Ford Pinto
Upon release the Pinto was received with both positive and negative reviews. "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. "Super Stock Magazine" found the fit and finish to be "superior" and were impressed with the car overall. "Car and Driver" found the Pinto, when equipped with the larger 2.0L engine and front disc brakes, to be a nimble and powerful commuter car with good visibility and sports-car feel. A review of the 1974 Pinto with an automatic transmission by "Car and Driver" was not as favorable noting significant decreases in mileage and acceleration.
Ford Pinto
In 1973, Ford's Environmental and Safety Engineering division developed a cost-benefit analysis entitled "Fatalities Associated with Crash Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires" for submission to the NHTSA in support of Ford's objection to proposed stronger fuel system regulation. The document became known as the "Pinto Memo". Cost-benefit analysis was one tool used in the evaluation of safety design decisions accepted by the industry and the NHTSA. The analysis compared the cost of repairs to the societal costs for injuries and deaths related to fires in cases of vehicle rollovers for all cars sold in the US by all manufacturers. The values assigned to serious burn injuries and loss of life were based on values calculated by NHTSA in 1972. In the memo Ford estimated the cost of fuel system modifications to reduce fire risks in rollover events to be $11 per car across 12.5 million cars and light trucks (all manufacturers), for a total of $137 million. The design changes were estimated to save 180 burn deaths and 180 serious injuries per year, a cost to society of $49.5 million.