News:

Changes Continue... Scott Hamilton

Main Menu

Mini Classifieds

79 Wagon with many extras
Date: 07/08/2020 04:18 pm
MISC PINTO PARTS

Date: 08/27/2017 10:23 am
McLeod Clutch

Date: 04/12/2017 12:08 pm
1976 Pinto

Date: 10/24/2017 02:00 pm
New front rotors and everything for '74-'80
Date: 08/02/2019 04:18 pm
Pinto Parts Windows & Windshield

Date: 11/12/2020 08:28 pm
Wanted - Offenhauser intake for 2.8l (6097DP)
Date: 01/28/2019 05:15 pm
Interior Parts
Date: 08/07/2017 03:59 pm
1975 rear end, 8 inch, drum brakes, and axles, 3.4 gear.

Date: 11/08/2019 10:01 am

Why the Ford Pinto didn’t suck

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suckThe Ford Pinto was born a low-rent, stumpy thing in Dearborn 40 years ago and grew to become one of the most infamous cars in history. The thing is that it didn't actually suck. Really.

Even after four decades, what's the first thing that comes to mind when most people think of the Ford Pinto? Ka-BLAM! The truth is the Pinto was more than that — and this is the story of how the exploding Pinto became a pre-apocalyptic narrative, how the myth was exposed, and why you should race one.

The Pinto was CEO Lee Iacocca's baby, a homegrown answer to the threat of compact-sized economy cars from Japan and Germany, the sales of which had grown significantly throughout the 1960s. Iacocca demanded the Pinto cost under $2,000, and weigh under 2,000 pounds. It was an all-hands-on-deck project, and Ford got it done in 25 months from concept to production.

Building its own small car meant Ford's buyers wouldn't have to hew to the Japanese government's size-tamping regulations; Ford would have the freedom to choose its own exterior dimensions and engine sizes based on market needs (as did Chevy with the Vega and AMC with the Gremlin). And people cold dug it.

When it was unveiled in late 1970 (ominously on September 11), US buyers noted the Pinto's pleasant shape — bringing to mind a certain tailless amphibian — and interior layout hinting at a hipster's sunken living room. Some call it one of the ugliest cars ever made, but like fans of Mischa Barton, Pinto lovers care not what others think. With its strong Kent OHV four (a distant cousin of the Lotus TwinCam), the Pinto could at least keep up with its peers, despite its drum brakes and as long as one looked past its Russian-roulette build quality.

But what of the elephant in the Pinto's room? Yes, the whole blowing-up-on-rear-end-impact thing. It all started a little more than a year after the Pinto's arrival.

 

Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Company

On May 28, 1972, Mrs. Lilly Gray and 13-year-old passenger Richard Grimshaw, set out from Anaheim, California toward Barstow in Gray's six-month-old Ford Pinto. Gray had been having trouble with the car since new, returning it to the dealer several times for stalling. After stopping in San Bernardino for gasoline, Gray got back on I-15 and accelerated to around 65 mph. Approaching traffic congestion, she moved from the left lane to the middle lane, where the car suddenly stalled and came to a stop. A 1962 Ford Galaxie, the driver unable to stop or swerve in time, rear-ended the Pinto. The Pinto's gas tank was driven forward, and punctured on the bolts of the differential housing.

As the rear wheel well sections separated from the floor pan, a full tank of fuel sprayed straight into the passenger compartment, which was engulfed in flames. Gray later died from congestive heart failure, a direct result of being nearly incinerated, while Grimshaw was burned severely and left permanently disfigured. Grimshaw and the Gray family sued Ford Motor Company (among others), and after a six-month jury trial, verdicts were returned against Ford Motor Company. Ford did not contest amount of compensatory damages awarded to Grimshaw and the Gray family, and a jury awarded the plaintiffs $125 million, which the judge in the case subsequently reduced to the low seven figures. Other crashes and other lawsuits followed.

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suck

Mother Jones and Pinto Madness

In 1977, Mark Dowie, business manager of Mother Jones magazine published an article on the Pinto's "exploding gas tanks." It's the same article in which we first heard the chilling phrase, "How much does Ford think your life is worth?" Dowie had spent days sorting through filing cabinets at the Department of Transportation, examining paperwork Ford had produced as part of a lobbying effort to defeat a federal rear-end collision standard. That's where Dowie uncovered an innocuous-looking memo entitled "Fatalities Associated with Crash-Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires."

The Car Talk blog describes why the memo proved so damning.

