boltbrain
Full Access Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2022
- Posts
- 136
- Reaction score
- 26
- Location
- Montana
- First Name
- Rick
- Truck Year
- 1979
- Truck Model
- Chevy K20
- Engine Size
- 350
Thanks, agree all around. There are pros and cons whichever. I am not so averse to using two. I’d prefer a manual valve but if they’re not available, yes just replace them often enough. But you don’t mention safety. I’ve been rear ended twice and sideswiped once ( parked). One rear ender was by a texting driver. It’s more dangerous on the road these days. I have other vehicles so it’s not a major factor but I’m thinking if someone side swiped a saddle tank, it could open like a sardine can and with sparks. I’m surprised there hasn’t been much mention of the lethality. I mean, there’s a reason they don’t design them that way anymore. I suspect that owners don’t much think if it when the tanks are hidden ( and slightly protected) by stock boxes.I'm coming along a little late but still want to give my input on 2 tanks vs one rear mounted tank. I had to cross this bridge a few years ago.
My truck was a factory single tank, and had developed a leak. I was not happy with one 20 gallon tank, I mean unless you hammer the tank on E there is what about 15 usable gallons. That's something like 200 miles on a good day on the highway and less than 150 on a bad day with a loaded trailer even less. That was totally unacceptable when making a couple hundred mile journey for feed. In the end I decided to add a second 20 gallon side saddle tank. Main reasons were I felt that the two side saddle tanks spread the weight out better, it was an simpler install, and nets me a total of 40 gallons. I start with two full tanks hammering the left tank on E knowing that the right is full, plus run that to a 1/4 I've got a solid 35 usable gallons. That's about 450 miles on a good day 350 on a bad day. I'm not disparaging the the rear tank swap at all I came close it and there are good reasons for doing it. But in the end I just didn't feel that the work involved was worth while to gain 11 gallons, where as I could bolt on stock components to gain 20 gallons and get 40 gallons total.
The switching valve for a two or even if a guy wanted a 3 tank system, is not really an issue anymore. In the old days there were units, particularly the one wire valves that were prone to failure. The newer units produced by Pollak and often sold under the brand Wells is very reliable. Far more reliable than any electric transfer pump could be. Keep in mind we are dealing with fuel here, and if I guy home brews a transfer tank system and there is a large amount of fuel spilled or fire involved you could be on the hook for the clean up / damages.
Like @Grit dog said a 35 - 40 year old, or even 20 year old replacement valve fails and guys get all upset about reliability. Show me an aftermarket electric fuel pump (frame rail type not injection) or electric transfer pump that age that still functions. It's just like the guys that whine and complain about there rubber fuel lines breaking down from ethanol. Yea, all know ethanol if hard on rubber fuel lines but after 35 - 50 years those lines are shot from age! I'm just saying. At least with the switch valve a guy could lay under the truck and swap ports on the valve to manually change the tanks. With an electric transfer pump if it goes bad your out of luck. Just my opinion obviously but maybe some food for thought on that subject.
On further consideration, until I see or think up a good fail safe plan I don’t want a transfer of tank to tank. I’m keeping the 4 wires that come from the dash and went to the valve.