Mini Classifieds

1971 yellow Pinto hatchback with limited edition chrome strips on rear door, 1600 cc engine

Date: 02/26/2017 03:22 pm
1973 Pinto Pangra

Date: 07/08/2019 10:09 pm
Looking for a 1977 Ford Pinto Runabout Hatchback
Date: 10/15/2017 10:03 am
1974 Pinto Passenger side door glass and door parts

Date: 02/28/2018 09:18 am
Wanted Type 9 5spd Transmission
Date: 07/04/2017 03:26 pm
74 Pinto Rear Side Lights

Date: 02/18/2017 05:47 pm
1980 Pinto-Shay for sale

Date: 07/07/2016 01:21 pm
front end parts
Date: 03/30/2018 12:48 pm
1977 Front Sump 2.3 Oil Pan
Date: 09/14/2018 11:42 pm

Why the Ford Pinto didn’t suck

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suckThe Ford Pinto was born a low-rent, stumpy thing in Dearborn 40 years ago and grew to become one of the most infamous cars in history. The thing is that it didn't actually suck. Really.

Even after four decades, what's the first thing that comes to mind when most people think of the Ford Pinto? Ka-BLAM! The truth is the Pinto was more than that — and this is the story of how the exploding Pinto became a pre-apocalyptic narrative, how the myth was exposed, and why you should race one.

The Pinto was CEO Lee Iacocca's baby, a homegrown answer to the threat of compact-sized economy cars from Japan and Germany, the sales of which had grown significantly throughout the 1960s. Iacocca demanded the Pinto cost under $2,000, and weigh under 2,000 pounds. It was an all-hands-on-deck project, and Ford got it done in 25 months from concept to production.

Building its own small car meant Ford's buyers wouldn't have to hew to the Japanese government's size-tamping regulations; Ford would have the freedom to choose its own exterior dimensions and engine sizes based on market needs (as did Chevy with the Vega and AMC with the Gremlin). And people cold dug it.

When it was unveiled in late 1970 (ominously on September 11), US buyers noted the Pinto's pleasant shape — bringing to mind a certain tailless amphibian — and interior layout hinting at a hipster's sunken living room. Some call it one of the ugliest cars ever made, but like fans of Mischa Barton, Pinto lovers care not what others think. With its strong Kent OHV four (a distant cousin of the Lotus TwinCam), the Pinto could at least keep up with its peers, despite its drum brakes and as long as one looked past its Russian-roulette build quality.

But what of the elephant in the Pinto's room? Yes, the whole blowing-up-on-rear-end-impact thing. It all started a little more than a year after the Pinto's arrival.

 

Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Company

On May 28, 1972, Mrs. Lilly Gray and 13-year-old passenger Richard Grimshaw, set out from Anaheim, California toward Barstow in Gray's six-month-old Ford Pinto. Gray had been having trouble with the car since new, returning it to the dealer several times for stalling. After stopping in San Bernardino for gasoline, Gray got back on I-15 and accelerated to around 65 mph. Approaching traffic congestion, she moved from the left lane to the middle lane, where the car suddenly stalled and came to a stop. A 1962 Ford Galaxie, the driver unable to stop or swerve in time, rear-ended the Pinto. The Pinto's gas tank was driven forward, and punctured on the bolts of the differential housing.

As the rear wheel well sections separated from the floor pan, a full tank of fuel sprayed straight into the passenger compartment, which was engulfed in flames. Gray later died from congestive heart failure, a direct result of being nearly incinerated, while Grimshaw was burned severely and left permanently disfigured. Grimshaw and the Gray family sued Ford Motor Company (among others), and after a six-month jury trial, verdicts were returned against Ford Motor Company. Ford did not contest amount of compensatory damages awarded to Grimshaw and the Gray family, and a jury awarded the plaintiffs $125 million, which the judge in the case subsequently reduced to the low seven figures. Other crashes and other lawsuits followed.

