- Seller: Dale D
- Location: Buena Park, California
- Mileage: 23,012 Shown
- Chassis #: 3R12X145654
- Title Status: Clean
- Engine: 2.0-Liter 4-Cylinder
- Transmission: 4-Speed
1973 was a good year for the Ford Pinto. It was the last year for small bumpers with the original body design and the robust 2.0-liter engine. It was also the first year for front disc brakes, heavy-duty steering, and suspension. There was a time when Pintos like this covered the roads, but these days, you rarely see Pintos, especially wagons, in this nice of condition. It’s being offered here on Barn Finds with a $14,500 asking price.
The previous owner told the seller that this Pinto was stored in a California warehouse for many years, and the condition would seem to support this. Pintos tended to rust, so finding one without rust is rather rare. The car’s overall condition is impressive but has some minor cosmetic flaws.
Ford’s Lima engine started life as a small and efficient 1.3-liter, but by the time this Pinto was built, it had been enlarged to 2.0-liters and featured an overhead camshaft. Horsepower was rated at 99 and was good for 115 ft-lbs of torque. The engine is paired with a 4-speed manual and runs as it should. These engines are known to rev nicely and are highly tuneable. A survivor like this should be preserved rather than modified, but the popularity of this engine means parts supply is healthy and should make keeping it running much easier. Overall, the engine bay looks tidy, although some surface corrosion is showing in a few spots. This isn’t a significant concern, but we recommend treating those surfaces to ensure they don’t become an actual issue.
The interior presents nicely, with minimal wear showing. The seller points out that the car retains its original-style interior door handles, which were prone to breaking. Many cars have received later-style handles, so finding one with its original handles is rare. Whether it adds value is hard to say, but it does help with the mileage claims. Given the target price point, Ford didn’t go too crazy with features or options on the Pinto. That being said, they are surprisingly comfortable and functional. The seller believes the Deluxe interior is all original, including the radio.
This California Blue Plate survivor is quite the find! Most Pintos lived a hard life and were crushed long ago. While this car isn’t for everyone, it will surely bring back memories for those who grew up riding around in a Pinto. Even if you didn’t, you have to appreciate those examples that have survived all these years. Values have climbed over the past few years, but most of the interest is in clean survivors like this one. So, if you’d love to give this Pinto a good home, make the seller an offer!
At least the the blue whitewalls match the handicapped zone it appears to be parked in…
To be fair though, it’s a very nice Pinto, just overpriced, IMO
Seller is showing off that it has new tires. Better than thinking the original or at least decades-old Maypops add value.
Those better be Michelins for that kind of money!
This Pinto Wagon would be the perfect garage mate for my 73 Ford 1/2 ton P/U. My truck is 2-WD, short box, 302 3 speed and the same yellow color. It is all original except for the lowered stance, custom exhaust and a 3-spoke Mustang steering wheel. It is my everyday driver. My wife could have this Pinto Wagon to drive and they could park next to each other in the garage. How cool would that be? Oh, hold on a second, I just read my post. I must of had some sort of brain freeze or serious Mental epiphany. Do you think my wife would give up her Lincoln SUV for this Pinto? Me too now, that I have reconnected to reality!
Pretty good shape for an old pinto. My family had a new one in 1978 and it was a bronze type color. By 1985 the rust had got to it and the long doors had sagging problems which I heard about years later. We lived in northern NJ and most of the winters were brutal.
Very nice but a little expensive.
Can’t speak to the 2.0 but I have had many Ford rangers with the plus a mustang with 2.3 excellent engines that don’t fail. Chang the oil and timing belt and will last a long time. All mine were sticks no air as is needed with that motor.
Car is great shape a little high price in my opinion. Overall a nice pinto good luck to buyer and seller and enjoy it it.
Lots to like here. Pinto Wagons are a popular body style. Four speed transmission. Upgraded interior. Bright color. Good shape, not rusty. The price might be on the high side, but probably not by much.
