…as did the Falcon.
When all was said and done, the “new” Mustang was essentially just a Falcon with a much nicer body design and much less interior room.
1 Like
I had one of those '65 Mustangs. Lucky I never got hit. The weakest point was the rubber filler hose from the tank to the cap. Get hit in the rear, the tank would crumple, popping off the hose and spraying the inside of the trunk with the gas. Any ignition would light off the gas, which would then go into the passenger compartment through the (thin) rear seat.
Even filling the tank of those early Mustangs was not exactly a picnic.
I used to dread the arrival of a Mustang or a late-model GM car at our gas station.
The Mustang’s gas filler required VERY careful insertion of the pump nozzle into the sharply-curved passage, so much so that I used to wonder if “lube” from the local…adult store…might have been appropriate for proper insertion.
And, then you had the PIA Mustang gas cap–secured with a wire lanyard–that was not easy to put back in place properly when you are in a hurry, in a very busy station, as mine was.
The GM vehicles had their gas fillers located behind the license plate, and they were mounted so low that I had to kneel on the oil/coolant/trans fluid soaked pavement in order to access them.
Not pleasant!
And, because of weak return springs, a lot of those license plates had permanently flopped down, parallel to the pavement, and were invisible to the cops.
Not exactly the finest designs from either Ford or GM!
2 Likes
Just curious . . .
How could Subaru tell you the VIN doesn’t exist . . . ?!
Did you show them the car and show them the VIN plate . . . ?!
Did they suggest the car was grey market, pre-production, or something else . . . ?!
Yes, and it was not separated from the interior by a trunk floor or a rear
firewall so when the tank ruptured , the gas sprayed all over the interior
and the occupants.
@db4690, I can’t explain the situation with the Subaru VIN and refusal to back the Recall. The car had originally been sold by the dealer where I was currently employed and the original owner had it towed in with a wiped engine after a fast lube incident. The car was low miles and showroom clean but the owner (who I talked to) decided to just trade it in at the same dealer.
I bought the car from that same dealer and figured one day between jobs I’d catch up the Recalls on it. That’s when the crap started. They kept insisting the VIN did not exist and that “maybe you’re entering an O instead of a zero” and so on.
That was not the case.
I even brought the title back in (which matched the dash and door jam plates) and the on-file paperwork from the same dealer. Two weeks of back and forth and Subaru started claiming the warranty clerk was poking the wrong keys on the keyboard.
That was not the case either because I personally stood there several times and watched her poke it in one finger at a time. I finally just gave up wrestling with them as I had bigger fish to fry.
I didn’t even get the headlight wire harness Recall approved and on that one I just bought the harness myself and changed it.
I love Subarus but have a very, very dim view of Subaru corporate due not to just me being yanked but also being yanked on numerous customer cars and having seen Subaru owners unjustifiably yanked around also.
After the seat broke a guy I knew had an old Chevy he was junking with some nice stock bucket seats he said I could have so the Bowtie seats went into the Subaru. They were actually 10 times more comfortable so other than almost dying it worked out in the end.
My understanding is that a Subaru owner in eastern OK did crash once when a seat back broke. He fell backwards and the car slewed off down an embankment and plowed into a large billboard. Both driver and passenger luckily only suffered cmparatively minor injuries.
Here’s the Mustang filler-
A high school student did not graduate in 1960 with us He had the steering column rammed though his body in a wreck
If this had happened to me . . .
After the seat broke, and you had a hairy situation, I would have gone to that very same Subaru dealer the very next morning. I would have DEMANDED to see the service manager.
Then I would have told him “Here’s my car with the supposedly non-existent VIN. And here’s my very real broken seat. I expect to have it fixed at no cost to me, under the very real recall. Get a move on. I want to see asses and elbows. And if you want to pay games, I’ll contact my lawyer, and you’ll be hearing from him shortly. Your choice.”
And then I would have crossed my arms in front of me and started loudly tapping my shoes on the ground.
1 Like
I hope you are aware that a major TV news station ADMITTED rigging the truck, so that the tanks would explode on national TV
Initially, they couldn’t get the tanks to explode by just having a crash. So they rigged up some explosives, I believe, for dramatic effect
As I recall, it was model rocket motors that they rigged to cause the explosion …
1 Like
The only thing I can think of with the incorrect VIN would be if it was recorded incorrectly at the factory. When the dealership checked it into inventory the dash and door jam plates were used and when the car was sold that correct VIN was recorded by DMV. With the evidence you and the dealership possessed you would think Subaru could admit the possibility of the factory incorrectly recording the VIN except of course they are to arrogant to admit making a mistake.
