Fire Prevention

[VETTE1966]

Perhaps this is a bit paranoid but I have been reading about the potential fire hazards that exist with vettes prior to 1967 due to shorts occurring under the top ignition shield (and elsewhere) that ultimately fry the wiring harness and worse (ref DEC 04 & OCT 05 Corvette Enthusiast articles).



These magazine articles suggest using a fusible link at the starter connection. (1967 vettes and thereafter have this or other similar protective devices). In doing further reading, however, fusible links seem to have lost favor to other similar devices, like fusible elements. That’s the extent of my knowledge.



Has anyone had any experience with either? I have seen pictures of fusible elements seemingly mounted on what appears to be the main positive battery terminal connection---anyone done this? I'm looking for a simple (easily replaceable if it blows) fix. Anyone have any better suggestions for protection?



I have a1966 roadster and a good friend of mine had such a fire occur and it nearly destroyed his 1965 roadster. That’s scary. I have a plastic insert under the top ignition shield which affords some comfort but I’d like to add fuse type protection. Any and all advice is appreciated. Thanks.

 

[JohnZ]

The advantage of a fusible link wire vs. a fuse device is that a fusible link won't fail due to a brief/sudden current spike, but a fuse will. The many strands of very fine wire in a fusible link make it act like a very slow-blow fuse.

 

[vette-66]

Pep boys, autozone (and others) have a nice 30 amp device that will work very well as a fuseable link, Take the #10 RED at the starter off and hook the wire to one end of this fuse block and then attach the other end back to the starter, this will protect the harness as all your power starts here.

These blocks have replaceable fuses that "plug in" so replacement should be a snap ( but I would find the reason it blew before replacing )

Hope this helps
Chuck

 

[Kd8pe]

30 amp device ?

Pep boys, autozone (and others) have a nice 30 amp device that will work very well as a fuseable link, Take the #10 RED at the starter off and hook the wire to one end of this fuse block and then attach the other end back to the starter, this will protect the harness as all your power starts here.

These blocks have replaceable fuses that "plug in" so replacement should be a snap ( but I would find the reason it blew before replacing )

Hope this helps
Chuck

wonder what the name of this device is,,?i would also like the part # if possible.
sure cant be to safe with these toys ,,,

thanks

 

[IH2LOSE]

Vette-66 welcome to the forum.


I am also scaired of a fire. But the fuseable links are the way to go as you can hide them real easey and if you did have a problem they are not that hard to replace.

 

[studiog]

This is a timely thread. Tonight I was testing my instrument cluster wiring and had left the main feed terminal end from the starter uncovered under the dash. I had just uncoiled the wiper cable which is also under the cluster. When it uncoiled it struck the hot feed terminal and within a fraction of a second the cable was glowing red hot like a toaster oven. I burned my hand in two places before I was able to disconnect it. The whole thing happened in just a couple of seconds. The first thing I thought of was a fuseable link. It is at the top of my list now! ad

 

[jimbo64]

John, can you give us a little more information on what to buy and where. Assume this comes different sizes. Hookup on the starter post would make sense but not the easiest place to work if you don't have it on a lift. Thanks

 

[JohnZ]

Fusible link wires for GM cars are available blister-packed at just about any auto parts store, with the large ring terminal already attached for connection to the battery cable stud on the starter solenoid (see photo). They come in different wire gauge sizes - you need one four numbers higher than the size of the wire they're going to protect (16-ga. fusible link for a 12-ga. wire, 14-ga. fusible link for a 10-ga. wire, etc.). You don't need all the wire you get - a 6" length will work fine; just splice it to the existing feed wire with a tubular butt connector and cover the joint with a piece of heat-shrink tubing to keep water out. Chevy finally added exactly the same thing in '67, but that main feed wire has zero protection against a dead short on '66 and earlier cars.

 

[studiog]

Thanks John, that photo is worth a thousand words.

 

[VETTE1966]

Thanks to all who replied---I know what I'm buying and doing this weekend.

 

[Wilkinshc]

I was considering using a fusible link after reading this but then I can across this info and it makes me a little scared to try them:

http://www.ronfrancis.com/pic/chart-file14.pdf

any thoughts?


Thanks Chuck

 

[magicv8]

I have the alt lines protected by Stinger fuses, and the starter A-C and harness lines protected by fusible links.

