Mini Classifieds

1977 Front Sump 2.3 Oil Pan
Date: 09/14/2018 11:42 pm
78 pinto wagon

Date: 06/04/2020 12:42 pm
need 1978 pinto guage cluster
Date: 03/07/2021 07:35 am
1971 Pinto Parting out

Date: 07/06/2018 01:11 pm
1974 Pinto Right Rear Interior Trim Panel

Date: 02/18/2017 04:44 pm
free transmissions
Date: 11/28/2019 10:21 am
76 pinto sedan sbc/bbc project for sale $1700 obo

Date: 10/27/2018 03:30 pm
1973 Pinto Wagon

Date: 05/06/2022 05:13 pm
Looking for a few parts - TIA
Date: 02/19/2023 12:18 pm

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: 139,599
  • Total Topics: 16,270
  • Online today: 452
  • Online ever: 3,214 (June 20, 2025, 10:48:59 AM)
Users Online
  • Users: 0
  • Guests: 238
  • Total: 238
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.

attempted air conditioning in a turbo pinto

Started by dholvrsn, August 17, 2009, 12:05:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dholvrsn

I let it the wagon year thing with the contractor slide. It would have only got the guy peeved in a moment of joy.

BTW, I believe that the compressor is probably a Nippondenso rebranded as a Ford. If it is, do any of you AC wonks know of any Nippondenso compressors with the mounting ears, a six groove serpentine pulley, and is R134a ready? With reference number or donor vehicle? Thanks!

BTW, still no UPS dude with condenser. Their tracker hasn't updated since last night.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

hellfirejim

I am interested in how this all works out as I have an arizona car that has a/c from the firewall back.  I am missing everything forward of the firewall.
jim
It's a good day to be alive!
PCCA Pinto Number #385


blupinto

Did you remind that contractor that there was no '71 Pinto wagon? lol. I hope your a/c turbo project is a success! How (pardon the pun) cool is that?!
One can never have too many Pintos!

dholvrsn

Still waiting for the UPS man with his brown shorts and my aluminumy condenser. Their office says that their guy is on the route. His surname just seems to be Mister Godot.

During this lull, I did try a sliding bracket and compressor with ear tabs from my parts pile. It fits in the space. Now to find a R-134a variant on that compressor with a six groove serpentine pulley.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

dholvrsn

I read over at TurboFord that the HR980 will run for a year or so filled with R-134a and then will disassemble itself out through the front.  :o

Scratching my head over what to do about the compressor while this project is in a lull waiting on UPS to deliver the condenser. Hopefully I will have some sort of epiphany about what to do about the compressor by the time I get the condenser mounted.

RIght now I'm toying with cutting down the mount for the tangental mount compressor or making a custom one out of ~3/8 plate iron.

I'm reminded about the ordeals that my Dad (Iowa pig farmer) and Grandpa (the Allis Chalmers dealer in Moorhead, Iowa) had with aftermarket air-conditioning in the aftermarket tractor cabs of the '60s and '70s. Pretty kludgy, clunky hang-on stuff that could be temperamental and high maintenance. I wonder how much Dad spent trying to keep cool in the ol' One-Ninety XT over those years, especially adjusted for inflation!

OTOH, AC in the AC!  :afro:
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

71pintoracer

R134a won't hurt it. Just make sure you drain all of the old oil and refill with PAG. The HR980 was a decent compressor. I never use R12 anymore, I convert everything.
If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?

dholvrsn

Is there a bolt-on replacement for the HR980 that can stand R-134a?

And what does happen if you do put R-134a in a HR980?
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

lugnut

FYI, your new compressor is a Tecumseh HR980.  Same as what came in my 1987 Turbo coupe. The prevailing opinion seems to be that it should be used with R-12, and not converted to r134a. I would not let that stop me from using it- there is still lots of R12 out there- check ebay.  I also recently saw brand new HR980 compressors in the Ford box for $130-150.
mike

dholvrsn

The UPS tracker says that my condenser has arrived in my town, but it hasn't made it to my house yet.

Anyway, two contractors were digging up the street in front of my house and one asked if my Pinto was '71. He bragged about how much he loved his '71 wagon with wood decals back in the day.

Cleaned up my compressor bracket and installed it. Also relocated the horn yet again. The first time was to make way for the VAM. Now moved again to make way for the compressor pulleys... I love "rivnuts"!

Cleaned up and painted the compressor. Probably too much work for something that is half likely to get exchanged.

Also spliced in a compressor pigtail on a Merkur meets Pinto meets homemade harness. I like to solder and shrink tube all of this stuff.

For peer review, here is my schematic for the wiring on this. I'm glad that I got most of this done during the initial engine swap. No wonder that swap dragged on.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

dholvrsn

Turns out that the pump and bracket didn't have enough room to fit in the Pinto. Now there was two and a half hours in 95? heat and $50 at U-Pull-It well spent....  >:( However these may work on turbo Pintos with the VAM box mounted on the other side of the fender well.

OTOH. with mixed luck, a weird old T-Bird compressor and bracket that I did have already have laying around did fit despite looking too weird and big. :P Now to clean those up for final mounting.

Update/omake: The old compressor set-up that originally came from the factory.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

dholvrsn

The factory condenser that came out of this car. I dinged it with a die-grinder and took it to a radiator shop to fix the ding. The ding was about the only thing that didn't leak. A more efficient replacement condenser and drier combo is UPSing its way across the US from Nostalgia Air. I was reading about how cars with driers don't have accumulators and that cars with accumulators don't have driers, but this has both. Don't ask me why....

The original factory AC fan and shroud that came out. The fan interfered with the serpentine belts which is partially why I put the electric fan in.

The two electric fans slated for the condenser.

If all those electric fans can't keep up with the heat from the AC and turbo, here's a $5 swap-meet goodie that I picked up yesterday and I may swap in with the factory shroud if it all fits.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

dholvrsn

The electric fan that I am running now, which is the biggest that I could find to fit the factory AC radiator.

The spot where the old piston pump was and where replacement pump is going.

The replacement pump and bracket from a circa '93 2.3 Mustang at the south Omaha U-Pull-It. I will try to install at least the bracket after dinner today.

The original hoses that will either be reused, spliced, or replaced depending.... Note accumulator on the one hose. I'm a newbie at this, so anybody who knows AC hoses please give some advice.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser

dholvrsn

Ladies and Gentleman! Step this way to see this amazing, most logic defying feat! A man will attempt to install air conditioning into the rare and uncommon turbo Pinto! An exhibition rarely attempted in the civilized world! Not for those of the weak constitution!

My turbo setup in a '79 wagon. I could almost say typical turbo Pinto setup, but even though it's been done enough to almost be a cliche, I don't think that any of them are really typical.

The factory in-dash AC that I will be trying to hook the newer stuff to.

The AC manifold with aluminum heat shield. Also the oxygen sensor on the turbo elbow has been relocated.

The two fan relays mounted on the driver's fender well. The rear is for the radiator fan and the front is for the condenser fans.
'80 MPG Pony, '80-'92
'79 porthole wagon, '06-on
'80 trunk model. '17-on
-----
'98 Dodge Ram 1500
'95 Buick Riviera
'63 Studebaker Champ
'57 Studebaker Silver Hawk
'51 Studebaker Commander Starlight
'47 Studebaker Champion
'41 Studebaker Commander Land Cruiser