FORD EXECUTIVES KNEW THEY WERE KILLING PEOPLE, WHY HAVEN'T THEY BEEN GIVEN THE DEATH SENTENCE?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Damn I feel like I am wading in the cess pool but I have to ask.

WATERBUFFALO
"Did you know that a vehicle capable of 96 miles per gallon has not been able to be sold in this country for the last 7 years because of the muscle the oil and auto companies have here?"

Can you give me some proof of that statement please.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,431
6,089
126
Actually, etech, the water buffalow only gets 96 miles to the bale, but you have to stop often to sweep up.

jhu, I wouldn't think of it; I know how much you hate sloppy seconds. And where you been, boy? It's good ta seez ya. Are ya in school?

Chess, I could a swored it was da govment dat caused da problem.

The reason Ford suggested such a low pressure was that the explorer tends to roll over and under inflation helps some.
 

Russ

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
21,093
3
0
As usual, everyone just ignores the one person in this thread who actually has first-hand knowledge on the topic. Did anyone bother to even read Pacfanweb's post?

Russ, NCNE
 

DABANSHEE

Banned
Dec 8, 1999
2,355
0
0
Actually Waterbuffalo, if you were to delve past all the layers of ownership layers, most of those companies you mentioned are probably majority owned by superanuation funds, in other words retirees.

"First off AnandTech doesnt endorse any of them, nor do we have any choice what so ever what the ad companies serve up. They make their own campaigns and serve them."

Ah, Zuni, no one put a gun to Anand's head & forced him to sign a contract giving up his right to vet adds. If Anand decides he doesnt want Ford adds on his sight because of the reasons outlined above he could communicate his feelings with his adlink server company & could alway change adlink servers if they don't take his feelings into account - Basically what I'm is its Anand's site, so the buck stops with him.

 

WATERBUFFALO

Banned
Apr 2, 2000
174
0
0
etech,

I'm real busy right now, but the company name is Peugeot and they are in France. They make great vehicles, but were driven out of the US through taxes and tariffs that priced them out of the market. I'm surprised that you are demanding proof when Honda and others have cars you can go out and buy today that get 70 miles to a gallon. Strange how France was our ally at one time and we give better deals to Germany. Those Krauts sure know how to make great machines, though. It's too bad Mercedes & BMW decided to have their parts made in China.
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Russ:

I read it, but I'm not about to say the tires have no defects. Anyone who can say that must have access to all the post crash tire inspections, testimony from employees at Firestone, government test results, scientific tests, etc. I think you are grossly oversimplifying the problem. All the facts are hardly in our hands. And what kind of tire is going to kill my family if it is a few pounds under pressure? All tires lose pressure and at varying rates. To be safe, a tire must be operable at pressures well above and below stated optimum pressures. This is just common sense. I'm pretty sure Firestone has a serious problem because of the sheer number of complaints about their tires.
 

Tominator

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,559
1
0
...WATERBUFFALO=Idiot

My brother is on his third Ford Explorer. All came with Firestone tires. No problems ever!

The term First Degree Murder has a definition....not that he would be interested...



<< .....criticize people who know exactly what they are talking about ..... >>


Wonder who that could be? Sure isn't you...



<< Did you know that a vehicle capable of 96 miles per gallon has not been able to be sold in this country for the last 7 years because of the muscle the oil and auto companies have here? >>


Sounds like Sierra Club propaganda.....A gallon of gas only has so much energy no matter how it is burned.....more nonsense!



<< Firestone is a Japanese corporation, so killing Americans is easy for them >>


Racists Bastard!:)

I could go on and on....but...WATERBUFFALO=Idiot....
 

kru

Platinum Member
Oct 24, 1999
2,818
0
0
There is physical evidence that Ford was made aware of this problem over THREE YEARS AGO.

If so, let's hear it.

Everyone believes what they want to believe

Yourself included. :)

You've made it clear you belong on one side while anyone who does not agree with you 100% belongs on the other side. Makes it really hard to have a rational give-and-take discussion, don't you think?
 

PCAddict

Diamond Member
Nov 19, 1999
3,804
0
0
I am not happy with Ford, nor Firestone at this point. I own a Ford vehicle which came with the recalled tires. I replaced them on my own months ago because they sucked so bad.

I'm going to reserve further judgement until all of the facts are out.
 

snoogans

Banned
Sep 14, 2000
248
0
0
This happens ALL THE TIME. Corporations exist to make money, that's it. They don't care how.

