Fire Risk? Even a Pinto has to be hit in the back.....

The Pinto got a bad rap. It was no more dangerous than other small cars of the era.

I had read: The big settlement in question involved two girls who just filled up their Pinto on a foggy night in Indiana, they forgot to put the gas cap back on, so they stopped in the middle of the road to put the cap on. A driver of a work van behind them dropped a doobie, and bent down to pick it up. He rear ended the Pinto at highway speed and gas spewed every where , causing the flareup.
 
Not really a big deal nor a major concern.
I mean, judging by all the dirty, peeling paint Hondas that I see on the road, few....if any.....wash their cars.
 
And Ford calculated the cost of sending Roses to the funeral as part of their cost decision as to whether or not to fix them or pay for the BBQ.....
 
Agent2006 said:
sailsmen wrote: And Ford calculated the cost of sending Roses to the funeral as part of their cost decision as to whether or not to fix them or pay for the BBQ.....


https://users.wfu.edu/palmitar/Law&Valuation/Papers/1999/Leggett-pinto.html

I think the general cost calculator tool was not intended to be the final word ...a YES/NO on a specific design decision. (Buy your kids a big panther, and you won't have to worry as much!)
Click to expand...
Tell that to the police cruisers that were bursting into flames after being rear-ended. Better get your kids a 2003+ panther
 
"In 2001, Ford learned that a specific component – small tabs on the U-brackets attaching the rear stabilizer bar to the axle -- was contributing to a high incidence of post-impact fuel-fed fires in Crown Vics. In a crash the stabilizer bracket tabs are pushed forward into the tank and punctures it. Gas escapes, and a fire starts, which is continually fueled by gas draining from the puncture hole. These are hellish fires that burn savagely.
In 2001, Ford changed the bracket design so it would not puncture tanks, but Ford did nothing to protect the public from this defect for the nearly three million Crown Vics made between 1992 through 2001that were on the road.
Instead of notifying consumers or recalling the vehicles, Ford issued a “Technical Service Bulletin” advising repair facilities that the dangerous tabs on police cars [not regular Crown Vics owned by individuals] could be corrected by grinding off the U-bracket tabs -- a simple and extremely inexpensive fix that takes less than ten minutes and could be done with the U-brackets in place without removing the bracket from the vehicle.
Ford had a duty to warn the public in 2001 and did nothing.".

Don't know how accurate the above is from a plaintiff atty website.
 
Mr. Man said:
Tell that to the police cruisers that were bursting into flames after being rear-ended. Better get your kids a 2003+ panther
Click to expand...

Funny you two wrote this. Both of my boys drove/drive CVSports or HPPs.

All thier friends like the car. Another of the neighborhood friends drives his Dad's same era Northstar Caddy.

When I mentioned to the group that they all drove sleds... They all laughed and said, "That's cause they ride smooth!" I think this generation of kids (now 16-20) will be car guys n gals!
 
sailsmen - "In 2001, Ford learned that a specific component – small tabs on the U-brackets attaching the rear stabilizer bar to the axle -- was contributing to a high incidence of post-impact fuel-fed fires in Crown Vics. In a crash the stabilizer bracket tabs are pushed forward into the tank and punctures it. Gas escapes, and a fire starts, which is continually fueled by gas draining from the puncture hole. These are hellish fires that burn savagely.
In 2001, Ford changed the bracket design so it would not puncture tanks, but Ford did nothing to protect the public from this defect for the nearly three million Crown Vics made between 1992 through 2001that were on the road.
Instead of notifying consumers or recalling the vehicles, Ford issued a “Technical Service Bulletin” advising repair facilities that the dangerous tabs on police cars [not regular Crown Vics owned by individuals] could be corrected by grinding off the U-bracket tabs -- a simple and extremely inexpensive fix that takes less than ten minutes and could be done with the U-brackets in place without removing the bracket from the vehicle.
Ford had a duty to warn the public in 2001 and did nothing.".

Don't know how accurate the above is from a plaintiff atty website.
Click to expand...

OPTIONAL UPGRADE PROGRAM 02B02 ««« -click-
crash-fire-protection.jpg

.
​
And / +(plus) ... Fire Suppression System

FireSuppressionSystemWithFuelTank.jpg

.
​

Didn't catch fire (without either of the above) .....


didnotcatchfire.jpg

.
​
.
 
Mr. Man said:
Tell that to the police cruisers that were bursting into flames after being rear-ended. Better get your kids a 2003+ panther
Click to expand...



100% not factual, it should read after many departments screwed aftermarket equipment down and punctured the fuel tank, when it was hit, combined with the structural integrity of the tank being compromised with 30 holes in it, it spewed fuel on impact and caught fire.

With that said, the 25 years I have spent at a large SO, we have multitudes of vehicles in many different states of crashes that would have seemed like fire or death would have been a certainty, and officers mostly walked away, never a fatality or fire.

Actual real world facts, instead of made up internet rumors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yep....and many of the CV fires resulted from numb nuts who were driving 70 mph and then plowed into the back of Police cruisers that were stopped on the shoulder.
Not many vehicles are built for 70 mph rear end collisions.

Now...... back to the OP's topic of fiery HONDAs!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top