The Ford Pinto Turns 40
I have always identified with the underdog, and at times have taken on the role of the apologist. But this time let’s just say I’m playing the devil’s advocate. After all, no one in their right mind would “really” defend a car that could be defined as a roadside bomb.
Popular Mechanics saddled my client with the designation of one of the “10 Cars That Deserved to Fail.” If my reference to automotive volatility is not a big enough hint, the model I’m defending was named after a horse, and of course, it’s not the Mustang. There was even a Pony option.
Yes, I dare to be in the corner of the Ford Pinto.
The Pinto was Ford’s way of addressing the blossoming subcompact market in the wake of such models as the Ford Falcon and the Mercury Comet. The company’s competitors had introduced the AMC Gremlin and the Chevy Vega and everything looked good enough to roll out. Which Ford did before, some say, testing the vehicle’s performance in rear-end collisions.
If the Pinto’s credentials are not sufficiently established by the Popular Mechanics hall of shame induction, there’s Time magazine’s ranking as number 21 in their “The 50 Worst Cars of All Time” article.
But, hey I’m supposed to be singing the praises of the Pinto.
Consider The Pinto Stampede that is coming to a city near you--Salina, Kansas May 29th; Columbia, Missouri May 30th; Indianapolis May 31st; Cambridge, Ohio June 1st; and ending up the next day at Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Pinto devotees will be making their way from Denver Colorado to Carlisle for the All Ford Show. They will be celebrating the Pinto’s 40th birthday.
Norman Bagi of Milford PA will be the “trail boss” for the event, which benefits the Wounded Warrior Project. And if I might enter his statement into the record, "Unlike other rallies that celebrate 'automotive ingenuity' or 'classic styling,' the Pinto has a reputation all its own — one we feel that has been grossly over-exaggerated."
Of course what he is referring to is the signature feature of the Ford Pinto - its unfortunate propensity to ignite when struck from the rear. It was this thing about bumper bolts piercing the fuel tank. But like JFK’s marital fidelity and Mother Teresa’s depression, history looks different after the passing of decades and such is the case with the Pinto.
In a paper published in the Rutgers Law Review in 1991 entitled “The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case,” the popularly accepted fatality figures of 500-900 deaths was scaled way back to the official figure recorded by the NHTSA, which was 27. The author then compared that frequency with other subcompacts of the time--and statistically the Pinto was no more fire-prone than its competitors.
I rest my case.
[Time, Popular Mechanics, Times Herald-Record]This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
The Ford Pinto Turns 40
I have always identified with the underdog, and at times have taken on the role of the apologist. But this time let’s just say I’m playing the devil’s advocate. After all, no one in their right mind would “really” defend a car that could be defined as a roadside bomb.
Popular Mechanics saddled my client with the designation of one of the “10 Cars That Deserved to Fail.” If my reference to automotive volatility is not a big enough hint, the model I’m defending was named after a horse, and of course, it’s not the Mustang. There was even a Pony option.
Yes, I dare to be in the corner of the Ford Pinto.
The Pinto was Ford’s way of addressing the blossoming subcompact market in the wake of such models as the Ford Falcon and the Mercury Comet. The company’s competitors had introduced the AMC Gremlin and the Chevy Vega and everything looked good enough to roll out. Which Ford did before, some say, testing the vehicle’s performance in rear-end collisions.
If the Pinto’s credentials are not sufficiently established by the Popular Mechanics hall of shame induction, there’s Time magazine’s ranking as number 21 in their “The 50 Worst Cars of All Time” article.
But, hey I’m supposed to be singing the praises of the Pinto.
Consider The Pinto Stampede that is coming to a city near you--Salina, Kansas May 29th; Columbia, Missouri May 30th; Indianapolis May 31st; Cambridge, Ohio June 1st; and ending up the next day at Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Pinto devotees will be making their way from Denver Colorado to Carlisle for the All Ford Show. They will be celebrating the Pinto’s 40th birthday.
