• Welcome to ClassicBroncos! - You are currently viewing the forums as a GUEST. To take advantage of all the site features, please take a moment to register. It's fast, simple and absolutely free. So please join our community today!
    If you have problems registering or can't log into your account, please contact Admin.

New Fuel Tank Design

How important is capacity to you?

  • 17 gallons is good enough

    Votes: 20 10.3%
  • 18-20 gallons is better

    Votes: 103 53.1%
  • 23 gallons is preferred

    Votes: 50 25.8%
  • 23 gallons is not enough

    Votes: 21 10.8%

  • Total voters
    194

gnsteam

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
3,522
Loc.
Lincoln NE
Just curious on the progress of this new tank design. I'm literally days away from ordering one of the current 23 gallon EFI offerings.
 

DonH

Sr. Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
421
Loc.
WA State 30 miles from the beach
Retired and on a budget $1000 is not posible. But retired with skills I built a 20 gallon tank that just fit inside the frame and close to the two inch body lift. Also had a top of tank feul pump install. Also made axcess door in bed of Bronce to change fuel pump in future.
 
OP
OP
englewoodcowboy

englewoodcowboy

Lick Creek Restorations
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
4,200
This is the current update as of this morning 03/05/21. Laser cut parts arrived last Friday evening so assembly will start this week. We are on schedule to have a prototype on display at the show as of right now, hoping to have a couple working prototypes installed also. Only 2 weeks left for us so a lot has to fall into place in order for this to happen. Worst case we will have a table top display. The final design has it almost 4" shorter than the other options as well as a provision to correct for the fuel gauge issue. It is looking like total capacity is going to be 21 gallons, I will update those numbers for actual capacity and actual useable capacity when we do some at-the-pump tests. Calculated useable capacity is looking like it will be 20 or very close to it. The tank will be sold in bare stainless finish, you can have the option of painting it if you desire. We may also add a brushed option as well down the road but the forming process is leaving mill marks on the plate. Someone could spend the time to sand and polish them if they wished as well. The mounting system will be shown at the show. It is very streamlined, non intrusive and leaves a ton of room for exhaust routing as well and has already been verified with all of Duffs systems including some that we have in development that will be available this summer available through Duffs.
 

Attachments

  • 33E013BB-8A0C-41D8-9B2A-6EB7689FD46E.jpg
    33E013BB-8A0C-41D8-9B2A-6EB7689FD46E.jpg
    141.6 KB · Views: 156
  • LCR 20GSST Fuel Tank with corners clipped v4.jpg
    LCR 20GSST Fuel Tank with corners clipped v4.jpg
    21 KB · Views: 167
Last edited:

toddz69

Sponsor/Vendor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Messages
10,080
This is the current update as of this morning 03/05/21. Laser cut parts arrived last Friday evening so assembly will start this week. We are on schedule to have a prototype on display at the show as of right now, hoping to have a couple working prototypes installed also. Only 2 weeks left for us so a lot has to fall into place in order for this to happen. Worst case we will have a table top display. The final design has it almost 4" shorter than the other options as well as a provision to correct for the fuel gauge issue. It is looking like total capacity is going to be 21 gallons, I will update those numbers for actual capacity and actual useable capacity when we do some at-the-pump tests. Calculated useable capacity is looking like it will be 20 or very close to it. The tank will be sold in bare stainless finish, you can have the option of painting it if you desire. We may also add a brushed option as well down the road but the forming process is leaving mill marks on the plate. Someone could spend the time to sand and polish them if they wished as well. The mounting system will be shown at the show. It is very streamlined, non intrusive and leaves a ton of room for exhaust routing as well and has already been verified with all of Duffs systems including some that we have in development that will be available this summer available through Duffs.

Looking good! The kickout in the front looks like a nice way to add some extra capacity.

Todd Z.
 

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
8,615
Maybe the coffee isn't working yet but how does the rear end not hit that "kick-out" in the front of the tank at full droop? If it doesn't, then is there unused space btw the rear pumpkin and the tank then?

