By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Me, in a panic braking situation..??
Not a chance in hell.
"..That decreases ABS efficiency..."
No, that decreases BRAKING efficiency. ABS "efficiency" is what keeps the tire(s) rolling ever so slightly, just exactly what I didn't need or want. So, ineffect, pumping the brakes would "increase" ABS efficiency.
You're supposed to slam on ABS brakes and keep your foot down.
I'm not sure how a system could be regarded as more efficient while it does a worse job.
Let me ponder that....my head hurts. :P
Sounds like you're saying that if you flick your headlights on and off, this is more efficient use of the switches and relays.
There seem to be a lot of posts lately that have that effect on me. I have learned to identify them early and skip them before they cause me harm. :shades:
I suppose that, as host, you are compelled to suffer through.
My condolences.
1. The best baking (highest friction with the road) occurs right before the wheel locks up
2. That almost nobody can maintain braking right at that cusp
3. Therefore, the next best thing was to pump the brakes rapidly so that the wheel locks up momentarily, then back off so that the wheel cycles about the lockup point rapidly.
4. Some drivers can do this, but most probably can't, so
5. ABS was developed to do this for the driver - pump the brakes much more rapidly than a driver could
Hence, the dictate to just stand on the brakes and let the ABS do the work.
IIRC, wasn't ABS first developed for and used on airplanes to aid in braking, particularly on wet runways?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Any day now I fully expect to see a new ABS design aspect wherein ABS is/remains disabled unless VSC indicates that the driver needs to, or is, asserting directional control.
ABS has always been primarily about retaining steering control.
And with the right input, shorter stops in the rain. Especially on a motorcycle and in panic situations.
But the execution of ABS at a sales-level though, has left a lot to be desired. To this day, many sales happen and the salesman never confirms if the purchaser is aware of the differences in how to use ABS brakes. I'm sure there are many longer stopping distances still today, due to people feeling the stutter under their foot and actually letting up on the brake thinking "what's that?"
People have had to find out on their own to 'stand on the brakes' if you realize ABS has activated. Even owner's manuals did not make that clear in the beginning.
I DO NOT PUMP MY BRAKES IN A PANIC BRAKING SITUATION..!!
I might even break the seat back due to the force I apply to the brake pedal, if the pedal itself doesn't shear off first...
But prior to the advent of ABS pumping the brakes could/might produce the same "positive" results as having an Anti-lock Braking System.
Most salespersons, even today, will tell you that ABS provides quicker/shorter stopping distances....when the exact opposite is the truth of the matter.
Did you know that the accident record for ABS equipped cars is worse, marginally worse, than non-ABS equpped cars...? Apparently what tips the balance is the larger number of single car accidents, run off the road accidents, for ABS equipped cars. Strange.
And besides, good braking is *about* control of the car. A 1963 Pontiac could lock up the brakes so that the tires would melt just by tapping on that 12-inch wide over-booster power brake pedal, but that's not "good brakes".
But you are right that some people *defeat* ABS by how they use it, and some people are defeated *BY* ABS, say for instance on gravel, where non-ABS brakes would work better.
I'd imagine if a driver inadvertently was standing on the brake and gas simultaneously in a UA incident, that would create a lot of mayhem with the ABS system.
In a few cases you are also better off not wearing a seat belt, but generally, it is much safer to wear one. Betting your retirement savings on a long shot will sometimes pay off, but you are more likely to go broke.
Gotta play the odds.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I totally agree with that statement, as well as those saying new car buyers are grossly uninformed about the proper use of ABS braking systems.
You can call the BMW Performance Center in SC and speak with anyone there who deals with the folks picking up new cars at the Center. One of the things they demonstrate there is the ABS systems, and I would guess a full 80% of the participants really don't know how to use ABS systems properly before going through the day's training.
I have seen it first hand...
1. The best baking (highest friction with the road) occurs right before the wheel locks up
2. That almost nobody can maintain braking right at that cusp
3. Therefore, the next best thing was to pump the brakes rapidly so that the wheel locks up momentarily, then back off so that the wheel cycles about the lockup point rapidly.
4. Some drivers can do this, but most probably can't, so
5. ABS was developed to do this for the driver - pump the brakes much more rapidly than a driver could
Hence, the dictate to just stand on the brakes and let the ABS do the work.
I fully agree. For 99.999999% of the drivers on the street, ABS brakes, when used as designed, will outperform the best actions of the driver.
Unfortunately, the percentage of drivers out there that think they are the next Mario Andretti (and have the appropriate driving skills to go along with it) is much higher than the remaining .000001 of drivers.
BUT... you're right. Unless you know how to use it, you're in for a shock, especially if you don't have disc brakes at all four wheels. Gravel roads, rain, snow, and the like all cause ABS systems with rear drum brakes to go into shock. Unless you know it will do that, you're off the road, almost guaranteed.
