Am I the only one whose mats have "teeth" on the underside that absolutely prevent them from sliding? I thought all good mats had these in addition to the hooks.
I have some small aftermarket mats with teeth. The one on the driver's side was sliding around several years ago so I took it out. They are smaller square mats and were sitting on top of the OEM mats. Originally got them to help soak up snow and ice, and that's not much of an issue here anyway.
Looking at them, you wouldn't think they'd slide at all, but they do. I'll try to snap a pic when the van gets back home (they live on the floor of the back seat now).
So, you were stacking mats were you !! The mats I am referring to are designed to sit on carpet, maybe yours were sitting on plastic or rubber mats or an insert of plastic or rubber. Either that or your carpet was worn smooth !!
If you are sitting at a desk and have a chair mat with teeth, sitting on carpet, I challenge you to move it just by shifting your feet !
You have the high end Lexus models with quality rubber mats. The recall is for all the cheap model Toyota an Lexus vehicles. :shades: I like the ones with teeth as well to hold in the carpet and not slide around.
Actually that would be an invalid test. Power brake boosted by vacuum is a system to lessen the amount of effort required by your foot to depress and hold the brake pedal. Other than overcoming the hydraulic resistance, power brakes do not stop the car any faster/shorter. Neither do anti-lock brakes. They merely give you control of the car while braking hard. Steering is possible with ABS. NOT possible w/locked-up brakes.
the mats in my mustang have teeth on the underside, but the driver's mat slides all over the place. maybe the mat still has it's baby teeth, although the are 18 years old.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
The 4cyl TURBOcharged Audi A5 probably has an electric vacuum pump since by definition TURBOcharged engines do not develop enough vacuum to supply the power brake booster. So repeated WOT ( Wide Open Throttle ) braking tests should not have much effect on engine vacuum and braking. There is little/no corelation.
I have a SAAB 900Turbo (Inline DOHC 16-valve 4), and it has a standard power brake booster with no electric vacuum pump. Brakes work fine under full acceleration (low vacuum) conditions with the car.
So you are saying that Toyota telling 3.8 Million owners to take out their OEM rubber floor mats is a smoke screen, to cover for a more serious flaw in their overall design?
Correct me if I'm wrong, by all means, but I believe it was a Lexus RX rubber mat in a Lexus ES car, that cop was driving.
So it was Lexus/Lexus, only the wrong model.
This case really ought to be excluded from the investigation, and they should stick to cases where the correct mat created a problem. There aren't too many RX mats in ES models.
That is true, except for your SPECULATION that the rubber mat went under the brakes making them useless. I am still speculating that there is an additional problem with the firmware that should shut down the engine when some one is applying heavy braking as the CHP was. It is a fact that he burnt up the rotors and pads trying to stop the car. That should have signaled something in that brilliant control module that the person wanted to stop, not keep going 120 MPH.
Bottom line is you and I and several others disagree that Toyota/Lexus shares in this problem that is very widespread with 3.8 million possible runaway vehicles. I say to Toyota fix them or get them off the road. I don't want to be an innocent statistic as was the fellow in Northern CA.
No, it's a lowest common denominator thing. Sort of like putting a sticker on a baseball bat that says do not hit yourself over the head with this bat, as it could be dangerous....to satisfy the lawyers.
I am still speculating that there is an additional problem with the firmware that should shut down the engine when some one is applying heavy braking as the CHP was.
Would you care to share with us which cars in the U.S. have this feature in their "firmware"? Or do you propose recalling all the cars in the U.S. to get rid of possible runaways?
I'm not sure where we disagree or that I understand your contention of my points. I understand vacuum boost systems very well. The question that I did see come up is the assisted emergency braking that is become standard on cars. Are they designed predicated on the vacuum booster helping apply pressure to brakes first and the ABS system actually giving another added boost? If there is no vacuum to help with initial application of hydraulic fluid to the wheel cylinders, is the ABS pump capable of applying full throw of application of the pistons?
>power brakes do not stop the car any faster/shorter.
Try turning off your motor at 70 mph, pump the brake pedal a couple of times to drain the vacuum (actually allow air into the vacuum chamber), and then try to make an emergency stop.
Something went wrong, badly wrong, in the systems on that car. Full throttle in a lower gear with engine at high RPMs. Was vacuum assist inadequate to stop the car with the engine revving very high? I would assume there was vacuum at a low enough pressure to help. The brake rotors were reported to be glowing hot from friction. Is Toyota guilty of having too much horsepower in the V6 for their brake systems to handle in their Camry?
How many other cars besides ToyLex have 5 fatal unresolved accidents from uncontrollable throttles? To me it would be common sense to write code that would react to shut down wide open throttle when brakes are applied heavily. Unless their engineers are incapable of writing decent fail safe code. I own two ToyLex products. I just don't share your belief that they are that much better than the rest. Electronics wise I find them inferior to GM products. Thankfully mine do not share the questionable drive by wire components used in the 3.8 Million vehicles that are in limbo while Toyota scratches their heads.