Just a note, 73 was the first year for front only bouncy bumpers. After that, both ends had them. I had a 73 Gran Torino Sport with the huge front bumper. 72 was the last year for small bumpers on both ends.
I don’t remember that yellow shade on a stock Pinto. And I sure don’t remember a 1.3 four cylinder Lima engine. I remember a 1.6, that was in addition to the 2 liter. All said. Nice car. And priced like all the other good ones at classic car dealers.
Wasn’t the 1.6 a Kent engine, as in Ford Cortina?
Yes, the Pinto’s 1.6L was a Kent engine, shared with the Cortina.
My Driver’s Ed cars from the driving school were painted that same shade of yellow, apparently so other driver’s could see and avoid them, with the big “Student Driver” sign on top of the roof to warn them if the yellow color didn’t do it, LOL!
I’ll tell you what, if I were in the market for a Pinto wagon, I’D seriously consider this one. I like the earlier normal bumper 1973 and Prior ones. Its a wagon, its a stick, its a happy color. Its in incredible condition if the pictures paint an accurate picture. Its a high price to me, but hey, how many genuine clean non rusted out Pintos are really out there?
We had a ’73 Pinto wagon we drove on vacation from Orange, Ca. to Lake Tahoe, and back. I loved it!
I bought one new in 1973, but dark green. Back them you paid extra for white walls I declined and had Michelin tires instead. Loved that car.
Were all the Pintos subject to the rear collision gas tank issues or did they sort it out somewhere later in production? A nice example of a iconic little car.
Don’t be that guy.
Sorry. I’m that guy. Not trying to queer the pitch, but this old enough that younger folks may not be aware of the issue. If, as mentioned it didn’t apply to the wagons, so much the better.
It comes up every time. Every. Time.
Rumor has it. Only the odd serial numbered cars did.
Station wagons never had that problem
this 1? never as itsa waggy.
Yes, sorted ater.
?
There was a recall. A very cheap fix for Ford. If it hasn’t been done, Ford has to do it, free.
Nice car.
One nit pik. The air filter inlet flex hose needs to be connected to the sheet metal inlet port located on the inner fender ahead of the battery. In the pictures the hose is resting on the battery.
Other than that, the car is in amazing shape. Had two 72’s, both 2L, one automatic and one 4 spd. Always reliable. Used to see these all over the place. It’s amazing what becomes collectible. If I had the space, I would seriously consider it.
72 was the last year for the small bumpers.
Disc brakes were available from the start of Pinto production for 1971 and became standard for 1974.
The gas tank fix applied to the 1971 through 1976 sedans and hatchbacks. None of the station wagons, sedan deliveries or the Cruising Van were affected due to their different tank and filler design.
The 1977 through 1980 models had the update built in at the factory.
if this is a survivor, the original factory paint looks amazing for its age! i bought one off the showroom floor in the same color and i don’t remember it looking this good. i saw a similar car sell at auction for $25k. if i had the room i would seriously consider putting this in my garage.
Even as a nostalgic blast to the past, with my folks having gone through 3 Pinto wagons while I was growing up, the only way I’d give serious thought to this neat little shooter is if the first digit of the price disappeared –
Ahh memories. My first car, mine was green with wood grain. Good times
Only the hatchbacks were recalled due to a gas tank rupturing in a hard rear-end accident. The wagon, which was a different design, was not involved in the recall.
Pretty cool car all in all, but I’d rather have a Vega GT wagon. It’s too bad Ford never offered a “sport” type of option for the Pinto. The Cruising Wagon doesn’t count… Add a set of optional (1974-??) Pinto aluminum slotted wheels and fit a 71/72 front bumper and you have a great little cruiser!
A Vega wagon? Really? Ford did offer an upgraded instrument package as an option for the Pinto, which included a tach, oil pressure, voltmeter and coolant temperature gages, but it wasn’t a popular option, as it must have been pricey for an entry-level subcompact car.
