Yep, but that is an analysis from a Legal viewpoint. What - I believe - made the Pinto case memorable was not that in a given subset of accidents it was (or wa

Yep, but that is an analysis from a Legal viewpoint. What - I believe - made the Pinto case memorable was not that in a given subset of accidents it was (or was not) slightly more dangerous, it is the fact that the matter was looked into by the manufacturers and that it was waved off on a mere cost/benefit basis (with a supposed cost for increased security per car of US$ 11). Mind you this is all in all normal, any safety norm or related technical specifications is (or should be) based on the "reasonable costs for society to obtain a reasonable increase in safety".