The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network - View Single Post

**Dan in Pasadena** · 11-06-2009, 07:26 PM

Derider,
Which of the linked kits are you talking about?

I like the Summit kit (for my '46) admittedly because it is smaller and more likely to fit in my narrower frame. I also like that its a fuel cell (plastic) so more rupture resistant and cannot rust like the galvanized tanks eventually will. It also has the GM/Universal sender mount that uses the 5 perimeter bolts instead of the locking ring like the Quanta and the ClassicParts one do.

I have a Ford tank (from SOME car, not sure which) between my frame rails now with no sending unit in it. But the gauges I got from Chev's of the 40's came with the GM/Universal type.

Also, does anyone know if the 0-90 ohm senders/5 bolts are standard to GM type senders and the 0-30 ohm senders are standard to the Ford/lock ring type senders, or am I oversimplifying?

11-06-2009, 07:26 PM	#8
Dan in Pasadena Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Glendora, CA Posts: 6,336	Re: Underbed gas tanks...yes again Derider, Which of the linked kits are you talking about? I like the Summit kit (for my '46) admittedly because it is smaller and more likely to fit in my narrower frame. I also like that its a fuel cell (plastic) so more rupture resistant and cannot rust like the galvanized tanks eventually will. It also has the GM/Universal sender mount that uses the 5 perimeter bolts instead of the locking ring like the Quanta and the ClassicParts one do. I have a Ford tank (from SOME car, not sure which) between my frame rails now with no sending unit in it. But the gauges I got from Chev's of the 40's came with the GM/Universal type. Also, does anyone know if the 0-90 ohm senders/5 bolts are standard to GM type senders and the 0-30 ohm senders are standard to the Ford/lock ring type senders, or am I oversimplifying?