In it, Ford's director of auto safety estimated that equipping the Pinto with [an] $11 part would prevent 180 burn deaths, 180 serious burn injuries and 2,100 burned cars, for a total cost of $137 million. Paying out $200,000 per death, $67,000 per injury and $700 per vehicle would cost only $49.15 million.

The government would, in 1978, demand Ford recall the million or so Pintos on the road to deal with the potential for gas-tank punctures. That "smoking gun" memo would become a symbol for corporate callousness and indifference to human life, haunting Ford (and other automakers) for decades. But despite the memo's cold calculations, was Ford characterized fairly as the Kevorkian of automakers?

Perhaps not. In 1991, A Rutgers Law Journal report [PDF] showed the total number of Pinto fires, out of 2 million cars and 10 years of production, stalled at 27. It was no more than any other vehicle, averaged out, and certainly not the thousand or more suggested by Mother Jones.

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suck

The big rebuttal, and vindication?

But what of the so-called "smoking gun" memo Dowie had unearthed? Surely Ford, and Lee Iacocca himself, were part of a ruthless establishment who didn't care if its customers lived or died, right? Well, not really. Remember that the memo was a lobbying document whose audience was intended to be the NHTSA. The memo didn't refer to Pintos, or even Ford products, specifically, but American cars in general. It also considered rollovers not rear-end collisions. And that chilling assignment of value to a human life? Indeed, it was federal regulators who often considered that startling concept in their own deliberations. The value figure used in Ford's memo was the same one regulators had themselves set forth.

In fact, measured by occupant fatalities per million cars in use during 1975 and 1976, the Pinto's safety record compared favorably to other subcompacts like the AMC Gremlin, Chevy Vega, Toyota Corolla and VW Beetle.

And what of Mother Jones' Dowie? As the Car Talk blog points out, Dowie now calls the Pinto, "a fabulous vehicle that got great gas mileage," if not for that one flaw: The legendary "$11 part."

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suck

Pinto Racing Doesn't Suck

Back in 1974, Car and Driver magazine created a Pinto for racing, an exercise to prove brains and common sense were more important than an unlimited budget and superstar power. As Patrick Bedard wrote in the March, 1975 issue of Car and Driver, "It's a great car to drive, this Pinto," referring to the racer the magazine prepared for the Goodrich Radial Challenge, an IMSA-sanctioned road racing series for small sedans.

Why'd they pick a Pinto over, say, a BMW 2002 or AMC Gremlin? Current owner of the prepped Pinto, Fox Motorsports says it was a matter of comparing the car's frontal area, weight, piston displacement, handling, wheel width, and horsepower to other cars of the day that would meet the entry criteria. (Racers like Jerry Walsh had by then already been fielding Pintos in IMSA's "Baby Grand" class.)

Bedard, along with Ron Nash and company procured a 30,000-mile 1972 Pinto two-door to transform. In addition to safety, chassis and differential mods, the team traded a 200-pound IMSA weight penalty for the power gain of Ford's 2.3-liter engine, which Bedard said "tipped the scales" in the Pinto's favor. But according to Bedard, it sounds like the real advantage was in the turns, thanks to some add-ons from Mssrs. Koni and Bilstein.

"The Pinto's advantage was cornering ability," Bedard wrote. "I don't think there was another car in the B. F. Goodrich series that was quicker through the turns on a dry track. The steering is light and quick, and the suspension is direct and predictable in a way that street cars never can be. It never darts over bumps, the axle is perfectly controlled and the suspension doesn't bottom."

Need more proof of the Pinto's lack of suck? Check out the SCCA Washington, DC region's spec-Pinto series.

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 139,600
  • Total Topics: 16,271
  • Online today: 583
  • Online ever: 3,214 (June 20, 2025, 10:48:59 AM)
Users Online
  • Users: 0
  • Guests: 346
  • Total: 346
F&I...more

My Somewhat Begrudging Apology To Ford Pinto

ford-pinto.jpg

I never thought I’d offer an apology to the Ford Pinto, but I guess I owe it one.

I had a Pinto in the 1970s. Actually, my wife bought it a few months before we got married. The car became sort of a wedding dowry. So did the remaining 80% of the outstanding auto loan.

During a relatively brief ownership, the Pinto’s repair costs exceeded the original price of the car. It wasn’t a question of if it would fail, but when. And where. Sometimes, it simply wouldn’t start in the driveway. Other times, it would conk out at a busy intersection.

It ranks as the worst car I ever had. That was back when some auto makers made quality something like Job 100, certainly not Job 1.

Despite my bad Pinto experience, I suppose an apology is in order because of a recent blog I wrote. It centered on Toyota’s sudden-acceleration problems. But in discussing those, I invoked the memory of exploding Pintos, perpetuating an inaccuracy.