Norman Bagi of Milford PA will be the “trail boss” for the event, which benefits the Wounded Warrior Project. And if I might enter his statement into the record, "Unlike other rallies that celebrate 'automotive ingenuity' or 'classic styling,' the Pinto has a reputation all its own — one we feel that has been grossly over-exaggerated."
Of course what he is referring to is the signature feature of the Ford Pinto - its unfortunate propensity to ignite when struck from the rear. It was this thing about bumper bolts piercing the fuel tank. But like JFK’s marital fidelity and Mother Teresa’s depression, history looks different after the passing of decades and such is the case with the Pinto.
In a paper published in the Rutgers Law Review in 1991 entitled “The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case,” the popularly accepted fatality figures of 500-900 deaths was scaled way back to the official figure recorded by the NHTSA, which was 27. The author then compared that frequency with other subcompacts of the time--and statistically the Pinto was no more fire-prone than its competitors.
I rest my case.
[Time, Popular Mechanics, Times Herald-Record]This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Gas Prices Going Down, But They’ve Changed Our Lifestyle
Gas prices might no longer be on the way up—at least for a little while—but it appears that this time, surging pump prices, combined with the persisting economic conditions, have meant that U.S. families are feeling it more sorely than before.
A new Gallup Poll found that Americans are still a little shell-shocked by what became, for a while, the $4-a-gallon reality. Fifty-three percent of Americans report that they have made major changes in their personal lives to accommodate steep gas prices. And by now, nearly three quarters say that they've made major changes of some sort to accommodate the higher prices.
In response, nearly a third of Americans are driving less. But they're also cutting back on vacation travel, even if they're higher-income families—a trend that's been especially worrisome for the tourism industry and other sectors of the economy.
Particularly of concern for those worried about the psychological blow of gas prices is that about two thirds of Americans say that gas prices have caused them financial hardship. Gallup has been asking that question for years, and it's the among the highest figure it's seen since it started asking the question in 2000—only surpassed in 2005, when gas prices first passed the $3 mark and in 2008 when they surged past $4 a gallon.
Are there less-painful solutions, like keeping speed down?
Yet many families might be underestimating the impact of some less painful strategies. In the poll, while 12 percent reported less leisure driving, only one percent reported driving less aggressively or keeping speed down to save money on gas—a change that may prove financially significant if kept up over a year.
On a national level, gas prices appear to have peaked. According to the federal government's Energy Information Administration (EIA), the price of a gallon of regular gas was already about a half-cent lower than the week before. And it appears that in recent days, prices have been falling more rapidly; according to GasBuddy.com, average U.S. pump prices stand at about $3.89 a gallon, about seven cents a gallon lower than a week ago.
The latest results are part of a joint USA Today/Gallup poll conducted May 12-15—after they'd leveled off in most regions—from a random sample of 1,024 adults in all 50 U.S. states plus the District of Columbia. Confidence is plus or minus four percentage points.
Even wealthier households traveling less
Curiously, Gallup found, this urge to cut back on driving (and spending) isn't just limited to the lowest-income families; it spans a wide range of income levels. Even in the $75,000 and up household income range, 44 percent reported having changed their habits because of higher gas prices.
Gallup does note, however, that the type of economizing that families have done is different, depending on income level. Lower-income Americans are more likely to report "significant hardships" that involve household expenses, while middle- and upper-income households are simply driving less for vacations and errands.
There are also some pronounced differences between how men and women are dealing with gas prices. Men and women in about an equal percentage said that they were driving less, but men were nearly twice as likely to say they purchased or planned to purchase a more fuel efficient car and women were about twice as likely to say that they've cut back on household expenses.
[Gallup]
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Gas Prices Going Down, But They’ve Changed Our Lifestyle
Gas prices might no longer be on the way up—at least for a little while—but it appears that this time, surging pump prices, combined with the persisting economic conditions, have meant that U.S. families are feeling it more sorely than before.
A new Gallup Poll found that Americans are still a little shell-shocked by what became, for a while, the $4-a-gallon reality. Fifty-three percent of Americans report that they have made major changes in their personal lives to accommodate steep gas prices. And by now, nearly three quarters say that they've made major changes of some sort to accommodate the higher prices.
