Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Toyota Halts Sales of Popular Models - Accelerator Stuck Problem Recall

19899101103104173

Comments

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,680
    Not according to the NHTSA report put out by Edmund's. You have any data as to which vehicle is supposedly subject to this UA report. All indications are the Lexus ES is the worst vehicle for UA on the NHTSA. Which makes sense. The 2009 ES350 is the vehicle 4 people burned to death in last year. If you have not read the reports I would be happy to post them for you. They have been on here several times since it happened.

    Toyota is on the stand because they ignored UA thinking they were above the law and the consumers were not important. Nice try at diverting attention to other automakers. Just no reason to believe the others have the UA failure rate that Toyota has. How many people have died as a result of UA in a 2009 VW or Audi? Show us the link.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,680
    In case you missed the real truth about UA and Toyota. Here are the charts again. 6 of the worst 10 vehicles for UA are all built by Toyota.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/deeper-nhtsa-data-dive-117-models-ranked-by-rat- e-of-ua-incidents/
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,680
    If you seem so certain about VW/Audi having more UA complaints on the NHTSA site, you should go look for yourself. I just pulled up the most popular models of VW and Audi for 2009 and this is the only report I found for UA. And when he hit the brakes the car stopped. I think you picked a dog that just won't hunt. Your chart is bogus.

    VEHICLE WAS TURNING INTO A PARKING SPOT, DRIVER HAD MOVED FOOT FROM ACCELERATOR PEDAL TO BRAKE. SUDDENLY, ENGINE SURGED AND VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE. THE DRIVER APPLIED SIGNIFICANT BRAKE PRESSURE TO HALT VEHICLE AND TURNED OFF IGNITION. VEHICLE SUBSEQUENTLY DROVE NORMALLY AND DEALER INSPECTION FOUND NO PROBLEM. *CN
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Wehn I took my auto in I stated I wanted electrical checked as for some reason light had switched from front lighting overhead to back seat lighting when door opened. So I had no mirror lighting. Also wanted idle checked as had some unexplained increases when braking, parking ,etc. I also wnted it completely serviced for a long road trip. My complaints were not written on work order. Was a problem when picking it up. Service center attempted to just make me pay without speaking with an agent of work completed. I just requested to speak with agent. Second agent stated I didn't ask, it's not on report. Just had to politiely stay and requested first agent.

    Thye first time there was an issue was when I bought the vehicle. They let me take it home, but was to return it to have door painted as there were scratches on door. Service center just attempted to pass vehicle back to me with just a buffing out of the scratches which did not visibly correct. Was so easy to still see scratches. Was resolved and door painted.

    We had never had any history of problems in past with other manufaturers. So now am just evaluating if just this dealership, or a general practice at Toyota dealerships. I plan to watch what happens in future and make sure all documented each visit. Was aware of these issues long before all of the investigations started, and had plans in place for my future interactions already.
  • tomjavatomjava Posts: 136
    you're saying that NHTSA chart is bogus? Read this chart below!
    Same things many of the complaints in Toyota, VW, Volvo, GM, Ford are stupid and can't be duplicated!

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124235858link title
  • revitrevit Posts: 476
    Toyota coverup

    Two weeks ago in this column I called Toyota's investigation into its unintended acceleration problem a coverup. I was one of the first reporters to use the "C" word, which resulted in an appearance on the CBS Evening News to repeat those charges.

    While I had no inside information to draw that conclusion, looking at what's transpired from the perspective of an engineer with product development experience, it was obvious that Toyota was being untruthful. The company had failed to provide details about the tests it had conducted, and didn't make its engineers available to discuss the issues. Since my column first appeared, much more evidence has come out that has substantiated these charges.

    We've learned that over the past seven years Toyota and NHTSA, our government regulatory agency, have received more than 1,600 complaints. Sudden acceleration has allegedly caused as many as 34 deaths, including an off-duty highway patrolman and his family here in San Diego.

    Internal Toyota memos now show that it bragged about saving $100 million in recalls by successfully negotiating with NHTSA regulators to curtail its investigations. During this time Toyota told complaining owners that their problems were due to faulty floor mats, including one owner that later died when his car crashed after suddenly accelerating ... with his floor mats stored in his trunk.
    Even the most recent fix, adding a metal shim to the accelerator mechanism to prevent full engagement of a toothed part, seems a stretch to me. The fact that the problem of unintended acceleration increased dramatically when Toyota went to a computer controlled accelerator system, leads me to think the problem may be related to an electrical or software glitch.

