Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:35, 3 March 2016

Ford Pinto
Ford Pinto
Overview
Manufacturer	Ford
Production	September 1970–1980
Model years	1971–1980
Assembly	Edison, New Jersey Milpitas, California St. Thomas, Ontario, Canada
Body and chassis
Class	Subcompact car
Body style	2-door coupe 2-door sedan delivery 2-door station wagon 3-door hatchback
Layout	FR layout
Related	Mercury Bobcat Ford Mustang II
Powertrain
Engine	1.6L Kent I4 2.0L EAO I4 2.3L OHC I4 2.8L Cologne V6
Transmission	4-speed manual 3-speed C3/"Selectshift/Cruise-O-Matic" automatic
Dimensions
Length	163 in (4,100 mm)
Width	69.4 in (1,760 mm)
Height	50 in (1,300 mm)
Curb weight	2,015–2,270 lb (914–1,030 kg) (1971)
Chronology
Predecessor	Ford Cortina (captive import)
Successor	Ford Escort

The Ford Pinto is a subcompact that was manufactured and marketed by Ford for model years (MY) 1971–1980. The 1971 two-door sedan was followed by hatchback and wagon models for MY 1972. With over 3 million produced over a 10-year model run, the Pinto outproduced the combined totals of its domestic rivals, the Chevy Vega and the AMC Gremlin.

Beginning in 1977, controversy arose surrounding the Pinto's fuel tank design, which was linked with an increased risk of deadly fires. The issue gained media attention after it became public that Ford knew about but did not fix the issue. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ultimately ordered a recall, and a design modification was made to reduce the risk of fire. A number lawsuits were successfully brought against Ford. A subsequent analysis of the Pinto's overall safety indicated its safety was comparable to other cars of its class. The Pinto has been cited widely as a business ethics as well as tort reform case study.

A rebadged variant, the Mercury Bobcat, debuted in 1974 in Canada and in March 1975 in the US. The Pinto/Bobcat and the smaller, imported Ford Fiesta were ultimately replaced by the front-wheel-drive Ford Escort and Mercury Lynx. Pintos were manufactured in St. Thomas, Ontario at St. Thomas Assembly; Edison, New Jersey at Edison Assembly; and in Milpitas, California at San Jose Assembly.

The nameplate "Pinto" derives from the distinctive white and solid pattern of coloration common in horses.

Background

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Ford Pinto" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (April 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

U.S. automakers had first countered imports such as the Volkswagen Beetle with compact cars including the Ford Falcon, Chevrolet Corvair and Plymouth Valiant, although these cars featured six-cylinder engines and comprised a larger vehicle class. As the popularity of smaller Japanese imports from Toyota and Datsun increased throughout the 1960s, Ford North America responded by introducing the Ford Cortina from Ford of Europe as a captive import. U.S. automakers would soon introduce their own subcompacts. The Pinto was in compliance with Japanese regulations concerning vehicle length and engine displacement, but exceeded width dimensions by 60 mm (2.4 in).

The Pinto was introduced on September 11, 1970. The AMC Gremlin was the first to arrive on the market six months before the Pinto, and the Chevrolet Vega was introduced the day before the Pinto. Both the Pinto and the Vega were new, but the Pinto used powertrains proven in Europe from the European Ford Escort, while the Vega's innovative aluminum engine would prove troublesome. The Gremlin was designed around a six-cylinder engine, and was derived largely by truncating the rear body from the compact-class AMC Hornet to achieve its short length.

Design

This section may have been copied and pasted from another location, possibly in violation of Misplaced Pages's copyright policy. Please review http://uniquecarsandparts.com/car_info_ford_pinto_v6_wagon.htm  and remedy this by editing this article to remove any non-free copyrighted content and attributing free content correctly, or flagging the content for deletion. Please be sure that the supposed source of the copyright violation is not itself a Misplaced Pages mirror. (March 2016)

Ford President Lee Iacocca wanted a 1971 model that weighed less than 2,000 pounds and that would be priced at less than $2,000. A team of stylists at Ford was assigned to design the Pinto's exterior and interior instead of using the European Ford Escort. Robert Eidschun's design of the exterior theme was eventually chosen in its entirety. The clay models of the Pinto were finalized in December 1968 after which Eidschun left Ford to join Chrysler, as a studio Design Manager.