To keep from cutting the harness to install the link, I bolted the fusible link to the harness lug and bolted the other end to the solenoid post (with an add on lug). My wrapped harness is covered by plastic loom and the added fusible link is also encased in a separate reflective plastic loom sealed with heat reflective tape. If the link burns, it should not damage the harness at all. I don't think it can burn through the wrapped loom either.

In addition to harness protection at the alt and starter, I found it necessary to add a fuse to the ignition line at the ballast resistor terminal, since any contact with a ground by any pink harness wire will melt the wire before the fusible link gets warm. (Ask me how I know this - better yet look up a previous post on shielded BB plug wires touching coil terminals.) Although I have Pertronix points replacement electronics, which makes the ballast resistor unnecessary, I use one end of the resistor as a terminal post to connect all the ignition wires.

PS: while I was at it, I replaced the GM starter bracket with a piece of wider stainless that not only holds the front of the starter but shields the wiring from the exhaust manifold heat.

 

[stepinwolf]

I was considering using a fusible link after reading this but then I can across this info and it makes me a little scared to try them:

http://www.ronfrancis.com/pic/chart-file14.pdf

any thoughts?


Thanks Chuck

Chuck,

No comments for now, but I have the exact same apprehensions, after ordering a bunch of stuff that is all protected by these types of links. :ugh

Stepinwolf

 

[magicv8]

Apprehensions are what make us consider fusible links. I try to think of it this way - if you currently have NO protection, the same flame (as pictured above) can occur anywhere in your car that there is a malfunction. The engineers who ordered the links installed in later models thought they were cost effective protection.

If you want hidden harness protection in correct looking wiring, I haven't seen a better solution. If you want top of the line protection, IMO a bank of circuit breakers is the optimal solution. I have two separately wrapped links at my solenoid, but I am considering an (incorrect) upgrade to a bank of Stinger fuses mounted around the heater/A-C area - with a 60ampAGU main on a 6ga wire distributing 3 ways (horn relay, harness lug, and interior accessories) via separate 30ampAGU fuses.
http://www.hifisoundconnection.com/Shop/Control/Product/fp/vpid/1559052/vpcsid/0/SFV/30046/sret/12151213210223218281220223282229284231286227230291222227222223232225228233240233228

If nothing goes wrong with my 66 before winter, changing to fuses and rerouting the solenoid wiring will be something to make winter more fun.

IMO the only thing that's almost as much fun as driving a Corvette is working on one.

 

[Ron Miller]

Chuck,

No comments for now, but I have the exact same apprehensions, after ordering a bunch of stuff that is all protected by these types of links. :ugh

Stepinwolf

I guess I can understand your apprehension, but it would be a much larger flame if the wires shorted without the link and the whole car and garage burned down.:ugh:cry

But, I know where you're coming from!!

 

[Ron Miller]

Fusible link wires for GM cars are available blister-packed at just about any auto parts store, with the large ring terminal already attached for connection to the battery cable stud on the starter solenoid (see photo). They come in different wire gauge sizes - you need one four numbers higher than the size of the wire they're going to protect (16-ga. fusible link for a 12-ga. wire, 14-ga. fusible link for a 10-ga. wire, etc.). You don't need all the wire you get - a 6" length will work fine; just splice it to the existing feed wire with a tubular butt connector and cover the joint with a piece of heat-shrink tubing to keep water out. Chevy finally added exactly the same thing in '67, but that main feed wire has zero protection against a dead short on '66 and earlier cars.

John, did Chevy add any other fusible links or overcurrent protection at any other locations on the '67, or only at the battery cable stud on the starter solenoid? My cars are a '65 & '66, not familiar with all the changes made in '67.

 

[JohnZ]

Yes, they also added 20-ga. orange fusible links where the 16-ga. black/white ammeter sense wire attaches to the horn relay buss, where the 10-ga. red power feed wire connects to the voltage regulator, and where the other 16-ga. black ammeter sense wire connects to the battery cable stud on the starter solenoid. Four in all, including the 14-ga. brown one where the 10-ga. main power feed wire connects to the battery cable stud on the starter solenoid.

 

[studiog]

I was considering using a fusible link after reading this but then I can across this info and it makes me a little scared to try them:

http://www.ronfrancis.com/pic/chart-file14.pdf

any thoughts?


Thanks Chuck

Would be nice to have more info about the conditions and type of link and connections that were used to conduct the experiment.