    Incredibly, the coverup continues. A Toyota vice president, Bob Carter, recently stated at the National Automobile Dealers Association convention in Orlando, Fla., that "Testing by Toyota, NHTSA and Exponent, an outside consulting firm hired by Toyota, has found no evidence of problems with Toyota's electronics.
    "There is no problem with the electronic throttle system in Toyotas," Carter said. "There's not anything that can even remotely lead you in that direction." Carter said Exponent was told to "tear the components apart to try to find anything wrong and initial tests could find nothing."

    While it may be true that during the couple of months Exponent ran its tests it found no problem, Carter's conclusion that "there is no problem" is neither accurate nor a logical conclusion. Two months of testing six or eight randomly chosen cars does not prove that there is not a problem. First, the sample size of the test is far too small to be able to make any valid conclusions concerning its entire fleet of cars. Second, it did not test the specific cars already known to have the problem. Statements such as Carter's continue to mislead the public and demonstrate that Toyota is still not serious about getting to the bottom of the problem.

    It's now time for Toyota's president, Akio Toyoda, to move aside the marketing, PR and damage control people who just obfuscate the issues. He needs to take personal charge, do what's in the best interests of its customers, and make safety its first priority, ahead of profit.

    Here's what Toyota should be doing if it really wants to find the cause of unintended acceleration:

    1. Instruct every engineer or Toyota repairman who has had any involvement in the design, manufacturing or testing of unintended acceleration to come forward with what they know and report their findings to Mr. Toyoda directly.
    2. Request that every customer who's experienced the problem of unintended acceleration bring their cars into their Toyota dealer in exchange for a loaner.
    3. Bring 1,000 of Toyota's best engineers to the United States to fan out and examine these cars that have been turned in to the dealers. Subject these cars to extensive testing to try replicate the reported problems.
    It's much more likely that a population of cars that have experienced the problems will yield better results than testing a few new cars.
    4. Buy back samples of these cars that indicate anomalies and subject them to additional testing in Japan.
    5. Have this team of Toyota engineers present their findings for peer review to a team of U.S. experts in electronics, software, testing and quality control from academia, the automotive industry and NHTSA, and then report directly to the public.

    Mr. Toyoda's testimony this past week was filled with apologies, but did little to reassure us that they are doing everything possible to get to the bottom of these problems. He has still failed to explain why the company did little to test for electronic problems, yet keeps ruling that out as a cause, saying he was "absolutely confident" there was no problem with the electronics, and repeated the company's stance that sudden accelerations were caused by either a sticking gas pedal or a misplaced floor mat.

    I predict that comment will come back to haunt Toyoda and his company. Evidence is already surfacing that some university experts have been able to prove the contrary.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 17,711
    >2. Request that every customer who's experienced the problem of unintended acceleration bring their cars into their Toyota dealer in exchange for a loaner.
    3. Bring 1,000 of Toyota's best engineers to the United States to fan out and examine these cars that have been turned in to the dealers. Subject these cars to extensive testing to try replicate the reported problems.
    It's much more likely that a population of cars that have experienced the problems will yield better results than testing a few new cars.
    4. Buy back samples of these cars that indicate anomalies and subject them to additional testing in Japan

    Have toyo buy back all the cars where anyone has had a problem, whether toyo's service writer kept it off the work order or not.

    Ship those cars to Japan and have the toyota engineers, marketing, heads, all drive them. Give cars to the US head honchos as well. Let them take the chance on being the one with the jackpot car that has UIA :sick: .

    That will show their confidence in their product. :blush:

    I'll bet the problem's etymology would be found a WHOLE lot faster with the toyota folks having to drive the cars that had at least once exhibited the problem

    Bet they wouldn't tolerate having the UIA problem blamed on the driver, either. :P

    This message has been approved.

  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited March 2010
    "..At WOT the two sensor voltages can in fact overlap.."

    No,...NOT.

    Someone is reading the chart/graph incorrectly.