Ford North America's decision to create an all-new vehicle instead of integrating a design from international corporate resources paralleled GM North America's approach when creating the Chevrolet Vega — opting not to use the established Vauxhall Viva or Opel Kadett marketed at the time at GM dealerships in Canada, and USA Buick dealerships from 1967. Designers working on products intended for North America had more freedom with exterior dimensions and engine sizes in relation to Japanese counterparts, where those criteria were dictated by Japanese government regulations. Typically, Detroit manufacturers created products that emulated import aspects with market-driven improvements.

While the previously introduced Ford Maverick offered either straight-6 or V8 engine and a front bench seat, the Pinto offered an inline-4 engine, and bucket seats – more in keeping with small imports such as the Volkswagen Beetle, available since 1949, the Toyota Corolla, introduced to North America March 1968, and the newly introduced Datsun 1200 which appeared in 1970.

Compared with imports, seating was low to the floor. Styling somewhat resembled the larger Ford Maverick in grille and tail light themes, but with a fastback profile.

The car's mechanical design was conventional, with unibody construction, a longitudinally mounted engine in front driving the rear wheels through either a manual or automatic transmission and live axle rear end. Suspension was by unequal-length control arms with front coil springs; the live rear axle was suspended on leaf springs. The rack and pinion steering had optional power assist, as did the brakes.

Production history

After a 22-month development period, Ford introduced the Pinto under the tagline The Little Carefree Car.

After structural work on alternate body styles encountered obstacles, Ford offered the Pinto as a two-door sedan, with entry level models priced at around $1850, undercutting GM's Chevrolet Vega and directly targeting imported models — which included such new competitors as the Mazda 1200 in 1971, the Subaru DL in 1972, and the Honda Civic in 1973.

By January 1971, the Pinto had sold over 100,000 units and 352,402 for the entire 1971 production run. 1974 saw the most Pintos produced in a single model year with 544,209 units.

1971–1973

The Ford Pinto went on sale on September 11, 1970 in one bodystyle, a fastback sedan with trunk and metal trunklid. A hatchback became available on February 20, 1971, debuting at the Chicago Auto Show (also, in 1971, the Pinto brochure came with a paper cutout Pinto that one could fold together to make a 3D model). Marketed as the Runabout, the hatchback went on sale five days later, priced at $2,062. The hatch itself featured exposed chrome hinges for the liftgate and five decorative chrome strips, pneumatic struts to assist in opening the hatch, a rear window approximately as large as the sedan's, and a fold down seat — a feature which became simultaneously an option on the sedan. The hatchback model matched the sedan in all other dimensions and offered 38.1 cubic feet (1.08 m) of cargo space with its seat folded. By 1972, Ford redesigned the hatch itself, with the glass portion of the hatch enlarged to almost the entire size of the hatch itself, ultimately to be replaced with a rear hatch that was entirely glass.

On February 24, 1972, the Pinto station wagon debuted with an overall length of 172.7 in (4,390 mm) and 60.5 cubic feet (1.71 m) of cargo volume. The first 2-door Ford station wagon since 1961, the Pinto wagon offered flip-open rear-seat windows as an option. Along with front disc brakes, the 2.0L engine was standard equipment. A Pinto Squire wagon featured faux wood side paneling similar to the full-size Country Squire.

1974–1978

In 1974, to meet federal regulations, 5 mph bumpers were added to both the front and rear. Unlike the majority of 1970s cars, the addition of larger bumpers to the Pinto would not necessitate major changes to the bodywork. While the underpowered Kent engine was dropped, the optional OHC engine was expanded to 2.3L. In various forms, this engine would go on to power a variety of Ford vehicles for 23 years. Mercury begins selling the Bobcat as a Canada-only model. With 544,209 units sold, 1974 would be the most popular model year for the Pinto.

In 1975, in a move to better compete with the AMC Gremlin, Ford introduced the 2.8L V6; while far less powerful than the Gremlin, the V6 gave the Pinto a feature unavailable in the Chevrolet Vega. Sales of the Mercury Bobcat are expanded to Lincoln-Mercury dealers in the United States; it is sold as a hatchback and wagon.

For the 1977 model year, Pinto wagons received a new option package. Dubbed the Pinto Cruising Wagon, it was the sedan delivery version of the Pinto styled to resemble a small conversion van, complete with round side panel "bubble windows".

Other appearance packages offered by Ford were similar to the Cosworth Vega and the 304 V8 Gremlin X; these were strictly appearance upgrades, not a factory performance package.

In 1978, the Pinto became the second-smallest Ford sold in the U.S., as the company introduced the Fiesta. Nearly two feet shorter than the Pinto, the German-designed Fiesta was the first front-wheel drive car sold by Ford in the USA.

