Carl F. Thelin

 “Daddy. I have to go bathroom.”

“OK, Katy – it's not too far. I’ll pull in at the next rest stop. OK?

“Daddy – go faster, I really have to go.”

Daddy recalled the sign that they just passed – 19 miles to the next so-and-so fast food rest stop before Flagstaff. “Hmm,” Daddy thought to himself, “I wonder if Katy can hold it for about 20 minutes.”

Looking in the mirror, he saw Katy with her chin on her arms folded over the seatback, with her head between her brothers. She was stretched out on top of the suitcases and blankets piled in the back. How nice, he thought to himself, as he often daydreamed, that when she gets into high school, Katy will have two big brothers to keep the bad boys from bothering her.

How nice it was, he grinned, that they got this new Ford Explorer in time to use on the vacation to see the Grand Canyon. It was buzzing along just great. Thinking that their new Ford had already put on at least a thousand miles and ought to be broken in, Daddy eased the speed from 70 to 80 mph. Even though the outside temperature was at least 90, speeding up should help the AC to keep the car cool.

 And so it did as they flew along.

“Daddy, there is a buzzing back here.” Turning to Alice, beside him, Daddy asked, “What is she complaining about now?” Before his wife could answer, Daddy began to feel vibration coming through the rim of the steering wheel. It was not a tingle or a buzz, just a slow beating. There definitely was a thumping going on and he knew it must be way back behind him where Katy was.

Daddy listened for a noise, but there was only a tactile sensation – the vibration he felt in his hands. It was so low it was barely a hum. The hum grew louder, with some snapping-slapping-popping jolts thrown in. Just about the time he started to figure it out, the tire at the left rear tore apart right under Katy. Whap-whap-whap and then screech, as the tire tore apart and the back of the car lurched down at the left. The tire tread wrapped around the rear axle, seizing the wheel and causing the Ford to quickly yaw to the left, toward the sandy median.

“Oh shit!” Instinctively daddy yanked the steering to the right. "Oh Boy!" At nearly 80 mph, that was not a good maneuver. The Ford spun sharply back to the right, swerving off the pavement onto the rumble-strip and then it was dragging its front tire in the gravel. When the bare rear rim slid onto the soft asphalt rumble strip, it dug in and tripped the Ford.

The SUV tipped sharply onto the driver's side, slamming flat and smashing out all the windows. Then it sort of bounced up over the stiff left edge of the roof; came down from the short air borne hop onto the roof edge on the other side, and  continued rolling onto right side and then nearly back onto its wheels again. Not quite – it flopped back with the passenger side on the gravel beside the highway.        

The Explorer came to rest with all its glass gone, except the glued-in windshield. Thankful that they were belted in, Mom, Dad and the two boys were badly dazed, but alive. The unrestrained Katy had slid out the right back window opening when the truck was on its roof. She suffered a fatal head injury. Being squashed into hamburger by the side of a car landing on you is about as fatal as it can get.

                        AN EARLY EDUCATION IGNORED BY ME.

While I was still traveling by airline (too ugly an ordeal to do now days) for my job as a crash scene investigator, I flew to a city in the Deep South to meet a lawyer who would take me to the scene of an “accident”. Albert said he would pick me up at the airport and take me directly to the rural road where the collision occurred, and the whole trip would be short enough that I could catch the evening flight and be home that same day. Al waited for me at the baggage carousel. He was indeed a cheerful, friendly fellow who reminded me of Ben Matlock, the TV character played by Andy Griffith. Al had his new pride and joy parked across the street from the terminal, ands was obviously waiting for my comments as soon as we took off.

Figure 1 Ford Explorer (1991 model)

            “Well, what do you think?”

            Al, I am impressed. This is the first time I have been in one of these. It sure is a lot prettier than a pickup truck. The dash is nice and seats are even nicer. Did you just get it?

            Yeah, I thought the Explorer would be better than my Taurus for running around pickup up people and stuff for evidence. Lots of room in back for junk.

            The V6 engine seems quiet enough and the whole car is pretty quiet. You must really love it, Al.

            Yeah. Smooth – except for the ride. It jolts you pretty bad on the bumps and pot holes.

            I could tell that. Feels like the tires are kinda hard. Al, if you don’t like the harsh ride, and could use more room than the Taurus – why not get a Windstar minivan? That’s got more room and a nicer ride?

            Oh Hell no. Vans are for women. I gotta have a macho machine like this.

                        THAT WAS MY INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW FORD EXPLORER.

The Ford Explorer began life as a 1991 model. It became a sales sensation when it appeared. It was really the first of the class now called the SUV – Sport Utility Vehicle. Car engineers already had a good description for such a pickup truck with a built-in roof over the back end. The US government had coined the expression Multi Purpose Vehicle which was applied to almost all not-a-truck vehicles that had the utility to carry a workman’s load as well as a few passengers. Guys like me thought of the Willys Jeep and the original Chevrolet Carryall as the MPVs. The acronym MPV stuck with all pickup trucks until the public adopted SUV for the same purpose. The hulking, lavish thing we call a Chevrolet Suburban is a grown-up child of the Chevy and Dodge Carryall tall station wagons from the 1930s.

When the explorer was introduced as a 1991 model the grille and front end sheet metal told that the Explorer was built with a fancied-up body Ford Ranger chassis. The Explorer two-door model, soon abandoned, was Ford’s replacement for the Bronco MPV that was based on the F-150 chassis with a way-too-big V8 engine.

                        FIRESTONE TAKES THE BULLET FOR FORD.

