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



  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 10,136
    And hopefully the same set of circumstances would never happen again for the new owners. The down side to this, I wonder if the new owners even know the history behind this vehicle. And, if they found out, would they still want the car?
    2018 Acura TLX SH AWD ASpec
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Like I already stated - $1800 plus $150/hr, plus $4000(school probably gets now) in equipment is nothing, nothing, nothing!!! Don't forget all approved by University too. There is no personal financial gain for Dave Gilbert!!! Ridiculous!!!! Dave Gilbert started this project out on his own. Dave Gilbert had just bought Toyota truck. Said recall and issues enticed him. One of his expertises is auto electronics. Toyota and NHTSA had their chance to work with him but they didn't call back. Sean Kane got back immediately. Kane agreed to help pay, to finish work as that was what was needed. This all was in testimoney after sworn in an dunder oath. University of Southern Illinois Auto Technology Department is #1 in nation. Gilbert stated under testimony he is not against Toyota at all. Actually Toyota usually supplies school with vehicles.

    What does Exponent gain by working for Toyota - $1,000,000+++++
    What does Toyota gain by using Exponent??? H-mmm (1)no electronics problem (2)defense reports for all their law suits, witnesses from Exponent (3)hundreds of million dollars savings in defeating their law suits (4)etc..

    So I ask who is biased???????????? Who gains most!!!!

    That congressman who attacked Kane for paying Gilbert - attempting to discredit Gilbert's findings as biased - is politics talking loud and clear it appears!! Sounds more like he got some money for his own personal politics. Don't forget Toyota had extra lobbyist in
    Washington this week. Toyota pays out way over $1,000.000 lobbying in Washington for their interests.

    No one has to be rocket scientist to realize what is happening! Facts reveal Gilbert is the least biased.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Yes, I too am very disappointed. Each step of way, things nver seemed correct, started forming some negative opinions, but still wanted and hoped they were addressing the issues.

    Toyota hiring Exponent was the final straw. I already knew who Exponent was and what they can do.

    Inanba and that memo response - I don't remember it - was telling. Sorry - I strongly feel response was not true. And assume legal issue.

    Here they are
    (1)??? Think may be driver
    (2)Miscare of car
    (3)Structure of vehicle
    (4)Structural parts

    I am going to post these causes as separate posting also. Think everyone may respond more.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660

    (any of you remember #1 for sure?? - I misssed per my notes)
    (1)??? Think may be driver
    (2)Care of car
    (3)Structure of vehicle
    (4)Structural parts
  • steverstever Posts: 52,571
    edited February 2010
    You do the wireless download "thing" in cars, you'll get the privacy advocates

    Well, you can turn that off in Windows so the updates aren't automatic. But yeah, the NSA would probably enjoy having a backdoor into it.

    And some members here think that Toyota and others are already flashing the cars with new code without telling the owners. But if that were true, some tech somewhere would be spilling the beans.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,571
    edited February 2010
    Sharonkl, I'm afraid I was spreading incorrect information the other day based on a 2002 link I found.

    Dr. Gilbert got his PhD in 2006.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Steve, so you found Toyota gives to Gilbert's program too. I wonder why Toyota never called him back until several days later. I sure don't see Gilbert being out to get Toyota. Gilbert actually had more to lose by doing study, and detrimental risks for presenting it were high. University may lose out on Toyota money, cars in future.

    Seems like I have more pieces of the puzzle going in place.

    Many thanks. Helped alot!!!
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Steve - thanks. Got it already. You are sharing lots of info for me and others too I am sure! Sincerely appreciate.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Yes, complaints on NHTSA site are someowhat vague. Safety sites are the ones who complain those people are not called and list of detailed questions asked. I also saw in a final report NHTSA they did say they called people. But no included list of any questions asked so I could evaluate validity of study. How can there be any validity assumed when professionally no onbe can evaluate questions posed to these people. No responses included in report as attachments??? I just seemed to continue finding more faults as I read on. And I am not expet in autos!! From medical research analysis type approach I can definitely say it is faulty.

    Too bad they never asked such a question.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    You meant Johnson and Johnson didn't you??? You had said PGE??

