It's a valid point RT, but you're talking about making modifications in a different direction. And to make any EB safer you'd even have to change the stock tank's location, shape and protection factors. After all, they designed these even before the Pinto and it's not like they're protected in any way other than being shaped with more of a taper in the back. Not sure if that was for safety, or departure angle, or aesthetics.
Otherwise it's as much, or more exposed than the Pinto ever was. Even in stock form.
I think the cars had better bumpers, but less robust materials.
Yes, adding fuel to the fire (literally) would not necessarily be a good thing, but a stock tank is just as likely to be a problem. So might as well enjoy the added capacity and range, and hope for the best with regard to accidents.:-[
Rear-enders are the least controllable by the rearendee though, so it's hard to account for.
You've got a point, and it's something we've discussed before and all have to take into account. Personally I decided long ago that the extra range and not having to be "that guy" that stops at the gas stations the first, is worth it.
Might not say that if I'm rear-ended hard I suppose. But hopefully under the circumstances I can still jump out and run pretty quick!
I've actually been rear-ended twice in my Bronco Not hard enough to do damage to my truck, but hard enough to destroy the cars that hit me. Both had to be towed, but not hard enough to harm the truck.
And that was before my Hanson bumper.
My '68 has a nice receiver hitch in that area beneath the bumper. Looks like it will protect the tank up to a point, so hoping that will help a little more as well.
Paul