You're confusing Sikes with Saylor, it was Sikes that was told to shift into neutral but wouldn't. Sikes was in a Prius and might have been concerned about the possibility of SEVERE FWD regan braking in neutral at those speeds.
And we've read before that some transmissions will "protect themselves" by monitoring redline and refusing to shift into neutral at WOT.
I personally have never read that. It may be true, but the logic certainly escapes me... Down-shifting limits... yes, but not having the capabilities to shift to neutral....no.
As in the link I posted in #1663, that didn't appear to be the case in a Toyota Avalon, and while Toyota may make Lexus automatics with different operating characteristics, I doubt that would be one. Its simply much easier to put rev-limiting code into the ECU to protect the engine, because it works 100% of the time, even when in park or neutral.
Thanks - it is really hard to keep the facts straight on these.
Busiris, I found some comments on other sites (like this Yahoo one) but no definitive links the other day. I was hoping someone would chime in. People have said that the Lexus transmission prevented shifting into neutral at WOT to prevent transmission damage.
Then there's this:
"The other common defense tactic advised by experts is to simply shift a runaway vehicle into neutral. But the ES 350 is equipped with an automatic transmission that can mimic manual shifting, and its shift lever on the console has a series of gates and detents that allow a driver to select any of at least four forward gears.
The arrangement of those gear selections could make it difficult to shift from a forward gear directly into neutral in a panic situation, Toyota spokesman Lyons acknowledged." (LA Times)
I bet a chimpanzee could do it in about 5 seconds of fiddling....but sure, if you're headed for a brick wall rather than running down the highway, I could see where you don't really want to wiggle through a shiftgate---fair enough in one version of a very grim scenario
The arrangement of those gear selections could make it difficult to shift from a forward gear directly into neutral in a panic situation, Toyota spokesman Lyons acknowledged." (LA Times)
Yeah, we have discussed that a few times here...but you would have to be in a complete panic or not thinking clearly to not be able to manage the gate.
How exactly DOES a floor mat cause an electronic throttle to stick?
I've never seen a floor mat jam a pedal to WOT. I'll bet none of us could even MAKE a mat do that. Really? to WOT? I'd like to see that demonstrated without using a cinder block. I'd be fascinated to see how that is possible.
The arrangement of those gear selections could make it difficult to shift from a forward gear directly into neutral in a panic situation, Toyota spokesman Lyons acknowledged."
As others have stated, performing a task at you leisure can be quite different under duress.
Reminds me of the movie The Dirty Dozen, when in training, the "recruit" can't fully climb the rope...until Lee Marvin's character starts shooting immediately beneath him with a machine gun.
Give someone the old "put the correct shaped object in the corresponding hole" test, then do it again, but this time, have someone start shooting real bullets in his direction.
I would think the mat would have to be over-sized, or at least shifted forward quite a bit.... creating a "lip", or flange, that would catch the base of the accelerator pedal, once it was depressed forward of the lip.... not allowing a return to "normal" idle position.
Sort of like the theoru of a "one-way" gate-guard that you find in some parking lots that have spikes depressed by cars leaving, but catch on the tires of incoming cars.
I think the tabs designed to hold mats in place are way too light duty considering how some people get in and out of their car. I have seen really tall people 'push off' with their right leg when getting out. I have also seen them push forward once seated behind the wheel to position themselves. After a year or two of that, the originating tabs under the mats get folded over or broken off, which then allows the mat to start sliding around more easily. You take one or two big legs pushing on the mat and it doesn't take much to shear those tabs off.
Just out of curiosity I stepped out into the driveway and tried every which way to jam the electronic throttle on my MINI with the mats, with rolled up rags, etc. and I couldn't do it. I could get it to stick a little bit (high idle) but the spring pressure defeated the mat easily, even when I placed it right on top of the pedal.
Also it seems to me if the mat were the culprit, this would be evident the first time you got in the car and attempted to drive it. I don't see how a mat, especially a new one, could shift so much as to bunch up around the gas pedal, and....even if it did bunch up, how it could keep the gas pedal totally floored.