    AS for J&J - Tylenol incident!!! They did excellent!! Actually became hereos in minds of most US citizens. Somewhere I had saved an article where a consultant on crisis management was analyzing Toyota's approach to press pressure & coverage. Found - here is link. Just one consultant view

    Are you in Pennsylvania???? Just curious as my daughter inlaw worked with them on east coast for awhile as a consultant. My son was going to Pennsylvania medical school at time. Lived in Havertown which was only about 20-30 minutes from J&J.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Yes, I understand what you are saying. At least it was a start for Toyota as he states at hearing and as he had claimed all along. Know he was trying to say system did not pick error up so failsafe systems never engaged. I just don't know enough aobut electronics to evaluate this aspect.
  • graphicguygraphicguy SW OhioPosts: 10,136
    edited February 2010
    Sharon...I'm just outside of Cincinnati. I have many friends who work for P&G, in many capacities (including their engineering dept). And, I have many friends who work for Toyota, both in their North American HQ, which is right across the OH river from Cincinnati, in Erlanger, KY and in a suburb of Cincinnati called Blue Ash, which houses Toyota's marketing dept.

    I spent many years with Xerox personally, as well as with some other high profile, high tech companies, many of whom were partners with Toyota.

    So, I get a healthy dose of the way "big business" works, personally, socially and professionally. I'm trying to think of a way that Toyota could have screwed this up worse. And, I'm having a hard time doing so.

    They broke the very first rule, for any company....

    LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS. Instead, Toyota dismissed their complaints. Some of those dismissals turned into accidents, some turned into injuries, and at their very worst, some turned into deaths. In many instances, they tried to blame their customers, which only made things even worse. On top of all of that, they've tried to cover up their failures.

    I really don't know how much worse they could have made it on themselves unless they actually went out and shot their customers.
    2018 Acura TLX SH AWD ASpec
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited February 2010
    DW..Dear Wife.

    "..Do you have link where Gilbert says he did use 0.02 voltage..."

    I have presumed that Dr Gilbert simply shorted the two signals together without realizing that it would take a really SOLID short to reduce the voltage differences between the two sensors to less than 0.02 volts. Less than 0.02 volts is the threshold required for the Denso ECU to detect that the two sensors are shorted together.

    And yes, I agree, "this" would be only a starting point for Toyota. "this" is a certain and sure indication that someone at Denso is specifying and/or writing seriously FLAWED firmware.

    "..He does development/engineering for Porsche.."

    Then is there any change he could get them to fix the design flaw in my '01 Porsche C4's climate control system..?? VW had the very same problem in their Cayenne clone (common climate control..Bosch) and fixed it via a firmware reflash but Porsche simply claims it is operating as designed...

    My Porsche, and ALL Porsches subsequent to 2000, will quite thoroughly CHILL the interior surface the windshield with the A/C cooling once the cabin temperature stabilizes around the temperature setpoint.

    Not really a problem unless you happen to be driving after a very HOT day in July shortly after dusk on a very HUMID evening in Alabama, or like situation. Wipers wipe it away instantly but only after you realize your nighttime forward distance vision is declining, has seriously declined, due to the slow build up of condensation on the exterior of the windshield.

    So now I ALWAYS override the windshield airflow duct routing whenever the A/C is not disabled.

    "..brakes would win out....correct assumption ?.."

    Possibly NOT..!

    That all depends on just how the BTO, Brake/Throttle Override, is implemented. If it is simply integrated into the current DBW and/or engine/transaxle ECU controlling firmware, say via a simple reflash, then it would be subject to the same failure modes currently in consideration.

    The proper way, failsafe way, would be a completely separate implementation of BTO. Say a small module that "watched" the brake light switch, the brake fluid pressure switch, and both of the throttle plate servomotor feedback position sensors. If the brake light switch remained closed for more than say, 200 milliseconds OR the brake fluid pressure rose above a certain predetermined level, AND the throttle plate position remained above idle, the new module would open the EFI circuit and thereby starve the engine of fuel.
  • jdm9jdm9 Posts: 38
    I understand what you are saying as that part has been said/proven many times in the recent past and stated by possibly yourself and others on several occassions , it is obvious that in some cases and most definetly in the CHP tragedy that the brakes are no match for 400 or so hp. Im not sure whether Im asking this properly or not but what Im asking for is simple, its this " first hand, personal reports of UA and whether during UA turning off the key worked and if not, what exactly occurred when the key was turned off" The answer to that question is in no way definitive as to how UA has or will respond , but merely adds to the broader base of information, which can not be a bad thing.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited February 2010
    400HP sets the "bar" pretty high. Braking systems are designed to be adequate at stopping the car WITHOUT the engine still driving, at WOT hp yet, the primary braking wheels. With some cars it might only require, along with momentum, only 50-100 HP to keep the car moving beyond what many of us would consider a safe distance.