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suck

Mother Jones and Pinto Madness

In 1977, Mark Dowie, business manager of Mother Jones magazine published an article on the Pinto's "exploding gas tanks." It's the same article in which we first heard the chilling phrase, "How much does Ford think your life is worth?" Dowie had spent days sorting through filing cabinets at the Department of Transportation, examining paperwork Ford had produced as part of a lobbying effort to defeat a federal rear-end collision standard. That's where Dowie uncovered an innocuous-looking memo entitled "Fatalities Associated with Crash-Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires."

The Car Talk blog describes why the memo proved so damning.

In it, Ford's director of auto safety estimated that equipping the Pinto with [an] $11 part would prevent 180 burn deaths, 180 serious burn injuries and 2,100 burned cars, for a total cost of $137 million. Paying out $200,000 per death, $67,000 per injury and $700 per vehicle would cost only $49.15 million.

The government would, in 1978, demand Ford recall the million or so Pintos on the road to deal with the potential for gas-tank punctures. That "smoking gun" memo would become a symbol for corporate callousness and indifference to human life, haunting Ford (and other automakers) for decades. But despite the memo's cold calculations, was Ford characterized fairly as the Kevorkian of automakers?

Perhaps not. In 1991, A Rutgers Law Journal report [PDF] showed the total number of Pinto fires, out of 2 million cars and 10 years of production, stalled at 27. It was no more than any other vehicle, averaged out, and certainly not the thousand or more suggested by Mother Jones.

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suck

The big rebuttal, and vindication?

But what of the so-called "smoking gun" memo Dowie had unearthed? Surely Ford, and Lee Iacocca himself, were part of a ruthless establishment who didn't care if its customers lived or died, right? Well, not really. Remember that the memo was a lobbying document whose audience was intended to be the NHTSA. The memo didn't refer to Pintos, or even Ford products, specifically, but American cars in general. It also considered rollovers not rear-end collisions. And that chilling assignment of value to a human life? Indeed, it was federal regulators who often considered that startling concept in their own deliberations. The value figure used in Ford's memo was the same one regulators had themselves set forth.

In fact, measured by occupant fatalities per million cars in use during 1975 and 1976, the Pinto's safety record compared favorably to other subcompacts like the AMC Gremlin, Chevy Vega, Toyota Corolla and VW Beetle.

And what of Mother Jones' Dowie? As the Car Talk blog points out, Dowie now calls the Pinto, "a fabulous vehicle that got great gas mileage," if not for that one flaw: The legendary "$11 part."

Why the Ford Pinto didn't suck

Pinto Racing Doesn't Suck

Back in 1974, Car and Driver magazine created a Pinto for racing, an exercise to prove brains and common sense were more important than an unlimited budget and superstar power. As Patrick Bedard wrote in the March, 1975 issue of Car and Driver, "It's a great car to drive, this Pinto," referring to the racer the magazine prepared for the Goodrich Radial Challenge, an IMSA-sanctioned road racing series for small sedans.

Why'd they pick a Pinto over, say, a BMW 2002 or AMC Gremlin? Current owner of the prepped Pinto, Fox Motorsports says it was a matter of comparing the car's frontal area, weight, piston displacement, handling, wheel width, and horsepower to other cars of the day that would meet the entry criteria. (Racers like Jerry Walsh had by then already been fielding Pintos in IMSA's "Baby Grand" class.)

Bedard, along with Ron Nash and company procured a 30,000-mile 1972 Pinto two-door to transform. In addition to safety, chassis and differential mods, the team traded a 200-pound IMSA weight penalty for the power gain of Ford's 2.3-liter engine, which Bedard said "tipped the scales" in the Pinto's favor. But according to Bedard, it sounds like the real advantage was in the turns, thanks to some add-ons from Mssrs. Koni and Bilstein.

"The Pinto's advantage was cornering ability," Bedard wrote. "I don't think there was another car in the B. F. Goodrich series that was quicker through the turns on a dry track. The steering is light and quick, and the suspension is direct and predictable in a way that street cars never can be. It never darts over bumps, the axle is perfectly controlled and the suspension doesn't bottom."

Need more proof of the Pinto's lack of suck? Check out the SCCA Washington, DC region's spec-Pinto series.