Mercury Bobcat (1974–1980)

Lincoln-Mercury dealers marketed a rebadged variant of the Pinto, as the Mercury Bobcat, beginning with model year 1974 in Canada and 1975 in the United States. The Bobcat was marketed as a hatchback and as a station wagon, under the Villager nameplate, and both featured a modified grille. The hatchback featured modified tail lights.

In total, 224,026 Bobcats were produced from 1975 to 1980.

1979–1980

For the 1979 model year, the Pinto saw its first significant styling update. Taking on square headlights, the Pinto shed its styling borrowed from the Maverick. Wearing larger taillights, the Pinto now wore a square, sloping grille.

1980 marked the end of the Pinto's production run. For 1980, the V6 engine was discontinued, leaving the 2.3L as the sole engine.

The Pinto would be later complemented by the German built, smaller front-wheel-drive Ford Fiesta, and formally replaced by the Escort for the 1981 model year.

Powertrain

Except for 1980, the Pinto was available with a choice of two engines. For the first five years of production, only four-cylinder inline engines were offered. Ford changed the power ratings almost every year.

Of particular note is the introduction in 1974 of the 2.3 litres (140 cu in) OHC I4 engine. This engine would be updated and modified several times, allowing it to remain in production into 1997. Among other Ford vehicles, a turbocharged version of this engine would later power the performance based Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, Mustang SVO, and the European-built Merkur XR4Ti.

Initial Pinto deliveries in the early years used the English (1,600 cc (98 cu in)) and German (2,000 cc (120 cu in)) engines tuned for performance (see below). The 2,000 cc engine used a two barrel carburetor where just one bore was bigger than that used on the Maverick. With the low weight (not much above 2,000 lb (910 kg)) and the SOHC engine it rated a 10.8 second 0-60 time. With the advent of emission control requirements, Ford moved from the European sourced to domestically sourced engines, using new or modified designs. New safety legislation impacted bumpers and other parts adding to the weight of the car, reducing performance.

Revised SAE standards in 1972 dropped the Pinto's 1.6 L (98 cu in) engine to 54 bhp (40 kW) — and the 2.0 L (120 cu in) engine to 86 hp (64 kW).

Reception and criticism

Road & Track faulted the suspension and standard drum brakes, calling the latter a "serious deficiency," but praised the proven 1.6 L Kent engine, adapted from European Fords. The larger 2300 inline-4 found in the Chevrolet Vega was an innovative, brand new design using an aluminum alloy block and iron head, but needed more development work as initially released. Consumer Reports rated the 1971 Pinto below the Vega but above the Gremlin.

In 2004, Forbes named the Pinto in its list of Worst Cars of All Time.

Citing the Pinto's engineering and safety problems, Time magazine and Dan Neil named the Pinto in their 2008 list of the Fifty Worst Cars of All Time.

In 2009, Business Week named the Pinto in their list of the Ugliest Cars of the Past 50 Years.

In the 1983 film Cujo, the protagonist is trapped inside a Ford Pinto with a failed carburetor.

Fuel tank controversy

In 1977 public controversy developed over the safety and structural design of the Pinto's fuel tank. The design of the fuel tank made it slightly more likely that fuel could spill and potentially ignite in the event of rear-end collision. As early as 1974 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration had started investigating complaints about the Pinto's fuel tank safety, but didn't take action until 1977 when a Ford memorandum acknowledging the safety issue came to the public's attention.

The Ford Pinto has been cited and debated in numerous business ethics as well as tort reform case studies.

Fuel tank design

The Pinto's design positioned its fuel tank between the rear axle and the rear bumper. In a crash, the filler neck could tear away from the tank, spilling fuel beneath the car, and the tank itself could also be punctured by the bolts protruding from the differential.

Emergence of controversy

Ford's Environmental and Safety Engineering developed cost-benefit analysis entitled Fatalities Associated with Crash Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires which was distributed internally by Ford's director of automotive safety. The analysis compared the cost of repairs to the cost of settlements for burn deaths, serious burn injuries, and vehicle burnouts. Ford estimated the cost cost of repairs to be $11 per car, for a total of $137 million, and estimated that settlements would cost $49.5 million. Mother Jones magazine obtained the document. In September, 1977 Mother Jones magazine said that Ford was aware of the tank's design flaw, was unwilling to pay for a redesign, and decided it would be cheaper to pay off possible lawsuits. The document became known as Ford's Pinto Memo.