    These days most ignition "switches" only "tell" the engine/transaxle ECU that you wish to kill the engine. Any failures of that module or the controlling firmware and anything is up for "grabs".

    In the case of PB start/stop you might know to hold that PB down for 3 seconds in order to kill the engine but the firmware must be "alive and well", watching the PB switch, if it is to acknowledge your wish.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Smith's Testimony Tuesday February 23, 2010

    Smith's vehicle - 2006 Lexus ES350. Odometer reading 2760.
    SUA Incident - Oct 12, 2006

    I did not take notes in beginning of her testimony - but believe she was traveling on freeway - when vehicle took off. At that point I recall she took foot off pedal and braked hard. Car kept going. She did look down at her feet briefly to check(sort of natural). Said she didn't see anything- seemed fine. Over the 6 miles of trying to stop - vehicle was going at high speed - tried shifting into all gears she thought. Braking hard to no avail. That part of her testimony seemed to be a little unclear re: shifting to all gears. Even during her testimony it appeared she felt she did, but still appeared to be little confused here. She was upset and could see. Maybe this was cause?? She started crying at some point, stating she felt she was going to die - I foget when. Was still upset even talking about incident. From what I recall vehicle did start slowing on it's own. When she got it to aobut 35 miles I believe she said she was able to then get it to side of road. But even when she could stop it engine was still staying elevated lots higher. I believe she said she then turned it off.

    I do recall the brakes were gone after the incident. This would most definitely be expected. Something else was ruined too??? For that fact it could have been a transmisssion she needed too?? Brakes were gone as result of incident, and odometer reading on car was 2760. .

    Her husband came immediately as she had hit his # w auto dial on blue tooth while incident was occurring. He came immediately. As he was drving over he called AAA or when he arrived?? Car was not running at that point. With AAA as witness husband shifted vehicle into neutral to enable loading on flatbed, and car attempted to start on its own, and then think they said it stopped. Smith's called Lexus dealership and AAA took vehicle there. Smith's did have AAA responder document what happened when car put in neutral whilke trying to load vehicle on flatbed, and write little about what happened. Car at Lexus dealership - fixed. Brakes and something else. Did Toyota do more??? That is good question??? Since vehicle is still on road now with no more problems maybe so. Smith's did keep all the documentation. Car was fixed and was told by Toyota if vehicle maintained properly brakes will always override engine acceleration. There is no problem with her car. Floormats. Toyota was told how vehicle tried to start itself after incident also with AAA witness report showing same & full account of incident.. Mrs, Smith does not feel floormats were cause. She is positive there was no interference. Said amde no sense since vehicle was acting so strangely evn when they tried to load it on flatbed. Very upset she was not believed.

    One Note - my experience with my dealership - I find mine does not write complaints on work order. Why? I am not sure. Next time they won't get by with not doing.

    2007 They finally decided to file complaint with NHTSA. Felt they might get some help to prevent anyone else from having same experience as she did. Wrote letter and provided all the documentation. Seems NHTSA felt floor mats. Not electronics. Same result as Toyota.

    Mr. Smith
    Husband also testified but didn't say as much. Stated quite upset as both of them were treated like they were liars and idiots, and were not telling the truth. He feels Toyota took the cheapest way out. He feels NHTSA failed the public. Reminded NHTSA - one of mission statements is - save lives. Wanted to let everyone know they are not usually complainers, just decided was too serious. I forget if he ever said if he checked vehicle by brake pedal, etc. I would assume he would have - sort of the natural guy thing to do.

    Mrs. Smith - Social Worker. her testimoney was quite difficult for her recalling the incident.
    Mr.Smith - Vice Preident ????
    Both appear to be nice intelligent people. They appear to be amiable also. My guess is their documentation of car trying to start itself while loading on flatbed with an outside witness verifying this helped validate their case.

    All I have notes on. Probably is more. Couldn't write fast enough.
    I actually felt very sorry for both of these individuals. Incident was an emergency. People do not always do what is normal in these situations. Did she try all gears - don't know?? Does she think she tried all - I would guess yes. But possibly her noted hesitation here may indicate normally she questions too, but another side of her feels she did. Shifting is sort of irrelavant though. What she explained was high speed SUA event and she could not brake it to a stop. Vehicles only had 2760 miles odometer - brakes would still be excellent SUA high speed in itself is scarey.