Oh - interesting factiod a few people might not know. ABS was developed for F1 racing not because it braked better than the pros but because it kept the brakes from literally catching fire and/or melting. It happens to also work nearly as well as what the pros could do, so it was a win-win. Normal people have to train quite hard to learn to brake like that, same as any racing school would require of any pro-in-training.
The BMW driving school is a wonderful idea. Few people know how to actually drive their cars these days.
I think you are mistaken in that comment.
ABS systems were being designed back in the 1900's in the train and aircraft world...
http://www.ehow.com/about_5042665_history-abs-brakes.html
http://www.autoweb.co.uk/article/537
http://wikicars.org/en/Anti-Lock_Brakes_(ABS)#History
You can test until the cows come home but until you put the product into customer hands testing will never be complete.
A fully mechanical system saw limited automobile use in the 1960s in the Ferguson P99 racing car, the Jensen FF.
***
(1966 - also the first full-time AWD passenger car, interestingly enough)
***
I should have noted that I was talking about *automotive* applications. The only use before this was in prototypes and a few airplanes. A modern computer controlled system didn't come about until 1978(Mercedes).
Many safety items (even the basic safety belt) standard in cars today made their mark in racing before showing up in passenger vehicles.
The same goes for drive train enhancements, so it really shouldn't be surprising to anyone.
I wonder if the NASCAR Toyotas have the same ETCS-i system with stupid hall effect pedal sensors instead of contact potentiometers and with the same (Not Optimum) voltages for the two sensors.
I bought one of this vehicles in 2007th and I reported to Sofasa Colombia that I noticed acceleration in the vehicle although I wasn´t speeding up the car, several months later I was of risk of an accident because unintended acceleration in my car.
Right now I´m waiting for a desicion of the authorities in Colombia, because I claim 2 years ago to change my car considering this one was on warranty and I was on risk to be injured because of this particular condition.
I will appreciate some information you can provide me about cases in Renault Logan, regards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------
Hola a todos, vivo en Colombia y estoy interesado en conocer sobre antecedentes de casos reales de aceleración no intencionada en vehículos Renault Logan.
En el 2007 adquirí uno de estos vehículos y reporté varias veces a Sofasa Colombia y el concesionario que noté aceleración en mi carro aunque no estaba aplicando el acelerador, varios meses después estuve en riesgo de accidentarme debido a aceleración no intencionada en éste.
En estos momentos estoy esperando por una desición de las autoridades de mi país, debido a que 2 años reclamé por el cambio de mi vehículo, considenrando que aún estaba bajo garantía y que estuve a punto de salir lastimado por esta condición particular en mi carro.
Apreciaré información/antecedentes que puedan suministrarme sobre estos casos en vehiculos Renault Logan, saludos.
Its entirely problem the problem may be interaction between cell phone use
and cruise control on vehicle- The wave lengths are Speed of Light divided
by the RF frequency. IF the half wave length matches closelty the length of
car's turn signal, there will be a direct connection of RF signal to cruise cntrl
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Look how long it took Boeing to discover that the hydraulic rudder control valve on their 737's had a serious design flaw. The valve had to fail first in a somewhat normal way, debris blocking the pilot spool from moving, and that resulted in uncovering the design flaw.
The valve design was found to be fail/FAIL, not failsafe.
It's even possible that many years from now we might see a death bed confession from a senior NipponDenso programmer.
Or from one of the Toyota techs who reportedly experienced it and tried to blow a whistle. It would have been blown and heard at Ford.
Reports or 93 deaths is just too much.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/us-poised-to-release-toyota-probe-- findings/article1898397/
If we attempt to embrace truly "critical thinking", none of these arguments holds any water. It's no better than the "god did it" argument really.
At best, we have the basis for yet another conspiracy theory, which I never subscribe to, because having been part of large organizations, and in the army, I know that nobody can keep their mouths shut for very long.
They even squeal regularly in the Mafia, where the penalties for doing so would far exceed any punishments meted out at Toyota.
Maybe the North Koreans could keep a lid on it, but they don't seem to be involved ....or ARE THEY? :surprise:
Something tells me that any death bed confessions will be coming from those who tried to run their scams on Toyota and cash in on this whole sorry mess. Says a lot about our society. Shameful.
I know it must be extremely embarrassing to all those who have been trying to stir this mess up....but it is time to give it up, you were wrong.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110208/ap_on_bi_ge/us_toyota_recalls
Sounds like the skeptics have got to throw in the towel:
"We enlisted the best and brightest engineers to study Toyota's electronics systems and the verdict is in. There is no electronic-based cause for unintended acceleration in Toyotas,"
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2011/02/federal-investigation-finds-no-- electronic-glitches-in-toyotas.html
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
For those who wish to believe in UA, there is NOTHING that can be done to shake that belief.
You're correct. The appeal of a consiracy theory is far too strong for a "true believer" to admit that they might....just might, be in error.
Officials with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said they reviewed consumer complaints and warranty data in detail and found that many of the complaints involved cases in which the vehicle accelerated after it was stationary or at very low speeds.