The widespread allegation was that, due to a design flaw, Pinto fuel tanks could readily blow up in rear-end collisions, setting the car and its occupants afire.

People started calling the Pinto “the barbecue that seats four.” And the lawsuits spread like wild fire.

Responding to my blog, a Ford (“I would very much prefer to keep my name out of print”) manager contacted me to set the record straight.

He says exploding Pintos were a myth that an investigation debunked nearly 20 years ago. He cites Gary Schwartz’ 1991 Rutgers Law Review paper that cut through the wild claims and examined what really happened.

Schwartz methodically determined the actual number of Pinto rear-end explosion deaths was not in the thousands, as commonly thought, but 27.

In 1975-76, the Pinto averaged 310 fatalities a year. But the similar-size Toyota Corolla averaged 313, the VW Beetle 374 and the Datsun 1200/210 came in at 405.

Yes, there were cases such as a Pinto exploding while parked on the shoulder of the road and hit from behind by a speeding pickup truck. But fiery rear-end collisions comprised only 0.6% of all fatalities back then, and the Pinto had a lower death rate in that category than the average compact or subcompact, Schwartz said after crunching the numbers. Nor was there anything about the Pinto’s rear-end design that made it particularly unsafe.

Not content to portray the Pinto as an incendiary device, ABC’s 20/20 decided to really heat things up in a 1978 broadcast containing “startling new developments.” ABC breathlessly reported that, not just Pintos, but fullsize Fords could blow up if hit from behind.

20/20 thereupon aired a video, shot by UCLA researchers, showing a Ford sedan getting rear-ended and bursting into flames. A couple of problems with that video:

One, it was shot 10 years earlier.

Two, the UCLA researchers had openly said in a published report that they intentionally rigged the vehicle with an explosive.

That’s because the test was to determine how a crash fire affected the car’s interior, not to show how easily Fords became fire balls. They said they had to use an accelerant because crash blazes on their own are so rare. They had tried to induce a vehicle fire in a crash without using an igniter, but failed.

ABC failed to mention any of that when correspondent Sylvia Chase reported on “Ford’s secret rear-end crash tests.”

We could forgive ABC for that botched reporting job. After all, it was 32 years ago. But a few weeks ago, ABC, in another one of its rigged auto exposes, showed video of a Toyota apparently accelerating on its own.

Turns out, the “runaway” vehicle had help from an associate professor. He built a gizmo with an on-off switch to provide acceleration on demand. Well, at least ABC didn’t show the Toyota slamming into a wall and bursting into flames.

In my blog, I also mentioned that Ford’s woes got worse in the 1970s with the supposed uncovering of an internal memo by a Ford attorney who allegedly calculated it would cost less to pay off wrongful-death suits than to redesign the Pinto.

It became known as the “Ford Pinto memo,” a smoking gun. But Schwartz looked into that, too. He reported the memo did not pertain to Pintos or any Ford products. Instead, it had to do with American vehicles in general.

It dealt with rollovers, not rear-end crashes. It did not address tort liability at all, let alone advocate it as a cheaper alternative to a redesign. It put a value to human life because federal regulators themselves did so.

The memo was meant for regulators’ eyes only. But it was off to the races after Mother Jones magazine got a hold of a copy and reported what wasn’t the case.

The exploding-Pinto myth lives on, largely because more Americans watch 20/20 than read the Rutgers Law Review. One wonders what people will recollect in 2040 about Toyota’s sudden accelerations, which more and more look like driver error and, in some cases, driver shams.

So I guess I owe the Pinto an apology. But it’s half-hearted, because my Pinto gave me much grief, even though, as the Ford manager notes, “it was a cheap car, built long ago and lots of things have changed, almost all for the better.”

Here goes: If I said anything that offended you, Pinto, I’m sorry. And thanks for not blowing up on me.

gerard
xx Wanted: Front Valance for 1980 Pinto
July 12, 2013, 11:11:15 PM
by gerard
I am looking for a Front Valance for a 1980 Ford Pinto Wagon and if anybody knows where one is give me a call at 301-904-6491 or email me at kmckay@md.metrocast.net
Thanks Kevin
0 comments | Write Comment
Starliner
xx 3:55 gearing, best option to change gearing for gas mileage & X-way
November 08, 2006, 08:08:32 PM
by Starliner
I have a 1973 1600 stick Pinto with 23,000 original miles.   I am now using it as a daily driver and racking up the miles fast.  I travel 108 miles a day through the rough & tumble roads of Detroit.  I get 29-35 miles per gallon with 80% of my drive on the freeway using BP 87 gas.  No spark knocking even under load even with a 195 T-stat.  I am surprised of the good gas mileage because the motor really buzzes.  It is running somewhere around 3400 RPM at 65 mph.   What gear ratios are available that would fit into my existing axle housing?   Right now it is a 3:55

2nd question:
I may try taller tires, but that sure would screw up my cornering and only make a slight gear ratio change.  If I do,  where can I find a selection of stick shift speedometer gears to compensate for the tire diameter change. 