    Are they suing? I don't know??? The costs of repair just donot justify the huge cost of attorney's fees to pursue a lawsuit. Mrs. Smith was not injured. Besides even if they would win, they would still have to collect. I really doubt any lawsuit brewing.

    Since this happened in 2006, present situation Toyota, publicity did not affect what happened to them 2006.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 11,858
    sounds like 'Onstar'. we already know they can send you a vehicle health report or shut down you car, if requested.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 11,858
    I think Dr. Gilbert demonstrated 'one way to skin a cat'. Where there is one way to trip up the ECU, there are probably others.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • revitrevit Posts: 476
    Akio Toyoda's story doesn't add up.

    The president of Toyota Motor Corp., the centrally controlled behemoth founded 73 years ago by his grandfather, told a congressional committee Wednesday that he didn't know about mounting sudden-acceleration complaints with Toyota vehicles until late last year.

    He also didn't know the substance of a corporate briefing paper prepared in July that touted $100 million in savings on recalls, warned about sudden acceleration complaints in Toyota and Lexus models and described a federal bureaucracy that is not "industry-friendly."

    But now, faced with a global brand and P.R. fiasco, Toyoda knows with "absolute certainty" that the sudden unintended acceleration complaints tied to 34 deaths and the recall of 8.5 million vehicles worldwide cannot be attributed to electronic throttle controls in Toyota and Lexus cars and trucks.

    Toyoda, the scion of the industrial dynasty, said the right things. He apologized. He took responsibility. He essentially admitted that ambition outstripped execution and strayed from the corporate creed that made Toyota the brand powerhouse it became.

    But he didn't bring an end to the nightmare. Buried in his careful statements is red meat for trial lawyers looking to make a buck off Toyota's $30 billion-plus cash hoard and red meat for like-minded politicians trolling for contributions from trial lawyers.

    More obvious is the unmistakable admission that Toyota, the gold standard of the global auto industry, allowed the arrogance of success to blind it to festering troubles within.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    So you are from Cincinnati. Sounds like you are an engineer. And you are not mad at me blasting PGE for their chromium pollution & their actions here in California? But facts are really there and chromium does cause high rates of cancer, etc. And you probably have great friends who work for Toyota. Your friends are who I worry about and feel sorry for.

    I thought when you mentioned J&J - just maybe you lived near where my son and daughter inlaw lived when my son was going to medical school. Shucks! But Ohio is quite nice I hear..

    LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS - yes, this does really seem to be a big area where they failed. During the hearing it was quite apparent there was a big breakdown in their system for f/u and thorough good investigation. Realized many difficult to address issues exist since all decisions mad in Japan. And am not sure of how Japan views our cultural values and US system, as I am not quite sure of theirs. With US market so large I do have concerns US can not make many of their own decisions. I guess only time will tell how much this has hurt them. Some people are not even paying attention to investigation.

    Blaming people/the drivers will never sit well. Got Audi in lots of trouble. This is just not a good public customer relations approach. There is an ole' philosophy customer is always right. We always referred to it as "The Nordstrom Treatment" -

    Since my husband was CEO of corporation and my son is CEO of his own corporation - yes I do understand some aspects a corporation from insiders perspective. I worked for Kaiser Permanente in San Francisco 20hrs/week as medical professional so I understand how large medical groups work to certain degree too. And there are good highly ethical corporations and then there are those who secretly are unethical. Of course the later hopes they don't get caught.

    COVERUP - Toyota hiring Exponent - after what I know about them, & their past actions - does make it appear they are hiding something. The timeline events that have unfolded seem to be pointing in that direction too. I personally feel as I said earlier Toyota needs Exponent for a few things. (1)No electronic problems report, (2)Exponent to help with legal engineering defense, be witness at trials (3)Help them avoid $hundred of millions settllement, (4)Etc. This is just my personal opinion only.

    Brake override should take care of electronic bugs that may cause SUA. Since this announcement came out Nov, 2009 think Toyota already knew where they stood. The number of SUA/UA incidents are small compared to number of vehicles sold. But there are at least 35 deaths. Hundreds of accidents. Sadly it does appear they have looked at this only using statistical methology. Seems possibly they ignored the importance of the human factor in the 35 deaths. This is not wise in US, as it usually will reach crisis at some point. And it did with the San Diego accident.
  • mikefm58mikefm58 Posts: 2,882
    Car was fixed and was told by Toyota if vehicle maintained properly brakes will always override engine acceleration.

