Post

real straightforward calculation finds that Cybertrucks are 17 times more likely to have fire fatalities than the Ford Pinto fuelarc.com/evs/its-offi...

I really love this! My first car was a Pinto that my mom sold me when it had 90k miles (pesky baffler issue was fixed). It was a great car up to 134k miles, after which it broke down so many times over the next 5 yrs that finally AAA sent me a warning letter bcz I'd been towed 7 times in 1 year😄.

But, for all its problems, my Pinto never caught on fire!

As I recall, the fire danger was when Pinto got smacked hard in the rear, where the fuel tank was located, causing leakage. How common was that? I have not kept up on the nature of the fire causes for Cybertruck, but obviously a much more common occurrence whatever the origin.

It wasn't so much the design as how Ford responded. Rather than admit there was a problem and issue a recall (shorter bolts on the affected models would have solved it) they decided it would be cheaper to pay compensation to the families of victims.

My recollection is that it was something more substantial than too long bolts. I thought the fuel tank was too exposed to impact caused by a weak rear bumper and easily-detached fuel filler tube.

27 deaths out of 3.1 million cars sold, not that common!

But I would argue that the Pinto fuel filler design was still inherently dangerous. Plenty of reason for Ford to be liable for deaths.