Nobody cares about the &quot;little people&quot; even though their company depends on us buying their stuff. However, they continue to sell us 3rd rate products and we continue to pay for them. When they make something like it's supposed to be made (higher quality materials, more attention to research and whatnot) we get charged more because it's a &quot;premium&quot; product. What they should have done in the first place and make it standard, they call extras and make us pay for it

I wanna run something buy you...check this out (with an open mind): (((LONG)))

Let's choose a product to discuss first...Compact Discs. Usually, these range from 12+...here and there you can get 'em for 10. I'm talking about new CD's too, not used.
Anyway, let's say EVERYONE on the planet decides they don't wanna pay that much for a CD anymore. So, that forces the record companies to lower the price. We already know the artists who make the music don't get much from CD sales. Most of it goes to marketing, execs, studio time, etc... So, to lower prices on CD's, companies would have to cut some people out of the process (Which they should do already) or lower their salaries.

I wouldn't want a paycut if nobody else got one so that's not possible. Everyone would have to take a pay cut...which would bring down the whole system. Everyone would make less but everything would cost less too. Us &quot;little people&quot; do have the power to change whatever but only if we all agree...a revolution now and then is a good thing.

I realize it'll never happen and the above only makes sense in theory (least to me) but it's interesting all the same.

Us against the companies. I'll be on the frontlines once &quot;Planet Starbucks&quot; happens. Too bad there is no reset button because we need one. We let the greedy get away with too much now they think they can get away with anything.

Everything is connected and everything is dirty. Wash it all away...
 

Jazar

Senior member
Mar 27, 2000
262
0
0
Ladies and Gentlemen... Mr. Ralph Nader (waterbuffalo) has found anandtech! :)
 

Shazam

Golden Member
Dec 15, 1999
1,136
1
0
Waterbuffalo: First degree, premeditated murder has a very strict definition under the law. I don't think Ford qualifies for it.
 

Russ

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
21,093
3
0


<< I think you are grossly oversimplifying the problem. >>



chess9,

I'm not oversimplifying anything. In point of fact I made no comment at all about the problem itself. I merely illuminated the fact that, as is nearly always the case, the one person who actually gets information from other than the usual suspect sources (the media) is ignored as the debate rages on.

For me, because he's on the receiving end in real life, he possesses more credibility than the press and radical organizations going after Ford, and certainly more than anyone in this thread.

Russ, NCNE
 

thebestMAX

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2000
7,487
121
106
I will never buy Firestone tires again. I said this in 1963 and never have. ONLY tire I ve ever had numerous problems with and have watched all my friends do the same. Have always had high performance cars and since the 60s have used Goodyear, BF Goodrich, Yokohama and so on. Only problems have been nails and how can you blame the tire?

Dont like Fords either, never feel like the brakes are going to stop me like they should. Lots of pretty cars though.
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Russ: I know those radical lawyers, most of whom are Republicans, are really hot on Firestones' cujones. :p

While I agree the media often bollix the easiest story, I don't think they are fabricating the problems. I give Pacfanweb's views some credence because he is in the industry. I also discount his views somewhat because he's in the industry.

Having said that, the sheer volume of complaints against Firestone, combined with the damning t.v. interviews of former employees suggests, but does not prove, Firestone has a serious problem. In addition, Ford is backing away from Firestone faster than GW backed away from Bob Jones University. They've already named Michelin as a replacement supplier. Did they do it just because there is a perception of bad tires, or because very real problems exist? Also, did all those Republican congressman who held hearings fall for the radical lawyers' line? Get a grip, Russ. Firestone probably produced a seriously defective product. The preliminary evidence looks very bad. Unless Firestone comes up with an un-smoking gun, they will probably disappear from the commercial landscape.

The sad part of this kind of corporate irresponsibility is that it gives guys like waterbuffalo a platform to shoot down capitalism. Every stupid corporate decision could be the one that brings industry more regulation. I still like to think we have managers who are smart enough to understand this simple equation, but Firestone doesn't look too smart right now.
 

Ornery

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,022
17
81
Firestone sure does have a bogus product there. That's pretty much undisputable. And who would even give a sh!t about it except that people are getting killed.

I'm still having trouble figuring out how a blow out could be such a big deal. Any vehicle could experience a blow out at any time. Why do so many of these crash and burn (figuratively)? If you had a high speed blow out in a Suburban or Montero would it suffer the same fate? Something's fishy. A friggen blow out should not be fatal! And should it matter if these victims were wearing seat belts or not? For some reason it does to me.
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Ornery:

As I've said before, the SUV design is not as good for stability as, say, my '87 Merc which is wide and low. Add faulty tires to a design that encourages roll-overs and you have tragedy. The design of the SUV puts great reliance upon reliable tires and the ability of the driver to handle the high center of gravity driving characteristics. I get a flat at 65 mph, I roll off the side of the road. SUV driver in his cushy environment, unprepared for the difficult chore of handling an out of control behemoth with a flat tire and high center of gravity equals tragedy. That's my analysis.

