Mini Classifieds

Front sump oil pan
Date: 01/02/2017 06:54 pm
Wanted Type 9 5spd Transmission
Date: 07/04/2017 03:26 pm
1971 ford pinto items for sale

Date: 08/03/2017 07:40 pm
2.3 carb intake

Date: 07/15/2020 09:25 pm
Mallory Unilight dist 2.0
Date: 10/25/2019 03:44 pm
wanted a 1979 Pinto or Bobcat front valance
Date: 03/17/2019 10:15 pm
Dumping '80 yellow Pinto

Date: 06/21/2017 03:45 pm
Seeking 1971-1973 Rotors
Date: 04/08/2021 12:23 pm
Front Body parts needed
Date: 02/09/2018 06:09 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: 139,593
  • Total Topics: 16,270
  • Online today: 445
  • Online ever: 3,214 (June 20, 2025, 10:48:59 AM)
Users Online
  • Users: 0
  • Guests: 327
  • Total: 327
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.

Pinto reproduction parts - let's poll!!

Started by popbumper, February 03, 2008, 05:15:19 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

77turbopinto

It would take me less time to list the parts that I don't think should be reproduced.

That being said, and at the risk of sounding like a pessimist, I think that everyone that posts what parts they would like made should also state what THEY would be willing to PAY for them. One example: By far, the cheapest prices for floor pans, and floor patch panels that I have ever seen are the ones for early Stangs: $30. to $90. (depending on Y/M and size of the panel). I am sure this is based on the number of parts sold, and I doubt that the same parts for a Pinto would ever meet that demand or be that low cost. More 'food for thought': It has been stated that a quarter skin for a H/B-Sedan can be purchased right now for about $185. each, but similar ones for an early Mustangs have a price range from $60. to $115. depending on the Y/M (BTW: MOST are well under $100.). Looking at this relationship, one might assume it might hold true for other parts as well.

IMHO: Just because a part is 'reproduced' does not mean that the 're-pop' will be any cheaper than an NOS one of the same; in some cases I would count on them being much higher priced.

Am I saying we (anyone) should not seek out suppiers and manufacturers? NO, NOT AT ALL! I just hope that everyone has a reasonable expectation of what this items MIGHT cost.


Bill
Thanks to all U.S. Military members past & present.

rkk

Grilles
Wheel trim moulding(chrome)
Steering wheels
Chrome trim and emblems
Headliners that work.  I have replaced mine, but they are hard to fit in.  When I replaced the one in my AMX they make a nice ABS plastic one that pops in and you can line it with material if you would like.  Makes the process a lot easier than the rod and material style.

This is the stuff I have had a hard time finding in good shape.
1976 TURBO PINTO
1969 AMC AMX not a pinto, but I like it, fast for not being a FORD (It's different just like a PINTO)

dave1987

1. Floorpans
2. Cluster gauge bezels
3. Radio Bezels
4. Door panels
5. Steering Wheels
6. Dash Pads
7. Interior Panels of all Kinds
8. Exterior repair Panels of all Kinds
9. Steel fuel line of exact fit.
10. Battery Trays
11. Turn Signal and Brake Lenses
12. Turn Signal Cams

I would say the things I would like to see the most out of my list would be 1, 2, 5, 10, 11 and 12. Very hard things to find in good condition and for a reasonable price, even used. Regardless of year, every restoration would be easier if parts for our Ponies were more available.
1978 Ford Pinto Sedan - Family owned since new

Remembering Jeff Fitcher with every drive in my 78 Sedan.

I am a Pinto Surgeon. Fixing problems and giving Pintos a chance to live again is more than a hobby, it's a passion!

bobscat

wow, I really hope that everyone gets in here and offers their input.  I couldn't agree more that us Pinto guys are kinda "left hung out to dry" when it comes to restoration parts.  Especially when you visit a sight claiming to have "hard to find" parts, and yes they are for older cars, but they are for all the older cars that everyone else supplies parts for.  This kinda goes without being said, but yes, patch panels are definitely a must in my book.  There are too many Pintos sitting around with weeds growing up around them, and though it is nice to score one of these at any given time, very few are "cancer" free, or even left with minor rust for that matter.  lower door skins, quarters, fenders, and hoods, not to mention seals, would be a godsend to most of us trying to fix up our little ponies.  And when it comes to what years, I would have to say the earlier end and the later end seem to be the most popular, but to say that leaves out the guys with other years and then they are still stuck in the same boat.  It sure would be nice to see parts made for all years, but than again, not sure what the demand would be.  Just my thoughts as I initially read this,  so I guess in essence I am trying to say my vote is on door skins, quarters, hoods and fenders for 79-80's. 

TIGGER

I myself am after Wagon weatherstripping.  Gaskets for the popout windows.  Gaskets for the fixed side windows and finally a rear hatch window gasket.  My original ones have shrank thru the years and the pass side fixed leaks some when it rains.  I am pretty good about making sure it gets cleaned up before it spreads.  I have been fortunate enough to find all but one piece (the piece that leaks) but I am hesitant to use any of them for fear of them being the last ones on earth. 

