Topic: uh-.. got a ford taunus 1600 1974

[martin99]

Hey Strynboen,

Saw this beauty while in Greece last week, and thought of you.

[strynboen]

looks like a old 12 m or 15 m..15=1500cc

[martin99]

Sold as a Mk2 Cortina here - yours would be a Mk3. I always thought a Taunus was a rebadged Cortina, but when you see them side by side there are several styling differences too. Can't imagine why they did that.

[strynboen]

yes cortina have that back door/vindow...Coca cola bottol sving..looks real cool.
..but they dont have that( "Knudsen "front vas only in the erly ones) until 74 i think then they look like cortina front. the small nose.and no coupe modells..granada and consul..vas more like...most granadas had the 2,8v6 germen engines..consuls had the old 3,0 v6
the later cortina(mk 4 i think) is just as the germen Taunus..

[scottly]

The Pinto in the US came with the 1.6 or 2.0 four, and later with the 2.3 four, which was used for many years in different models of Fords, sometimes with turbo-chargers. The 2.8 V-6 was found in the early Mercury Capri, which was a completely different car than the Pintos of the same time. 

[Stev-o]

Pintos were crap cars and known to have exploding gas tanks when rear ended. 

My sister had one - bad decision to buy, it was a downgrade from the Firebird she had previous.

[eigenvector]

I can't say about them being crap cars, but their tendency to explode is a total myth.  So far as I know their safety record is approximately the same as other cars from that era.

Whether or not you liked their body style or their performance is another matter.

[Stev-o]

... but their tendency to explode is a total myth. 

Really?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a6700/top-automotive-engineering-failures-ford-pinto-fuel-tanks/

[eigenvector]

Yes really.  What you don't see in that video is the ignitor that actually set off the fire.

That was not some random test, it was well documented and the fact that the details are missing is simply because the media chose not to show them.

I don't blame you for not knowing, the media - all 3 networks, withheld the facts and so far as I know still haven't come clean.

[scottly]

Eigen, you may be thinking of a much more recent staged "test" of a pick-up truck exploding after a side impact, done by the competing manufacturer to make the other's product look bad.
The Pinto had two issues with the fuel tank in rear-end collisions; the first was that the back of the rear axle had very sharp edges, and the tank could get gashed open if shoved into it. The recall fix was to install a plastic cushion between the axle and the tank. The other issue was that the filler tube was simply inserted through an O-ring sealed opening in the tank a small distance past the seal, and it took only a slight movement of the tank to pop the tube out, leaving a 2" hole. The recall fix was to install a longer tube, that didn't pop out so easily. Ford knew about the problems, and decided it was cheaper to pay off the claims than fix the cars, until that landmark case.
Recent Ford Crown Victorias, often used as police cars, have also earned a reputation for bursting into flames after rear end collisions.

[eigenvector]

I know about what I'm referring to.

This is a quote from another source:
"ABC’s 20/20 decided to really heat things up in a 1978 broadcast containing “startling new developments.” ABC breathlessly reported that, not just Pintos, but fullsize Fords could blow up if hit from behind.
20/20 thereupon aired a video, shot by UCLA researchers, showing a Ford sedan getting rear-ended and bursting into flames. A couple of problems with that video:
One, it was shot 10 years earlier.
Two, the UCLA researchers had openly said in a published report that they intentionally rigged the vehicle with an explosive.
That’s because the test was to determine how a crash fire affected the car’s interior, not to show how easily Fords became fire balls. They said they had to use an accelerant because crash blazes on their own are so rare. They had tried to induce a vehicle fire in a crash without using an igniter, but failed.
ABC failed to mention any of that when correspondent Sylvia Chase reported on “Ford’s secret rear-end crash tests.”
"

While I do not dispute that Ford undoubtedly underemphasized their design problems, there is wild discrepencies about the number of fatalities the cars causes.  More than a few sources (including Ford of course) only puts them at 27 or so - about the same as other vehicles of that era.  The gas tank puncture required a rear-end collision of over 50 mph - a HUGE collision from the rear.

[eigenvector]

Maybe to shed more light on this - there's an article written by Gary Schwartz in 1991 (I believe) that details this case and dispels many of the media perpetrated myths about the Ford Pinto.