I haven't stomped on the brakes hard enough on a car with Brake Assist to see what would happen (my older Camrys have ABS without BA, and my old Frontier only has antilocks on the rear brakes). I assume that BA applies full braking power using the existing vacuum when it senses the driver wants to make a panic stop. The ABS will kick in only if one or more tires start to skid, but ABS per se doesn't add any stopping power.
If this driver lifted off the pedal, brake assist would cease at once, and with each pump of the pedal, there would soon be little vacuum assist left with the wide-open throttle.
In a normal situation, if you stand on the pedal hard enough (with both feet if necessary), it will still stop the car in the same distance even if power assist is lost. However, you have to be prepared to put a LOT more effort into it if the vacuum is gone (I've practiced at work going downhill on our 0.4-mile long driveway, not at 70 mph of course!) Many people might not have the needed leg strength though.
You do raise a good point about cars being overpowered. Just about all manufacturers have been involved in the ongoing horsepower race, and it could be argued that 272 hp is too much for a family sedan. Also, why do we allow cars to go way faster than the highest legal limit in the land, currently 80 mph? It's not like many of us will ever ship our cars over to Germany to use on the Autobahn.
Well, I waited until my wife got home to snap photos of my "extra" mat that I quit using in the minivan a while back. I should have focused on the '97 Outback in the garage.
It has "teeth" but it slides around pretty easily, at least when my feet aren't resting on it. And it was way too far forward. The nibs aren't doing much good gripping the old carpet, and the mats are 12 years old too.
I put photos up on my CarSpace page of the mats on both cars. Here's one:
"Federal highway-safety inspectors have released new details of a fatal car crash that triggered Toyota Motor's largest recall, including a finding that the Lexus ES 350 sedan involved had a gas-pedal design that could increase the risk of it being obstructed by a floor mat."
Among the factors being probed:
"the Lexus ES braking system loses power-assist when the throttle is fully opened, increasing braking distance fivefold.
the Lexus' accelerator-pedal design may have contributed to the risk of floor-mat entrapment... the lever is not hinged and has no means for relieving forces caused by interferences
the lower edge of the accelerator pedal was "bonded" to the rubber floor mat...not secured by the vehicle's retaining clips"
it could be argued that 272 hp is too much for a family sedan.
My 1998 Suburban only had 230 HP and I found it more than adequate. I thought of a good test for cars to pass. The throttle should be locked wide open and when the car reaches its maximum speed the brakes applied and the car would have to come to a stop in a reasonable distance. They spend millions on crash tests. Why not just such a test? I think it would show the cars in question could not be stopped with the brakes.
How many other cars besides ToyLex have 5 fatal unresolved accidents from uncontrollable throttles?
If you go back far enough (25 years), every major make and model with an auto tranny has been alleged to have "sudden acceleration" incidents, with gruesome accounts of death and destruction. Just ask Clarence Ditlow! Audi almost was killed in the US because of this problem, later attributed to "pedal misapplication" by the drivers.
Thankfully mine do not share the questionable drive by wire components used in the 3.8 Million vehicles that are in limbo while Toyota scratches their heads.
I think you're overreaching here. What those vehicles all apparently share is the same floormat to gas pedal clearance issues. We don't know if throttle-by-wire is the culprit. You seem to be assuming it is because of your audio problems in your Lexus. I personally can't imagine going back to balky mechanical throttle linkages or cables.
I've informed my son who has a 2006 Prius in NYC about this issue. I told him either to take out the driver mat or to make sure it's properly secured by the hooks (it always has been when I've driven it). I'm not staying up nights worrying about his car going wildly out of control.
My former '97 Camry had a "mere" 133 hp (3/5 the weight of a Suburban though), and it was certainly enough. Never had a problem merging onto highways; only needed a little more "juice" in some passing situations on 2-lane roads, not something I need to do very often though around here.
I own two ToyLex products. I just don't share your belief that they are that much better than the rest. Electronics wise I find them inferior to GM products.
Then you are in a distinct minority. The latest reliability survey from Consumer Reports ranks Toyota #3 (Scion was #1) out of the 33 mfgs they received surveys on. In contrast, Cadillac was ranked #23.
Thanks for posting that report, it is very interesting, but bottom line they said that no conclusions had been reached as to the cause of the accident.
Since the accident happened a little over 2 months ago, I find it almost unbelievable that, even though the data recorder or black box has been recovered, no attempt has been made to retrieve any data from it.
I was reading about the Northwest pilots today and how fast the FAA pulled their licenses for overshooting MSP. It seems that the NHTSA has been accused of dragging their feet over the years and other agencies, like the FAA, are acting without waiting for the NHTSA to issue findings.