Many SUV owners would do well to learn how to properly handle their vehicle when it is off balance at high speeds. But how would we teach them?
 

Ornery

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,022
17
81
Hmmmm, I don't like the sound of this. I've always asked folks that get their cars up to around 140MPH what kind of tires they're running. I know it takes a special tire to hold up at those speeds. And I'd hate to have tire failure going that fast.

I don't think people take the warnings seriously about SUVs poor emergency handling. I'm even surprised its that bad. Sheesh, a simple blow out at legal speed means DEATH! Holy crap!

And Moonbeam will love this, but it seems to me that the government &quot;allows&quot; the construction and sales of SUVs to the general public. I can't believe anybody would be allowed to market a vehicle that was inherently unsafe. Although a motorcycle might fit that description! And if the government allows such an unsafe vehicle to be marketed, they might as well share the blame.

Firestone built a crappy product and should be liable. But if you had put those tires on your sedan, you'd only expect them to replace the tire if it gave out. If you had an accident because of the blow out, would you go after Firestone? Would your insurance company? Would you go after your vehicle manufacturer?

Seems to me that Ford tried to make the damn Explorer a little safer by underinflating the tires. I'm sure Firestone agreed that would be OK. Now it turns out that some of those tires that Pacfanweb mentioned, puked under the stress. By the time engineers figured out the problem, people had already been killed. But to go after either Ford or Firestone for &quot;knowingly&quot; letting shoddy tires be used doesn't really square up.

Who would I blame? Sounds like the old nursery rhyme about the horse shoe nail:
  • For want of a nail
    the shoe was lost.
    For want of a shoe
    the horse was lost.
    For want of a horse
    the rider was lost.
    For want of a rider
    the battle was lost.
    For want of a battle
    the kingdom was lost.
    And all for the want
    of a horseshoe nail.
Who would you sue for losing the kingdom? The blacksmith?

For the want of &quot;good rubber&quot; adhesion was lost. For the want of adhesion a tire was lost. For the want of a tire control was lost. For the want of control a life was lost. All for the want of good rubber?

Hmmm, for the want of a &quot;good vehicle design&quot; control was lost too. But that doesn't seem to fit in that reworked rhyme :confused:

Do you think that lives were lost because because of the Tire? Poor SUV design? No seat belt? Poor driving? Executives saving money? Was it the Government's fault for allowing a poor vehicle design on the road? Should the manufacturer of the poorly designed vehicle be to blame? How about the consumer/driver? Does he share any blame?

Oh well, I still don't see suing Ford except for the deep pockets aspect...
 

SJ

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,151
0
0
The majority of accidents involving firestone tires are explorers, however NOT ALL. The problem involve more than Ford and Firestone.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
I also think that people do not know their vehicles as well. How many of you know how to do routine maintenanceon you automobile? Who checks their tire pressure weekly? What about giving your car a physical inspection? Would you fly on an airline that didn't do maintenance? People no longer treat their cars right. I wash mine 3-4 times a week if not more. I check the oil level, tire pressure, under the hood, look at the suspension and make note of anything odd. I then research it on the net or take it to the dealer. We are making our cars death traps. I remember not to long ago that a wreck occured in front of me on the interstate. I was doing around 60. Two people rear ended people in the wreck. One was a soccer mom in a SUV. I simply applied my brakes and went into the emergency lane. DUH! Why run into the back of a car when the emergency lane is there? Oh the cause of the wreck was a man changing his tire in the middle of the freaking interstate!
 

eia430

Senior member
Sep 7, 2000
369
0
0
It's all about money, like the airline industry. The only time safety inovations will be implemented is when the cost to do so is less than the cost of not doing so. We all have a financial value to companies if it's cheaper to just let a few of us die and only cost 25 million a year but it would cost 30million to implement the changes well you can forget about the changes. But if it will cost the company 30,000,001 in money lost if no change is made then you bet the change will be made. Lives aren't important folks, you're just a number, it's the bottom line profit margin that is the all important and protected beast.
 

WATERBUFFALO

Banned
Apr 2, 2000
174
0
0
millenium,

it sounds like you are very aware of your vehicle. however, most people do not do as you do. we have to trust the manufacturer to advise us as to how often the care needs maintenance and to do the required maintenace at that time.

the manufacturer of a product has the responsibility to build in compensations for their product to be used at lower or higher standards to compensate for all those who do not follow the letter of the maintenance. I worked on the Ford assembly plant in Wixom, Michigan making t-birds and lincolns when i was an undergraduate on weekends and during the summers. the cars are built to be off inches in height from the ground on all four courners and still meet the inspection standard. there are many areas that have compensations built in which are inherant in their system. they have attempted to catch up with the Japanese and others, but the bottom line is money, and they count on american loyalty to purchase american products as well.