Members
  • Total Members: 7,892
  • Latest: Tanar_D
Stats
  • Total Posts: 139,565
  • Total Topics: 16,275
  • Online today: 561
  • Online ever: 1,681 (March 09, 2025, 10:00:10 AM)
Users Online
  • Users: 0
  • Guests: 557
  • Total: 557
F&I...more

My Somewhat Begrudging Apology To Ford Pinto

ford-pinto.jpg

I never thought I’d offer an apology to the Ford Pinto, but I guess I owe it one.

I had a Pinto in the 1970s. Actually, my wife bought it a few months before we got married. The car became sort of a wedding dowry. So did the remaining 80% of the outstanding auto loan.

During a relatively brief ownership, the Pinto’s repair costs exceeded the original price of the car. It wasn’t a question of if it would fail, but when. And where. Sometimes, it simply wouldn’t start in the driveway. Other times, it would conk out at a busy intersection.

It ranks as the worst car I ever had. That was back when some auto makers made quality something like Job 100, certainly not Job 1.

Despite my bad Pinto experience, I suppose an apology is in order because of a recent blog I wrote. It centered on Toyota’s sudden-acceleration problems. But in discussing those, I invoked the memory of exploding Pintos, perpetuating an inaccuracy.

The widespread allegation was that, due to a design flaw, Pinto fuel tanks could readily blow up in rear-end collisions, setting the car and its occupants afire.

People started calling the Pinto “the barbecue that seats four.” And the lawsuits spread like wild fire.

Responding to my blog, a Ford (“I would very much prefer to keep my name out of print”) manager contacted me to set the record straight.

He says exploding Pintos were a myth that an investigation debunked nearly 20 years ago. He cites Gary Schwartz’ 1991 Rutgers Law Review paper that cut through the wild claims and examined what really happened.

Schwartz methodically determined the actual number of Pinto rear-end explosion deaths was not in the thousands, as commonly thought, but 27.

In 1975-76, the Pinto averaged 310 fatalities a year. But the similar-size Toyota Corolla averaged 313, the VW Beetle 374 and the Datsun 1200/210 came in at 405.

Yes, there were cases such as a Pinto exploding while parked on the shoulder of the road and hit from behind by a speeding pickup truck. But fiery rear-end collisions comprised only 0.6% of all fatalities back then, and the Pinto had a lower death rate in that category than the average compact or subcompact, Schwartz said after crunching the numbers. Nor was there anything about the Pinto’s rear-end design that made it particularly unsafe.

Not content to portray the Pinto as an incendiary device, 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.”

We could forgive ABC for that botched reporting job. After all, it was 32 years ago. But a few weeks ago, ABC, in another one of its rigged auto exposes, showed video of a Toyota apparently accelerating on its own.

Turns out, the “runaway” vehicle had help from an associate professor. He built a gizmo with an on-off switch to provide acceleration on demand. Well, at least ABC didn’t show the Toyota slamming into a wall and bursting into flames.

In my blog, I also mentioned that Ford’s woes got worse in the 1970s with the supposed uncovering of an internal memo by a Ford attorney who allegedly calculated it would cost less to pay off wrongful-death suits than to redesign the Pinto.

It became known as the “Ford Pinto memo,” a smoking gun. But Schwartz looked into that, too. He reported the memo did not pertain to Pintos or any Ford products. Instead, it had to do with American vehicles in general.

It dealt with rollovers, not rear-end crashes. It did not address tort liability at all, let alone advocate it as a cheaper alternative to a redesign. It put a value to human life because federal regulators themselves did so.

The memo was meant for regulators’ eyes only. But it was off to the races after Mother Jones magazine got a hold of a copy and reported what wasn’t the case.

The exploding-Pinto myth lives on, largely because more Americans watch 20/20 than read the Rutgers Law Review. One wonders what people will recollect in 2040 about Toyota’s sudden accelerations, which more and more look like driver error and, in some cases, driver shams.

So I guess I owe the Pinto an apology. But it’s half-hearted, because my Pinto gave me much grief, even though, as the Ford manager notes, “it was a cheap car, built long ago and lots of things have changed, almost all for the better.”