In response, nearly a third of Americans are driving less. But they're also cutting back on vacation travel, even if they're higher-income families—a trend that's been especially worrisome for the tourism industry and other sectors of the economy.
Particularly of concern for those worried about the psychological blow of gas prices is that about two thirds of Americans say that gas prices have caused them financial hardship. Gallup has been asking that question for years, and it's the among the highest figure it's seen since it started asking the question in 2000—only surpassed in 2005, when gas prices first passed the $3 mark and in 2008 when they surged past $4 a gallon.
Are there less-painful solutions, like keeping speed down?
Yet many families might be underestimating the impact of some less painful strategies. In the poll, while 12 percent reported less leisure driving, only one percent reported driving less aggressively or keeping speed down to save money on gas—a change that may prove financially significant if kept up over a year.
On a national level, gas prices appear to have peaked. According to the federal government's Energy Information Administration (EIA), the price of a gallon of regular gas was already about a half-cent lower than the week before. And it appears that in recent days, prices have been falling more rapidly; according to GasBuddy.com, average U.S. pump prices stand at about $3.89 a gallon, about seven cents a gallon lower than a week ago.
The latest results are part of a joint USA Today/Gallup poll conducted May 12-15—after they'd leveled off in most regions—from a random sample of 1,024 adults in all 50 U.S. states plus the District of Columbia. Confidence is plus or minus four percentage points.
Even wealthier households traveling less
Curiously, Gallup found, this urge to cut back on driving (and spending) isn't just limited to the lowest-income families; it spans a wide range of income levels. Even in the $75,000 and up household income range, 44 percent reported having changed their habits because of higher gas prices.
Gallup does note, however, that the type of economizing that families have done is different, depending on income level. Lower-income Americans are more likely to report "significant hardships" that involve household expenses, while middle- and upper-income households are simply driving less for vacations and errands.
There are also some pronounced differences between how men and women are dealing with gas prices. Men and women in about an equal percentage said that they were driving less, but men were nearly twice as likely to say they purchased or planned to purchase a more fuel efficient car and women were about twice as likely to say that they've cut back on household expenses.
[Gallup]
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Bill Ford: A Quarter Of All Vehicles Electrified By 2020
Will one-fourth of all new vehicles be either hybrids, plug-ins, or electric vehicles in less than a decade?
That's what one of the world's top auto-industry execs thinks—at least for his company. In a piece in Fortune Magazine, Ford Motor Company [NYSE: F] Chairman Bill Ford made that prediction, anticipating that about 25 percent of the company's fleet will be electrified by 2020, up from just a couple percent currently.
But Ford caged that approximation, saying that it's hard to predict how quickly technology will be adopted. "You might as well throw a dart. One thing I've learned is that you can't push technology. It has to be pulled."
Ford had previously been estimating that between ten and 25 percent of its vehicles would be electrified. In quoting the higher figure, the chairman—known for his environmental focus—is either being optimistic or this reflects a harder push for the company.
Ford pointed to its plans for the latest Focus Electric models and how whether powered by gasoline, diesel, or electricity, they'll roll off the same assembly lines. Following that, an electric version of the C-Max five-seat hatchback is in the works, as is a plug-in hybrid.
He isn't the only high-ranking auto executive to think that electric or electrified vehicles will be a significant portion of the new-vehicle market in a decade. Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn has said that he expects that electric vehicles (not including hybrids) could account for ten percent of the company's global sales by 2020.
"We need to build a smart grid and install millions of car-charging stations in garages and in public spots while creating the IT that ties it all together," said Ford, who is rallying for assistance with R&D from Washington, D.C. "If we don't, there's a danger America will get left behind."
Ford also spoke out for making cities more livable, and backing up the growth in vehicles worldwide with "smart roads, smart parking, and smart public transit."
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Bill Ford: A Quarter Of All Vehicles Electrified By 2020
Will one-fourth of all new vehicles be either hybrids, plug-ins, or electric vehicles in less than a decade?
