Packard Forum Index » Project Blogs

Part of the problem with unused drain plugs is the two pieces rust or corrode together. If you try removing the plug and are not careful to hold the bung tightly with something, it's a pressed in piece and will twist loose from the tank. Repairing the leak when that happens can get interesting.

Jim,

I had a thought after I posted earlier, maybe the guy didn't realize the tank would collect moisture and condensation or maybe he couldn't get the drain plug loose.

I thought you were going to look into Renue'd as a solution a while ago so I was kind of surprised to read that you had taken it it a local shop. I will be very interested in Big Kev's experience with Renue'd in the next couple of weeks. If the new tank for my car is gone, I think I will probably be in the same boat you guys are in.

I am still thinking about a Kevlar tank. Never rust, puncture proof, probably take any fuel/ alcohol/ methanol mix in the future without a problem. When the Collings Foundation restored their B24, the new wing tanks were made of Kevlar. 100LL avgas- no sweat.

The Chevy truck thing was fabricated (what else is new?) by NBC News. They put a fusee up on top of the fuel tank when they couldn't get it to blow up on its own.

If anyone in a parts store has access to documentation, it would be interesting to see what the actual details of this 57 Chevy tank are. One poster mentioned he was using one and it fits. If it is close and doesn't require any big mods, then those are repro'd & might be a decent option. Use the Chevy pickup unit in the opening and make what is needed to substitute our sender. That should be a fairly simple thing to do and doesn't look like it would need too much plumbing change either.

Attach file:

---

  (5.41 KB)


  (13.77 KB)

RIGHT! I remember that now that you mention it - GM got (I think) an undisclosed settlement for that!

I realize that the drain plug can be a bitch. I tried to drain the tank on my '60 Imperial when I put it up for storage some years ago. Would not budge! So I guess I should be a little understanding and hope my guys did try to take the plug out of the Packard - not that it matters much at this point.
I did think about the "Renue" process as it sounds great. However, Portlandon hooked me up with Tom of Able Radiator and I sort of like to give local people a shot. He has talked about a "polymer"(sp?) but I'll know more when I pick up my tank and he sees it. If he doesn't come through I'll give the "Renues" guys a shot. I just wish there was a shop closer than California or British Columbia. I'd hate to ship it to them only to be told it's a gonner.

Stephen, if I might suggest something, I'd grab that tank if I were you sooner rather than later. I can see something like: "Mom doesn't have that Packard anymore so why do we still have this thing taking up room in the cellar?" Maybe you have better luck than I do but that has been MY experience.

My thanks as always to everyone who has taken the time to help. It is what's making this whole thing possible.

Hi Howard,
I see you posted the chevy tank pics while I was blithering on. I've got the time so I will look into this and get back to you all.

From what I've been told, the top half of my tank is fine. Wouldn't it be great if the two halves matched up!

If I've done this right, here is a tank that has possibilities. It's for a '53 Chevy and they have the spare tire well like ours. I'll have to get the exact measurements and look into it. According to the site (classic car auto parts), it's a "new" model.

Attach file:

---

  (10.87 KB)

Looks like a possibility. The filler angle looks a little flat and no vent but minor details there. The 57 didn't have a vent either. Is it 20 gallon or a 17? The smaller tank seems to have been on a lot of cars in that era and might need a little work on the sender arm if so.

Maddeningly - they give neither the capacity nor dimensions. I've sent an e-mail and will call tomorrow. There is another for the 49-52 that looks close as well - also a new model.
I'll let everyone know what I find out.

I think the problem with the filler on the tank picture above is first the angle and curvature as Howard mentioned. But the big problem is that the filler comes out of the top half of the tank. This would probably run right into the frame rail. The Packard filler tube attaches to the bottom half of the tank and runs under the frame fail. The vent tube comes out of the top of half and runs over the frame rail. Hence the need for the rubber hose in the vent tube.

Attach file:

---

  (28.41 KB)


  (35.40 KB)


  (34.91 KB)

I forgot about the filler being low but in looking at either of the Chevy tanks, wonder if those openings are high enough to go over the frame as the vent does. The 53 Chev would appear to be the best option in that regard if the capacity is good. The 57 would have the advantage of sender being more accessible and not have to drop the tank but would need more work to mount. At least we would have a screen using that system.

If it clears, then cutting off the new filler to a stub and cutting ours to match and connecting with a rubber hose should be possible. Then it would just be a matter of figuring a support (if a tightly clamped hose wasn't enough) and blocking off the vent tube on the filler neck. The other poster running the 57 tank must have done something similar. I seem to remember something about a short piece of exhaust tubing he welded onto that tank.

At any rate, while one of you have your tanks out, could we get some excellent measurements and pictures of everything important for future reference.