Sidenote:  Next week I will be adding a NOS electric fan assembly from a Tempo.  $23.00  ...
27 comments | Write Comment
miked1989
xx few questions about smog in california
May 23, 2009, 01:13:33 PM
by miked1989
so i have these headman headers and am wondering if anyone else in California have headers on there pintos or just stock exhaust manifold.

are any headers street legal in California?

was a vacuum amplifyer used on a 77 2.3l?

3 comments | Write Comment
LongTimeFordMan
xx Fuel starvation in 73 wagon
November 26, 2019, 09:31:02 PM
by LongTimeFordMan
About a week ago my wagon began to have a fuel starvation  problem.

Originally oem fuel pump, stock 32/36 holley webber carb.

I was driving along in town and suddenly the car just quit with 3/4 tank of fuel i had just topped.tank off.

Limped.into a parking lot and discovered that the fuel filter between fuel pump and carb was empty and only bubbles were comming into the filter no fuel sort of like vapor lock but ambient temp was only about 70 farenheit.

Ive had no previous problems with vapot lock even in 100 temps in city driving.

Fiddled.with the hoses, blew thru the filter, blew into the carb inlet hose, blew into fuel.supply pipe and all were clear but the pump wouldnt pump anything.

After about an hour the car started and i was able to drive about 5 miles and same thing.

Replaced the fuel pump and stull no fuel at pump outlet.

Fiddled about an hour and car started but with very weak fuel  ...
8 comments | Write Comment
Leah_Scotia
xx 1978 Pinto carburetor - HELP PLEASE!
September 11, 2012, 10:31:25 PM
by Leah_Scotia
Hey there,
I recently purchased a 1978 Pinto 4-cyl 2.3L automatic & have done a lot of work on it but I think I really just need to replace the entire carburetor.  However, I'm not exactly sure of what model I need.  I think it is a 5200 Autolite or Motorcraft, 2-barrel, but can't seem to find one on eBay. I found a Holley listing, as follows:

*New Holley 2bbl carburetor (r8303) CA1981 is tagged Motorcraft D8EE-ama. This carb replaces several different number carbs and is listed as fitting

    1978 Ford Mustang  and Pinto with 2.3l 2300cc 140cu in 4cyl manual transmission*

Does it make any difference if it is an auto or manual for the carburetor & does this seem like the correct part that I need?
Thanks so much for any of your help!  I'm looking forward to getting this orange beast moving again.

-Leah
11 comments | Write Comment

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40

Attention Stampeders and Newcomers,

The Pinto Stampede will join up and meet Friday March 1st at the Concourse De Lemons, 14 North Fletcher Avenue Fernandina Beach, FL 32034.

The show runs from 1:00-5:00 pm. So you cand rive in the morning, enjoy the show. Hang out with the other Pintos and head back

...

Read More

1 Comment

The Chattanooga Motorcar Festival is inviting examples of under appreciated cars to participate in the main concours on Oct. 15, 2023. Take part in a real, live fancy schmancy concour and share your love of the Pinto with the concours crowd.

BONUS – Concours entrants get two 3-day tickets to the event,

...

Read More

0 Comments

"Carlisle Pennsylvania - Pigeon Forge Tennessee"

Final call for the Stampede,

I am doing the final numbers, and if you want to join in, there is still time, if you want to meet up because we are in the neighborhood, just let me know and I'll tell you when we are passing through and you can ride with us
...

Read More

0 Comments

We need more Pintos to overcome the Mavericks, so we can have an awesome police-escorted parade of Pintos!

It's in August 13, 2022, and here's the flyer:

https://carcruisefinder.com/ohio-car-shows/event/pinto-vs-maverick-car-show-challenge-2022/

Hope to see you there! Happy Motoring!
Dan

...

Read More

1 Comment

We are a week and a couple of days from Carlisle '22. I am planning on bringing my Pinto and some spare parts down to the Ford Nationals. I am hoping to see some if not all, some of the fine folks that I met on the 50th Pinto Stampede. Norm has assured me that this show and swap meet are one of the favorites

...

Read More

1 Comment
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40