Well I can certainly see a way the mat could jam the pedal.
First a lot of people remove the mats to clean under them. I've been frustrated numerous times trying to put the mat back on the clips. Therefore they can get let "loose". Mine mats may not be on the clips right now.
Second is that some people replace the mats that come in the cars. many of the mats are cheap and what I call "fair weather" mats. I personally like the heavy rubber ribbed mats that places like Sears and Target sell. So the cheap mats are begging for replacement by generic aftermarket ones for holding snow/slush/water.
Then consider if the accelerator when pressed is going down to form a "V" shape with any rise in that area - what we used to call a transmission tunnel.
So if the accelerator is pressed down in a vehicle with that V-shape, and you have loose mats, and certain designs you certainly could get the accelerator stuck. A heavy rubber mat with ridges that can catch the edge of the accelerator would certainly do the trick. Stick such a mat in front of a door, and try to move the door over it.
Seems to me if there was a "V" or bunch up in between the gas pedal and the transmission tunnel you'd have a hard time pressing DOWN.
I'd really like to see it demonstrated in a Prius or Lexus. Or is this, once again, an unrepeatable event? I mean, a mat is a tangible thing---seems like someone could install it in such a way as to make it reliably create a WOT situation.
Just out of curiosity I stepped out into the driveway and tried every which way to jam the electronic throttle on my MINI with the mats, with rolled up rags, etc. and I couldn't do it. I could get it to stick a little bit (high idle) but the spring pressure defeated the mat easily, even when I placed it right on top of the pedal.
Here's why....
A MINI gas pedal is hinged at the bottom, whereas most (maybe all) Toyota products have gas pedals hinged at the top, much like the pendulum of a grandfather clock. Create a condition where the arc's lowest point gets caught on, say, a misplaced floor mat, and it can't return to its idle point. Your foot forces the pedal beyond that point, but the return spring isn't strong enough to over-ride the resistance... therefore, it can't return to idle.
That's why Toyota shaved off several millimeters off the pedal bottoms, in order to add additional "ground" clearance.
Perhaps BMW's base-hinged pedals should be the standard in cars. As you experienced it, its very difficult to jam a bottom-hinged pedal.
I'd really like to see it demonstrated in a Prius or Lexus. Or is this, once again, an unrepeatable event? I mean, a mat is a tangible thing---seems like someone could install it in such a way as to make it reliably create a WOT situation.
Ask and you shall receive....
Read the offical accident report on the Saylors crash. A different driver ( I think his name was Barnard) duplicated the stuck floor mat a few days earlier in the very same car, and even told the dealership about it.
As did my post earlier today, including a You Tube link showing how a displaced mat can hook the pedal in a Sienna. Originally the question was general. Later the question asked for evidence regarding different Toyota products.
It begs the question if blinders are on, on purpose? Isn't there enough natural controversy in the world without creating it unnaturally? Question was not directed to you, busiris.
I saw that video and watched it a couple of time and the mat does not floor the pedal to WOT. You can plainly see that the mat, if it hooks the pedal, depresses it about 1/4 way at most. Watch how much travel the gas pedal has left as the driver then floors the pedal with the mat on it.
True, a dangerous situation to be sure but it doesn't sound like the same scenario as the accident to me. In the case of the mat pressing the pedal 1/4 the way down, the brakes should be able to handle this no problem.
Also the driver could easily slip his foot under the pedal, since it is a toploader. I couldn't do that in my MINI, but of course the mat can't catch the pedal in a MINI, so no comparison intended.
I have a fair question for you, Mr Shift. Why did you choose to feature and post a link to a You Tube that supports your 1/4 throttle, yet in the same breath chose to not acknowledge the You Tube link that I posted, which shows the mat holding the throttle WO, which was your original request? This is why I suggested that controversy and blinders were intentionally at play here.
I'll not further entertain any rebuttal you could possibly have to my question.
(I had to resist posting this to busiris, since you seem to prefer to respond 'via' his posts??)