In return the NHTSA is generating more reports for public consumption. Gotta love interagency wars.
I never did hear a final report about the woman in the new Ford Explorer, iirc, who wrecked on the DC beltway while talking on her cell phone. The NHTSA was supposed to issue a finding about it too but I must have missed it.
In the case of the ES350 raging out of control where a trained CHP could not stop it, the Sheriff has the black box in question. Maybe they are giving ToyLex a chance to redeem themselves. Who knows, the way government agencies protect their turf. Then maybe it was burned, to where the data is ruined. Seems like they would have been able to read it by now. Too busy writing tickets with their new herd of BMW riding deputies. I have not driven through Santee without seeing someone stopped getting a ticket. They have these high class BMW motorcycles they sneak around town nailing those that would go 3 miles over the limit.
The Santee Toyota Service Center called today. They are trying to locate a new NAV, CD,DVD unit to replace mine that gave up the ghost. Forunately it did not stick the throttle wide open causing me to crash. :P
"Then you are in a distinct minority. The latest reliability survey from Consumer Reports ranks Toyota #3 (Scion was #1) out of the 33 mfgs they received surveys on. In contrast, Cadillac was ranked #23."
Forget about Consumer Reports; it surveys its own readers/subscribers. It's like a Republican publication survey its readers about which party is better; of course you know the answer is Republican. People who don't agree with Consumer Reports would stop subscribing for it.
JD Power is more neutral and credible. In its most recent (3-year-old) car dependability survey, Buick is No. 1 of all brands; Lexus No. 3; Toyota No. 4.
Go read all the reader comments in Yahoo Auto or other online forums to see how many problems reported under Toyota Camry.
Toyota's design is plain stupid; it removed the driver's ability to stop the car when any electrical or mechanical failure to cause the car in unintended acceleration; even a CHP veteran trained for emergency driving for all his career life could not stop the run-away Lexus and was killed with his family members. Here are the Toyota designs:
1) The power brake assistant would cease function in full throttle; the driver needs to apply over 220 lbs of force on the brake pedal to slow down the car which is impossible in a sitting position. 2) The Start/stop button needs to be held for more than 3 seconds to shut down the car; which is totally counter intuitive because in panic the driver would repeatedly press and release the button, not holding. 3) The shift handle needs to go thru a lot of twist and turns to reach the neutral position; which is almost impossible to do in emergency without looking down to watch where it's going in a super fast moving car.
All these designs are the typical design rules for Toyota for over 10 years. The floor mat only exposed the problems; not the root of the problems. The simple solution of removing the floor mat would not fix the problems. Toyota needs to put the drivers' safety first, recall all cars made in the past 10 or more years, change the hardware and the software design to give back driver's ability to stop the car in any condition!
My cars don't have emergency brake assist. I couldn't find anything as to whether it's a separate system with large pump capability or if it uses the ABS pump setup which, I theorize, doesn't have as large a volume capability. The large volume would be needed if the vacuum assist doesn't initially apply the pistons taking up slack in the calipers.
>You do raise a good point about cars being overpowered
I threw out the idea that cars don't need high horsepower (high torque) to travel most of our roadways. The horsepower race through the last few years has been unnecessary. A fuel efficient V6 doesn't get good mileage while utilizing 280 horsepower. Even 4-cyl have suffered a horsepower race: "Car XXX is better than Car YYY because their 4-cyl has more horsepower (or torque)."
I just can't believe that the brakes, with or without the emergency assist if it was on the vehicle, would not have slowed the car.
1) The power brake assistant would cease function in full throttle; the driver needs to apply over 220 lbs of force on the brake pedal to slow down the car which is impossible in a sitting position. 2) The Start/stop button needs to be held for more than 3 seconds to shut down the car; which is totally counter intuitive because in panic the driver would repeatedly press and release the button, not holding. 3) The shift handle needs to go thru a lot of twist and turns to reach the neutral position; which is almost impossible to do in emergency without looking down to watch where it's going in a super fast moving car.
How many other manufacturers have the same systems -- effectively no power assist at wide-open throttle (where did you get 220 lbs BTW?), start/stop buttons with different procedures as to how to turn off the engine, and gated shifters of one sort or another? British Rover (a poster, not the vehicle) has the most experience here of the different start/stop buttons. You certainly don't want a button that switches off the engine with just an accidental nudge.
As for your 10-year assertion, the Camry (the car I'm most familiar with) didn't switch to a gated shifter until the 2007 model year; mine has the simple straight-through PRND32L lever. I don't know of any Toyotas (Avalon? Land Cruiser? and some Lexii excluded) that don't have the tried-and-true mechanical ignition switch with key as standard.)
>. The floor mat only exposed the problems; not the root of the problems.