Can't visualize it this am yet! lol
 

toddz69

Sponsor/Vendor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Messages
10,080
Maybe the coffee isn't working yet but how does the rear end not hit that "kick-out" in the front of the tank at full droop? If it doesn't, then is there unused space btw the rear pumpkin and the tank then?

Wondered about that too, although I think the problem would be at full bump, rather than full droop? Maybe I need to try coffee sometime.... :)

Todd Z.
 
OP
OP
englewoodcowboy

englewoodcowboy

Lick Creek Restorations
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
4,200
Maybe the coffee isn't working yet but how does the rear end not hit that "kick-out" in the front of the tank at full droop? If it doesn't, then is there unused space btw the rear pumpkin and the tank then?

Can't visualize it this am yet! lol

The space we are utilizing resides under the rear cross member. This has also been designed around Duffs Dual Sport 4 link and Monster 4 link for fitment. It clears with still enough room to push the axle back until the upper truss collides with that cross member and that will happen before it hits the tank at full compression. We also verified this without the shocks installed and went to full coil bind with no issues. We have 2 broncos in the shop with those suspensions on them and a cardboard mock up was used to verify clearance.
 

tripleJs15

Jr. Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
157
The space we are utilizing resides under the rear cross member. This has also been designed around Duffs Dual Sport 4 link and Monster 4 link for fitment. It clears with still enough room to push the axle back until the upper truss collides with that cross member and that will happen before it hits the tank at full compression. We also verified this without the shocks installed and went to full coil bind with no issues. We have 2 broncos in the shop with those suspensions on them and a cardboard mock up was used to verify clearance.


Just picked finished the dual sport install - would love to pick up this tank soon!

f5596df67b7655e3bdc1682b2ce38608.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
8,615
Ice cream time.... yes TZ, full stuff HA!
 
OP
OP
englewoodcowboy

englewoodcowboy

Lick Creek Restorations
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
4,200
A little more on the progress...
 

Attachments

  • 0A298CC7-681C-4FAB-B021-19E959542E7F.jpg
    0A298CC7-681C-4FAB-B021-19E959542E7F.jpg
    136.5 KB · Views: 193
  • 82971BB6-B675-4C76-AB90-9F7A18B412C1.jpg
    82971BB6-B675-4C76-AB90-9F7A18B412C1.jpg
    118.3 KB · Views: 196

EricLar80

Bronco Guru
Joined
Jun 14, 2001
Messages
2,170
The overall concept looks really nice and will work great when installed. If you were looking for feedback, there are some things you could do to lower costs. I assume the welding length and jigging add to the cost more than material does, as does the number of individual cut pieces and cut holes (length of cut and piercings for laser cutting). At the risk of giving unsolicited feedback, here are a few ideas:

I really like that you have tabs and receiving slots to help align and position parts in relation to each other. But I would make that slot as short as possible because it's just added weld time and perhaps more opportunity to leak at the weld.

I would reduce the number of holes in the system (in the baffles, for example), and move the exchange between the regions within the tank to the perimeter of the baffle sheet. Fewer pierces with the laser will reduce cost for the parts.

I think there is also a way to simplify the bulged section of the tank so that you don't have a bunch of separate parts coming together. I like that you integrated the angled front pieces into the bulge. I wouldn't cut the entire front section out to fit-in the bulge - you could build the tank like a regular tank with an intact front wall and then have holes cut out at the top and bottom of the bulge on the front wall to allow gas/air to flow in and out easily. So the bulge is almost scabbed onto the side rather than an integral part of the tank structure.

The recessed area on the top for the fuel pump could be cut in position and bent down (bend would be where the flat recess and front wall intersect.

The strip that makes up the side wall of the recess could be a little taller than the open slot so you are welding a T joint vs a corner joint (less sensitive to tolerances).

I would look into making the main tank body out of 2 large pieces that come together almost like a square tennis ball. Or whichever way reduces weld length and simplifies assembly.

Again - great design and I am interested in buying when you are ready to sell. :)
 

Madgyver

Bronco Madman
Joined
Jul 30, 2001
Messages
14,678
wow! you make it look easy. i'm going to mock up a tank for my needs with some tape and cardboard. it will be less capacity, pumpkin is in the way...
 
