Those of you romancing over the rear filler neck might not recall one of the reasons for its elimination:
The ‘Pinto Effect’
1 Like
More likely the “Lawyer Effect” because of the lawsuits and public backlash from the “Pinto Effect” I don’t remember any other cars that actually had that particular problem.
1 Like
Those gas fillers behind the license plates were a pain at the gas station - they were prone to kicking back gas when the nozzle would shut off, spilling some, to the annoyance of the customer.
In my years of pumping gas, I often spilled lots of gas on the ground, especially with the filler tube behind the license plate. When there were lots of cars waiting for gas, and you were rushing around, spilling gas on the pavement was the last concern on anyone’s mind.
Ironically, no one cared.
Times sure have changed. I think for the better.
+1
I really disliked filling the tank on cars with those rear fillers. Having to squat behind those cars was not a favorite activity of mine.
1 Like
I had one customer ask me “Are you going to pay me for that?” It confused me, he was joking with me the whole time he was there, but it quickly became apparent he wasn’t joking then.
What other models had this particular problem? And please cite your sources.
Enjoy? Not really, it’s just so easy to do. I can’t pass it up.
Of course, the Pinto had its fuel fill located at the left rear quarter panel not the rear of the car and that had ZERO to do with the problem they experienced where the gas TANK was located behind the rear axle…
3 Likes
Ok, so maybe not exactly the ‘Pinto effect’, but safety played at least a partial role in eliminating rear-tag fill-up location.
Refute me as any of you wish!
Partial is right. There is also the propensity to spill fuel when refueling. A huge reason was the inconvenience of the rear filler neck. Being able to pull up to any pump was quickly offset by having to crouch down to insert the nozzle and fill the tank. Right around the same time, self serve gas stations were cropping up in my neck of the woods. Fine to have some gas jockey deal with it, not so great for older folks having to fuel it themselves…
1 Like
You seem to confuse stating an opinion as something worth refuting. You made the claim, back it up.
The under the bumper gas fillers disappeared with the advent of 5 mph bumpers. They couldn’t survive the test undamaged, I would think. They often still hid behind the plate, but it was above the bumper:
3 Likes
Is that why my mom sent me to get gas? 
1 Like
52 posts, you folks are sure opinionated about what is really just a classic-car issue. I do expect the reason for only one filler on modern cars is b/c of gasoline safety. The exhaust system and filler pipes are both competing for space.
So what was the reason all the other years? 99% of all cars ever made only had one filler.
What do you think it is?
It was obvious from the beginning - 2 fillers are unneeded and a waste of money.
4 Likes
It’s not my “opinion” that it was safety-related - EVERY SOURCE ON THE INTERNET says that!
I didn’t intend to start or extend an argument. Maybe we should agree that cost, safety and need are all factors?
1 Like
Please provide a link or site. Chevy used the rear filler until '96 on the Impala, so it stuck around for a long time. The one example you cite, the Pinto, didn’t even have a rear filler, it was on the side.
Plenty of cars with side fill tanks keep the tank in pretty much the same location as the Pinto, behind the rear axle, ahead of the rear bumper.
My dad had a pinto wagon. I don’t know where the tank or filler was. After the big fire scare, he just had a hitch put on and drove on. Actually a nice car. So was my corvair.
I guess I just learned cars are dangerous. So is walking. So is biking. No way to get out of this place alive.
2 Likes