So, the big question is did Toyota know the likelihood of these things happening after earlier problems with runaway acceleration and problems with drive-by-wire in their engine control software, transmissions, etc. An engineer has alleged that they covered up crash testing that was dangerous; did they cover up knowledge of threats after runaway accidents already occured?
Floormat problems exposed the accelerator poor design. But the other problems had to have been figured out by engineering after the first crashes. Did Toyota ignore or destroy or fail to publicize the results therefore costing lives.
I just can't believe that the brakes, with or without the emergency assist if it was on the vehicle, would not have slowed the car.
I agree. My speculation (and it can only be that) is if the driver had applied firm, steady, and continuous pressure (with both feet if necessary), the car would have slowed down. My guess though is that in the understandable panic, when the brakes didn't slow down the car anywhere near the normal rate (because of the stuck throttle), he lifted off the brakes and tried to find other ways to slow down, without success.
I do know for a fact that the 2007 and later Camry and ES models have emergency brake assist as standard, as do the vast majority of cars today with ABS.
except for your SPECULATION that the rubber mat went under the brakes making them useless
Under, over, or bunched up there, who knows? They obviously interfered.
3.8 million possible runaway vehicles
Gotta love hyberbole!
it would be common sense to write code that would react to shut down wide open throttle when brakes are applied heavily
Then you couldn't brake-torque to get off the line quickly on an acceleration run. That would kill 0-60 numbers, which sells cars. Not so common sense.
Toyota will send letters Friday to 3.8 million Toyota and Lexus owners warning them to yank the driver's floor mats out while it continues to devise a fix to keep them from jamming the gas pedal - a problem cited in an Aug. 28 Lexus crash killing four.
Any fix won't be cheap. Analysts have put the cost of just redone mats at up to $100 million. But the NHTSA's crash findings (see earlier post here) also noted a gas pedal design with potential for mat interference. Reuters quotes a Tokyo Shimbun report that if a pedal change is needed it could cost up to $440 million.
Until Toyota figures it out, lose the mats if you own a 2007-10 Camry, 2005-10 Avalon; 2004-09 Prius; 2005-10 Tacoma; 2007-10 Tundra; 2007-10 ES 350; and 2006-10 IS 250 or IS 350.
It looks like this system being recalled started 6 years ago with the 2004 Prius. There were reports of runaway Prius from the very beginning. Toyota blamed it on the driver. There were so many stalled Prius reports I would imagine the runaways did not get much attention. The Prius stalling turned out to be poorly written code. So why would we not suspect the same with the runaway issue? 6 years of sweeping the problems under the rug should get a thorough investigation by the Feds. Maybe even Congressional hearings. They got time to mess with the NFL, they should have time to investigate 5 fatal accidents in cars being recalled.
Then you couldn't brake-torque to get off the line quickly on an acceleration run. That would kill 0-60 numbers, which sells cars. Not so common sense.
Now that is hyperbole and a total lack of common sense. That is for teens. I think the last time I did that was in a 1948 Cadillac 4 door. I won the race. How many more lives could be saved by discouraging kids from racing?
JD Power is more neutral and credible. In its most recent (3-year-old) car dependability survey, Buick is No. 1 of all brands; Lexus No. 3; Toyota No. 4.
JD Power and CR both have their strengths and weaknesses. As far as reported problems go, JD Power counts a misaligned pin stripe the same as a blown engine and assigns them the same importance. Not something that makes much sense to me.
Under, over, or bunched up there, who knows? They obviously interfered.
It would be very convenient to just blame the dealer on this problem. I think ToyLex knows a lot more than has come out so far. You don't recall 3.8 million vehicles on a whim. How many of those 3.8 million vehicles even have OEM rubber floor mats? Toyota pushed the odds and lost. Watch the sales of the suspect models for October. No hyperbole needed to incriminate Toyota on this issue.
Let's be clear - I'm talking specifically about the case with the Trooper.
We know the mats got in the way, and we know that the wrong mats were used. Those are the primary factors in this case.
I don't think that specific case should be used as input in the investigation on Toyota's throttle system design simply because these were not ordinary circumstances.
If there are other cases (and I realize there are), with no mat interference, then use those in the investigation, because that information is valid.
Last I checked it was perfectly legal to take your car up to Capitol Raceway's 1/4 mile track.
So get a modified control unit for the racer. I could care less about the stats in a car mag. When you put the lives of people on a lower level of importance than getting the best 0-60 times for a magazine, it says a lot to me about the car company. We have forced the auto makers to put every kind of safety device known to man in the cars we buy. And something as simple as stopping a runaway throttle control is NOT addressed. Something is wrong with that picture. All the airbags in the world will not protect people in a runaway car crash. Which is what we are discussing. This is not about floor mats. This is about a company that knows they have a problem and shuffled it under the floor mats.
with Toyota and the steering links from all those 4WD trucks (Tacomas, 4Runners, T100s) from the 90s made it to the local news last night. A local attorney is representing 3 families so far whose children were killed or permanently injured when the links broke.