Here goes: If I said anything that offended you, Pinto, I’m sorry. And thanks for not blowing up on me.

72 DutchWagon rolling resto

Started by 72DutchWagon, September 05, 2015, 07:48:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

pinto_one

Your probably right on the ign switch , you might have to wait untel you have that problem again, then you drop the steering colom and check the switch then ,power should flow through all the large yellow wires , and the car looks great , 👍👍👍

76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

76hotrodpinto

It's cool to see the pinto has it's place there too.

There's a tubbed out capri carcass for sale here, that's been haunting my dreams lately. It's almost the same shade of blue as the one you posted.
1976 half hatch 2.3 turbo w/t5.

74 PintoWagon

I had one of them Mercs, nice riding car..
Art
65 Falcon 2DR 200 IL6 with C4.

dga57

I think you might be on the right track with your thoughts about the ignition switch... I had a 1983 F-150 that did that.  All I ever had to do was cut it off and restart it and it would be fine.  Probably worth looking into.  As for the photos, I LOVE that Mercury!!!


Dwayne :)
Pinto Car Club of America - Serving the Ford Pinto enthusiast since 1999.

72DutchWagon

Donkey has past the biannual road test!
A few niggles had to be ironed out by the (luckily!) classic loving crew at the shop that did the test, including welding a small patch.
After that, the only  problem I ran into once, was that I lost all electric power to the accessories, engine was running fine, but I had no power to the dash (fuel gauge) wipers, turn signals etc.
I treated the fuse box to a dose of contact spray, and the problem went away, but I also have a suspicion that it might have to do something with the ignition switch not returning to the right spot after starting?
If anyone knows the exact cause please tell me because it's not something I'd like to see coming back.

Today I took the wagon to the Antwerp Classic Salon, Antwerp is just half an hour away and we enjoyed the trip.
On the parking I left  Donkey in good company and had a nice time at the expo. I bought some brake line wrenches and I spoke to someone who might have a Mustang II 8 inch rear for me, fingers crossed.
I added some more Ford product images for your pleasure.

72DutchWagon

Thanks for the remark!
ASML in Eindhoven? A microchip man who digs stone age technology?
Always welcome to come take a look at my donkey (and go for a spin).
And I just might take you up on that offer some time...

robertwwithee

It's nice to read your posts 72 dutchwagon.  I'll keep you in mind on my next trip to Netherlands.  I work for ASML.  I could bring a part or two over.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk


72DutchWagon

A few months ago I changed the turn signal cam because it was broken.  Now I found out that my left brake light wasn't working, and there was nothing wrong with the bulb.
A quick search on the net revealed that with Mustang's (same steering column)  the problem is normally in the turn signal switch, and you have to get a new one.
Now Rockauto doesn't show these for 72 Pinto's. I just took the risk of ordering one for a 72  Mustang w/o tilt, OE PRO SM44F, and it's all right. A few wire colors are different, but it's just plug and play.

72DutchWagon

Got the car back in the garage to do some work, have to pass Dutch APK test in March to be  allowed on the road for another two years.
When I removed the left side panel to run through the fuel pump wires (they had been lying on the floor since summer) I discovered  a lot of bird feed left over's, some chewed on hazelnuts, and a door post cavity stuffed up with what looked like plucked carpet (so that's where the carpet went?). Did once strange lodgers live in these premises!?
Didn't find any animal droppings though. I  cleaned the lot out, and this corner will probably at some time need some welding and anti-rust treatment.
The brakes needed attention too, left back drum kept locking up, on inspection I found out that I had different setups left and right, on the right side two equal length brake pads, and all kinds of incorrect fitting.
Up till now I've replaced the rear shocks,  rear drum brake hardware and emergency brake cable.
I included a picture of the plastic emergency brake handle cover, this kind of stuff is so easy to break before you find out how it clicks open.