OP
OP
englewoodcowboy

englewoodcowboy

Lick Creek Restorations
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
4,200
The overall concept looks really nice and will work great when installed. If you were looking for feedback, there are some things you could do to lower costs. I assume the welding length and jigging add to the cost more than material does, as does the number of individual cut pieces and cut holes (length of cut and piercings for laser cutting). At the risk of giving unsolicited feedback, here are a few ideas:

I really like that you have tabs and receiving slots to help align and position parts in relation to each other. But I would make that slot as short as possible because it's just added weld time and perhaps more opportunity to leak at the weld.

I would reduce the number of holes in the system (in the baffles, for example), and move the exchange between the regions within the tank to the perimeter of the baffle sheet. Fewer pierces with the laser will reduce cost for the parts.

I think there is also a way to simplify the bulged section of the tank so that you don't have a bunch of separate parts coming together. I like that you integrated the angled front pieces into the bulge. I wouldn't cut the entire front section out to fit-in the bulge - you could build the tank like a regular tank with an intact front wall and then have holes cut out at the top and bottom of the bulge on the front wall to allow gas/air to flow in and out easily. So the bulge is almost scabbed onto the side rather than an integral part of the tank structure.

The recessed area on the top for the fuel pump could be cut in position and bent down (bend would be where the flat recess and front wall intersect.

The strip that makes up the side wall of the recess could be a little taller than the open slot so you are welding a T joint vs a corner joint (less sensitive to tolerances).

I would look into making the main tank body out of 2 large pieces that come together almost like a square tennis ball. Or whichever way reduces weld length and simplifies assembly.

Again - great design and I am interested in buying when you are ready to sell. :)

I appreciate the feedback. A lot of the items you mentioned we have considered. The tank is supposed to have the 2 sides folded on the bottom edge but at the moment the place we are using to do the work does not have the correct tooling to clear their machine to make that bend. Our goal is to reduce the inches of weld required as much as possible. If they purchase that tooling then we will eliminate about another 60" of weld required approximately. Right now as it is when comparing to the other options out there we have reduced the amount of weld required by a decent amount. As for the laser holes etc. they do not impact the cost as much so that is why we have them, literally only pennies per part so I wanted to ensure we have decent flow points but the main reason is also trying to reduce weight. The tank is 14g 304 Stainless and is very sturdy. These units will be fully tightened welded and pressure tested prior to leaving our facility. We still have some items to address and streamline as well. Right now labor is going to be the largest impact on price so getting that down to a minimum, simplifying assembly etc. will help control the costs. We are working to be in the same price range as the other current offerings as best we can.
 

pbwcr

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
623
Hard to Add much to the discussion. I am living with my 23 gallon EB tank.
I have a lot of experience with custom tanks and aux tanks. I spend half my time wheeling in Baja and 30 gallons is required. Frist rig was a stretched 96 with 55 gallons including the Aux tank. Second rig is a TJU with the Genright 31-32 gallon main tank replacement. The new rig is a Wrangler 21JL with a 12 gallon aux that mounts between the tailgate and the spare (Not for and EB so installing would be a project – don’t be afraid).
1) Gauges: I used one that was calibrate at first fill. Unlimited points for the memory. Custom digital display was selectable gallons or Liters remaining or quantity or ¼, ½, ¾, full. Worked great for a tank that liquid level was not proportional to liquid height. Common in aircraft tanks and any odd ball tank shape. Most are digital which I do not favor. Anyway, the things are accurate. I chose 2 gal between points on a 30 gallon tank. Make your own adapter to fit the tank. Comes with its custom a digital gauge that will not match you now have. Used that gauge on the 96 aux tank but could be adapted to the main tank which used the Ford stock setup. Other gauges I tried were a waste of time/expense and too had many issues. Most difficult was a Ford float gauge on the 96 AUX tank. I never got the float set correctly. The 96 main tank with stock float had the same issue. I got them close and said enough is enough.
2) Cost: Tank cost is an issue. The 96 was all custom and the cost was extremely high and had several do overs. The aluminum Genriight with steel skid was 32 gal and around 2k and the latest Titan 12 gal aux is around 500. The only setup that did not have significant issues would be Genright. They know how to do it. It uses the stock Jeep float sender so it has the built in inaccuracy and for sure it is not linear.
3) Leaks: None of my custom tanks have the expansion issue, but My 23 gallon EB BCB tank leaks fumes when hot thru my vent. More expansion volume would be good. The 72 EB has a small catch tank so all I get is fumes. A bigger catch tank would help. So, if you leak gas when the tank gets hot consider a 1.5 gallon catch tank. Mount it above the tank so it drains back.
 