    The useable range, actual voltage "span" for the gas pedal position sensors, from idle to WOT, is 0.80 volts to 2.6/4.5 volts for sensor #1 and 1.6 to 3.4/5.0 volts for sensor #2.

    There is NO question that the Toyota/Denso system should have "faulted" when the two signals were initially shorted together. From reading the factory shop/repair manual it is pretty clear that the voltage tolerance, less than 0.02 volts, for detecting that the two sensor signals are shorted together was not well thought out. IMMHO less than 0.40 volts, or even 0.20 volts, would be more in the proper range.

    So the "mistake" Dr. Gilbert made was not using a more robust short, say a copper buss bar. ;)

    The way you describe the Kia system sounds very much like they use the very same NipponDenso system as does Toyota, highly likely so in any case.

    Has anyone shorted, "casually" shorted, these two signals together on a Kia to confirm that the monitor detects the short ..??
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,680
    edited March 2010
    I posted that very chart to show just how little research these people do before they put something online. The bottom line. Where do these reports come from? I have gone over the NHTSA ODI website and fail to verify what any of them are trying to get US to believe. They all seem to cherry pick bits and pieces to strengthen a position. Take the NPR link you just posted.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration identified 251 complaints alleging sudden acceleration and related problems for vehicles in model year 2009. A breakdown by vehicle make follows.

    What are the related problems to UA? Is it the fact that you cannot stop a Toyota when it is at high speed with WOT? It is all a way to spin any data to say what you want it to say. I don't own a VW Audi. I own a Toyota that has never had a recall. The last of the well built Sequoias. So it makes no difference to me. It is just such a large number of complaints on the newer Toyota and Lexus vehicles that even the lazy bunch at the NHTSA could not ignore them.
  • kent19kent19 Posts: 1
    Accelerator problem is in the electronic "drive by wire". I had the identical problem in my new 2003 Mercedes SL500. The accelerator suddenly would shoot up to 6000 rpm. I had it towed to Mercedes 3 times and each time I was told there was nothing wrong and the "computer check" was normal. They inferred that I "didn't know how to drive a Mercedes". On the 3rd time, the mechanic who had just completed his "normal computer analysis" drove out of control out of the service area and nearly killed someone and nearly wrecked the car. Mercedes sent someone from Germany who spent a month before deciding it was the "accelerator actuator" in the drive by wire. Since then, Mercedes has installed a brake by-pass in case of unintended acceleration. I have have no problems since. Toyota needs to check with Mercedes
  • tomjavatomjava Posts: 136
    Nice try to spin the UA compliant data from NHTSA. The death in ES350 is due to the wrong carpet and caused a gas pedal stuck, and that Toyota is at fault. So the confirmed deaths in Toyota UA is how many? Based on your assumption, all manufacturers are suck and above the law by simply ignoring UA,

    UA is not only Toyota problem but many others even European brands that have a brake override in place. And some posters are insisting that UA is only Toyota problem!

    Even in Audi 5000 fiasco, there were so claims of UA deaths, and the end NHTSA confirmed that all due to driver's error.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    The first rule of trouble-shooting is to find a way to reliably replicate the failure. Once you can do that then finding the solution is usually fairly simple and straight-forward.

    But...

    I pity Toyota/NipponDenso in/for this case.

    Replicating this seemingly extremely rare failure will be hard enough, but what if it has something to do with the surrounding environment, say driving through an area of numerous cell towers? Or even a combination of the surrounding environment and driver activity, say, simultaneous "set/accel" actuation and inadvertent braking due to left foot "resting" on the brake pedal.

    Sometimes, in the end, you find that you simply cannot replicate the failures and then you have to go into fall-back mode, shot-gunning the problem. Make best guesses as to what/which might be the causative factors and begin applying "patchwork". In this case I would start by applying voltage snubber, "surge protector", networks to all of the inductive devices.

    But then if you resort to this latter method just how long, how much (end-user..??)testing before you can say the problem is fixed, and which "patchwork" worked..??

    Pity Toyota/NipponDenso, I wouldn't want to be in their position right now.

    Ms Smith's UA incident started just as she was entering the highway, just about the time one might normally actuate "set/accel" mode. Then later the engine begins acting "normally" once the braking gets the speed down to ~35MPH, the approximate speed that cruise control is automatically disabled.

