I.m a new member and enjoy gretly all the subjects and all the pinto wisdom on this site, My question you probably have addressed before but perhaps someone will repeat the solution to the pinto gas tank . I.m talking fire and explosion etc. Are there safe tanks? And can the rear body be reinforced so that rear enders dont puncture the tank. I did put a 8 in. rear end in that is smoother than the old stock rear end, I think the bolts on the stock rear must have puctured the tank. Thanks in advance for anyone who can throw some light on this issue. My wife is refusing to ride in the car as it is.
http://www.fordpinto.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=31&topic=5283.0
I think the pinto is as safe as any car of that size and age, I gave up tying to get my wife to ride in mine 3 yrs ago(it has nothing to do with the gas tank)
Funny thing though, My Pinto is in the garage all winter while her minivan sits out in the snow ;D
JOE
A year ago, I purchased two New Old Stock kits for "Recall campaign 293" from Green Sales in Cincinnati. After that, they still had five left.
Do yourself a favor. Get the thing installed. There is no downside to having it, but infinite downside from not having it.
oldcarpierre
I would see if it had it installed already.
Bill
Thanks to everyone who responded to my question. I will check to see if my 77 wagon has the recall fix. From what you all said I do feel better having a wagon. Thanks again for this wonderful Pinto web site!
QuoteI think the pinto is as safe as any car of that size and age, I gave up trying to get my wife to ride in mine 3 yrs ago(it has nothing to do with the gas tank)
It's the other way around for me. I have been trying to get my Pinto to let my wife ride in it.
High_Horse
You all know my theory:))))))
(read signature)
QuoteI will check to see if my 77 wagon has the recall fix
I thought by 74 or 75,they had that gas tank thing all taken care of ???
Joe
jgpinto72
Ford fought the NTHSA until they no longer could. The recall was issued in the summer of 1978.
oldcarpierre
QuoteThe recall was issued in the summer of 1978.
The recall was only for 71-76 Pinto and 75-76 Bobcat. the 77-80 models were built "safe"
Joe
That is because Ford spent 1975, 76, 77 and '78 fighting against recalling the earlier models.
I understand Ford was hesitant (negligent) in the recall, but can we assume 77-80 cars were built "safe"
I was under the impression that it was the fact that the filler tube was fitted into the tank with a rubber grommet as opposed to being welded intigrelly to the tank that made for the crash fire hazard. When the car was rear ended to any extent and the tank moved from position the tube would pop out ( and with the filler hole so close to the bottom of the tank) the tank would begin to spill immediately dispite the ammount of fuel in it. My 77 wagon, which I thought was immune from the fire hazard, I see, still sports the rubber grommet but it is located near the top of the tank. Some say tank hits rearend some say fuel tube grommet. Or does the collision with the rearend pop the tube out kinda like the action of a pop gun?
ColdCase_Horse
Here is what wikipedia has to say. Notice only 27 people ever died in Pinto fires. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Safety_problems
QuoteI see, still sports the rubber grommet but it is located near the top of the tank.
Many cars and trucks use the rubber grommet. I believe the issue was the length of the tube into the tank.
I laugh every time I'm under my car and see that almost 30yr old piece of plastic between the tank and differential.
like that will make a big difference in a 30+mph crash
QuoteNotice only 27 people ever died in Pinto fires.
I'm pretty sure more people were killed in Chevy pick ups but they still make them.
Joe
Quote from: douglasskemp on February 06, 2007, 12:20:12 PM
Here is what wikipedia has to say. Notice only 27 people ever died in Pinto fires. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Safety_problems
Good link!
I will add it to the "collection."
I do like how they say "Over 2 million" made, maybe the are reffering to sedans and H/Bs.
BTW: A Mustang III?
Bill
Yep...Mustang III. I am assuming that is what they were known as when they were first being conceived to replace the Mustang II. When my dad had his old 80 (before I inherited it,) we were going through some old paperwork. It still had the order sheet and original window sticker (or paper since it didn't really stick very well). On the window paper, it was still called a Mustang II, and a Mustang III on the build/order sheet. My grandparents were the original owners, and they sold it to my dad in the 90s. The day we sold it, it had over 260k, and my brother had just finished using it for his driver's license on-the-road test. I want to say that was like 98, but my memory is already starting to go.
I think that most of the problems occurred with the early models, (71/72, and to some extent, 73's), as the 74 and later versions had larger bumpers and the low impact collision shocks, plus a lot more metal attaching them, ( in the rear), to what ever one would call a frame.
I have a 72 Runabout and Bill has seen how I addressed the problem. Trouble is that it added a lot more weight to the rear end. I placed quarter inch wall four inch square tube in the rear of the vehicle. What it replaced was the thickest steel in the whole vehicle, a one and a half inch wide by about two inch piece of quarter inch angle steel.
The bottom bumper bolt attached on the up side and the rear spring shackle attached to the bottom. The angle piece was enclosed in a box of fourteen gauge sheet metal on the underside of the vehicle..
Replacing this with the square tube was a lot of work, but I have more confidence in the rear that I had before. I also fabricated an aluminum fuel cell to replace the side inlet original gas tank. The rear spring shackles now bolt to the bottom of the tube, and both bumper bolts attach to the up side. Not saying that this is the way to go or the best fix,
it's just what I did.
Al