GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 21,629
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Joe Donaldson (@Joey D) on April 10th, 2019 in the Automotive News category.
Hello, Mater.
I don't know if it's so much that people don't want them as it is they've just been told by carmakers that they don't want to make them. When gas prices were up over $3 a gallon there were quite a few folks scouring auto trader magazines and Craigslist trying to find Rangers or S-10s in good condition, because they needed something with hauling capacity but didn't want a fuel sucking V8 and SUV sized passenger space. There's definitely a market for them, but it's a market that has less overhead than the "living room on wheels" segment so no one wants to pursue it.Unfortunately, the buying public doesn't want single cab trucks or even really small trucks anymore. But I totally get the disappointment with not having them around anymore. I'd totally buy a small truck is there was one on the market.
And yet despite "mid-size" trucks being so huge, they feel absolutely cramped inside. I tried driving a 2018 Colorado a while ago and it felt like it had even less interior space than my Silverado that's 12 years older than it. The seat having terrible back support didn't help matters either, but still.When I had my Tacoma it was absolutely massive.
So in regard to the exposed aux fuel canisters... what's the fire risk on those? I see people carrying gasoline on bumper hitches, attached to rear spare tires, etc. etc. And I always wonder... what happens when you get rear-ended and fuel goes everywhere?
Mythbusters did a test that was close to this. In movies, every time a car goes over a cliff, it explodes. So they tested it be sending a bunch of cars over a cliff. They also dropped heavy weights on exposed gas tanks. Nothing they did could make a gas tank explode. The most they got was some fire, and only because they ignited it. The only real danger I can see to the exposed fuel cans you show on the back of that truck is the fuel inside might get on the exhaust and start a fire. That's about it.So in regard to the exposed aux fuel canisters... what's the fire risk on those? I see people carrying gasoline on bumper hitches, attached to rear spare tires, etc. etc. And I always wonder... what happens when you get rear-ended and fuel goes everywhere?
Mythbusters did a test that was close to this. In movies, every time a car goes over a cliff, it explodes. So they tested it be sending a bunch of cars over a cliff. They also dropped heavy weights on exposed gas tanks. Nothing they did could make a gas tank explode. The most they got was some fire, and only because they ignited it. The only real danger I can see to the exposed fuel cans you show on the back of that truck is the fuel inside might get on the exhaust and start a fire. That's about it.
Yeah, go figure.oh is that it? Just fuel leaking everywhere and causing a fire?
And even then, the canisters that people fix to the outsides of their vehicles are made of steel or very hard plastic and designed to take a pretty large amount of abuse. You'd have to be trying to intentionally puncture one to get it to spill.The only real danger I can see to the exposed fuel cans you show on the back of that truck is the fuel inside might get on the exhaust and start a fire. That's about it.
And even then, the canisters that people fix to the outsides of their vehicles are made of steel or very hard plastic and designed to take a pretty large amount of abuse. You'd have to be trying to intentionally puncture one to get it to spill.
In regards to the Wayout, I'd imagine being recessed into the quarter panels gives them even more protection since those spots would probably be reinforced in some manner.
So in regard to the exposed aux fuel canisters... what's the fire risk on those? I see people carrying gasoline on bumper hitches, attached to rear spare tires, etc. etc. And I always wonder... what happens when you get rear-ended and fuel goes everywhere?
Yeah, but that was a combination of a critical design flaw (a bolt from the rear bumper piercing the fuel tank in a rear end collision and spilling gas onto the exhaust), and Ford deciding that they didn't want to spend a tiny amount extra per car to install a tank liner that would have pretty much eliminated the issue.I feel like there was a car that was notorious for this...
Does not looks like real jeeps. They’re all rounded and covered with big plastic trim.
But that’s what you get when a Italian company who makes economy compact cars purchases a classic American brand...
covered with big plastic trim.
Have you not seen a Jeep made in the last 30 years?Does not looks like real jeeps. They’re all rounded and covered with big plastic trim.
But that’s what you get when a Italian company who makes economy compact cars purchases a classic American brand...
Jeep was literally doing exactly that as a brand even when Willys-Overland was the name on the letterhead; all of three years after they have been building them exclusively to help punch Hitler in the dick.Does not looks like real jeeps. They’re all rounded and covered with big plastic trim.
But that’s what you get when a Italian company who makes economy compact cars purchases a classic American brand...
That's a bit of a stretch. Lido threw billions of 1980s dollars at it and the state of the art factory and hand picked engineering staff it came with were only afterthoughts. Someone would have picked it up if Chrysler hadn't; especially with how desperate Renault was to unload it. If Barry O hadn't stepped in in 2009, someone would have stripmined it from Chrysler's corpse then too.And if it wasn't for FCA, Jeep would no longer exist.
Except when it doesn't.In movies, every time a car goes over a cliff, it explodes.