This originally made the news about 4 years ago when a family of 4 was killed in east Asia in a Prado, their version of the 4Runner. Toyota issued a recall over there but waited more than a year to make the recall here in the U.S. Now the attorney has evidence that only 1/3 or so of the affected trucks have been repaired under the recall (I had one of the affected trucks at the time, they replaced my steering links even though I had well over 200K miles on the thing), and more than 100K of them have been declared impossible to contact by the company.
The story of a high school senior killed by his '91 Tacoma was very sad of course, but the larger point was they received the recall notice 3 months after his death. If the recall had occurred in the U.S. when it occurred in Japan and other east Asian countries, it is highly likely the fault on his Tacoma would have been repaired before it killed him. When all the facts are finally known on this one, it may well prove to be a cover-up at Toyota at the highest levels. Several executives at Toyota lost their jobs over this at the time, the implication being they HAD covered up reports from engineers pointing out the weak steering links.
I was of two minds on this one at the time and continue to be so: yes, it appears there was a cover-up and that's bad. Yes, the recall should have been simultaneous in all markets where the affected models were sold. However, in all the cases of failures the trucks in question were very old at the time of failure, always more than 10 years old, many of them over 200K in miles, and I wonder exactly how long the automaker has to be responsible for the vehicle being sound to drive.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I don't think that specific case should be used as input in the investigation on Toyota's throttle system design simply because these were not ordinary circumstances.
I disagree, and it looks like Toyota does also. Why didn't they just fall back on the previous recall and point the finger at the Lexus dealer?
I don't think you have a good argument against a fail safe WOT. I think it is of a much higher importance than 16 airbags in a car. Airbags that did not help the victims AT ALL in this case. Simple code to stop the engine when heavy braking is involved would have saved those people.
0-60 sells cars, whether we like it or not. It is very important, like it or not.
They could include launch control with every car, so you'd have to press a button to do that, but they can't just cut the throttle when you hit the brakes.
Runaway throttle control SHOULD be addressed if indeed that is found to be the case after these investigations are done.
I do not think cases where the mat interfered are good input, simply because there was the interference to begin with.
This is not about floor mats
In the case of the Trooper it was. In other cases, perhaps not.
I wonder exactly how long the automaker has to be responsible for the vehicle being sound to drive.
That is a good question. I just received a recall on my 1999 Ford Ranger. Says it could catch fire just parked. It is away from the house most of the time so not a problem. I will take it into Ford for the fix. I am not trying to say that Toyota is the only company to cover up known problems. They are just the current ones in the lime light. I think Ford Firestone got a lot more negative press than this has. I blamed a lot of those Explorer deaths on people driving an SUV way beyond its limits. Big SUVs are the safest vehicle except when you have a maniac behind the wheel.
Comments
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Probably for cost savings as molding all the plastic for those little grippy teeth must be expensive.
It totally relies on those hooks/anchors.
Not sure about the ones for that Toyota, and my Sienna only has carpets, not rubber all-weather mats.
If my mats were smooth I would shop around for mats with teeth.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Looking at them, you wouldn't think they'd slide at all, but they do. I'll try to snap a pic when the van gets back home (they live on the floor of the back seat now).
If you are sitting at a desk and have a chair mat with teeth, sitting on carpet, I challenge you to move it just by shifting your feet !
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
maybe there was no pending lockup.
the car didn't slow down.
maybe the mat still has it's baby teeth, although the are 18 years old.
So it was Lexus/Lexus, only the wrong model.
This case really ought to be excluded from the investigation, and they should stick to cases where the correct mat created a problem. There aren't too many RX mats in ES models.
Bottom line is you and I and several others disagree that Toyota/Lexus shares in this problem that is very widespread with 3.8 million possible runaway vehicles. I say to Toyota fix them or get them off the road. I don't want to be an innocent statistic as was the fellow in Northern CA.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Would you care to share with us which cars in the U.S. have this feature in their "firmware"? Or do you propose recalling all the cars in the U.S. to get rid of possible runaways?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I'm not sure where we disagree or that I understand your contention of my points. I understand vacuum boost systems very well. The question that I did see come up is the assisted emergency braking that is become standard on cars. Are they designed predicated on the vacuum booster helping apply pressure to brakes first and the ABS system actually giving another added boost? If there is no vacuum to help with initial application of hydraulic fluid to the wheel cylinders, is the ABS pump capable of applying full throw of application of the pistons?
>power brakes do not stop the car any faster/shorter.
Try turning off your motor at 70 mph, pump the brake pedal a couple of times to drain the vacuum (actually allow air into the vacuum chamber), and then try to make an emergency stop.
