Ford Pinto Trial Essay -- essays papers

traverse Pinto Trial The objective of this paper is to investigate what led to the Ford pinto criminal tryout and the impact that it had. What led up to the criminal indictment of Ford, the trial itself, the verdict of the trial will be discussed. The Impact that this trial has had on the Automobile industry will also be investigated. In the late 1960s there was strong competition from VW and several Japanese companies in the small railway car market. Due to this competition Ford hurried the forge of their small car, the Pinto, to market. Since the car was rushed into market and the specifications for the car were that it weigh below 2000 pounds and monetary value less than $2000, safety device was not a major associate in the excogitation of the pinto.1 In pre- intersection pointion testing Ford found that the boast cooler was likely to leak and possibly burst into flames when it is struck from behind. sexual documents show that eleven of the tests averaging thirty one miles per hour were performed before the Pinto went into production. In only three of the eleven tests did the fuel tank in the Pinto not rupture. In one test a plastic wiffle ball was fixed amid the front of the gas tank between the tank and the derivative instrument housing so that four bolts would not tear into the tank. In the following(a) successful test a piece of steel was placed between the fuel tank and the bumper. In the third test the fuel tank was lined with a rubber liner. Although Ford found that fuel tank rupture was likely to happen they decided to go ahead with this design because assembly line machinery was all ready tooled and they concluded that it was not greet efficient to add an $5.08 rubber bladder to the car cost to the car to quicken the design flaw, instead they determined that it would be cheaper to settle or fight any civil law suits rather then remedy this problem.3 In their cost analysis, that would have improved fuel tank safety for their whole line of cars and trucks, they concluded that there would be 180 can deaths, 180 serious burn injuries, and 2100 burned vehicles at a cost of $200,000 per burn death, $67,000 per serious burn injury, and $700 per burned vehicle which came up to a full(a) cost of $49.5 million. The estimated cost to prevent leakage in their cars and trucks was $11 dollars each. So with sales of 11 million cars and 1.5 million light trucks the total cost to improve fuel tank safety wou... ...so showed that even if the product passes the minimum safety standards a manufacturer should hold safety concerns with the final importance.5 Lastly, it gave other attorneys confidence to file criminal charges against a manufacturer if they purposely sell a harmful product. In conclusion I commit that Ford acted very irresponsible in the design of the Pinto and they should have been held accountable in both civil and criminal cases. They were foolish and morally faulty to take profits over peopl es lives. Every engineer can swindle a lot about how important product safety is by looking into this case.BibliographyReferences1Lee Patrick Strobel, Reckless Homicide? Fords Pinto Trail, 1980 , And Books. LL2Francis T. Cullen, corporeal Crime Under Attack, The Ford Pinto Case and Beyond, 1987, Anderson Publishing. LL3Ellen Hochstedler, Corporations as Criminals, Perspectives in Criminal Justice, 1984, Sage publications. LL4Paul Eisenstein, Courts bind Crash Course in Car Design, The Engineer v 277 July 1, 1993 pg. 18. EJ5Charles J. Murry, The Real Story Behind Car Fires, Design intelligence v 48 1993 pg. 114-120. EJ