That's what one of the world's top auto-industry execs thinks—at least for his company. In a piece in Fortune Magazine, Ford Motor Company [NYSE: F] Chairman Bill Ford made that prediction, anticipating that about 25 percent of the company's fleet will be electrified by 2020, up from just a couple percent currently.
But Ford caged that approximation, saying that it's hard to predict how quickly technology will be adopted. "You might as well throw a dart. One thing I've learned is that you can't push technology. It has to be pulled."
Ford had previously been estimating that between ten and 25 percent of its vehicles would be electrified. In quoting the higher figure, the chairman—known for his environmental focus—is either being optimistic or this reflects a harder push for the company.
Ford pointed to its plans for the latest Focus Electric models and how whether powered by gasoline, diesel, or electricity, they'll roll off the same assembly lines. Following that, an electric version of the C-Max five-seat hatchback is in the works, as is a plug-in hybrid.
He isn't the only high-ranking auto executive to think that electric or electrified vehicles will be a significant portion of the new-vehicle market in a decade. Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn has said that he expects that electric vehicles (not including hybrids) could account for ten percent of the company's global sales by 2020.
"We need to build a smart grid and install millions of car-charging stations in garages and in public spots while creating the IT that ties it all together," said Ford, who is rallying for assistance with R&D from Washington, D.C. "If we don't, there's a danger America will get left behind."
Ford also spoke out for making cities more livable, and backing up the growth in vehicles worldwide with "smart roads, smart parking, and smart public transit."
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Survey: Most Republicans In Favor Of Higher MPG Requirements
Democrats and Republicans might disagree on a lot of things, but it appears that fuel economy regulation doesn't need to be one of them.
According to a new nationwide study, those who identify Republican are nearly as likely to think that we need to put a tighter fuel-efficiency framework in place as those who identify Democrat.
The study, which was commissioned by the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and conducted by Opinion Research Corp. last month (of a sample size of 2,000), found that 62 percent of Americans support a 60-mpg standard by 2025. Just 32 percent indicated they're against it.
More than 60 percent of both Democrats and Republicans agreed that they think it's important to decrease oil consumption and that the federal government should require automakers to increase fuel economy—leading up to a 60-mpg standard by 2025.
A lot of common ground when it comes to petroleum independence?
According to the survey, two-thirds of those who identify Republican support the general concept of fuel economy standards while more than half support the 60-mpg standard in the works. General support for higher fuel-efficiency standards in general was at 75 percent nationally and as high as 82 percent, in California.
Compliance with a 60-mpg standard is expected to add cost to new vehicles, yet it would, over time, pay off because of lower fuel costs. The survey even varied the questions to consider this payback for the 60-mpg technology—asking about three-, five-, and ten-year paybacks, along with policies left up to the states, but in each case both Democrats and Republicans supported the policy by more than 50 percent. Support peaked for the shortest three-year payback, with Democrats at 72 percent and Republicans at 62 percent.
Where we get our oil was one of the common worries among respondents. About two-thirds of those supportive of the new standards were concerned about either fuel prices or Middle East oil dependence.
Addressing a common concern: high gas prices and foreign oil
It's already been a year of elevated worry about high gas prices; and according to the survey, 85 percent of Americans are concerned about gas prices while 87 percent are concerned about our oil consumption. The average household expenditure on gasoline is estimated to have risen by more than $1,000 per year from 2009 to 2011, due to rising pump prices as well as volatility that's in part due to a dependence on oil imports.
The non-profit organization, which has been calling for the stricter standard, stresses that any successful fuel economy program must be long-term, to give consumers and the industry time to adapt, and it must accommodate consumer preferences by understanding that while SUVs have the same footprint as lower compact cars they simply can't achieve the same mileage. "Standards for larger vehicles will be more lenient, but every vehicle class will be required to improve at a fast pace," the CFA said in summary, in an appeal to policymakets. "This levels the playing field between auto makers and removes any pressure to push consumers into smaller vehicles."
[Consumer Federation of America]
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
