The Ford-Firestone Tire Crisis

In August of 1978 three teenage girls were driving a Ford Pinto and were struck from behind. The three girls died because the Ford Pinto’s fuel tank ruptured from the collision and burst into flames. There was a big debate about the safety of the Ford Pinto to its proneness to its fuel tank catching on fire in low-speed rear-end

There are many different cases where people have been critically injured or have died from burn-related injuries from the ruptured the Pino gas tank. This case study specifically discusses the 1978 untimely deaths of Lynn Marie Ulrich, Dana Ulrich, and Judy Ann. Between 1971 and 1978, the Pinto was responsible for a number of fire-related deaths. It was the death of these teenagers that lead brought the controversy of the Ford Pinto’s faulty gas tank placement to a climax resulting in criminal homicide charges for the automaker. Ford’s CEO Henry Ford II and Ford’s new president Lee Iacocca were responsible for the launch of the Ford Pinto. To stay ahead of the growing competition, The Pinto was not to weigh over 2,000 pounds and not costs not to exceed $2,000. Ford officials knew that the Pinto represented a serious fire issue when struck from the rear, but were desperate to expedite the vehicle’s release, the Pintos timing was set just under 25 months. Tooling has already been kicked off, so when crash tests revealed a serious defect in the gas tank, it was too late for any design modifications. The tooling was well underway. Therefore, Ford’s president decided it would be too costly to make changes in the Pinto’s gas tank location pushing ahead with the original design which went unchanged for six years. Any changes to the low-cost Ford Pinto would result in an increased price, thus possibly making it less desirable by small car buyers. Iacocca understood that people shopping for compact cars were watching every dollar, One Ford engineer explained, “the process of elasticity on these subcompacts is extremely tight. You can price yourself right out of the market by adding $25 to the production cost of the model”.

- the relationship causes person to create a new dynamic based on the future rather than on what has been known in the past.

why we form relationships eventually lead to a deeper level of connection, the intensifying and

Ford executives were under a great deal of pressure to produce a smaller, more gas efficient automobile. Japanese and German automobile sales were rapidly increasing. These competitive forces drove Ford’s executive team to respond by rushing the design process of the Ford Pinto. By 1973, the Pinto was well into production when engineers discovered a flaw in the gas tank, which was located just under the rear bumper. They discovered that if the vehicle suffered a rear-end collision over 20 mph, the gas tank could break and spill gasoline into the passenger compartment, potentially resulting in a fire. The remedy for the flaw was a part that cost $11.00 per vehicle. Executives at Ford knew the company had followed all safety standards and regulations. At that time, automobile safety standards only needed gas tanks to withstand a collision under 20 mph. An internal cost-benefit analysis revealed the costs would be substantially higher to fix the design flaw that the costs associated with any potential damages due to collisions and loss of life. The public remained unaware until Mother Jones journalist, Mark Dowie broke the story in 1977. Fueled by the media, what followed was a frenzy of public outcry and court trials.

The Grand Jury initiated a case against Ford after a tragic accident occurred on 10th August 1978 along U.S. Highway 33 near Goshen, involving a 1973 Ford Pinto car that was struck from the rear by a van. On board of the 1973 Ford Pinto there were two sisters (Judy and Lynn Ulrich) and their cousin Donna Ulrich who succumbed to burnt injuries after Pinto’s gas tank ruptured and got into flames in the process.

literature reported that in only 2-3% of all accidents are tires or wheels reported to be a

It is often said that all good things come to an end. Relationships come and go, and some mean more than others. In fact, there was even a relationship model developed by a communication researcher by the name of Mark Knapp. In his model, he goes through what seems to be presented as a smooth step transition from each stage in which a relationship eventually evolves into. As I studied this up then down ladder model, I began to realize that I ought to build up some strong calf muscles, because my relationship sure has climbed up and down a few flights of stairs. Mark Knapp believes that relationships go through multiple stages, the uphill stages being initiation, experimenting, intensifying, integrating, bonding, then relational maintenance. On the flip side, Knapp believes the descending stages to be differentiating, circumscribing, avoiding, and eventually, termination.

We were just outside of York, PA when all of a sudden what sounded like an enormous explosion ruptured our ears. We pulled off to the side of the road in a screeching halt, ready to inspect the damage. As a result, we got a puncture in the front right tire, enough to keep us stuck at the side of the highway for

These number will be used for predicting future financial statements later in this case study.

Personal evaluation of this case would take into consideration the fact; one engineer did offer a document indicating and estimate for the cost of value refitting which would prevent the Ford Pinto from bursting into flames should a rear end collision occur. A simple, $1, plastic gadget weighing one pound fitted over the gas tank bolts would have prevented the tank from being punctured. Conclusion was that "it was more economical to let people die and settle the suits afterward" (Newton and Ford, 2008). Put simply, the Ford corporate heads believed no project was worth manufacturing if the cost-benefit indicated a greater cost than the benefit. Further evaluation of the analysis indicated if the

In 1972 a Ford Pinto, purchased six months prior, unexpectedly stalled on the freeway in California. The Pinto was hit from behind by a Ford Galaxy, erupting into flames instantly. The driver of the car, Lilly Gray, suffered from fatal burns and died a few days later in the hospital. The passenger, a 13-year old boy named Richard Grimshaw, was also severely injured from burns, which caused his face and body to be permanently disfigured.

The Ford Motor Company and General Motors have greatly influenced and shaped the global automobiles industry over the 20th Century. While there are other big car-makers both in the United States and elsewhere in the globe, the two companies have been the commonest and significant players across the entire sector. This research focuses on an argument of how competition between both companies has benefited them.

One of the biggest ratifications Goodyear had in the 1900’s, was when Ford started equipping their Model T with Goodyear Tires.

As it relates to the competitive structure, or the number and size distribution of companies within an industry, the automobile industry is considered a consolidated industry, where a small number of large companies dominate and are able to set prices. Traditionally, in America, these companies were called “The Big Three,” Chrysler, Ford, and GM, but Toyota, was also a major rival during the recession. “In consolidated industries, companies are interdependent, because one company’s competitive actions or moves (with regard to price, quality, and so on) directly affect the market share of its rivals, and thus their profitability” (Hill & Jones, 2012, p. 62). The relative power of consolidation on the automobile industry was high.