Re: ***NEED CARNAGE PICS***and info
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=94&did=793
Looks here like youre wrong Timmy, I know you didnt think that was possible, but the truth hurts.
[/ QUOTE ]
Looks like you're shooting off at the mouth again, what a surprise. I already knew that everyone that owned one of these trucks before 1995 got a credit towards buying a new truck, but the general consensus that they blow up constantly was fueled by the NBC-led fireball TV show that started this entire thing.
I already agreed that it is a shitty design. Scared the crap out of me when I knew I got hit in the fuel tank when I got broad sided. First thing I did was get the hell out of my truck and run. I was scared it was going to blow up, too.
Looking back on it, as violent as the crash was, I'm surprised that there was no leakage, but there sure is a good size dent in the tank to prove it took a pretty good hit, and survived.
EDIT:
Quoted from your very own article.......
[ QUOTE ]
Cooney added that the number and size of the settlements did not mean that the C/K pickups were unsafe. Given the millions of C/Ks made, he said, "the vehicle has a tremendous safety record."
GM produced more than 9 million of the pickups from 1973 to 1987 with fuel tanks outside the frame. It then changed the design.
[/ QUOTE ]
It has also been proven that these trucks don't suffer any more fuel tank related fires than any other vehicle on the road based on statistics.
Seemingly stupid design? Sure. Resulted in a significant change in the number of deaths in serious accidents with these trucks? I really don't think so, but you may disagree.