<VV> Pintos and Corvairs

[gswiatowy at rochester.rr.com]

Speaking as a person who has a friend who has not one but 3 Pintos.
He loves the cars, yet I don't know why.
He doesn't get my fascination with Corvairs.
I can live with that too.

In 1978, I worked at a Ford dealership of all places.
Pinto recalls for the gas tank issue.
I didn't think they were overly hazardous other than the fact ANY small car, getting hit by a bigger car, or truck.
Is going to lose.
But, I drove plenty of them.
Very un-inspiring.
Corvair was always fun to drive.
Vega..............really want to go there?
I had to work on plenty of them over the years as well.
One time a friend of mine called me as his Vegas caught on fire.
On the phone he told me it had something to do with an exhaust leak.
I went to tow him in with a tow strap and an International Scout.

The number 3 piston was sticking outside of the block.
And the fire happened because of the igniotion of the "open" cylinder setting the oil covered motor on fire.
that car later got a small block 283 installed.

Gary Swiatowy


>    1. Re: Vega (Astre) Praise (Tony Underwood)
> From: Sethracer at aol.com
> Subject: <VV> Pintos and Corvairs
> There's  nothing inherently wrong with the Pinto.  And I don't wanna 
> hear  anybody start in on that exploding Pinto fiasco which is bogus 
> and needs  to be chalked up right beside Corvairs turning over and 
> Yugos rusting in  showrooms. 
>  
> The problem I perceive on the Corvair wasn't anybody rolling over, and the  
> problem on the Pinto wasn't an exploding gas tank. The problem - in both 
> cases -  was the accountants over-ruling good engineering decisions. The 
> Corvair was  designed and tested with a front anti-sway bar - it was then removed 
> before  production for cost reasons. To save a little bit of money on each 
> car.  At least the GM accountants or engineers didn't say; "Well, without 
> the  front bar, we will only have a few cars roll over for the life of the car 
>  on the road. Those possible deaths won't cost us as much as equipping all 
> of the  cars with a bar."  Uh - with the Pinto, a Ford engineer testified in 
> court  to having performed that very calculation. Only so many possible 
> accidents and  fires, that would cost less than solving the possible 
> tank-into-axle issue on  all those already-built Pintos. If nothing else, it was bad 
> PR for Ford,  and bad PR for automotive engineers (and accountants) in 
> general. It really  doesn't matter if the Pinto was no worse than many other cars 
> of the time (just  like the outcome of the safety tests on the Corvair). 
> Somehow the public  received the news that the car companies had to make 
> trade-offs for safety  reasons vs. cost. That made a subtle change in the way many 
> people thought of  the car companies in general. We all lived through it. 
> (Well many of us older  folks!) The conspiracy theorists among us might say 
> that the "Safety" issue has  been used by car companies to justify huge price 
> increases for newer cars.
>  
> -Seth Emerson
>