FSC Forum - View Single Post - How to identify if your 73-87 was repaired by GM's fuel tank recall

FordeatinZ71 · 12-20-2007, 09:25 PM

why do ya'll do this? i asked not to have this thread littered. you guys believe what you wanna believe, i got other proof (that i've tried to show in my other thread but i guess no one wants to read because ya'll have it all figured out) that convinces me otherwise. GM wouldn't have recalled them if there wasn't a significant problem.

ok, i didn't wanna do this here, but i'll repost my proof, this time i'll break it down more and explain what it is. please read it at least halfway thoroughly before making another response to this thread. i'm not saying that a kid kicking the fender is gonna make you go up in flames. i'm not saying a bus hitting you at 50 is gonna make you go up in flames...the problem is that in a side-impact of moderate severity there is a MUCH higher risk for fuel LEAKAGE than in a safer vehicle, which leads to a higher risk of fire. there were over 1,800 people killed due to fires in C/K crashes from 1973 to 2000, tell their families there was no defect...you're liable to get smacked.

ok, talk is cheap, here's the proof i've dug up. if after reading through this you don't believe it still, then fine, don't. but please don't criticize me and just let this thread be. have enough respect for me as another forum member trying to help my fellow classic truck owners to just leave this be and not to talk trash on me for trying to inform people of a defect. oh, and the reason we have access to this is that GM (after one of many of it's lawsuits) was forced to make this formerly-insider info public as part of the judgement. if all this had been available when NBC made their false report then they wouldn't have needed to do that crap to scare the public.

first is a FARS (Fatal Accident Reporting System) report listing all the fire-related fatal C/K crashes (crashes where, by investigation, fire was determined to be the fatality) from 1993-2002. there is 15 pages.
http://autosafety.org/uploads/FARS.pdf

second is a 55-page engineering report issued by transportation secretary Federico Pena outlining WHY these trucks have a defect. this explains a lot of things i never knew...
http://autosafety.org/GMAttC.pdf

this was an inside memo dated 1978 that, again, informed GM that this was a problem and that "moving the tanks inboard the frame might eliminate some of these potential leakers"
http://autosafety.org/GMAttI.pdf

here's another inside memo that shows GM engineers exploring different fuel tank locations and fuel tank shields
http://autosafety.org/GMAttJ.pdf

here is the study that says (according to GM) that the K-series trucks performed worse in the crash tests. they are the ones that come up with the frame flex theory, hell, they even moved crossmembers in 1984-later K-series trucks to increase flex, it says it all in there, just read. this test is from 1984 and was a summary of all the crash tests ran BY GM from 1981-83.
http://autosafety.org/GMAttL.pdf

this was a sketch by Vice President Alex Mair recommending what could be an "easy fix". it would have cost GM $23 a truck to do...but it was ignored.
http://autosafety.org/GMAttM.pdf

this is the study where GM concluded that it wasn't "cost effective" to spend over $2.20 per vehicle to prevent fuel-fed fires in crashes...
http://autosafety.org/GMAttN.pdf

this is Ed Ivey's 1994 deposition. read the outlined part...he is asked if there is a more dangerous place GM could have put the fuel tank...
http://autosafety.org/GMAttO.pdf

there is more proof that is on this page http://autosafety.org/article.php?scid=94&did=504 but i posted what i feel is the most pertinent. read over it and come to your own conclusion. yes, NBC got in trouble for creating the explosions, but that doesn't mean that there WASN'T a problem...

oh, and about the frame thing. there IS a difference. this is all the proof i've found so far but i do plan to keep looking. i didn't get a "part number" persay, but i did find a website (GM Parts Direct). i looked up a 1985 Chevy C-10 frame and then a 1985 Chevy K-10 frame. the C-series frame has a price, the K-series frame isn't available. here's the link, look for yourself. if you can find me a GM manual that states part numbers or a statement otherwise that the K-series frame is EXACTLY the same as the C-series frame, i'll eat crow...until then i'm sticking to my guns.
http://www.trademotion.com/partlocat...85&catalogid=2

edit, here's a frame specs sheet from ChucksChevyTruckPages...
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/framespecs.html