pinto_one

I see what you are against DutchWagon ,  and how do you get it certified ? ,  maybe if you over built it they can put a lower rating on it , (down to what you need) I have towed trailers with my pintos since day one back in 71,  but the toe hitch,s are getting raire,  still looking for the old early hitch but as you said it can not block the plate , so what you might want is like the one on my car , its a old class two , 300lbs tougne wt, 3500lbs trailer , receiver type , yes over kill for yours but fill the bill for what you want to do , and being a old american car they do not know what came with it , its older than the guys that want it inspect it , have a good welder make it up , then dirty it up like it looks old as the car and say it came with the car , and show photos of mine from the USA , just a idea good luck
76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

72DutchWagon

Nice to see that we've got the official Pinto trailer hitch story covered now, and well documented!
Building your own is an option but not legal around here, it needs to be certified.
Another problem is that a hitch that is partially blocking view of the licence plate can also result in a fine in The Netherlands, you then need a removable hitch.
Looking at the moderate towing weight capability, it may just be too much trouble to spend time on.

Pinto5.0

Is it an option to build your own hitch? I've built 2 for custom applications over the years & plan to build 2 more for 2 of the Pintos so I can run a bike carrier on them.
'73 Sedan (I'll get to it)
'76 Wagon driver
'80 hatch(Restoring to be my son's 1st car)~Callisto
'71 half hatch (bucket list Pinto)~Ghost
'72 sedan 5.0/T5~Lemon Squeeze

oldkayaker

Blaine's hitch looks like the one I had on my 71 Runabout, see photos.  Mine is bent up a bit from my attempts of body stretching after a rear end collision.  Mine was made by Draw-Tite Co. out of Belleville, Michigan with part number of: PIN 1 IK.  Draw-Tite's web site no longer shows hitches for Pinto's.  Your Ford instruction sheet appears to be for similar hitch, look at how it bolts to the bumper for a difference.

If you end up using a similar hitch, I recommend reinforcing the mounting points.  I added full width angle iron to the rear floor and inside the rear bumper to spread the load .
Jerry J - Jupiter, Florida

72DutchWagon

I see, you've got the original part for which I did find the fitting instructions (also have these in bigger readable format). On this it didn't state that it would work for wagon's too.
In Europe we don't see flat metal trailer hitches at all, the ones we do have need some sort of certification to be legal.
I'll think about the how's  and if's for a while, no hurry, thanks again for your help.

pinto_one

Got you a photo , the sedans and wagons bolted the same way , a flat bar bolted to back of the spare tire tube with two 3/8 bolts and large washers on the inside , the middle of the flat bar had one 1/2 stove bolt from the inside going to the rear that went though the 90 degree bent tongue that went over the top of the Hourse shoe brackets you see bolted to the bumper , I think it was only good to a tad over a 1000 lbs trailer weight , and 250 lbs tongue weight , this is from memory will look and see if I can find it to see what is stamped on it ,  Later Blaine
76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

pinto_one

Nope , but let me look and see if I still have one , it was very simple the way it bolted to the car , it fit the sedans also, it would be easy for you to make if I can get a few photos for you , later Blaine

76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

72DutchWagon

I just ran into an add for a trailer hitch on a Dutch site, advertised as a Mustang II part.
Does anyone have an idea if this might fit my 72 Wagon?

pinto_one

looks like you got it running good DutchWagon , as for the vibration it could be the drive shaft , if you cut it and did not have it bailanced after , hard to do no mater how careful you try , had mine done when i cut mine , do not worry about the play in the diff, as long as it is quite its ok, might just want to change the oil in it ,
76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

76hotrodpinto

Thanks for the pics! It's cool to see that many "foreign" fords. I had a german capri when I was younger. I would love to have it back now. It was just a cheap runner for me, back then, but now I see how cool it really was. Your donkey looks about as out of place as mine does at shows here.

(pics from before motor swap)


1976 half hatch 2.3 turbo w/t5.

72DutchWagon

Yesterday I took donkey to the National Ford parts day, a 200 mile round trip to Barneveld.
It's not a huge event, and on the parts side, there's not much for donkey to be found, it's mostly for European Ford products.
The images show Taunus, Consul/Granada and Capri's, not a Stang in sight.
Most people had never seen a Pinto, some didn't know that a wagon was made.
The trip was a good try-out though for the car, average highway speed was between 75 and 80 miles on the gps.  Mpg was around 23. No major problems, no leaking or overheating.
There is lots of vibration going through the car, think I'll have to take it to a drive shaft specialist. I also have excessive play in the diff,  but no whine, could that add to the vibes? Any other known vibration causes that I should check out?

