'28 phaeton fuel capacity

Phred

Phred

Senior Member
Recent discussions about making a "gas stick" to measure actual fuel in the tank has brought to top of mind my confusion/observations about the published 10 gallon capacity of the 28-29 fuel tank.

Attached is a photo of a stick I made to measure the remaining fuel in my 28 phaeton (6-26-28 firewall date). I drained all the available fuel from the tank by disconnecting the fuel line at the carb, attaching a rubber hose to the end of the line, and let gravity drain the tank. I then added fuel one gallon at a time and made marks on the stick after each gallon. I was surprised when I discovered I could get 11 usable gallons into the tank.

Now when there are 11 gallons in the tank, the fuel level is right at the bottom of the filler neck (the tank IS FULL). I would not fill this full and then leave the car parked out in a sunny parking lot on a summer day, but have have topped it this full prior to starting a trip of at least 30 minutes or more.

I have confidence in my data as I have: 1) lost my gas stick and had to make a new one yielding the same results, and 2) have added 10+ gallons to the tank when the gas gauge had been reading a non-bouncing "0" for a while.

So, why the published 10 gallon capacity for 28-29? My thoughts are:

1) The phaeton does have a different cowl and perhaps a different tank than a sedan?

2) With a "properly" adjusted fuel gauge float will the float be hitting the top of the tank at 10 gallons and not be registering beyond "F", even though there is about 5/8" more room to reach the filler neck?

Any factual comments would be appreciated.

Thanks Fordbarn.
 

Attachments

  • Gas Stick.jpg
    Gas Stick.jpg
    74.4 KB · Views: 50
I drove my '28 Phaeton across country four times and the distance between gas stations travelling through the Arizona and New Mexican deserts was an important factor in survival. (I took along a can of gas just in case, of course.) So, I was in tune with how much gas I could cram into the tank. I found the same as you - 11 gallons. I sometimes virtually coasted into a desert town on fumes and was able to put in those 11 gallons, although on a hot day, some gas would bubble out as the gas tank "breathed" in the heat. The gas tanks were all the same in capacity in 1928-29, having nothing to do with the body style.
No matter how well adjusted the Model A's gas gauge is, it is simply too indefinite of an animal to trust implicitly. Use it only as a guide. As long as the gauge bounces, there's gas in the tank. If it sits still in the "E" position, you'd better be finding a gas station REAL soon! :)
Marshall

UPDATE: I wish to add that I had removed the fire arrestor (screen) from the phaeton's gas tank because of the splash-back problems caused by the gas pump nozzle. Filling up every couple hours during a 1500 mile drive made this necessary. I wonder if that made any difference in the tank's maximum capacity? Probably only a negligible difference, if any.
 
Last edited:
.... and Scrooge's extra special tip...fill up early morning when the fuel is cooler and thus more molecules per litre
 
At my ranch I have a 500 gallon Liquid Propane 'Gas' tank to fuel my large household appliances. The most that ever gets put in the '500 gallon tank' is 80%, per U.S. & Calif. mandates. The reason is to allow for expansion of the fuel when subjected to warm days.

I suspect that the same reasoning applies to liquid petroleum gasoline in a '10 gallon' tank.
 
johnbuckley said:
.... and Scrooge's extra special tip...fill up early morning when the fuel is cooler and thus more molecules per litre
Click to expand...

When my Dad and I were on various trips we took together, we would search out country stations that had above ground tanks and fill up early in the morning (before sunrise). When we could accomplish that, gas mileage for that day was terrific.
 
top off tank all the way and I can get 12 Gal's. in my 31 Tudor. You will just be filling over the max. Have fun modelAtony tony white Lafayette, LA
 
I just checked on the internet for gasoline expansion per volume - this probably means pure gas, not crap gas i.e. with alcohol at 10%, but I doubt crap gas would be much different. It is .00053/degree F. That means for a 40 degree change, which is quite a bit as far as temperature change per day is concerned, that is slightly over 2% more gas at the higher temperature (40 degrees increase), not very much. At 15 MPG, that is piddly .3 mpg more if you filled up at the cooler temperature. That would mean you could travel about 3 miles further on a full tank of gas.
Rusty Nelson
 
Sadly, Rusty, we are governed not be reason, logic and facts, BUT by Government mandated bureaus, whose 'facts' are often at odds with reality.
 