12-20-2007, 09:25 PM	#10
FordeatinZ71 FSC Drunkin Teem Status: Offline Join Date: Aug 2002 Member ID: 2427 Pics: My Gallery Location: Hooks, Texas...i keep working closer and closer to 'Bama! Age: 25 Posts: 2,882	Re: How to identify if your 73-87 was repaired by GM's fuel tank recall why do ya'll do this? i asked not to have this thread littered. you guys believe what you wanna believe, i got other proof (that i've tried to show in my other thread but i guess no one wants to read because ya'll have it all figured out) that convinces me otherwise. GM wouldn't have recalled them if there wasn't a significant problem. ok, i didn't wanna do this here, but i'll repost my proof, this time i'll break it down more and explain what it is. please read it at least halfway thoroughly before making another response to this thread. i'm not saying that a kid kicking the fender is gonna make you go up in flames. i'm not saying a bus hitting you at 50 is gonna make you go up in flames...the problem is that in a side-impact of moderate severity there is a MUCH higher risk for fuel LEAKAGE than in a safer vehicle, which leads to a higher risk of fire. there were over 1,800 people killed due to fires in C/K crashes from 1973 to 2000, tell their families there was no defect...you're liable to get smacked. ok, talk is cheap, here's the proof i've dug up. if after reading through this you don't believe it still, then fine, don't. but please don't criticize me and just let this thread be. have enough respect for me as another forum member trying to help my fellow classic truck owners to just leave this be and not to talk trash on me for trying to inform people of a defect. oh, and the reason we have access to this is that GM (after one of many of it's lawsuits) was forced to make this formerly-insider info public as part of the judgement. if all this had been available when NBC made their false report then they wouldn't have needed to do that crap to scare the public. first is a FARS (Fatal Accident Reporting System) report listing all the fire-related fatal C/K crashes (crashes where, by investigation, fire was determined to be the fatality) from 1993-2002. there is 15 pages. http://autosafety.org/uploads/FARS.pdf second is a 55-page engineering report issued by transportation secretary Federico Pena outlining WHY these trucks have a defect. this explains a lot of things i never knew... http://autosafety.org/GMAttC.pdf this was an inside memo dated 1978 that, again, informed GM that this was a problem and that "moving the tanks inboard the frame might eliminate some of these potential leakers" http://autosafety.org/GMAttI.pdf here's another inside memo that shows GM engineers exploring different fuel tank locations and fuel tank shields http://autosafety.org/GMAttJ.pdf here is the study that says (according to GM) that the K-series trucks performed worse in the crash tests. they are the ones that come up with the frame flex theory, hell, they even moved crossmembers in 1984-later K-series trucks to increase flex, it says it all in there, just read. this test is from 1984 and was a summary of all the crash tests ran BY GM from 1981-83. http://autosafety.org/GMAttL.pdf this was a sketch by Vice President Alex Mair recommending what could be an "easy fix". it would have cost GM $23 a truck to do...but it was ignored. http://autosafety.org/GMAttM.pdf this is the study where GM concluded that it wasn't "cost effective" to spend over $2.20 per vehicle to prevent fuel-fed fires in crashes... http://autosafety.org/GMAttN.pdf this is Ed Ivey's 1994 deposition. read the outlined part...he is asked if there is a more dangerous place GM could have put the fuel tank... http://autosafety.org/GMAttO.pdf there is more proof that is on this page http://autosafety.org/article.php?scid=94&did=504 but i posted what i feel is the most pertinent. read over it and come to your own conclusion. yes, NBC got in trouble for creating the explosions, but that doesn't mean that there WASN'T a problem... oh, and about the frame thing. there IS a difference. this is all the proof i've found so far but i do plan to keep looking. i didn't get a "part number" persay, but i did find a website (GM Parts Direct). i looked up a 1985 Chevy C-10 frame and then a 1985 Chevy K-10 frame. the C-series frame has a price, the K-series frame isn't available. here's the link, look for yourself. if you can find me a GM manual that states part numbers or a statement otherwise that the K-series frame is EXACTLY the same as the C-series frame, i'll eat crow...until then i'm sticking to my guns. http://www.trademotion.com/partlocat...85&catalogid=2 edit, here's a frame specs sheet from ChucksChevyTruckPages... http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/framespecs.html <---thanks 454SS!! 1991 Chevy Silverado K1500 extended cab, 350, 700R4 with shift kit, exhaust work...in need of body work...lol... 1983 GMC Sierra K1500 sold...