72DutchWagon

Thanks for the extra info Blaine, I did loosen the three phillips screws and pulled some on the complete unit but didn't know were it was going so stopped. Next time I'll take it all out.
Would have been so much nicer on the table with an autumn specialty bock beer (yes, cold please) next to it, but on the other hand, then I would probably have got the wires wrong and indicate left when going right.

pinto_one

Yep and we dump ice in our Tea also ,  but as for my wife's cooking I sometimes have to quickly eat it before the taste catches up, 😵😵
76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

76hotrodpinto

Or a warm beer. You never know, over there in dutch land.
1976 half hatch 2.3 turbo w/t5.

pinto_one

so i guess it was a alternator problem you had and got it fixed , great , on your turn signal switch , do you know it does come out the top, in case you do not you remove the lower plastic cover and you will see a curved plug in connector , you un plug it and will all slide out so you can go and work on the table next to a cold beer ,  :o
76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

72DutchWagon

Three jobs done last weekend; conversion to one wire Powermaster B 57141 alternator, replace turn signal cam, and put new pedal rubber on clutch pedal.
I wanted to (over)kill the insufficient battery charging problem once and for all so opted for a 140 amp Powermaster one wire conversion. I read tons of posts on forum's about how this is supposed to work, and all I read was that "it only takes one wire".
I know there's more people that would like to hear the complete story so here's how we (me and my stepbrother) did this.
This Powermaster alternator's case has the same mounting measurements as the 40(!) amp original, so no changes to the brackets. I also ordered a 112 double v-belt pulley, so now I can run double belts on the original double belt Scorpio pulley's. First we ran a earth wire from the top alternator bolt to the chassis. We discarded the original black charge wire that disappears into the loom (on its way to the dash) and taped it off. The other two wires (that go to the voltage regulator) were also secured out of the way. The connector on the voltage regulator was removed and taped off. The voltage regulator was taken out.
From the alternator we ran a new 4 AWG wire through a 150 amp mega fuse directly to the battery plus post. The starter wire was connected to the charging post on the alternator (keep in mind that I already did a mini starter conversion and bypassed the standard solenoid). From the battery plus post we ran somewhat thinner wire to the plus side of the solenoid.
That's it, we can later add a voltmeter, run from  the #1 terminal on the alternator (that would be the third wire coming of a one wire alternator...).

Replacing the turn signal cam (Dorman 49301) meant removing the steering wheel with a puller, cutting the original wires and having to shorten them even more because they were worn through in several places. Then it's a fiddly job to get the wire connections done and get everything tucked away in the least stressful position.

After that, fitting a new Dorman 20731 clutch pedal pad was a 5 second job.   

pinto_one


You might have to do a volt drop test on the car , what you have to do it start it up and run for a few minutes and then turn the lights on , all of them ,put the fan motor on low or med, take a volt meter and check what voltage between the alternater and battery, if you have more than a volt you have bad wires , over the years they get hard and the resistance goes up, also check engine to the negative post on the battery , that will give you fits, I put two ground straps on mine , and last is see what is stamped on the alternator , I do remember some were stamped 42 amps or less 😳, I have one off of my parts car and it was a 60 AMP, (see photo) , I have a larger one on my V6 pinto , it's a 100AMP , and last on your cam is if you have to remove it you have to remove the head 😩, yep the cam is removed from the back , so if you have a non A/C car you can remove the radio and use a hole saw on the fire wall to remove the cam, but remove one the the rocker arms and look at it , if it is smooth across the face just install it back and adjust the valves and keep on going , get a zinc oil additive, most oils do not have them because most engines have roller cams instead of the old slider cams , hope this helps