I don't expect you to read his article - law journal, but if you search for his name a synopsis should pop up somewhere.

[scottly]

The speed to dislodge the filler tube was about 25MPH. The young man in the land mark case was only horribly burned, like the cop on Phoenix, so they can't be counted as fatalities.
Other than the rear-end collision issues, the Pinto wasn't a bad car when compared to the other small cars of the same period. It's motors were reliable, and responded well to modifications. The Chevy Vega, which looked better from a performance point of view, at least on paper, was plagued with reliability issues stemming from the use of an aluminum block with an iron head. If you got over 50K miles out of a Vega without it eating it's head gasket, you could consider yourself lucky.

[strynboen]

almost all cars from that period had rear end tanks.
.and some even had it in the pass cabin(c 10 chevoes) and most others ..even Volvo 140 series had the tank behind the rear aksel...they moved it to forvard of the rear aksel..in 1972..
 Taunus/cortina had the rear mounted tank too..thats just a charming detal of veteran car driving.
..i alvays have a 5 kg pulver fire exh ..in all my cars/tractors/combines..if it can stop my ovn fires..or somone others fires all good..

[eigenvector]

I don't want to give you all the impression I'm some super Pinto fan.  I'm not, I think they look awful - except for the wagon, which is passable, just to point out that they were unfairly maligned by a horribly dishonest media.  They aren't alone - the Chevy trucks Scottly mentioned, the Jeep rollover controversy, the Corvair.  All were victims of muckraking and the public's desire to stick it to the man.  Volkswagen probably fits there too - and I'm as guilty of jumping on the bandwagon as anyone.

The part about the Pinto controversy that annoys me so much is the 2nd case brought against them.  3 girls driving a Pinto, pulled over the side of the road to replace the gas cap which (I believe) they left on the roof after gassing up.  Full size 2 ton Chevy van with the front bumper replaced by a 4x4 post slams into the back of the car at 55 mph.  One girl is ejected and dies.  the other 2 are killed in the crash, but the subsequent fire obscured that.  Does the prosecutor sue the driver of the van (who was drunk, stoned, and taking caffeine pills)?  Nope.  Did they sue the state for not providing a place for the girls to pull off the road completely (that road was well known as dangerous for that reason) - nope.  They sued Ford and filed criminal charges against them - negligent homicide.  Hid evidence from them about the driver of the van.  All charges were dismissed but this case basically crucified them for a long time.

[strynboen]

got the Taunus home..it had not run for some years..so did a test of fuel and brake lines..thanged oil and filter,before hit the ferry to main land..had a nice ride home,the Automatic funktion nice at moderat speeds 110 kmt...

[eigenvector]

It's not a bad looking little car.

Body looks straight, paint seems intact.

[Stev-o]

4 cylinder SOHC?

[Terry in Australia]

Yep, looks a lot like Ford's Cortina. I was never a fan, but we had a cortina of the same shape that had a 4.1 litre inline 6 that went like the clappers. Like most Fords of the era though, they were very prone to rust. My cuz bought a "one owner" recently, it had belonged to a little old lady who probably did just drive it to church, and it was like I'd gone back in time when I saw it, excellent paint and interior, even had the original AM radio fitted, and as it's been garage kept from new, no rust!

Speaking of "Much Maligned" cars, I've got 2 Ford Explorers here. Due to their reputation for exploding they are as cheap as chips here in Oz, I bought my truck for $1600 from it's second owner, it's in perfect shape apart from the usual Explorer camchain rattle, but my son has been driving it for around for a year now and nothing's gone wrong with it, so I'm kind of surprised? He's killed all his other cars, but he can't kill a car that's supposed to explode at a moment's notice?  

[strynboen]

yes 4 cyll 1600 cc ohc belt drived cam..but still have a dummy dovn mounted cam for oil pump and disburator.-ignision and fuel pump . drive...ford did not thange too many tools/ detals..like engine  casting..think the head is the only thange from the old pushrod engines..both head and blok is cast iron..a heavy..but strong engine..have not all this korosion problems in vater cap/head..
but they, use to use/suck oil dovn in the valve steam seals.
..mine is smoking badly..and can give plinging after have cut the ignision..need a air cut valve/or a ventilation valve for the intake manifold to lean aut..so the afterburn not can go on...