User:Sable232/CVPI

The following is the Fuel Tank Safety section of the Crown Vic article as of May 17, 2006:

Fuel tank safety concerns

{{POV}} While the car has been highly rated for safety, there was some controversy and lawsuits in the 1990s over the car's gas tank leaking after certain types of high energy impacts, specifically when being hit at a certain angle offset in the rear at speeds greater than 85 mph (137 km/h). However, the safety ratings are still higher than most other American vehicles at this price point. In fact the survival rate for these type of collisions was higher than any other mid-sized sedan, which perform worse due to their much lighter construction, lower weight, and shorter distance for a crumple zone. In the case of the Crown Victoria, it is a combination of factors including a number of different traits, such as the nature and position of the gas tank, and the unique circumstances of the car crashes - namely at speeds of over the legal limit - something most civilians would never be subjected to. There are very few, if any, reports for this fire problem when struck at ordinary speeds.

The condition may have been exacerbated by police equipment installers drilling over the package tray in the luggage compartment. Due to the gas tank's orientation, drilling through the package tray may result in drilling into the gas tank. The equipment installers would then install bolts that go into the gas tank and can cause sparking in an accident. Ford's solution in the form of a recall kit includes appliques to mark unsafe areas to drill in the luggage compartment, as well as a rear differential cover shield, and rear shock lower bolt shields.

It is interesting to mention the contents of the recall kit because they can be found on early 1980s Fords. Ford used polymer shields on the gas tank facing the rear differential covers. Ford also used polymer shock bolt covers for the lower mounts on the rear shocks. These items were removed on later models, however. Further, many investigations, both performed by federal/state agencies, and the police department themselves, have found that items in the trunk were improperly stowed - which became tank-piercing projectiles when impacted at high speeds. Ford's immediate reaction was to offer a Kevlar-lined trunk-storage unit, and distribute training as to the proper (and improper) stowage procedures for trunk materials. Lastly, for 2005 and newer models, Ford offers the first-ever, on-board fire-suppression system for the Crown Victoria Police Interceptor units, which effectively choke any fire on-board when detected.

Even though this model of the Crown Victoria has been criticized for this type of rear end collision, the civilian Panthers all have the same "flaw" and Ford refuses to address this problem on all the models. It should also be noted then every other car on the road has the same "flaw", but civilians do not routinely park on the shoulder of high speed interstate highways, where they would be subject to a collision that can cause a fuel tank to erupt. Fire related police fatalities are no higher than those for the Chevrolet Caprice. See Numbers Don’t Damn Crown Vic.

Despite numerous court cases charging Ford with partial liability for fires caused in accidents, the company has never been convicted. An attempted class-action suit in Belvidere, Illinois in 2004 failed as well. Although the company has avoided financial responsibility for the fires, the components found in Ford's fuel tank safety kits have been in use with Ford vehicles since the early 1980s as evidenced in the 1980-1982 Ford Thunderbird that has a polymer differential cover shield and lower shock mount shields to prevent the fuel tank from contacting those areas.

This is the same section as of November 13 2006:

Fuel tank safety concerns

{{npov}} {{Unreferenced|date=January 2007}} While the car has been highly rated for safety, there was some controversy and lawsuits in the 1990s over Ford Crown Victoria gas tank leaks after certain types of high energy impacts, specifically when being hit at a certain angle offset in the rear at speeds greater than 85 mph (137 km/h). These impacts did cause fuel tank failures in the Crown Victoria. However, the impacts also caused similar failures (and at higher rates) in other popular law enforcement models such as the Chevrolet Impala. For comparison, the survival rate for these type of collisions was higher for the Crown Victoria than any other current mid-sized sedan, which perform worse due to their much lighter construction, lower weight, and shorter distance for a crumple zone.

The reports that the cars were more prone to fires during a rear collision was a simple combination of three things. First, most law enforcement agencies rely heavily on the Vic as their primary vehicle, meaning that any police-related auto accident is very likely to involve a Crown Victoria. Second, the accidents occurred as the result of the officers intentionally parking their vehicles close to active traffic to shield a stopped motorist - something most civilians would never do. Third, the impacting vehicle was often traveling at, or above, the posted legal limit (70-75 mph in most jurisdictions).

The condition was exacerbated by police equipment installers drilling over the package tray in the luggage compartment. Due to the gas tank's orientation, drilling through the package tray may result in drilling into the gas tank. Installers also used screws set directly into the bulkhead and facing the fuel tank. In the event of a high-energy collision, these screws could be forced into the tank, both rupturing the tank and possibly acting as a spark source. Long bolts for mounting heavier equipment were also directly suspect. Further, many investigations, both performed by federal/state agencies, and the police department themselves, have found that removeable items in the trunk were improperly stowed. These items became tank-piercing projectiles during the rear-collision scenarios. Ford's solution came in the form of a recall kit including patterns to mark unsafe areas (to drill) in the luggage compartment. Also included were rubberized kevlar and hard ballistic nylon shields for the differential cover lower shock bolts. They also included a kevlar-based trunk liner. Ford used similar kits on early-1980s model passenger vehicles. For 2005 and newer models, Ford offers the first-ever on-board fire-suppression system for the Crown Victoria Police Interceptor units, which effectively choke any fire on-board when detected.

The problem, for all intents and purposes, ceases to exist when the vehicles are struck at ordinary speeds and in conditions most motorists face. In fact, police fatalities were no higher in the Crown Victoria than the Chevrolet Caprice.[1].

Despite numerous court cases charging Ford with partial liability for fires caused in accidents, the company has been exonerated and the "average Joe" safe nature of the Crown Victora reconfirmed. An attempted class-action suit in Belvidere, Illinois in 2004 failed as well.

The way I see it, it seems as though there are some people, as shown by the more recent version, who feel that this section of the article is awful and not NPOV if it doesn't consider Ford an evil organization. Then there's the other side, which turned the old version into the new, who realize that there is little in the way of blame to be thrown around. I personally believe the current version is about as NPOV as it's going to get. --Sable232 21:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)