Yes it was Estes model rocket motors. They also loosened the gas caps to ensure spillage upon impact. NBC apologized to GM. With 10 years production and over 2 million Pintos sold there were a total of 27 fuel tank fire deaths.
I can’t really fault the dealer or service manager. At the time the claim was denied I worked for that dealer and the service manager did get involved. The warranty clerk was doing her damnedest only to be continually told the VIN does not exist even though that same dealer had sold the car new and had all files dating back to the time of sale.
This problem was all on SOA; Subaru of America.
Believe me, when that seat broke and I instantly found myself staring straight up at the dome light the old heart did jump into the throat and my mind was going 100 MPH trying to remember if there was a turn ahead or whether there was someone about to pass me.
After the car was stopped and I surveyed the damage then I got POed and started cursing SOA. I had done probably several dozen of those Recalls on other cars and it wasn’t that big a deal, Remove the seat back, cut the hog rings, peel the cover off, insert cover over new seat back, clip new hog rings on , reinstall back.
If the car had gone into the ditch and I had gotten injured you can bet I would have sued them in a heartbeat; and I’m not a sue happy type of person.
As I said, I love Subaru cars but corporate Subaru can burn to the ground as far as I’m concerned. Being lied to or playing word games is apparently in the employee training manual.
I could write a small book on the number of incidents involving stalling, double talk, and flat out lies. This not only affected mechanic pay but also put the screws to a number of Subaru owners. My rant over… 
Well its sort of ironic I was told the Ford Lifeguard design had a dash that was more dangerous then the Plain flat metal dash,it seems in a collision or crash the thin padding on the flat I beam or whatever would give way and you ended up with a worse injury then the plain old sheetmetal giving away .live and learn,What about the old Jeeps with the fuel directly under the passenger or drivers seat ? I remember the hyped rear end collision tests ,it seems every car of that circa -so tested failed,It was said F Lee Bailey (remember him ?) got GM off the hook for the poor fuel tank placement on the trucks ,the fix ? A cash voucher or credit on a new GM truck:grinning:
[quote=“db4690, post:10, topic:94039, full:true”]
I hope you are aware that a major TV news station ADMITTED rigging the truck, so that the tanks would explode on national TV
Initially, they couldn’t get the tanks to explode by just having a crash. So they rigged up some explosives, I believe, for dramatic effect
BTW . . . I’m talking about the Chevy trucks with the tanks outside the frame rails
[/quote
I am aware that NBC rigged that truck to explode, but that doesn’t mean it is not a legitimate safety concern. Those trucks exploding have killed at least 150 people, maybe many more. Not including people burned and disfigured by the defect.
1 Like
Yes, but ford and dodge were able to put bigger tanks in without placing them outside the protective frame.
Boy this new forum layout is terrible… anyhow, I would buy your argument IF there was no other way to move the gastank out of the cab, the ONLY ones to put it where they did was GM. Ford and Dodge figured out how to do it safely.
Everyone has 20/20 hindsight, now don’t they? Keep in mind the frames were really not all that stiff. We have a Ford fuel tank inside the frame that can be pierced by thicker gauge frame steel and its more vulnerable to higher speed rear hits which are a higher percentage of accidents than side impacts. Or the GM tanks that are primarily threatened by side hits deforming the similar-to-the fuel tank thin gauge body sheetmetal. I am not picking a winner here, they are both design choices. These are the kind of discussions car designers have before making a decision.
Given the millions sold, 4.5 million GM trucks over the years with this tank location and considering the approximately 150 deaths that might have been caused by this design, statistically (1 death per 30,000 vehicles sold) this is a very safe vehicle.
The Ford Pinto was far worse. With 2.2 Million units sold and between 27 and 180 deaths, it is twice as bad as GM trucks. That said, it is still one death per 12,222 sold, if we use 180 deaths.
To put it in perspective, you have a 1 in 10,000 chance of being a traffic fatality every year.
I worked for a GM (Buick, Saab, Opel) dealer in the mid 1970s. I owned a Ford so was not in your situation. If I was I would not blame the dealership. I would blame GM. Threatening the service manager who was my direct supervisor would be insane.
And if we use 27 confirmed deaths?