Lawsuits

Approximately 117 lawsuits were brought against Ford in connection with rear-end accidents in the Pinto, with some cases bringing both compensatory damages and punitive damages

An example of a Pinto rear-end accident that led to a lawsuit was the 1972 accident resulted in the court case Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., in which the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District upheld compensatory damages of $2.5 million and punitive damages of $3.5 million against Ford, partially because Ford had been aware of the design defects before production began but had decided against changing the design.

Recall

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) ultimately directed Ford to recall the Pinto. Initially, the NHTSA did not feel there was sufficient evidence to demand a recall due to incidents of fire. 27 deaths were attributed to Pinto fires (the same number of deaths attributed to a Pinto transmission problem) and in 1974 the NHTSA ruled that the Pinto had no "recallable" problem.

In May, 1978 the NHTSA made an initial determination that the Pinto fuel system was defective. Days before the NHTSA was to issue Ford a formal recall order on the Pinto, Ford recalled more than a million Pintos for fuel system modifications. Ford estimated its cost for the Pinto litigation plus the Pinto recall service at $100 million. In 1978, Ford initiated a recall providing a plastic protective shield to be dealer-installed between the fuel tank and the differential bolts, another to deflect contact with the right-rear shock absorber, and a new fuel-tank filler neck that extended deeper into the tank and was more resistant to breaking off in a rear-end collision.

Subsequent investigation and analysis

At a trial examining the safety of the Pinto, a former head of the NHTSA said the Pinto’s design was no more or less safe than that of any other car in its class. It was pointed out that other vehicles like the AMC Gremlin and Chevrolet Vega had fuel tank designs which were very similar to the Pinto's. A comprehensive analysis looking at road fatalities between 1976 and 1977 showed that accidents in the Pinto were more likely to cause fire deaths, but that the overall number of fatalities in the Pinto was comparable to or lower than similar cars in its class.

Other lawsuits

A passenger in a 1975 Pinto was seriously injured in a collision. On August 30, 1979 Ford was served with a civil lawsuit Burgess v. Ford alleging defects including that the Pinto was structurally unsafe. In November, 1983, the suit was amended to include a claim of a lack of an airbag. Air bags were not legally required at the time. The suit was settled out of court in March, 1984 for $1.8 million, the largest known airbag litigation settlement. Ford said the settlement was unrelated to airbags. The court granted Ford a protective order on Ford documents obtained by the plaintiffs via court order. According to the Center for Auto Safety, the settlement was a "landmark" in establishing that a lack of airbags may be considered negligent design. The suit was widely publicized. The settlement was covered on the front page of The Wall Street Journal. The Today Show broadcast a consumer protection segment on the incident.

Gallery

• 1972 Ford Pinto Wagon
• 1976 Mercury Bobcat Villager (poor condition)
• 1979 Pinto
• 1979 Pinto Panel Wagon

Motorsport

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The Pinto was entered in the Trans Am Series during the 1972 season. After suffering several problems throughout the season, and finishing only one race, it was withdrawn from the series. The Pinto had also been entered in one race in the 1971 season.

See also

• AVE Mizar - A flying Pinto
• 60 Minutes: Unintended acceleration
• Dateline NBC: General Motors v. NBC