    Pretty ridiculous for Toyota to say that on a vehicle with 2760 miles. What kind of maintenance could she have done, or not done?
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Key words, wording....

    Will always override engine acceleration.
  • Key question in the UA issue seems to be, "will brakes override a full throttle vehicle situation, where the vehicle continues at full throttle and speed AFTER the brakes are applied. I would theorize that neither Toyota, or any other auto manufacturer, designs brakes that are adequate to perform this "once in a million" task.
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    DW - I love it! Tell her Hi!

    So you have a Porsche. So does my son. I am sorry to hear about the air conditioning problems. Not good. I know he doesn't work on air conditioning. So sorry. But I will be happy to call him tomorrow to see if he has problems, If so, has he been able to correct? Etc. I will get back to you.

    As for my son- actually he owns his own company. He doesn't work for Porsche. What he does is development/engineering post factory improved engine performance for the autos I mentioned earlier. Porsche is the biggest I think. At their site they do the development, testing, etc. Their site is all set up for the dyno & computer readout testing & they do for testing all the time. They only work on customers cars for special projects - ex: racing. special event, etc. Their distributors are the ones that buy the software upgrades to flash as customers request. Distributors make all decisions regarding any other needed vehicle changes due to this flash. They have other proucts they developed, but not sure what they are? I do apologize as my explanations are only my feeble attempt to explain and do appear quite simplistic.

    Hereis a link to Kane's testimony. He has written a little about Dave Gilbert's test. I am not sure if this will help you understand what Gilbert found or not. Gilbert did up his own report and submitted, but have not found that report anywhere. Let me know if you find out anything in this article. Would sincerely appreciate. %20022110.pdf

    Seems you too think there is a problem. So Denso firmware possibly. Thanks for the heads up. I had sort of felt possible electronic problem existed last November when they announced brake override implementation, but needed to wait.

    BRAKE OVERRIDE - So best to always have separate system, or failure of brake override can occur too.. I wonder what Toyota will do?? Sounds like there is already a possible firmware problem present where a override flash just may not work either. Boy, I was thinking all along just a flash would do this. H-mmm. This is something very important to know. All I can say is thank you!!! Thank you!!
  • sharonklsharonkl Posts: 660
    Comment from Toyota was sort of ridiculous. Mr. Smith was one that my notes indicated said that is what their letter from Toyota said. I forget if I just aded to her or his??? Reference was to letter and Toyota's finding.

    I was very curiou about this mention of "if properly maintained" to. Gosh - this vehicle only had 2760 miles on it. Sounds more like a form letter, and someone didn't do their job.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,112
    'Toyota defense' might rescue jailed Minnesota man
    LINO LAKES, Minn. (AP) - Ever since his 1996 Toyota Camry shot up an interstate ramp, plowing into the back of an Oldsmobile in a horrific crash that killed three people, Koua Fong Lee insisted he had done everything he could to stop the car.

    A jury didn't believe him, and a judge sentenced him to eight years in prison. But now, new revelations of safety problems with Toyotas have Lee pressing to get his case reopened and his freedom restored. Relatives of the victims - who condemned Lee at his sentencing three years ago - now believe he is innocent and are planning to sue Toyota. The prosecutor who sent Lee to prison said he thinks the case merits another look.

    "I know 100 percent in my heart that I took my foot off the gas and that I was stepping on the brakes as hard as possible," Lee said in an interview Wednesday at the state prison in Lino Lakes. "When the brakes were looked at and we were told that nothing was wrong with the brakes, I was shocked."

    Lee's accident is among a growing number of cases, some long resolved, that are getting new attention since Toyota admitted its problems with sudden acceleration were more extensive than originally believed. Numerous lawsuits involving Toyota accidents have been filed over the recent revelations, and attorneys expect the numbers will climb.

    Lee's Camry wasn't among those subject to Toyota's recent safety recalls, but Toyota did recall some 1996 Camrys for defective cruise controls that could cause sudden acceleration.

    Lee's current attorney, Brent Schafer, said several '96 Camry owners whose cars were not in the recall have filed sudden-acceleration complaints with federal regulators.

    Was this one of those many TSBs that get slipped in if you bring your Toyota in for service? How far back will Toyota have to go to get a clean slate?
  • jdm9jdm9 Posts: 38
    So can we safely say that this event sheds very little light on what the effect of shutting off the ignition is?
Sign In or Register to comment.