[junkyardjohn]

GM Trucks were not even built to the same level of fuel system safety as that of their competitors. Both Ford and Chrysler installed the gas tanks inside the frame rail because of concerns over fuel leakage and fire in side crashes. As a result, the incidence of fatal injury in side impact fire crashes where death is caused by fire is 3.5 times higher for GM than Ford and 4.7 times higher than for Chrysler. Our analysis indicates that $465 to $910 million of the $2 billion cost of GM Truck fires to date is attributable to fuel tank location.
WHEREVER SOMEONE PUTS THIER GAS TANK IS O-K WITH ME. BUT I DON'T THINK I WOULD LEAVE IT INSIDE THE CAB. JUST AN OPINION BASED ON MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIANCED. I THINK WE HAVE ALL LEARNED THAT SADDLE TANKS ARE NOT SO PRETTY GOOD EITHER. THAT KINDA LEAVES INSIDE THE FRAME RAILS AS THE NEXT BEST ALTERNATIVE. (AS THE ARTICLE STATES) I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHY G.M. MOVED THE TANK BACK IN 73 & SADDLE TANKS SURE WEREN'T A GOOD IDEA. I JUST THOUGHT YOU'RE STATEMENT...("QUOTE BY CPNE") Then only reason it was relocated in 73 was so they could build crew cabs, and later extended cabs. If you (you being a generality, not specific to any one poster) feel so compelled for safety reasons to move the tank, perhaps you'd be better off with an electric vehicle. WAS PRETTY SILLY CONSIDERING THIS POST WAS ABOUT MOVING THE GAS TANK WHILE REFURBISHING TRUCKS IN 2005, & NOT HOW G.M. DID IT IN 1972 OR 1973. (& THIS SMILEY MEANS THAT I FIND YOU'RE ANSWERS TO THIS POST EXTREEMLY FUNNY). IT'S KINDA CLOSED MINDED TO THINK THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU'VE NEVER HAD ANY EXPERIANCE WITH A BEHIND THE SEAT GAS TANK FAILURE, THAT NO ONE ELSE HAS EITHER. EVEN IF THE ODDS ARE A SCRILLION TO ONE.... I DON'T THINK THATS A BET I'M WILLING TO TAKE. (& I DON'T THINK I NEED A ELECTRIC VEHICAL EITHER) JOHN