101 Things I Learned® in Engineering School by John Kuprenas & Matthew Frederick

Author:John Kuprenas & Matthew Frederick [Kuprenas, John]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
Publisher: Crown/Archetype
Published: 2018-04-02T16:00:00+00:00

52

53

The Ford Pinto wasn’t unsafe.

Following the influx of small foreign cars into the U.S. in the 1960s, Ford developed the Pinto on an accelerated schedule. Shortly after its release, the vehicle was assailed for catching fire in rear-end crashes. Over 500 deaths were said to have resulted from design flaws such as bolts protruding from the rear differential near the gas tank.

In a wrongful-death lawsuit, an internal Ford document surfaced that stated that unimplemented improvements to the gas tanks would have cost only $11 per vehicle. Ford, using a human life value of $200,000, determined it would cost far less to pay for injuries and deaths than to improve 12.5 million vehicles. The legal standard of the day was expected to excuse Ford from liability, because the courts to that point had not considered a defendant negligent if the cost of an improvement exceeded its benefit. But the jury found Ford liable and ordered it to pay $3M compensation and $125M in punitive damages (later reduced to $3.5M).

A later study revealed that the unimplemented $11 improvement was never meant to address gas tank failures in rear-end collisions. Nor did Ford place a $200,000 value on human life; this value was created by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Statistics indicate the Pinto’s overall safety record was average for its day, with its registration rate matching its rate of involvement in vehicle fatalities.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.