Anyway, the horse has been beat absolutely to death. It is obvious who is holding Toyota stock and who isn't.
True, a dangerous situation to be sure but it doesn't sound like the same scenario as the accident to me. In the case of the mat pressing the pedal 1/4 the way down, the brakes should be able to handle this no problem.
Also the driver could easily slip his foot under the pedal, since it is a toploader. I couldn't do that in my MINI, but of course the mat can't catch the pedal in a MINI, so no comparison intended.
IMO, in modern cars (except really high performance/high horsepower models....maybe) brake systems are pretty sophisticated. I would think that a driver really laying on the brakes could stop almost any model with wide-open throttle, but it might very well take a great deal of pedal force. Even on high-performance models, brakes are upgraded accordingly, so I think stopping a hot-rod Corvette would be possible as well...
And, in my Toyota Tacoma, I actually simulated the foot under the pedal suggestion, with the ignition off. I depressed the pedal with a broom handle and attempted to get my size 11 EEEE underneath the pedal to free it.
I couldn't work my shoe up underneath the pedal to free it. Of course, the pedal was completely depressed, and I didn't try it at, say, 50%.
Then again, I wasn't speeding down the highway at 125mph under UA. I really can't say what I personally could/could not-would/would not do under those conditions. Unless one has actually been there, I doubt they could, either.
Still, in Saylor's case, I don't easily discount the testimony of the Barnard fellow. I can't see that he would have anything to gain from his story. To me, it sounds plausible...Much more so than electronic-induced UA.
As I understand it, the mats in the car were not the correct ones for that make/model, but possibly SUV mats.
They were that of a Lexus SUV, I thought everyone knew this. Are we still as "wide open" on this topic as ever, with Toyota fans full-out still protecting the Mother Company from any and all harm and non-blood foul? It looks like it as I catch up on lost posts on here.
Isn't it simply a stuck floor mat and nothing else? I sort of ruled out Toyota electronics several months ago and still simply believe it was nothing but a jammed floor mat causing the tragedy.
Before he was going over 120 mph, a couple drivers passed Saylor earlier saying he was on the side going slowly appeared to have a problem - hmmm - did he perhaps check the mat even then? If he knew he was having issues why would he floor it to have the pedal depressed so far down under a mat? (especially with a rental)
It was rare when I floored a vehicle - once was after I checked out the plug and points I just had changed in my old Dodge Charger - and got a ticket.
Now Saylor was a cop so I'm sure he floored many a Ford police car in his day - none with a stupid kill button you had to hold in for 3 seconds.
Anyway - as I posted earlier - it ain't over yet. A new review: Nevertheless, "it's very hard to assess whether this will have much effect," Goldberg says. The finding is likely to have very little impact at trial, though "It might have effect on settlement and it might have effect on the opinions of people in the jury pool," he says.
Further, a government report isn't infallible. In releasing the findings last week, NASA lead engineer Michael Kirsch said he couldn't rule out electronics entirely. Rather, he said, they aren't likely the source of unintended acceleration. The reports also don't absolve Toyota of the problems that led to the recalls in the first place: bulky rubber floor mats and sticky gas pedals.
Not Cleared From All Wrongdoing
Plenty of people still have lawsuits pending because of those and other issues besides electronics, says David Sullivan analyst with AutoPacific, a California-based research firm. The reports may allow Toyota to more easily reconcile issues with some people, he says, "but it doesn't exonerate them of all wrongdoing yet."
I thought I *WAS* looking at your youtube post. Please don't attribute sinister motives. Like with the UA incident, sometimes the simplest explanation might just be the right one. :P
And besides, what would make the one youtube video "correct" for the situation over the other?
If a phenomenon is variable over a spectrum of say 10 possible outcomes, then there is no one, predictable outcome.
Sometimes we assign the world "random" to this observation.
to have been a fly on the cabin wall of the '09 rental Lexus sedan. Saylor mentioned that "he was just trying to control the car" when mentioning of trying to get out of gear into neutral was discussed in this thread.