Notes

1. ^ "Directory Index: Ford/1971_Ford/1971 Ford Pinto Brochure". Oldcarbrochures.com. Retrieved December 3, 2011.
2. "Carfolio 1970 Pinto".
3. Mays, James C. Ford and Canada: 100 Years Together (Montréal: Syam Publishing, 2003), p.116.
4. Smith, Charles (March 25, 2006). "Lofty ambition / Developer revs up former Ford factory in Richmond for real live-work spaces". The San Francisco Chronicle.
5. Archived 2012-01-27 at the Wayback Machine
6. ^ "Birth of the Ford Pinto". Howstuffworks.com.
7. "Quart in a Pinto". The Motor (magazine). Vol. 3558. August 26, 1970. pp. 26–27.
8. "How Stuff Works Pinto".
9. ^ Standard Catalog of Ford, 4th Edition, 2007, by John Gunnell. Krause Publications
10. ^ Gunnell, John A. and Lenzke, James T. (1995). Standard Catalog of Ford Cars, 1903–1990. Krause Publications. ISBN 0-87341-140-4.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
11. "HowStuffWorks "The Birth of the Ford Pinto"".
12. Lienert, Dan (January 27, 2004). "The worst cars of all time". Forbes.
13. ^ "1971 Ford Pinto - The 50 Worst Cars of All Time". Time. September 7, 2007.
14. "Ugliest Cars of the Past 50 Years". Business Week, Damian Joseph, October 30, 2009.
15. Bazerman, Max H.; Tenbrunsel, Ann E. (April 2011). "Ethical Breakdowns". Harvard Business Review. Retrieved February 28, 2015.
16. Birsch, Douglas (October 25, 1994). The Ford Pinto Case.
17. Woodyard, Chris (March 28, 2011). "Case: Lee Iacocca's Pinto: A fiery failure". USA Today.
18. Kitman, Jamie (March 24, 2011). "Don't Like Government Regulation? How'd You Like Another Pinto?". Cartalk.com.
19. ^ Template:PDFlink
20. The Ford Pinto Case. State University of New York Press, Douglas Birsch and John Fielder, 1994, page 3. October 1, 1994. ISBN 978-0-7914-2234-2.
21. ^ Wojdyla, Ben (May 20, 2011). "The Top Automotive Engineering Failures: The Ford Pinto Fuel Tanks". Popular Mechanics. Retrieved February 28, 2015.
22. Dowie, Mark (September 1977). "Pinto Madness". Mother Jones. Retrieved January 17, 2014.
23. Grush, E.S.; Saundy, C.S. Fatalities Associated With Crash Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires (PDF) (Report). Ford Environmental and Safety Engineering. Retrieved March 2, 2016.
24. Sherefkin, Robert (June 16, 2003). "Case: Lee Iacocca's Pinto: A fiery failure". Automotive News.
25. "Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co".
26. "Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co".
27. Lee, M.T.; Ermann, M.D. (Feb 1999). "Pinto "Madness," a Flawed Landmark Narrative: An Organizational and Network Analysis". Social Problems. 46 (1).
28. Stuart, Reginald (June 11, 1980). "Governmant notifies Ford of possible recall for 16 million autos". The New York Times. Ford has put its costs of litigation and recall service on the Pinto at approximately $100 million. In the Pinto case, the highway safety agency made an initial determination in May 1978 that a defect existed in the fuel tank system. Days before a formal recall order was to be issued by the Government, Ford voluntarily recalled more than a million Pintos for modifications of the fuel tank system.
29. "NHTSA Recalls for the 1975 Ford Pinto".
30. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/04/the-engineers-lament "former head of the N.H.T.S.A. testified on Ford’s behalf, stating that in his opinion the Pinto’s design was no more or less safe than that of any other car in its class"
31. Olson, Walter (February 9, 1993). "The Most Dangerous Vehicle On the Road". The Wall Street Journal. Remarkably, even the affair of the "exploding" Ford Pinto--universally hailed as the acme of product liability success--is starting to look like hype. In a summer 1991 Rutgers Law Review article Gary Schwartz demolishes "the myth of the Pinto case." Actual deaths in Pinto fires have come in at a known 27, not the expected thousand or more. More startling, Schwartz shows that everyone's received ideas about the fabled "smoking gun" memo are false. The actual memo did not pertain to Pintos, or even Ford products, but to American cars in general; it dealt with rollovers, not rear-end collisions; it did not contemplate the matter of tort liability at all, let alone accept it as cheaper than a design change; it assigned a value to human life because federal regulators, for whose eyes it was meant, themselves employed that concept in their deliberations; and the value it used was one that they, the regulators, had set forth in documents. In retrospect, Schwartz writes, the Pinto's safety record appears to have been very typical of its time and class.
32. Amal, Nag (March 16, 1984). "Ford Settles Lawsuit Over Accident Victim For $1.8 Million Total". Wall Street Journal. p. 1.
33. Graham, John D. (2010). "Product liability and motor vehicle safety."". In Huber, Peter William (ed.). The liability maze: the impact of liability law on safety and innovation. Brookings Institution Press. p. 158. ISBN 9780815720188.
34. Waters, Frank (May 15, 1986). "Air Bag Litigation: Plaintiffs, Start Your Engines". Pepperdine Law Review. 13 (4): 5. Retrieved March 2, 2016. In Burgess v. Ford Motor Co., Ford was sued by a woman who had suffered severe brain damage. The 1975 Ford Pinto in which she was riding as a front seat passenger, and which was not equipped with air bag safety restraints, was struck by a Camaro in a front-angle intersection collision. Plaintiff claimed that the lack of an air bag protection system had rendered the 1975 Pinto uncrashworthy.
35. Frank, Cheryl (August 1985). "Pumped-up issue: Clash seen on auto air bags". ABA Journal. 71 (8): 22. Only a few air bag cases have been settled; none has gone to trial. The largest divulged settlement is Ford Motor Co.'s agreement in 1984 to pay Rebecca Burgess $1.8 million for severe brain damage and burns incurred when a Ford Pinto's fuel tank exploded. Burgess v. Ford, Civil Action No. CV 79-3515.
36. http://cms.scca.com/documents/Pro%20Racing/Archives/Trans-Am/1972.pdf
37. http://cms.scca.com/documents/Pro%20Racing/Archives/Trans-Am/1973.pdf
38. http://cms.scca.com/documents/Pro%20Racing/Archives/Trans-Am/1971.pdf