it's true also that suv's have a much greater chance of rolling over because their center of gravity is so high, but it is the job of the engineers to find solutions to these problems. in this case, ford would have lost billions if they waited to have the vehicle perfected before they began production, and after the production is begun and they are getting so many orders they can't keep up with them, it would be very unprofitable to stop and fix it them. that's why they tried to conpensate with the underinflated tires. when i was at ford and gm, the line didn't stop for anything; maybe if some were killed, until they could get the body out of the way, but it just *did not stop* and have 20,000 people standing around not working.

where ford betrayed us was when they continued selling these vehicles after they knew there was a problem and didn't warn people that they were in danger.

it reminds me of an encounter i had with a manufacturer of oven cleaner, which is a caustic substance that melts your skin. i asked him why they didn't put a skull and crossbones on it to be certain that even people who did not speak english would realize it's dangerous. his reply was that if they put a skull and crossbones on the can, people wouldn't buy it because they would think it was dangerous **which it was**. he said they weren't concerned about foreigners because they were based in cincinatti. I advised him that there are a great many people in this country don't read and write english well. it's pretty obvious to anyone who has ever called an institution such as a bank and has to pick a language first before doing a transction. but the oven cleaner manufacturer didn't care until i served them with a lawsuit and helped them do the right thing and change their policies. but taking on ford and firestone is a pretty heavy duty thing to do in this country, they own most of the political leaders. AND, you won't find very many lawyers who want to put themselves and their families in danger to fight them, unless the situation appears to be worth a lot of money, and has a high profile, which may happen here.

venuzuala is leading the charge by filing criminal charges against high officials at ford and firestone (involuntary homocide), and the people in venezuala can't get bought off like the people we have who have already sold their souls to the devil (aka major corporations), and the corporations pay off both sides to be sure to have one elected that is on their payroll.

their are people in venezuala who are going to be putting people in prison when this is all said and done. have you noticed what the political issues are here? prescription drugs. nothing about this incident has been discussed by the donkeys or elephants. they have seen to it that the only person who would bring it up at the debates has been cut out of them.

i'm going to be sure to vote for Ralph Nader, he is the only one running who refuses to take any money from any corporation. he is the only candidate who would lead this country out of the madness we find so intolerable that we have to shut it out of out minds so we will remain sane. the only problem is that if he had any chance to win after he had been illegally prevented from being in the debates, the corporations would kill him, just like the kennedy's and black leaders.

I know a lot about this because i was an anti-war activist in the 1960's and found myslef being followed by the FBI for burning my draft card on television at the 1967 Pentagon demonstration. the american civil liberties union got me off, but the Feds kept after me for years until they got so frustrated because they couldn't get me for anything and so they framed me and i was in jail for months fighting it. i was such a &quot;risk&quot; at the ripe old age of 19 that i couldn't get bail, and my family had to pay off a crooked judge to get me a &quot;deal&quot;. that was a real boost for my ideals, getting framed for a crime i didn't committ, then being able to walk away from it when they found out my family had the money to fight them, and paid off a &quot;fixer&quot;.

I requested my FBI file when the freedom of information act was implemented, and they sent me 30 pages with everything blacked out but my name and address because it was &quot;classified.&quot; in other words, they knew that there was information that would get them in trouble even, though this was over 30 years ago, so they just wouldn't let me see it. they claimed it had nothing to do with me, although they could not answer my question, &quot;If it has nothing to do with me, why is it in my file?&quot;
 

kru

Platinum Member
Oct 24, 1999
2,818
0
0
Firestone is a Japanese corporation, so killing Americans is easy for them. They still remember how we dropped nuclear bombs on their people.

I'd love to see you post this rascist bullsh|t over in the Asians? thread. :|
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Perhaps these tragedies have lessened the likelihood of people buying SUVs. If so, then some small good has occurred as a consequence of them. Personally, I think SUVs and Vans, e.g. the Silhouette, are a bad idea. Station wagons need to make a comeback.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
Waterbuffalo sounds like me when I was a college freshman . . . sigh.

The reality is that every manufacturer of every product, especially an inherently dangerous one like an automobile, is constantly evaluating the danger vs. cost equation. If cost were no object and neither was performance, we would all be driving Humvees.

The Pinto was far from being the first car on which the manufacturer decided to save money by failing to fix a known dangerous condition. The only reason they got busted as hard as they did was that they maintained internal memos in which they openly discussed the fact that it would be more cost-effective not to fix the fuel-tank problem.

Ford are not &quot;murderers&quot;, and I guarantee they will not be subjected to any criminal sanctions in the United States. I am ignorant of the law in Venezuela, but I would be surprised if they are sanctioned there either.