76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

72DutchWagon

I did some maintenance jobs last weeks, renewed the brake fluid which was the color of Coca Cola, and full of debris. Complete overhaul of brake system is on the future agenda.
Valve lash adjustment on the 2.0 is supposed to be done with  Hazet special tools 3429 and 329-5 because the efi intake manifold limits access to the adjusters on the left side. 3429 I found on the net, for 329-5 I fabbed a replacement from an old 19mm spanner. You don't really need the 3429 tool either if you shorten a normal 15mm spanner.
The camshaft is really worn, the lobes have ridges to the sides! Good excuse to put a Kent cams FR34 on the wanted toys list, and of course a new oil spray bar.
I cleaned up the battery posts  and checked the alternator load capacity but I'm still not convinced that the original alternator is going to cut it. If you add up the amp draw of efi, electric fuel pump, electric fan, H4 halogen headlights,  that's too much to ask from a 1972 power nothing configuration Pinto alternator.   

76hotrodpinto

I put the ol' pinto alt. back in with mine too. No problems keeping up with 12v demand. I'd keep poking around for shorts or lifts. Maybe a bad diode in you alt?
1976 half hatch 2.3 turbo w/t5.

pinto_one

You may have a fusable link that may be bad, they are built into the wire ends and burn out on the inside some times , the pinto alternator is large enough for what you need , it's just that you have to trace the wire and find out why the charging current is not making it to the battery , do a internet search under fusable link to see what it looks like , you will know what to look for , hope this is your problem , and a simple fix , good luck ,
76 Pinto sedan V6 , 79 pinto cruiser wagon V6 soon to be diesel or 4.0

72DutchWagon

Small hiccup in donkey land;  took the wagon to the municipal garbage dump site, was cleaning out the garage and garden. Just tossed a rotting rocking chair, and wanted to start the car up to leave this miserable  place where no longer wanted stuff is abandoned, and donkey decided she didn't want to leave. I turned the key another time and said "what's that donkey, do you want to stay here?"
She just answered with a very faint red glow from the dash and that was it.
Whilst pushing her off the site, some guys remarked that I just passed the old iron dumpster, haha, that was to be expected.
Well, the problem was obvious, after driving around for some days the battery was flat, charging system can't keep up with the demands, so I need to fab a bracket for the 90 amp  Scorpio alternator and hook that up.
The Scorpio alternator only has a thicker black wire that should go to the plus side of the Solenoid, and a thinner blue wire that should go to the idiot light on the dash as I understand it.
I do have some remaining questions for the experts on site though, I've been spending days on reading threads about these conversions but a few things stay unclear;
1 the original thicker black load wire from the 65 amp Pinto alternator disappears into the wiring loom, where does it go, does it first feed the dash and then comes back to the battery (Yellow wire to the plus post of solenoid)?
2 do I also hook this thicker black wire up to the plus side of the solenoid, or can it be taped of?
3 do I run the blue idiot light wire all the way to the wire that's now on the I post of the voltage regulator, and can I then discard the voltage regulator?
4 do I run the blue idiot light wire straight to the dash,  and if so, where do I hook it up? 


Welcome to FordPinto.com, home of the PCCA - the Pinto Car Club of America. Founded in 1999 with the goal of creating a dedicated meeting place with strong appeal to Ford Pinto and Mercury Bobcat owners and enthusiasts across all generations. Each day new members join the PCCA family expanding the knowledge base and enhancing our community.


Our site offers extensive information, technical and historic as well as live classifieds ads to find what you are looking for. One of our main goals is to save you time, money and a lot of hassle when searching for information about our cars. Not a member of our family yet? Please feel free to sign up
 for a free account and join the informative discussions in the forums when looking for that tidbit of info you seek. We, the members of FordPinto.com look forward to welcoming you to our family and hearing from you. We are here to assist in any way we can.


FordPinto.com supports the development of parts resources or parts re-manufacturing as opportunities arise. We promote the efforts of individuals and companies that endeavor to re-manufacture, sell, or otherwise distribute additional resources for the Ford Pinto or Mercury Bobcat.

As always, we at FordPinto.com encourage comments and suggestions on how we may be able to improve your experience with us. We take what our members have to say very seriously. Don't hesitate to submit your ideas and feedback.

management@fordpinto.com