    I have had instances myself wherein I felt the CC engagement was too "abrupt", too much "instant" acceleration, downshift/acceleration, for my "taste". And I almost always use the brakes to disable CC. Actually I don't even remember a time of using the CC "knob" to disengage CC, its simply too easy to "tap" the brake pedal lightly.

    So if my brake light switch should ever fail I might find myself in BIG trouble.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    So this NPR does have other available years. Wnet to site and found. Sorry, I retract what I said earlier.
  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 6,896
    revit....I think most of us could see where this was going a month or so, ago.

    Toyota's goal was never to get to the real fix. They've traded quality and safety for quantity. More disturbing, they've gone to great lengths to hide and cover up some known safety issues, all for money.

    Time and time again, the opportunity for them to do the right thing has been presented....in their own alleged investigations, in their dealings with NHTSA, before Congress, and now back with the NHTSA.

    Time and time again, they choose to hide information, make information inaccessible, and thwart efforts to get to the root causes.

    As bad as it is for Toyota right now, it will get worse. They've got NHTSA rooting through their documents (if they haven't been destroyed already). They've got members ov Congress ready to level huge fines on them. They've got the SEC investigating them. They've got the FBI looking at their suppliers (which will eventually lead them right back to Toyota). They've got lawsuit on top of lawsuit being filed against them. Consumer complaints are coming fast and furious over a variety of problems. They've even got their home country government putting the squeeze on them to "come clean".

    They could have avoided a good portion of this. They have chosen a different path.....one that's going to take them years if not an entire decade, to recover from.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,680
    They've got lawsuit on top of lawsuit being filed against them.

    I think Juries will be a bit more sympathetic to the consumers, with all the evidence of Toyota lying and hiding information. I know the family from San Diego has filed their suit. That should be a BIG one against Lexus and the Dealer. Both are responsible if Lexus did not make it clear to the Dealers on the Floor mat issue.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,680
    My question on the Biller papers and Tracy not being interested. If they are not all Biller says they are, why has Toyota blocked their release into evidence all the way to the TX state supreme court? has Tracy had some handsome settlements in all those cases he tried against Toyota? Something fishy going on. I say put them out there and let the juries decide.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    I realize NPR is public radio outlet.

    As for their study:
    (1)Study Explanation vague - unclear how calculated, methods used, etc.. Can be challenged by analytical experts.
    (2)Doesn't state which year they did this for??? Multiple years?? Etc.
    (3) No clarification what they mean legally - saying "model year" & how they are using "model year"? What does this actually mean???
    (4)Study Explanation does not explain if all SUA/UA included or not. When not stated definitively - problems & questions?
    (5)What/why/how are they breaking down by model years???
    (6)Who provided this info to NPR???
    (7)If NPR did analysis - who did it???? Were they paid? Associations with who asked??
    (8)How does it compare with other studies done?? Can it be compared?
    (9)Can you clearly deduct info with presense of unknown issues??
    (10)Etc.

    Second glance I just thought it was for model year 2009. I was busy and did not analyze when I saw reports. Went back a 3rd time since I saw blogs going back and forth. Just questions you can ask yourself when evaluating any data study report & is food for thought.

    tomjava I do thank you for submitting for all of us to review. Many data study reports available for SUA/UA do have a purpose, and must carefully break study down into an objective analysis format. And studies should have.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Which study by Edmunds were Truth About Cars using?? The first or the second study??? First was the long study results. The second study released in their press releases on February, 2010.

    Appears more studies by groups are coming out. That is good.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Well, Exponent hired by Toyoita is out to now prove Dr Gilbert wrong. Any of their reports will be highly questionable?? They are just a good litigation, defense type firm. Have too much proven info on them here in California. And there are more claims re: other reports as well.

    Any rate - glad to see you have reviewed Dr Gilbert's preliminary report findings. Dr. Gilbert may be limited on how much further he proceeds ahead. University funding related aspects maybe? Toyota donated autos and also $100,000 - to his department. We shall see? And all depends on how University administration views, if any applied pressure from Toyota??

    QUESTION - You do see some Toyota problem from reviewing Dr. Gilberts actual study, diagrams, etc.???

    Seems like Toyota has already stated that what he did in no way indicates real world situations?? Exponent to give report on findings.
Sign In or Register to comment.