External links

• Template:Dmoz
• FordPinto.com
• Mother Jones magazine's 1977 expose on the Ford Pinto
• Ford Pinto at The Crittenden Automotive Library includes full 1973 brochure in JPG format
• Ford Pinto Specifications and Production figures
• Ford Pinto Introduction Commercial

v t e Ford vehicles
Current models	Cars Focus Mondeo/Taurus Mustang Pickup trucks F-Series Super Duty F-150 Lightning Maverick Ranger SUVs/crossovers Bronco Bronco Sport Capri EV Edge L Equator Escape/Kuga Everest Expedition Explorer Explorer EV Mondeo Sport Mustang Mach-E Puma Puma Gen-E Territory / Equator Sport Vans Transit Courier Connect Custom Commercial trucks Cargo Super Duty F-250/F-350/F-450/F-550/F-600 Medium Duty F-650/F-750 F-Max Other vehicles E-Series Cutaway
Former models (by date of introduction)	1900s Model A/AC Model B Model C Model F Model K Model N Model R Model S Model T 1910s–1920s Model TT Model A Model AA 1930s Model B / BB trucks / Model 18 / Model 40 Model Y Köln Rheinland Model 48 Model C (Europe) Model C Ten Eifel Model CX 1937 Ford Model 7W Model 7Y E83W Prefect Anglia 1940s 1941 Ford Vedette Pilot 1949 Ford Custom B-Series Transit Bus N-series tractor 1950s 1952 Ford 1955 Ford 1957 Ford Abeille C-Series Comète Consul Thames Trader Country Sedan Country Squire Courier Crestline Del Rio Edsel (brand) Fairlane FK Galaxie Mainline NAA tractor Parklane Popular Ranchero Squire Taunus Thunderbird Vendôme Versailles (France) Zephyr 1960s 1960 Ford Capri Corcel Corsair Cortina E-Series/Econoline/Club Wagon Escort (Europe) Escort RS Cosworth Fairlane (Australia) P7 Ford Shelby Mustang Fairlane Thunderbolt D-Series Fairmont (Australia) Futura Falcon (North America) Falcon (Argentina) Falcon (Australia) GT40 LTD Torino 1970s Courier Econovan Econowagon Elite Fairmont Fiesta Granada (Europe) Granada (North America) L-Series Trucks Landau (Brazil) Landau (Australia) LTD II Maverick (North America) P100 Pinto 1980s Aerostar Bantam Bronco II Del Rey Durango Escort (North America) EXP Festiva Laser/Lynx/Meteor/Tierra LTD Crown Victoria Orion Pampa Probe Capri (Australia) Pronto RS200 Trader Scorpio Sierra Telstar Taurus (North America) list Tempo Verona 1990s Contour Cougar Crown Victoria Freda Galaxy Ka Puma (coupé) Royale Versailles (Brazil) Windstar ZX2 2000s Activa C-Max EcoSport Edge Excursion Explorer Sport Trac Five Hundred Flex GT LCF Freestyle Focus (North America) Fusion (Americas) Fusion (Europe) Ikon i-Max Maverick (Europe) S-Max Sportka/Streetka Territory (Australia) 2010s B-Max Escort (China) Figo Taurus (China)
Military	GP/GPW GPA GTB M1918 M8 Greyhound M151 M656 T17 Deerhound
Related topics	Concept vehicles Mercury (list) Lincoln (list) Police vehicles Crown Victoria Interceptor Tractors Trucks
Category List

• Copied and pasted articles and sections with url provided from March 2016
• Ford vehicles
• Rear-wheel-drive vehicles
• Station wagons
• Subcompact cars
• Sedans
• 1970s automobiles
• 1980s automobiles
• Product safety scandals
• Motor vehicles manufactured in the United States
• Cars introduced in 1970