Which one is safer? Jerry cans or Rotopax?
- Thread starter Johncmng
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
johnlastunas1995
New member
Jetboy
New member
Safer from what?
Jerry cans are much more durable in terms of abrasion or punctures. I'd bet on a jerry can lasting longer in a fire before rupture. But a Rotopax is probably less likely to leak and won't rust or corrode over time. I don't think either of them really wear out over time if they are maintained. Cheap Jerry cans suck usually. Good ones are expensive.
I personally like the Costco 5 gallon plastic jerry can shape fuel cans. Cheap. Good seals. Easy to pour.
Jerry cans are much more durable in terms of abrasion or punctures. I'd bet on a jerry can lasting longer in a fire before rupture. But a Rotopax is probably less likely to leak and won't rust or corrode over time. I don't think either of them really wear out over time if they are maintained. Cheap Jerry cans suck usually. Good ones are expensive.
I personally like the Costco 5 gallon plastic jerry can shape fuel cans. Cheap. Good seals. Easy to pour.
vipergrhd
New member
I prefer the old school look, since I am in Cali you need to get an EPA approved container. I have seen the Rotopax leaked before but I don't know what caused it, I liked the Scepter or Wavian tanks. Not sure about what you mean which one is safer, I say stay away from China built stuff.
2112 R
New member
Live in Cali as well, local off road house informed me that RotoPax gas containers were harder and harder to get due to the EPA stuff and there was some shipping drama or something that prevented them from getting in any more. I haven't followed up with them on current status, but maybe something to keep an eye on for options in case we have to go out of state.
I spilled more gas with those dam EPA things than when I just used an extra water pour attachment. Never had them leak though when full and hitting the trail.
I use two 2 Gallon RotoPax and use the water spout to refill the gas tank. They can bloat up in the sun, but never had any issues with them.
For really long trips into Death Valley etc I also bring a Wavian 5 Gallon Jerry Can and use a plastic auto siphon to refill the tank as the EPA spout for that is also total crap.
From a safety perspective it all depends on how you have them mounted and exposed. A really solid jerry can holder can almost enclose the entire J can and adds a lot of protection from rocks and other debris.
The RotoPax are pretty exposed and held with the center screw mounts, but are plastic and can take a beating.
OP - What are you specifically worried about regarding the safety?
I was thinking about mounting them on my roof rack and fear it might leak gas onto the roof.
2112 R
New member
Mine are mounted on the roof, I double them up with 2 gal water pax as well.
You can kind of see them in this pic.
As long as you crank down the cap and the seal with the reverse spout is solid they (so far) won't leak, even when I hit the desert and the heat puffed them up a bit with some pressure.
Apologies for the terrible pics, as it's not a direct shot of how they are mounted on the Gobi, but you can get the idea of how they are up there.
This is them without the water
Even in Death Valley with all the camping gear, the jerry can sandwiched between the cases and all the firewood and stuff they never leaked and even with all that weight never had an issue with them up there.
JSparky
New member
I own and use both. Had 8x 4-gallon Rotopax at one point, sold half of them off when I sold my Tacoma because I mainly got them to use with an AllPro bed rack. The Rotopax are super handy for folks who have limited auxiliary fuel carrying capabilities, namely because you can simply strap them down flat on a roof rack. We've done that a few times, on a number of different vehicles that lack rear bumper's with fuel carriers, and never had a problem with leakage (they are advertised that way). Like others said, you have to crank those tops down tight.
I like that Rotopax have a larger area with lots of handles, making them easier to pour solo. That said the CARB fillers they provided for me when I bought them back in 2014-15 are really, really slow, it takes us forever to empty a Rotopax. The Wavian/NATO style tanks I have, with provided CARB fillers, seem to pour faster, although we've never done a timed test. We also mix in non-CARB fillers for the NATO tanks when out of state, so my impressions may be biased.
That said, if I was advising someone on fuel containers, it'd start with where they're planning on storing them, how you'll be storing them, and how often you want to access them.
Rotopax ratchet-strapped to a roof rack can take a lot of time to access and re-secure, I think it's a great solution for the occasional long-distance trip, but not something to be relied upon regularly (it'll get old fast). Rotopax mounted with with Rotopax-branded mounts are much easier, it's a really slick system. NATO cans on the roof in a proper mount, or on a bumper mount, are likewise easy to access. NATO cans are arguably easier simply from the fact that more people are familiar with them. They also stand upright on their own at the gas station, making them easier to fill.
I'd take a big picture look at the overall vehicle build, how often and where the extra fuel will be needed, and then choose. I don't think there's a bad choice here, so long as we're considering a quality NATO-style can.
I like that Rotopax have a larger area with lots of handles, making them easier to pour solo. That said the CARB fillers they provided for me when I bought them back in 2014-15 are really, really slow, it takes us forever to empty a Rotopax. The Wavian/NATO style tanks I have, with provided CARB fillers, seem to pour faster, although we've never done a timed test. We also mix in non-CARB fillers for the NATO tanks when out of state, so my impressions may be biased.
That said, if I was advising someone on fuel containers, it'd start with where they're planning on storing them, how you'll be storing them, and how often you want to access them.
Rotopax ratchet-strapped to a roof rack can take a lot of time to access and re-secure, I think it's a great solution for the occasional long-distance trip, but not something to be relied upon regularly (it'll get old fast). Rotopax mounted with with Rotopax-branded mounts are much easier, it's a really slick system. NATO cans on the roof in a proper mount, or on a bumper mount, are likewise easy to access. NATO cans are arguably easier simply from the fact that more people are familiar with them. They also stand upright on their own at the gas station, making them easier to fill.
I'd take a big picture look at the overall vehicle build, how often and where the extra fuel will be needed, and then choose. I don't think there's a bad choice here, so long as we're considering a quality NATO-style can.
Baystate4Runner
New member
I prefer the Scepter NATO cans - offer the best of both worlds...you can drive a tank over them.
Fuel Canisters - Scepter Military - Civilian
Their complient cans with retarded California standards are crap - the military ones are the ones to get. Have to import them from Canada.
Fuel Canisters - Scepter Military - Civilian
Their complient cans with retarded California standards are crap - the military ones are the ones to get. Have to import them from Canada.
Charlievee
Senior Member
Could look at the surplus stores. They walk away enough. I'm looking for 3 or 4 of the 2.5 gal cans. I have seen them for water, but not fuel. On a side note, how are you guys securing them?