When the numbers of tires that failed on not-so-old Ford Explorers became large enough that number-crunchers at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration spotted the bulge in their defect charts, Ford deflected the blame. They simply said that tires from Firestone failed more often than those from Goodyear, their other supplier. Firestone (Bridgestone actually) agreed that there might have been some differences in the adhesive -- glue -- used to bind the steel-belted tread onto the radial ply carcass and liner which held the air pressure.

This led to a wave of publicity put out by the lawyers eager to capitalize on Firestone’s misfortune. See the quote below.

The Firestone tire recall is perhaps the most deadly auto safety crisis in American history. US regulators on 16 October, 2000 have raised the death count to 119 (the death count has steadily risen from 62, later to 88 and 101 deaths reported on 9/20/2000). Experts believe there may be as many as 250 deaths and more than 3000 catastrophic injuries associated with the defective tires. Most of the deaths occur in accidents involving the Ford Explorer which tends to rollover when one of the tires blows out.

Trial lawyers chose to direct their attention to Firestone rather than to Ford Motor Company. Why? They know that Ford, like General Motors, has a highly skilled legal staff and the will to fight lawsuits vigorously. Firestone Tire Company was a weaker organization, still coping with being taken over by the Japanese tire company Bridgestone. In 1988, the Bridgestone Corporation of Japan purchased the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company. It was the largest investment ever of a Japanese company in an American company. Every lawyer knew that it would be easier to squeeze money out of Bridgestone/Firestone because the Japanese car makers had already demonstrated an unwillingness to use the dirty legal maneuvers that were a staple of the Big-three lawyers.

            A RIDE AND HANDLING ENGINEER KNOWS THE REAL CAUSE

When I became an engineer designing experimental cars at the General Motors Engineering Staff, I soon learned how marketing overcame the engineer’s idealism.

In the 1950-60 time frame, a standard Chevrolet, such as the iconic the 1960 Bel Aire usually was seen with white wall tires – as seen below.

 

Figure 2 1960 Chevrolet Bel Aire advertisement

Let’s say that the original equipment tire was designated at 6.50-14 - a “C” sized tire.

This is portion of tire-size chart we used:

NUMERIC SIZES      LETTER*     METRIC  P-METRIC     70 SERIES

6.50-14  6.95-4            C                  178R14     P185/75R14    195/70R14

                                     D (not used)

7.00-14  7.35-14           E                  185R14     P195/75R14    205/70R14

7.50-14  7.75-14           F                  195R15     P205/75R14    215/70R14

* The letter indicates the load-carrying range of the tire.

For about $50 one could get an upgrade set of tires two sizes larger: 7:50-14 - an “F” sized tire. I recall that we paid about $50 more for the white sidewall option, too.

Funny thing, after I left GM I went to Uniroyal Tire Division which was the primary supplier of OE tires to GM. Although I was a research engineer, I managed to learn that GM paid Uniroyal about $50 for the set of five white wall tires for the Impala. Cute, huh. You actually bought the tires, not just the whitewalls by checking off “WSW” on the options list.

That was not the only rip off. GM engineers, looking at the tire data charts, would have preferred the 7.50-sized tire given the load realistically expected in the Impala sedan. Nevertheless, the bosses declared the 6.50 size as standard. That is three load-ranges less on the tire charts. It was “safe” – just barely.

How could they get away with that? Simple – the government encouraged it with dumb rules. Engineer picked tires by calculating the weight of the empty car, and adding 150 pounds for each seating position plus 200 pounds in the trunk (or the load space of a station wagon). Cars were sold as five-passenger vehicles. Theoretically, that determined the design load as 950 pounds. That is likely to be several hundred pounds too little, especially when packed for vacation.

You know that in real life, most station wagons might carry more load than that, and some would have stuff on the roof racks. The Explorer was being sold when the government reaction to the 1973 Iranian oil crisis was the 55 mph national speed limit which began in 1974 and was repealed in 1995. Did that overloaded station wagon, or Explorer, run at 55 mph on the Interstate? Most of them ran much faster with less than recommended tire pressures. That is the reason you used to see so many “dead alligators” alongside the highways. That’s the recipe for overheated tires that lose the entire tire tread at high speed and temperature. Explorers with 26 psi were asking for it.

There really was a benefit to paying extra for bigger tires on your Chevy, or any other car. The oversized tire may be inflated to a lower pressure than the standard tire in order to safely carry the same load. The soft big tire gave you a better ride, and better road grip, to boot. 

           

WHY DID FIRESTONE TAKE THE BLAME?

First of all, it was better marketing for Firestone to be nice to Ford. The real problem for Firestone engineers was that they knew Ford was at fault.

Remember that the lawyer thought his Explorer had a rough ride? It did because originally Ford specified the correct tire pressure, as recommended by the tire-maker charts – typically 35 psi for light truck tires.

But when owner ride complaints filtered back to the Ford brass, Ford suggested that owners reduce the tire pressure to as low as 26 psi. That was OK at low speeds around town, but clearly not good at interstate speeds in the southwest.

I’ll tell you another insider secret. It was easier for Firestone to take the hit for making a few million bad tires due to a defect in their manufacturing process. Once those tires were replaced, and the lawsuits were settled, the tire company survived.

 If Ford had been forced to admit that their engineering decision was poorly executed, that would have been a serious “defective-by-design” matter that would have tarnished the entire company. That would have impacted Ford’s sales much worse than the hit taken by Firestone. I could have taken those cases, but my prior employment at Uniroyal ruled that out. Surely some lawyer would say I was getting even with Firestone. No really. My beef was with Ford people for not paying attention to their own chassis engineers.      

Figure 3 an example from the newspapers.