NHTSA Deputy Administrator Ron Medford said that in many cases when a driver complained that the brakes were ineffective, the most likely cause was "pedal misapplication," in which the driver stepped on the accelerator instead of the brakes
Once again, the simplest explanation appears to also be the correct explanation.
Why am I not surprised???
I still believe there is a rare computer "single event" glitch for the rare high-speed cases.
Prof. Gilbert did show with his shorting test although not possible cause that if there was a computer glitch there would not be a diagnostic code to say there was.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/dr-gilbert-explains-his-research-into-toyota-el- - ectronics/
Key quote: ”What I have done is, I have shown that in the fault detection strategy of the Toyota systems, there is a window of opportunity where [an error] could occur and not be detected.”
The computer code hopefully was completely checked by NASA - the extensive code likely was why they asked for an extension - see the report on the code checker MISRA - hope they had it or something better.
See:
http://www.oregonsae.org/Meetings/misra_C.pps
Hmmmm....Yeah, those rocket scientists from NASA probably just didn't think of that. They only worked on the problem for a year and a half. Why don't you ask Edmunds for the prize....don't forget my cut.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Firstly, bear in mind that several of these Toyota drivers involved in unintended acceleration were on local television after their mishap with the opportunity to explain what happened. I saw all of these these interviews and believe what they say based on my own experience with electronics and software over the past 30 years. These people are sure that a stuck gas pedal / wedged floor mat were not the causes of their problem.
I maintain that the problem IS electronic based and that Toyota & NASA have not found anything conclusive. What this means is that the problem is not yet solved.
For Toyota to regain my confidence in their products, Toyota MUST redesign their throttle and brake systems such that they are actuated by CABLES and not a fly by wire setup reliant on software. The current Fly-by-Wire design that Toyota uses is, my friends and fellow Toyota owners, C R A Z Y. There is no reason for this type of design other than to showcase a technology that is not tried and true.
Just because NASA says that they have found no evidence of electronic faults in Toyota products MEANS NOTHING my friends; it means nothing. NASA is that same outfit that foged ahead with launch of Shuttle 'Challenger' after Morton Thiokol engineers pleaded / warned NASA to not launch Challenger on that cold day in January 1986. Thiokol knew that the 'O' rings in the solid rocket motors could not seal properly in sub freezing temperatures. Let's not forget our history with NASA. There also many questions regarding the Apollo program which these chaps will not address.
Toyota has an electronic RFI /EMI problem with their automobile's ECU. Start by the fly by wire redesign and use sufficient EMI / RFI filtering in the connectors of the wiring harnesses.
A foot mashed on the wrong pedal. Is there really a more elegant explanation for unintended acceleration?
1. It's very plausible
2. Humans have been known to make mistakes
3. The incident has never been reproducible
4. No other causes were found after exhaustive studies
5. The incidents affected very few cars and have suddenly stopped.
If only all of life's questions were complimented by such evidence!
I doubt they suddenly stopped. Have you really checked out the NHTSA complaint database?
With brake override there will be an enormous drop off after they got the recalled vehicles in and added override and did others for free.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/03/business/la-fi-toyota3-2010mar03
Toyota's fix is a bust, owners claim
New complaints allege sudden acceleration and other problems after recall work.
March 03, 2010|By Ken Bensinger and Ralph Vartabedian
I have already seen complaints popping up about UA on cars 10-20 years old that people have owned for a decade. I mean, c'mon.
I've had UA incidents myself---and it was because I stepped on the wrong pedal. Other than my realization about what I had done, my experience was no less real, or less terrifying, than the NHTSA complaints.
I could blame BMW or I could say I did something careless.
No thanks; cables really can rust and corrode and hang-up.
Then what are you going to buy?
They are all going to go to this technology eventually. Even heavy trucks are headed in this direction.
Almost ALL throttle actuation in today's vehicles are electronic. Automotive, heavy trucks and quite a few heavy equipment are using electronics for throttle actuation.
No, what YOU maintain is that you refuse to accept a very logical, scientific explanation for a symptom that NO ONE has been able to reproduce in a real-world environment. You allow your emotions to over-rule your intellect.
Don't worry. You aren't alone. There are, and will always be , conspiracy based theories out there to explain what a few wish to believe...
You cannot disprove completely the existence of pink unicorns, for instance.
That is, the problem isn't finding the cause but why these systems are designed in such a way to begin with such that they are not properly redundant and fail-safe. It's that we are using this technology (specifically drive-by-wire coupled with hall effect sensors) in vehicles when we don't need to, and until we get rid of the computer controls, we'll continue to have issues with various makers and their cobbled-together systems.
A cable cannot fail in such a way that it will cause UA. Even if the computer literally bricks itself in the middle of doing something and hangs.
But in any case, again, WHY are we using these things in a vehicle when a simple cable will suffice? Saying we didn't find an error or we fixed the software or whatever is still not an excuse for this. If they want computer control over your car to stop it remotely or something like that, then wiring up the On-Star to the fuel pump alone would allow them to turn off the car remotely.