Ford dual tank silliness

And that's exactly why I HATE new vehicles! You can't do that with them! You just made my point, Jim!

I don't think you're picking up what I'm putting down.
I keep driving my truck because I fill it with stuff and  I don't need a degree in computer science to repair it.

I'm not interested in dealing with a overcomplicated vehicle that needs a $1,200 diagnostic tool with bidirectional control just to program a replacement battery.

My 38 year old, gas guzzling rat trap is quickly running out of time though, because I can't easily find basic maintenance items like air filters and distributor rotors.

I'm broke as a joke and have probably saved $250 in gas since I screwed up my knee and can't work the clutch.
But this isn't my car.
I'm not paying the taxes or insurance.

That doesn't mean that for the VAST majority of people who just make a lease payment every month and only need to commute to their cubicle, a new, comfortable, fuel efficient vehicle isn't the best choice.

Courses for horses, and stuff like that.

I don't think there's any question that new cars are "better" in that they have more power, are more comfortable, get better mileage....  Just about everything that most people want in a car.

Some might debate this, but I'd argue that new cars are also more reliable, in that it's less likely that something will go wrong.  This covers everything else that most people want in a car.

Where the debate on reliability comes from is how easy (and how expensive) is it to repair when something goes wrong?  While I'll argue that it's less likely that something will go wrong on a new vehicle, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's less likely to strand you, especially if the driver's ability to "repair" it on the spot is factored in.  My '71 Bronco has "stranded" me more than my '97 F-250, which has "stranded" me more than all the new cars I've had combined.  But I've always been able to get the F-250 to take me home, and almost always the Bronco.  And the repairs on both have always been reasonable.

So old vehicles, combined with an owner who can deal with their idiosyncrasies, can be as reliable as a new vehicle, and be easier / cheaper to repair.

Show me a Camry that won't go at least 300k with just basic maintenance.

Back in the '70's it was like 65,000 miles, 100k from an American car was exceptional!

And then there was the smog.
Yellow haze in every city that would burn your eyes and throat.
When I was too little to see out the car window (no child seats back then! ) my dad would occasionally take me to the (plastics) plant in Elizabeth.
I could tell how far we were by the smells.
Paint, oil refineries, asphalt, chemicals, and OF COURSE MOMO, or methacrylic monomer.

Yeah, these new cars.... I HATE THEM!!!! 😡

Interested in your sender/gauge wiring, as I'm going to just wire the dash switch to the two senders, and run a manual valve (ala early Bronco) next to the seat, driver's side.  The "KISS" principle, I guess, but the electric valve issue is such an issue that I want to make it a non-issue.  

And so now, finally after 3 pages of talking about whatever, we're back to the subject of this thread! I love this forum. Stuff like this wouldn't happen anywhere else.

I must concede, as much as I dislike it. The points given above I cannot argue with and will admit are true. My stand is not "older vehicles are better". My stand is "I like older vehicles". Comfort is not an issue to me at all. As stated earlier, I literally walked a mile and a half yesterday (while it was cold and trying to rain), to get a cup of coffee. My "dream car" is a 1950ish International Metro van. Not much comfort there. But yes, newer cars are "better".

Every bar, gas station service bay, boat club and hunting lodge on the planet back in the day.

True, but I was referring to the other forums.

I'm sure you can find a forum with whatever behavior you like.  

We occasionally get the guy that really belongs on Pirate 4x4, and even had one that was banned from every truck forum I know of.
He eventually made himself persona non grata.... even here. 🙄

The worst of the worst is Yellow Bullet. I am NOT a member there.

Will attempt to get pics of my setup tomorrow. And of course my fuel gauge started acting stupid today.

It's a Ford.
They ALL act stupid. 😂

Yeah but it's an AUTOMETER! I've got WAAAAAAY too much money in them. It's not the gauge though, something weird with the sending unit.

check grounds.

Yep. That's what's wrong with the back tank. In all the electrical nonsense I've been though with this truck, it's mostly been bad grounds.

https://shop.broncograveyard.com/1966-1977-Ford-Bronco-Mechanical-Tank-Switching-Valve/productinfo/10260/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAzoeuBhDqARIsAMdH14HK6HRiU9w9W_e3RSzOoc02CEv7jpV5HNr9ji1VhdYBMrk6LmbdrMcaAmwUEALw_wcB

That is SO COOL!  I had no idea they made this for an early Bronco.

That's nice! I might get 2 of those and mount them to the floorpan. Where did they go in a Bronco, originally?

That's what I want to do eventually. The wiring I currently have will work with no modifications except removing the valves. I'll try to get some pics tomorrow.

Ifitaintbroke wrote

That's nice! I might get 2 of those and mount them to the floorpan. Where did they go in a Bronco, originally?

In the front of the seat riser, right below the driver's seat.

This isn't a great picture.  It's looking in the driver's door at the transfer case shift levers sticking up out of the side of the trans tunnel.  The tank switching valve is the silver handle on the brass stem on the right side of the picture.  Above that you're seeing the front of the driver's seat.

For what it's worth, it's a simple ball valve.  You turn it 90° to go from one tank to the other.  I think the stock valve had stops so it only turned 90°, but this replacement will turn a full 360°.  If it's not pointed pretty close to one of the two selection points it shuts both tanks off.  I suppose this could be used as a theft deterrent, but mostly it's been a way to make it run out of gas with two full tanks when I bump it with my foot.  (that's only happened twice)