Vega, sure! I think they had a great look, suspension, interior, but a crappy engine. I would swap a 3800 Chevy or Buick V6 and have a blast. I did have a 71 Pinto with the 2.0, Offenhauser 4 bbl intake, Holley 390, header, Racer Walsh cam, adjustable cam sprocket, pistons, Mallory Unilite, can’t remember the sway bar manufacturer, but front and rear, Koni shocks and 13×7 aluminum slotted wheels. It was an absolute hoot to drive, but couldn’t keep up with my 140 Corsa with sway bars and Koni’s. The biggest issue to me with the Pinto was the wide spread gear ratios, heck, it was an economy car, but the shift to 2nd and 3rd gear just kept the engine out of it’s happy range. Back to the Vega, heck, an aluminum 5.3 LS would make it scream…
I had a coworker back then that bought a Vega, I loved the looks when he told me the problems he had with the crummy engine and did a little research in Consumer Reports I bought a Pinto Wagon and had no regrets.
The GT package really didnt offer much other than mag style wheels and some stripes. Other than that it was still a Vega with a crummy engine and a body made out of beer cans
The drivetrain included the whopping 85 HP engine. The GT package also included the F41 suspension with special springs, shocks, front and rear sway bars, 6″ wide mag style wheels with the little A70-13 Polyglas tires, full instrumentation, the 4 spoke steering wheel, along with numerous little trim differences. The hood stripe was optional. Think back to the early 70’s, everything rusted…
Had a new one in 73, bronze with the fake woody trim, factory air and a 4speed, never gave me any problems. Drove it to the Grand Canyon from Dallas, camping on the rim was able to pick up the Rangers game on the AM radio from Dallas!
I’m partial to the 2.3L myself, but this is a nice, clean, rust-free example, rarely seen today. The 2.3L Turbo four from an SVO Mustang or the V6 from a T-Bird Turbo Coupe would likely drop-in with minimal modifications, as the Pinto eventually got the 2.8L Cologne V6 as the optional engine. The SVO Mustang was a turbocharged version of the Pinto 2.3L four, with internal upgrades to handle the extra power, so it should be a good fit. If you really want to go crazy, there’s always the 2.3L Ecoboost crate motor, with 300 hp! Whee!
My Bad, the Thunderbird Super Coupe got the 3.8L Essex V6, the Turbo Coupe got the same motor as the SVO Mustang. My 65 year-old brain regrets the error! Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa!
Just a note, 73 was the first year for front only bouncy bumpers. After that, both ends had them. I had a 73 Gran Torino Sport with the huge front bumper. 72 was the last year for small bumpers on both ends.
It’s another “Leapin’ Leena”! My best dead friend’s father worked for the post office with one of these in light blue. Leena had over 200,000 miles in use delivering mail outside of Philadelphia. Hard to kill if the rust didn’t do so.
At the height of the oil embargo in the early ’70s, I bought a used ’71 Pinto coupe with the small Cortina 4 cylinder and a 4 speed. I had just started my first after college job with low pay and decided it was time to give up driving the big block muscle cars I had grown used to. It sure didn’t have the giddyup of my 440 Charger, but it got 30 mpg instead of 8mpg. It was a lot of fun to drive, revving her up and rowing through the gears. My Pinto years still give me fond memories when I see one in Barn Finds.
nice car. stiff price though.
right model (U no what I always say re: “Wagonman”)
right yr (tucked bumpers),
right motor (Lima, no not Kent but close) a X-Flow with the,
right carb holly weber 32/36 (a progressive). BUT…
a lill too heavya car (~2300#). AND…
no vehicle (in my mind) should ever B painted this color.
Swaps:
* the later (2.5) ranger head w/the “D” shaped ports,
* T5 or AOD depending on daily use/driving conditions.
(It had discs, R&P from jump.)
If no wagon avail to me I might stretch to the 77+ Runabout (hatch) as the whole thing is clear glass & isa ‘kinda-wagon’.
Bought a 72 new. A text book definition of POS. The 4 speed stopped 4 speeding after a few months, and it took the dealer like 2 months to get it up and running (and no loaners in those days). Certainly the worst car I’ve owned (Eisenhower was POTUS when I was born, so I’ve had a few).