OP
OP
englewoodcowboy

englewoodcowboy

Lick Creek Restorations
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
4,200
Hard to Add much to the discussion. I am living with my 23 gallon EB tank.
I have a lot of experience with custom tanks and aux tanks. I spend half my time wheeling in Baja and 30 gallons is required. Frist rig was a stretched 96 with 55 gallons including the Aux tank. Second rig is a TJU with the Genright 31-32 gallon main tank replacement. The new rig is a Wrangler 21JL with a 12 gallon aux that mounts between the tailgate and the spare (Not for and EB so installing would be a project – don’t be afraid).
1) Gauges: I used one that was calibrate at first fill. Unlimited points for the memory. Custom digital display was selectable gallons or Liters remaining or quantity or ¼, ½, ¾, full. Worked great for a tank that liquid level was not proportional to liquid height. Common in aircraft tanks and any odd ball tank shape. Most are digital which I do not favor. Anyway, the things are accurate. I chose 2 gal between points on a 30 gallon tank. Make your own adapter to fit the tank. Comes with its custom a digital gauge that will not match you now have. Used that gauge on the 96 aux tank but could be adapted to the main tank which used the Ford stock setup. Other gauges I tried were a waste of time/expense and too had many issues. Most difficult was a Ford float gauge on the 96 AUX tank. I never got the float set correctly. The 96 main tank with stock float had the same issue. I got them close and said enough is enough.
2) Cost: Tank cost is an issue. The 96 was all custom and the cost was extremely high and had several do overs. The aluminum Genriight with steel skid was 32 gal and around 2k and the latest Titan 12 gal aux is around 500. The only setup that did not have significant issues would be Genright. They know how to do it. It uses the stock Jeep float sender so it has the built in inaccuracy and for sure it is not linear.
3) Leaks: None of my custom tanks have the expansion issue, but My 23 gallon EB BCB tank leaks fumes when hot thru my vent. More expansion volume would be good. The 72 EB has a small catch tank so all I get is fumes. A bigger catch tank would help. So, if you leak gas when the tank gets hot consider a 1.5 gallon catch tank. Mount it above the tank so it drains back.


More capacity in this application is so limited in requirement that it is simply not an option to consider. We have addressed a few major items, the first being the 23 gallon tanks hang so low they are ugly and some have had issues off road with departure angles. That is addressed in this design. The next issue was fuel expansion, all of the other manufacturers, though they call their tanks a 23 gallon tank they are actually 22.625 actual capacity. The way the have the filler allows you to pump them almost 100% to capacity and leave no room at all for expansion. 20 gallons at 60° will expand to 20.25 gallons at 80°. We have accounted for this, that is why I have noted the actual capacity is 21.125 gallons and we have it set up to only fill to 20 gallons leaving a minimum of 1 gallon for expansion. This will take care of the issues many have had when they fill up and the pump clicks off and they stop then later in that day they see fuel running out of the filler neck or out of their charcoal canister. All of this has been thoroughly accounted for in this design. The fuel sending unit issue has been battled for years and again it was due to the traditional 23 gallon design and as the level drops it is no longer linear once below a 1/2 tank. Changing to an alternate gauge for in the dash is not feasible as well for both our customers and existing owners who simply do not want to abandon their current gauge. We corrected the problem at the source. I always welcome feedback and criticism but please understand when we are looking at developing a product it needs to cover as many bases as possible and fill the needs for as many as possible. Making something so unique to carry 15 or 20 gallons more for those few that would like that option simply would not cover the costs of R&D. As it is right now between this fuel tank and the new exhaust systems we are developing I have invested an enormous sum that I hope to have a return on soon.
 
Last edited:
Top