Importing a Car from the US

Oneball

Oneball

Member
Messages
11,117
philw696 said:
Trials mate so how did you sort the manifold sealing ?
Click to expand...

Don’t know if it’s sealed yet!

Ive slotted the mounting holes a bit more so the bolts are definitely not fouling and I’ve used some better ARP washers as the zinc plated ones had bent as it’s 3/8” bolt and the holes in the manifold are 1/2”.
 
lifes2short

lifes2short

Member
Messages
5,831
Oneball said:
Just to confuse matters Ford made a car called the Pinto in the States and it was fitted with the Kent and Cologne engines.
Click to expand...

just googled that and this photo came up, cant imagine a kent in that, v6 yes, think google knows i like cars with birds now ;)


87562
 
Oneball

Oneball

Member
Messages
11,117
2b1ask1 said:
Ah the Ford BBQ

Notorious for exploding the tank in even a light rear end impact, with no safety cell if the doors wouldn’t open it would cook the occupants!
Click to expand...

Didn’t they find the issue during development and they worked out it would be cheaper to pay the wrongful death lawsuits than change the fuel tank design?
 
lifes2short

lifes2short

Member
Messages
5,831
2b1ask1 said:
Ah the Ford BBQ

Notorious for exploding the tank in even a light rear end impact, with no safety cell if the doors wouldn’t open it would cook the occupants!
Click to expand...

extract :eek:

"The Ford Pinto is perhaps the most dangerous car ever created. A series of design defects caused the car to burst into flames in low-speed collisions. But disturbingly, the defects engineered into the Pinto were no accident. In Ford’s quest to make a lighter, cheaper car, the corporation deliberately cut safety corners.

In 1973, Ford’s engineers created a cost-benefit analysis outlined in what has come to be known as the “let them burn memo.” The memo outlined the actual mathematical calculation used by the company to weigh the cost of human life against the cost of implementing safety design in the car. It showed the company knew its actions would result in burns and deaths. Yet Ford triumphantly rolled out the Pinto anyway as, “The Little Carefree Car.”

There was nothing carefree about the victims of Pinto explosions and fires. The burn injuries are horrific. Those victims who weren’t killed were condemned to a life sentence of suffering."
 
2b1ask1

2b1ask1

Special case
Messages
20,270
Oneball said:
Didn’t they find the issue during development and they worked out it would be cheaper to pay the wrongful death lawsuits than change the fuel tank design?
Click to expand...

I think you are right. I was a little alarmed by the location of the tank in your one, presumably there isn’t anywhere else it will go? It did look to have a bit of a cage around it though. The Pinto was immediately behind the rear bumper and was seamed around the middle in the same spot!
 
Oneball

Oneball

Member
Messages
11,117
2b1ask1 said:
I think you are right. I was a little alarmed by the location of the tank in your one, presumably there isn’t anywhere else it will go? It did look to have a bit of a cage around it though. The Pinto was immediately behind the rear bumper and was seamed around the middle in the same spot!
Click to expand...

There’s about 8” of bodywork and 3” of chassis behind the tank. Plus as you say it’s in a frame and foam filled. A bag tank would be better but they get expensive with their limited life. It’s pretty normal place though MGBs, Jags, 250SWB etc they’re all stuck out the back under/in the boot
 
Oneball

Oneball

Member
Messages
11,117
Rear lights cleaned and painted.
8770087701
I’ve also pressed new bulb holders in. The electrical pig tails were missing and are £25 each. This is the “Corvette tax” that’s made this so expensive, any other Chevy they’re a fiver. So got 4 conventional bulb holders from eBay for £10.
87702
 
You must log in or register to reply here.