Something went wrong, badly wrong, in the systems on that car. Full throttle in a lower gear with engine at high RPMs. Was vacuum assist inadequate to stop the car with the engine revving very high? I would assume there was vacuum at a low enough pressure to help. The brake rotors were reported to be glowing hot from friction. Is Toyota guilty of having too much horsepower in the V6 for their brake systems to handle in their Camry?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If this driver lifted off the pedal, brake assist would cease at once, and with each pump of the pedal, there would soon be little vacuum assist left with the wide-open throttle.
In a normal situation, if you stand on the pedal hard enough (with both feet if necessary), it will still stop the car in the same distance even if power assist is lost. However, you have to be prepared to put a LOT more effort into it if the vacuum is gone (I've practiced at work going downhill on our 0.4-mile long driveway, not at 70 mph of course!) Many people might not have the needed leg strength though.
You do raise a good point about cars being overpowered. Just about all manufacturers have been involved in the ongoing horsepower race, and it could be argued that 272 hp is too much for a family sedan. Also, why do we allow cars to go way faster than the highest legal limit in the land, currently 80 mph? It's not like many of us will ever ship our cars over to Germany to use on the Autobahn.
It has "teeth" but it slides around pretty easily, at least when my feet aren't resting on it. And it was way too far forward. The nibs aren't doing much good gripping the old carpet, and the mats are 12 years old too.
I put photos up on my CarSpace page of the mats on both cars. Here's one:
See more Car Pictures at CarSpace.com
Among the factors being probed:
"the Lexus ES braking system loses power-assist when the throttle is fully opened, increasing braking distance fivefold.
the Lexus' accelerator-pedal design may have contributed to the risk of floor-mat entrapment... the lever is not hinged and has no means for relieving forces caused by interferences
the lower edge of the accelerator pedal was "bonded" to the rubber floor mat...not secured by the vehicle's retaining clips"
Report reveals details on San Diego crash that led to recall (Seattle Times)
My 1998 Suburban only had 230 HP and I found it more than adequate. I thought of a good test for cars to pass. The throttle should be locked wide open and when the car reaches its maximum speed the brakes applied and the car would have to come to a stop in a reasonable distance. They spend millions on crash tests. Why not just such a test? I think it would show the cars in question could not be stopped with the brakes.
If you go back far enough (25 years), every major make and model with an auto tranny has been alleged to have "sudden acceleration" incidents, with gruesome accounts of death and destruction. Just ask Clarence Ditlow! Audi almost was killed in the US because of this problem, later attributed to "pedal misapplication" by the drivers.
Thankfully mine do not share the questionable drive by wire components used in the 3.8 Million vehicles that are in limbo while Toyota scratches their heads.
I think you're overreaching here. What those vehicles all apparently share is the same floormat to gas pedal clearance issues. We don't know if throttle-by-wire is the culprit. You seem to be assuming it is because of your audio problems in your Lexus. I personally can't imagine going back to balky mechanical throttle linkages or cables.
I've informed my son who has a 2006 Prius in NYC about this issue. I told him either to take out the driver mat or to make sure it's properly secured by the hooks (it always has been when I've driven it). I'm not staying up nights worrying about his car going wildly out of control.
Then you are in a distinct minority. The latest reliability survey from Consumer Reports ranks Toyota #3 (Scion was #1) out of the 33 mfgs they received surveys on. In contrast, Cadillac was ranked #23.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Since the accident happened a little over 2 months ago, I find it almost unbelievable that, even though the data recorder or black box has been recovered, no attempt has been made to retrieve any data from it.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
In return the NHTSA is generating more reports for public consumption. Gotta love interagency wars.
I never did hear a final report about the woman in the new Ford Explorer, iirc, who wrecked on the DC beltway while talking on her cell phone. The NHTSA was supposed to issue a finding about it too but I must have missed it.
The Santee Toyota Service Center called today. They are trying to locate a new NAV, CD,DVD unit to replace mine that gave up the ghost. Forunately it did not stick the throttle wide open causing me to crash. :P
"Then you are in a distinct minority. The latest reliability survey from Consumer Reports ranks Toyota #3 (Scion was #1) out of the 33 mfgs they received surveys on. In contrast, Cadillac was ranked #23."
Forget about Consumer Reports; it surveys its own readers/subscribers. It's like a Republican publication survey its readers about which party is better; of course you know the answer is Republican. People who don't agree with Consumer Reports would stop subscribing for it.
JD Power is more neutral and credible. In its most recent (3-year-old) car dependability survey, Buick is No. 1 of all brands; Lexus No. 3; Toyota No. 4.
Go read all the reader comments in Yahoo Auto or other online forums to see how many problems reported under Toyota Camry.
1) The power brake assistant would cease function in full throttle; the driver needs to apply over 220 lbs of force on the brake pedal to slow down the car which is impossible in a sitting position.
