Talk:Ford Pinto
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Who designed the Pinto
The article credits Lee Iacocca for the car. At the time of its design, he was in charge of the Ford Division -- clearly responsible for executive oversight, but too high up to be the real design, engineering, or product planning force. I am trying to research who else was involved. He clearly was the leading executive sponsor, however. Paulmeisel 02:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if you follow the link to the Grimshaw case, it was Justice Tamura who credited Iacocca. Of course, that could be incorrect, since there may be other evidence as to the management of the vehicle's design and production that didn't come into the trial for whatever reason (there are a lot of ways to exclude evidence). If you find a source with more detail than the Grimshaw case, be bold! --Coolcaesar 20:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- the link for the Grimshaw case is no longer active, but here is a good URL http://online.ceb.com/CalCases/CA3/119CA3d757.htm use it how you will, hope it helps... Shane198three@aim.com Email | AOL Instant Messenger Shane198three 06:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
My father worked on the Pinto as well as the Mustang. He always blamed Iacocca for the Pinto and thought he took too much credit for the Mustang. The Pinto was built based on his specification that it would cost $1000. Someone else says $2000, but that's probably what they sold it for originally. The Mustang was actually a lower profile project to redesign the Falcon. Of course, Iacocca did not want to take credit for the Pinto. My family had a Mustang and a Pinto. In the mid-70s they weren't that different, which Iacocca probably had something to do with also. Come to think of it those Chyrsler K-cars were junk heaps as well. The only people that bought them were true patriots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.237.189 (talk) 21:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thrifting
Iacocca had a policy known as "Thrifting", the act of economizing a cars design to increase profit. This may help explain the pintos early design problems. Iaccocas' plan called for a car waighing 2000 lbs for $2000.00. I once owned a 78 Pinto, waighing 2700 lbs, the difference being additional quarter panel supports, stronger rear fram members, and a plastic shield installed between the gas tank and the diffrential. Mine had the 2.3 coupled to a C-3 automatic and was an outstanding performerrandazzo56
I removed the paragraph about the Firestone/Bridgestone tires. Totally irrelevant to this article. BTW, I drive a 1975 Mercury Bobcat SW daily that has over 600,000 miles on it. It has become a very rare car these days. -Elaich 06:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Popular Culture
The Pinto, along with the Yugo, AMC Gremlin, AMC Pacer, and chevy vega, enjoys a reputation of being an American symbol for a "cheap economy car" or "cheapness", and the Pinto has made its way into popular culture because of this. Also, its reputation for being unsafe is frequently lampooned. Examples include:
I'm not sure how, in either of these productions, the car's "cheapness" or unsafe design is "lampooned." Other references are a bit more obvious.
In a Nash Bridges episode aired in 1996, the superstitious character played by Barry Bonds hires Nash and Joe to recover his Pinto, which was taken from him by an angry girlfriend. The Pinto blows up from a fuel leak (after being driven through a wall).
-
- Best example is in the Zucker, Abrahams and Zucker comedy film Top Secret where an East German police jeep hits the back of a Ford Pinto so lightly the bumper reverberates with a high pitch "ting!", but the Pinto subsequently explodes. Kransky 14:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pinto v. Mustang
The part about nobody investigating Mustangs for explosions and fires is actually wrong. 60 Minutes did an investigation of Mustangs in the early 2000s.
[edit] 1971 to 1981
The Pinto was sold from 1971 through 1981. Major changes were made to the Pinto in 1974 as part of the Mustang II project. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 03:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] 2010 Ford Pinto
References, anyone? It's mentioned in the article.WKPDX 03:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Ford Pinto Memo" link
The contents of the Gary Schwartz law review paper make it pretty clear that the link used for the "Ford Pinto Memo" is to a pretty specious page with a professor's factually incorrect, hearsay account of the memo. I'm not sufficiently Wikipedia-savvy to know the best way to fix it, but it really needs a better source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.85.249 (talk) 02:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I second the motion to substantiate sources such as this. I and others in related forums for years have never seen any substantive proof of this memo or it's contents. In reference is the following statement:
"The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case
Gary T. Schwartz, 43 Rutgers L. Rev. 1013 (1991)
The case of the Ford Pinto, and its alleged tendency to explode in rear-end collisions, provided the occasion for what is universally hailed as our product liability system's finest triumph. Everyone knows that Ford engineers realized the car was defective but decided (in a smoking-gun memo unearthed by trial lawyers) that it would be cheaper to pay off death claims than to change the design. There’s just one problem: what "everyone knows" turns out to be false."
Please make note in the article that the referenced item needs substantiation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.38.103 (talk) 23:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
