What engines did Ford Pinto have?

The Ford Pinto relied on small inline-four engines drawn from Ford’s own engine families. In practice, Pintos used primarily Kent-family units in the early years and CVH-family variants in later European models. The exact mix varied by market and production year.

Engine families used in the Pinto

The following outlines the main engine options that powered the Pinto across its different markets and generations.

Kent family (1.3L and 1.6L)

In its early years, the Pinto commonly used Kent-family inline-four engines. These included the smaller 1.3-liter option and the larger 1.6-liter variant, both of which delivered the Pinto’s characteristic compact-car performance and efficiency.

• 1.3-liter Kent inline-four


• 1.6-liter Kent inline-four

These Kent engines gave the Pinto its traditional lightness and straightforward maintenance profile, helping establish the model as an economical starter car during its heyday.

CVH family (1.6L and larger)

Later in its production, especially for European markets, the Pinto saw CVH-family four-cylinders. The CVH options included a 1.6-liter version and, in some markets, larger CVH variants that offered more power and smoothness compared to the early Kent installations.

• 1.6-liter CVH inline-four


• Larger CVH variants (where offered in certain markets)

CVH engines represented Ford’s move toward more modern overhead-cam designs, improving efficiency and performance within the Pinto lineup.

Regional variations and context

Engine availability varied by market and production period. The U.S. Pinto lineup leaned heavily on smaller Kent engines in its early years, while European Pintos increasingly featured CVH configurations as Ford updated the model for regional tastes and emissions requirements.

Summary

The Ford Pinto’s powertrain history centers on two main families of four-cylinder engines: the Kent family, with 1.3L and 1.6L variants, and the CVH family, including a 1.6L version and larger CVH options in select markets. The exact engine mix depended on year and region, reflecting Ford’s broader engine strategy for compact cars during the Pinto era.

What is a Ford Pinto worth today?

The price of a Ford Pinto varies greatly depending on its condition, with recent sales ranging from about $2,000$ 2 comma 000$2,000 for a low-end model to over $34,000$ 34 comma 000$34,000 for a top-spec 1979 Squire. The average price for a used Ford Pinto is approximately $12,139$ 12 comma 139$12,139. When the Pinto was originally released in 1971, its base price was just over $1,900$ 1 comma 900$1,900.
 
Historical price (1971)

• Base Sedan: $1,919$ 1 comma 919$1,919 (which is about $15,000$ 15 comma 000$15,000 in 2024 dollars)
• Hatchback: $2,062$ 2 comma 062$2,062 (about $16,000$ 16 comma 000$16,000 in 2024 dollars) 

Current market price (2023-2025)

• Average: $12,139$ 12 comma 139$12,139
• Highest sale: $34,650$ 34 comma 650$34,650 for a 1979 Squire
• Lowest sale: $2,000$ 2 comma 000$2,000 for a 1980 Pony Wagon 

Factors affecting current price

• Condition: Pristine, low-mileage examples command much higher prices.
• Model and trim: Higher-level trims like the Squire are worth more.
• Market fluctuations: The price of classic cars can change based on demand. 

What engines were available in the Ford Pinto?

The Ford Pinto had several engine options, including 1.3 L, 1.6 L, 2.0 L, and 2.3 L inline-four engines. Additionally, certain models offered a 2.8 L V6 engine, which was available in models from 1975-1977. The engines varied in displacement, horsepower, and specific design, including the European-developed Kent and EAO engines and the North American-developed 2.3L "Lima" engine.
 
You can watch this video to learn more about the performance of the Pinto engine: 1mRare CarsYouTube · Dec 28, 2024
Engine options

• 1.3 L: An earlier engine option for some European models. 
• 1.6 L: Available in earlier models, with later versions in the 1980s featuring a 1,598 cc displacement. 
• 2.0 L: A common engine, with a 1,993 cc version and a later 1,998 cc version. 
• 2.3 L: The North American-developed "Lima" engine, introduced in 1974 as the step-up option. 
• 2.8 L V6: A Cologne V6 engine that was offered as an option for certain models in the mid-1970s, though it was a tight fit in the engine bay. 

Did Ford ever put a V8 in a Pinto?

In their day, most Ford Pintos were pretty pokey. This one is emphatically not. With a 302-cubic-inch V-8 crate engine installed, this '70s subcompact is built to surprise at the drag strip.

What was the flaw in the Ford Pinto?

The main design flaw of the Ford Pinto was its rear-end vulnerability to fuel tank rupture and ignition in collisions. The fuel tank was thin, poorly protected, and placed behind the rear axle, where protruding bolts from the rear differential could easily puncture it during crashes above 25 mph. Despite knowing about this flaw, Ford was reluctant to fix it due to production time constraints and a cost-benefit analysis that prioritized profit over safety, a decision that led to numerous fiery accidents and lawsuits.
 
The design flaw

• Placement of the fuel tank: The fuel tank was positioned between the rear bumper and the rear axle.
• Thin tank walls: Due to cost-cutting measures, the fuel tank was made with exceptionally thin metal.
• Protruding bolts: Four poorly placed bolts on the rear differential assembly could puncture the tank.
• Lack of protection: There was no protective shield or support structure to prevent the bolts from puncturing the tank. 

The consequences

• In rear-end collisions at speeds over 25 mph, the bumper would buckle, the differential bolts would puncture the fuel tank, and the fuel would leak, leading to a high risk of fire and explosion. 
• The car was particularly dangerous in highway rear-end collisions. 
• This design flaw resulted in numerous accidents, with reports of hundreds of burn deaths. 

Ford's response

• Awareness: Engineers discovered the flaw during pre-production testing but were pressured to stick to a tight production schedule. 
• Cost-benefit analysis: Ford conducted a cost-benefit analysis that concluded it was cheaper to pay for accident lawsuits than to recall and fix the vehicles. 
• Correction: Ford eventually implemented a fix in the 1977 models by adding a plastic baffle between the tank and differential, a small improvement to prevent fuel leakage.