2) The Start/stop button needs to be held for more than 3 seconds to shut down the car; which is totally counter intuitive because in panic the driver would repeatedly press and release the button, not holding.
3) The shift handle needs to go thru a lot of twist and turns to reach the neutral position; which is almost impossible to do in emergency without looking down to watch where it's going in a super fast moving car.
All these designs are the typical design rules for Toyota for over 10 years. The floor mat only exposed the problems; not the root of the problems. The simple solution of removing the floor mat would not fix the problems. Toyota needs to put the drivers' safety first, recall all cars made in the past 10 or more years, change the hardware and the software design to give back driver's ability to stop the car in any condition!
My cars don't have emergency brake assist. I couldn't find anything as to whether it's a separate system with large pump capability or if it uses the ABS pump setup which, I theorize, doesn't have as large a volume capability. The large volume would be needed if the vacuum assist doesn't initially apply the pistons taking up slack in the calipers.
>You do raise a good point about cars being overpowered
I threw out the idea that cars don't need high horsepower (high torque) to travel most of our roadways. The horsepower race through the last few years has been unnecessary. A fuel efficient V6 doesn't get good mileage while utilizing 280 horsepower. Even 4-cyl have suffered a horsepower race: "Car XXX is better than Car YYY because their 4-cyl has more horsepower (or torque)."
I just can't believe that the brakes, with or without the emergency assist if it was on the vehicle, would not have slowed the car.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2) The Start/stop button needs to be held for more than 3 seconds to shut down the car; which is totally counter intuitive because in panic the driver would repeatedly press and release the button, not holding.
3) The shift handle needs to go thru a lot of twist and turns to reach the neutral position; which is almost impossible to do in emergency without looking down to watch where it's going in a super fast moving car.
How many other manufacturers have the same systems -- effectively no power assist at wide-open throttle (where did you get 220 lbs BTW?), start/stop buttons with different procedures as to how to turn off the engine, and gated shifters of one sort or another? British Rover (a poster, not the vehicle) has the most experience here of the different start/stop buttons. You certainly don't want a button that switches off the engine with just an accidental nudge.
As for your 10-year assertion, the Camry (the car I'm most familiar with) didn't switch to a gated shifter until the 2007 model year; mine has the simple straight-through PRND32L lever. I don't know of any Toyotas (Avalon? Land Cruiser? and some Lexii excluded) that don't have the tried-and-true mechanical ignition switch with key as standard.)
So, the big question is did Toyota know the likelihood of these things happening after earlier problems with runaway acceleration and problems with drive-by-wire in their engine control software, transmissions, etc. An engineer has alleged that they covered up crash testing that was dangerous; did they cover up knowledge of threats after runaway accidents already occured?
Floormat problems exposed the accelerator poor design. But the other problems had to have been figured out by engineering after the first crashes. Did Toyota ignore or destroy or fail to publicize the results therefore costing lives.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I agree. My speculation (and it can only be that) is if the driver had applied firm, steady, and continuous pressure (with both feet if necessary), the car would have slowed down. My guess though is that in the understandable panic, when the brakes didn't slow down the car anywhere near the normal rate (because of the stuck throttle), he lifted off the brakes and tried to find other ways to slow down, without success.
I do know for a fact that the 2007 and later Camry and ES models have emergency brake assist as standard, as do the vast majority of cars today with ABS.
Under, over, or bunched up there, who knows? They obviously interfered.
3.8 million possible runaway vehicles
Gotta love hyberbole!
it would be common sense to write code that would react to shut down wide open throttle when brakes are applied heavily
Then you couldn't brake-torque to get off the line quickly on an acceleration run. That would kill 0-60 numbers, which sells cars. Not so common sense.
Toyota will send letters Friday to 3.8 million Toyota and Lexus owners warning them to yank the driver's floor mats out while it continues to devise a fix to keep them from jamming the gas pedal - a problem cited in an Aug. 28 Lexus crash killing four.
Any fix won't be cheap. Analysts have put the cost of just redone mats at up to $100 million. But the NHTSA's crash findings (see earlier post here) also noted a gas pedal design with potential for mat interference. Reuters quotes a Tokyo Shimbun report that if a pedal change is needed it could cost up to $440 million.
Until Toyota figures it out, lose the mats if you own a 2007-10 Camry, 2005-10 Avalon; 2004-09 Prius; 2005-10 Tacoma; 2007-10 Tundra; 2007-10 ES 350; and 2006-10 IS 250 or IS 350.
It looks like this system being recalled started 6 years ago with the 2004 Prius. There were reports of runaway Prius from the very beginning. Toyota blamed it on the driver. There were so many stalled Prius reports I would imagine the runaways did not get much attention. The Prius stalling turned out to be poorly written code. So why would we not suspect the same with the runaway issue? 6 years of sweeping the problems under the rug should get a thorough investigation by the Feds. Maybe even Congressional hearings. They got time to mess with the NFL, they should have time to investigate 5 fatal accidents in cars being recalled.
