What engines did the Ford Pinto have?
The Pinto’s US lineup centered on three four-cylinder engines: a 1.6-liter, a 2.0-liter, and a 2.3-liter. European and other markets used smaller displacements such as 1.3- and 1.6-liter engines. Here is how the engine options broke down across the Pinto’s production life (1971–1980).
United States market engines
Ford offered a progression of four-cylinder engines in the US Pinto, expanding the lineup from the base engine to larger displacement options. The following list highlights the main US-spec engines that powered Pintos during its production run.
- 1.6 L inline-4 (approximately 1,597 cc) — the standard U.S. engine for early Pintos and a baseline powertrain for many models.
- 2.0 L inline-4 (approximately 1,993 cc) — a larger option introduced to provide more torque and mid-range power.
- 2.3 L inline-4 (approximately 2,253 cc) — a widely used upgrade, common on later Pintos and shared with other Ford models of the era.
Over the years, output and configuration varied by year, carburetion vs. fuel injection, and emissions equipment, but these three displacements comprised the core US engine lineup for the Pinto.
European and other markets engines
Outside the United States, the Pinto was typically equipped with smaller, more economical engines. The primary options in Europe and other regions included the following displacements.
- 1.3 L inline-4 (about 1,299 cc) — a common European starter engine for lighter Pinto variants.
- 1.6 L inline-4 (about 1,595 cc) — a widely used European option, offering a balance of efficiency and performance.
European Pintos tended to emphasize economy and compact dimensions, which is reflected in the engine choices offered there during the model’s production period.
Summary
In summary, the Ford Pinto’s engine roster reflects Ford’s budget-friendly subcompact strategy: smaller displacements in Europe (1.3–1.6 L) and a US lineup that grew from 1.6 L to include 2.0 L and 2.3 L four-cylinders. The 2.3 L Lima family engine became a hallmark of late Pinto production and also connected other Ford small cars of the era.
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 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.
How much horsepower does a 2.3 Pinto engine have?
2.3 (LL23)
The earliest units produced 66 kW (89 hp) and 160 N⋅m (118 lb⋅ft). This engine has also been known as the Lima engine, after the Lima Engine plant in Lima, Ohio, where it was first manufactured (it was also manufactured in Brazil starting in 1974).
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.