Doug, I think Dennis Carpenter is reproducing the clips for the wagon popout windows.  What I need are ones for the HB / Sedan.
79 4cyl Wagon
73 Turbo HB
78 Cruising Wagon (sold 8/6/11)

apintonut

74 hatch soon to be turbo 2.3
73 sedan soon to be painted
stiletto parts(4 sale)
79 pinto wagon & beentoad
wtb 75 yellow w/ black int. (rally?) like profile pic.

hellfirejim

I agree with parts mentioned but as I statedin the other thread, we need toget the rt front inner panel under the battery box.  The really seem to rust there.  Alro the battery box itself.  Nor rhar would be a good start.
jim
It's a good day to be alive!
PCCA Pinto Number #385


douglasskemp

**UPDATED** 2/5/2008  Do realize of course that just because I am willing to pay these prices, this does not mean I could pay these prices at this moment, and these are for BRAND NEW parts, not refurbished or rebuilt. **BTW, I have been looking into mold making, specifically with urethane and epoxy plastics.**

I will give a list of parts that typically A) Are damaged on EVERY car, and B) Are hard to find replacements for unless one is right in lady luck's pocket, or has deep pockets for the occasional evilBay score.

1. Door sills **50-100 a pair** (the aluminum trim piece that covers the edge of the carpet--This is usually worn due to the door hinge pins drooping & the heavy Pinto doors rubbing there upon closing the door.)
2. Battery trays. **50-100** (Need I say more?)
3. Gauge Cluster housing **40-80** (the white plastic piece that actually supports the gauges.  They get old and crumble to nothingness.  And YES I do know that there are at least four different styles)
4. The little plastic piece that goes on the hinges for the popout windows on a wagon. **Dennis Carpenter may be making these** (The wagon guys know exactly what I mean)
5. Emergency Brake handle cover/gasket. **40-80** (This would be two parts, the rubber gasket and the plastic cover as well.)
6. Sway bar end links **THANK YOU EVERYBODY THAT SENT ME THE LINK FOR THIS** (or at least the lower bushing...and if anyone knows where to find these, PLEASE let us know)
7. 2.3 oil pan. **60-120** (how many times have I tried to find one that didn't have a dent in it from running into a curb.)
8. Gas tank sending unit **60-120** (although from what I understand, you can use one from an early Mustang for the early cars, and one from a Fox Mustang for the later cars...but don't quote me on that)
9. Center caps **60-120** (both for the aluminum wheels, and the styled steel wheels.)

The following are just things that would be nice to see, even though I believe they will most likely not be reproduced.
10. Battery hold down **25-50** (not just a generic 'one size-fits all' please)
11. Wide wheelwell trim. **200-400 complete set** (both round and square fender styles)
12. Lenses. **varies, depending on year, size and type** (all of them...front, rear, side, all years...yes it's a pipe dream, but hey...you asked.)

Notice, of course, that I did not say anything about rust panels.  I DO think that rust panels, especially patch panels for the rockers, lower door skins, the lower rear quarters and the lower front fenders SHOULD be made for our cars.  Floor pans would be nice, as I am sure there are guys with rusted floors that would like something better than an "eh, that's close enough" fix.  Sure, they are not that hard to replace with some flat steel, or a panel out of another model (Mustang guys have it good!) but it is still going to look like it was replaced by something 'not quite right'.  I am one of the very fortunate few with very little, if any, rust issues, but I also know that I am in the VERY small minority.  I also want to keep as many of these little jewels on the road as we can.

--Doug
The Pinto I had I gave to my brother. The car was originally my mom's, (78 red Pinto sedan with a 2.3 and a 4spd.) I am originally from Tucson, AZ but moved to Oxnard CA :D
I'm looking for a Pinto wagon with an automatic.

fastbak390

Upper window felts
Rear window gasket for trunk models

1971 Trunk 2.0 - (mostly) AK Miller Turbo Setup

Pintony

Chris

PS - My list?
1) Floor pans = My vote
2) Dash pads =already done Just dashes EXPENSIVE
3) Quarter patch panels =already done. EXPENSIVE
4) Grilles = Which year do you make first there are 5 different ones not counting Bobcat...???
5) Door sills. =This would be nice... Who makes them for other companys???
6) Interior mouldings (these seem to always be beat) =What year???
7) Chromed plastics = Re-chrome would be cheaper than NEW

popbumper

Hi again:

  A few days back I mentioned I had found a manufacturer for Pinto reproduction parts, but said "metal" only. OK, let's bust this open even further, and say "repro parts in general"...not just metal.

  The question is this - if YOU could have a "wish list" of up to ten possible Pinto reproduction parts, what would they be, first to last? Floor pans? Panels? Hoods? Custom parts? Door rubber? Interior parts? Trim pieces? Bumpers?

  NAME them! I am trying to spearhead this effort, this is a REAL question, the Pinto folks need to step forward and get this stuff made. Details will follow as long as the inputs come forward. I have heard plenty of the arguments about pricing/demand, etc., and that's not my concern at this point. Speak up and be heard.

  This is a golden opportunity. Other car collector groups have access to vast numbers of repro parts. As the Pinto fan base continues to increase (and it is), doesn't it make sense that we should also have access to parts to allow us to restore these fine cars? Waiting on your lists.......please......

Chris

PS - My list?
1) Floor pans
2) Dash pads
3) Quarter patch panels
4) Grilles
5) Door sills
6) Interior mouldings (these seem to always be beat)
7) Chromed plastics
..etc......
4)
Restoring a 1976 MPG wagon - purchased 6/08