Ford publicly announced it supported the standard. A car traveling 35 mph struck them from behind, causing the Pinto to burst into flames. A rear-end collision would rip the tube away from the tank and gasoline would pour onto the road.
The larger inline-4 found in the Chevrolet Vega was an innovative, brand new design using an aluminum alloy block and iron head, but needed more development work as initially released. A spark from a cigarette, ignition or scraping metal would do the rest.
Super Stock Magazine found the fit and finish to be "superior" and were impressed with the car overall. Death, mutilation Pinto crashes caused the death and mutilation of occupants after their cars burst into flames after rear-end collisions, according to Wyden in The Unknown Iacocca.
Therefore, Ford did give equal consideration to the interests of each affected party.
People liked the car. The events surrounding the controversy have been described both as a "landmark narrative"  and mythical. Car and Driver magazine warned that by ignoring the foreign assault, the Big 3 were setting themselves up for an American industrial Waterloo.
The Pinto and its Mercury counterpart, the Bobcat, went on to become a top-selling subcompact in America in the early s.
Ford Motor Company[ edit ] On August 10, three teenage girls of the Urlich family of Osceola, Indiana were killed when the Pinto they were in was involved in a rear-end collision.
Many civil suits Civil actions were numerous, expensive and embarrassing. Ford soldin the United States inits first year. Worried about imports Foreign competition had begun to rattle the Big 3 by the late s. Except for the wagons, the taillamps were revised. Cost-benefit analysis is a legitimate tool, which determines the best course of action by comparing the costs and benefits generated through a particular situation.
Only when considering the narrow subset of rear-impact, fire fatalities is the car somewhat worse than the average for subcompact cars. The tooling process was well under way. The fuel tank was completely filled with gasoline rather than partially filled with non-flammable Stoddard fluid as was the normal test procedure.
The attorney prosecuting Ford in the trial "waved in front of the jury the death certificates of the three girls," according to an account by Automotive News.
Ford was a landmark in product liability law as the first time a corporation faced criminal charges for a defective product, and the first time a corporation was charged with murder. These works also reviewed misunderstandings related to the actual number of fire related deaths related to the fuel system design, "wild and unsupported claims asserted in Pinto Madness and elsewhere",  the facts of the related legal cases, Grimshaw vs Ford Motor Company and State of Indiana vs Ford Motor Company, the applicable safety standards at the time of design, and the nature of the NHTSA investigations and subsequent vehicle recalls.
Weights were placed in the nose of the car to help it slide under the Pinto and maximize gas tank contact. The vehicle headlights were turned on to provide a possible ignition source. Ford had the responsibility of providing its customers with the best safety features when using its automobiles.
He noted that fires, and rear-end fires in particular, are very small portion of overall auto fatalities.The cases involving the explosion of Ford Pinto's due to a defective fuel system design led to the debate of many issues, most centering around the use by Ford of a cost-benefit analysis and the ethics surrounding its decision not.
The Ford Pinto is a subcompact car that was manufactured and marketed by Ford Motor Company in North America, Based on standard procedures used to evaluate field reports, Ford's internal recall evaluation group twice reviewed the field data and found no actionable issue.
The Ford Pinto case is mentioned in most Business Ethics texts as an example of Cost-Benefit analysis, yet in those formats any appreciation of the complexity surrounding the issues of such decisions is overly simplified. The Ford Pinto case is today considered a classic example of corporate wrong-doing and is a mainstay of courses in engineering ethics, business ethics, philosophy, and the sociology of white - collar crime.
Running head: FORD PINTO FORD PINTO Insert Name Here Insert Affiliation Here The case of Ford Motor Company producing the Pinto is a clear example of unethical behavior on the part of an automobile manufacturer, where a potentially dangerous product was knowingly released into the market.
Browse used Ford Pinto for sale at killarney10mile.com Research, browse, save, and share from 3 vehicles nationwide.Download