the steering wheel, it would be coming back to greet you where you are sitting. Not saying 3 point seatbelts aren't a bad idea, but it's only a part of the overall safety equation. Your mod to the fuel tank was also a good idea. The filler pipe is placed nicely to rip open the tank and behind the cardboard (missing on my car) is all that nice horsehair in the rear seat. The Mustang was every bit as fire prone as the Pinto, it just flew under the radar.

That's why I got rid of my 66 Mustang.

Re the fuel tank, I think it's a good idea to study the options here. There does come a point though when you have to accept that old cars just do not have the same safety features as new ones. I view my Spitfire as about the same risk as riding a motorbike with the exception that I am unlikely to fall off it.

. Hide banner ads & support this website by becoming a > Gold Supporting Member <

To add your reply, or post your own questions

Members Sign In   or   Create an Account

Registration is FREE and takes less than a minute!


Having trouble posting or changing forum settings?
Read the Forum Help (FAQ) or contact the webmaster





Join The Club

Sign in to ask questions, share photos, and access all website features

Your Cars

1976 Triumph Spitfire 1500

Text Size

Larger Smaller
Reset Save

Sponsor Links