There has been another thread recently ("Obtaining the Best Advice" by Mike V in Florida) where there was discussion about the differences between the English spoken by Americans and other English speakers. We have a similar situation here. Thios thread is about the US gallon which is used NOWHERE other than in the US. (Likewise the American ton.)
This talk of getting 10 gallons in a 28/29 tank is confusing. About 8 is more like it - that is, proper imperial gallons.
Is thee any enthusiasm over there for the metric system? The rest of the world has moved on from the old imperial weights and measures.
 
I remember in the 1960's that we in school (in the USA) were told that our country would convert from the old inches/feet/yards/miles and liquids measuring system to the more rational metric system by the 1990's to match the rest of the world. For some reason, it didn't happen, nor have I heard anything seriously discussed about such a change for a long, long time. The metric system makes a whole lot more sense, that's true; but there are just so very many ways that the traditional system has embedded itself into our lives that it would be a mammoth shake-up for people here to make the switch.
The standard argument/joke about such a change to the metric system involves American football. What shall the announcers say henceforth? "It's third down and 1.5 meters to go for a 1st down." ??? That may not sound funny to non-American ears, but it's hilarious to us. Do we change the height of a basketball hoop from exactly 10 feet to 3.048 meters or round it off to 3 meters and change the distance shooting habits of half the kids in the United States? Lots of jokes are possible with this change. But the serious side is that we are out-of-step with the rest of the world and sometimes it bites us.
'Dunno the exact reason why the change to metrics hasn't happened here yet. Maybe part of the "Dumbing Down of America" at work = too stupid to change? Most of the world seems to think along those lines. :(
Marshall
 
Marshall V. Daut said:
I remember in the 1960's that we in school (in the USA) were told that our country would convert from the old inches/feet/yards/miles and liquids measuring system to the more rational metric system by the 1990's to match the rest of the world. For some reason, it didn't happen, nor have I heard anything seriously discussed about such a change for a long, long time. The metric system makes a whole lot more sense, that's true; but there are just so very many ways that the traditional system has embedded itself into our lives that it would be a mammoth shake-up for people here to make the switch.

Marshall, what you say about the conversion to metric causing confusion and upheaval is no different from what the rest of the "old imperial world" went through. Here, it wasn't much of a big deal at all. That was about 45 years ago now and although I was brought up in an imperial world, I have to stop and think (twice) before I use imperial now. I prefer metric by far nowadays. You guys have a head start on what we had - at least your currency is already metric. Ours was the old pound, shillings and pence.:eek:
Click to expand...
 
My insurance company rang me about renewal a few days ago. She said "your 4wd has a 2 inch lift and the wheels are 1 inch bigger aren't they?". I'm sure she was born after metric came in.

Inches and feet are easier to visualise (heck visualize) than several hundred millimeters, but such is life. I gather in the UK the change was made voluntarily years ago and nobody took it up. Here the sale of imperial rulers was banned for about 8 years after the conversion.
 
CarlG said:
When my Dad and I were on various trips we took together, we would search out country stations that had above ground tanks and fill up early in the morning (before sunrise). When we could accomplish that, gas mileage for that day was terrific.
Click to expand...
Times must have been tough! Wayne
 
To answer your question about different size tanks, it is my understanding that all of the '28 / '29 gas tanks are the same with the exception of minor external changes such as the location of the support for the GAV rod. That includes the '28 and '29 Murray and Briggs Fordor sedans and the Cabriolet also use the same tank.

Gar Williams
 
Metrics are like a foreign language to me and make no sense whats so ever. I can't even walk over to my tool box for a wrench W/O bringing back two or three to make sure I have the right size. Metric nuts and bolts sizes are too close together and I have been turning wrenches for a living since they came out on US cars and thread pitches are even worse.
 
Oh, you mean like: That looks like a half inch, is that a 12mm or 15mm or somewhere in between? So you pick out 3 or 4 wrenches and none of them are the correct size. Then you realize that someone really did put a half inch bolt in there!
 
CarlG said:
Oh, you mean like: That looks like a half inch, is that a 12mm or 15mm or somewhere in between? So you pick out 3 or 4 wrenches and none of them are the correct size. Then you realize that someone really did put a half inch bolt in there!
Click to expand...

"That looks like a half inch, but maybe it's a 7/16", 9/16" or somewhere in between? So you pick out 3 or 4 wrenches and none of them are the correct size.

What's the difference? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top