Now that is hyperbole and a total lack of common sense. That is for teens. I think the last time I did that was in a 1948 Cadillac 4 door. I won the race. How many more lives could be saved by discouraging kids from racing?
That's because there are 8,456,578,345,234,746,456 of them on the road.
Please pardon my gagrice-style hyperbole.
What you won't find is complaints about the Lamborghini Gallardo on those same forums because both of those owners are too busy to go to Yahoo Auto.
JD Power and CR both have their strengths and weaknesses. As far as reported problems go, JD Power counts a misaligned pin stripe the same as a blown engine and assigns them the same importance. Not something that makes much sense to me.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Last I checked it was perfectly legal to take your car up to Capitol Raceway's 1/4 mile track.
Not to mention I'm talking about car mags obtaining 0-60 numbers, which are a very important tool in selling cars, whether we like it or not.
While you may be bummed that your Hummer guzzles gas, how is that a defect? The Hummer sucks down gas very reliably.
So the real question is, what are they really measuring? Driver expectations vs actual ownership experience?
That's not a measure of quality. Not to me.
Instead, how about measuring things that break?
It would be very convenient to just blame the dealer on this problem. I think ToyLex knows a lot more than has come out so far. You don't recall 3.8 million vehicles on a whim. How many of those 3.8 million vehicles even have OEM rubber floor mats? Toyota pushed the odds and lost. Watch the sales of the suspect models for October. No hyperbole needed to incriminate Toyota on this issue.
We know the mats got in the way, and we know that the wrong mats were used. Those are the primary factors in this case.
I don't think that specific case should be used as input in the investigation on Toyota's throttle system design simply because these were not ordinary circumstances.
If there are other cases (and I realize there are), with no mat interference, then use those in the investigation, because that information is valid.
So get a modified control unit for the racer. I could care less about the stats in a car mag. When you put the lives of people on a lower level of importance than getting the best 0-60 times for a magazine, it says a lot to me about the car company. We have forced the auto makers to put every kind of safety device known to man in the cars we buy. And something as simple as stopping a runaway throttle control is NOT addressed. Something is wrong with that picture. All the airbags in the world will not protect people in a runaway car crash. Which is what we are discussing. This is not about floor mats. This is about a company that knows they have a problem and shuffled it under the floor mats.
This originally made the news about 4 years ago when a family of 4 was killed in east Asia in a Prado, their version of the 4Runner. Toyota issued a recall over there but waited more than a year to make the recall here in the U.S. Now the attorney has evidence that only 1/3 or so of the affected trucks have been repaired under the recall (I had one of the affected trucks at the time, they replaced my steering links even though I had well over 200K miles on the thing), and more than 100K of them have been declared impossible to contact by the company.
The story of a high school senior killed by his '91 Tacoma was very sad of course, but the larger point was they received the recall notice 3 months after his death. If the recall had occurred in the U.S. when it occurred in Japan and other east Asian countries, it is highly likely the fault on his Tacoma would have been repaired before it killed him. When all the facts are finally known on this one, it may well prove to be a cover-up at Toyota at the highest levels. Several executives at Toyota lost their jobs over this at the time, the implication being they HAD covered up reports from engineers pointing out the weak steering links.
I was of two minds on this one at the time and continue to be so: yes, it appears there was a cover-up and that's bad. Yes, the recall should have been simultaneous in all markets where the affected models were sold. However, in all the cases of failures the trucks in question were very old at the time of failure, always more than 10 years old, many of them over 200K in miles, and I wonder exactly how long the automaker has to be responsible for the vehicle being sound to drive.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I disagree, and it looks like Toyota does also. Why didn't they just fall back on the previous recall and point the finger at the Lexus dealer?
I don't think you have a good argument against a fail safe WOT. I think it is of a much higher importance than 16 airbags in a car. Airbags that did not help the victims AT ALL in this case. Simple code to stop the engine when heavy braking is involved would have saved those people.
They could include launch control with every car, so you'd have to press a button to do that, but they can't just cut the throttle when you hit the brakes.
Runaway throttle control SHOULD be addressed if indeed that is found to be the case after these investigations are done.
I do not think cases where the mat interfered are good input, simply because there was the interference to begin with.
This is not about floor mats
In the case of the Trooper it was. In other cases, perhaps not.
That is a good question. I just received a recall on my 1999 Ford Ranger. Says it could catch fire just parked. It is away from the house most of the time so not a problem. I will take it into Ford for the fix. I am not trying to say that Toyota is the only company to cover up known problems. They are just the current ones in the lime light. I think Ford Firestone got a lot more negative press than this has. I blamed a lot of those Explorer deaths on people driving an SUV way beyond its limits. Big SUVs are the safest vehicle except when you have a maniac behind the wheel.