Stuck gearshift at WOT, I know we've beat this dead horse but we inquiring minds would love to know this. Malfunctions happen, especially if he was in cruise control.
Hey, does the report mention whether or not he was in cruise control or not? Was his rental sedan on cruise control at impact? Anyone know?
Don't know and don't remember from the police report: http://autos.aol.com/gallery/Saylor-crash-report - and I wonder if the confidential data in the NASA report checked the same Lexus model. The black box was likely toasted - brakes were also - wonder if he knew not to pump them - sure his foot pressure was strong unlike a frail woman or old fart (note that crappy Toyota black boxes had access denied to other cases until the NHTSA / NASA team insisted). Normal Fault codes would not show anything about the pedals as PROVEN by Prof. Gilbert - likely not cruise control faults either.
Normal Fault codes would not show anything about the pedals as PROVEN by Prof. Gilbert -
As the previous poster said, Gilbert proved nothing of the sort. Do a little reading on what he actually said and did...
Your comment is just another example of one main reason why this issue has been so prolonged... Too many people getting their information from forwarded emails and you-tube.
All the high-speed cases the dealer said "No problem sir" ( or Madam who did not have the pedal strength to overcome the acceleration even without pumping the brakes" The case where a driver limped into a dealer by putting it into neutral until he got to the service department - well there were NO CODES detected.
With no codes detected, even more reason to be suspicious of driver error or floor mats. Now we have yet another incomprehensible failure to coincide with multiple simultaneous failure of brakes, ignition, cruise control and transmission---the failure of the OBD diagnostic system to detect over-revving and all the other failures.
And remember, that then everything does back to normal and is subsequently not repeatable in the UA cases. (except for the crashed cars I mean--but even in crashed cars, computer modules are not destroyed).
think of Andy Rooney looking back at you as he's about to tell you what happened then...we still don't know why this rental Lexus sedan in Aug.2009 shot like a bat outta hell out-of-control. Except for the fact that someone at Bob Baker Lexus of San Diego put floor mats from a Lexus SUV down on top of the car's regular floor mats. :sick:
Though they were burnt to a crisp they still saw two layers of burnt to a crisp floor mats in the car.
Bull - I gave you the quote from Prof. Gilbert - prove it otherwise. Toyota's consultant Exponent showed that his shorts could not happen. I agree with that but they never showed there would be engine codes.
The problem with your (lack of) understanding of the situation is simple...
What Dr. Gilbert demonstrated was this... One can induce errors into the system that will not be recorded ONLY AFTER the circuitry logic has been modified.
He demonstrated no way that this could actually occur in the real world, and as far as I know, no one else has to date.
It all boils down to this... I can wire your home with a security system, putting a sensor on each door and window. Any intrusion will be detected as long as entry is made through one of these places, and the system is "armed" (Toyota's ECM Error reporting design).
Now, your house is robbed, but no sensor detected an "alarm" condition".
Why no alarm?
Simple... Because an earlier visitor tampered with one of the sensors, modifying it to where it is always in state of "closed" (Dr. Gilbert's action... he changed the conditions of the "circuit").
The alarm still functions as intended, but an extraneous "event" bypassed the logic of the circuit.
Don't accept that if you wish, but it is what occurred. Ask Dr. Gilbert himself if you doubt it.
In a way, I feel sorry for Dr. Gilbert. His work was bastardized by the media and he has been subjected to quite a lot of bad press. If he had it to do over again, I have no doubt he would have never made his work public.
The Corvette engine does not drive the front wheels in opposition to the primary braking resource.
Has someone asked Barnard how easy it was, or was not, to overcome the stuck gas pedal....?
What did he do to overcome the stuck pedal...?
I suspect any modern vehicle's brakes are sufficient to stop the car at WOT if the driver makes the concerted effort to do so, regardles if its front or rear wheel drive. Braking systems have improved immensely in the last 20 years.
Of course, you are most welcome to rent any model you choose and give it a test if you believe otherwise. Have at it... But, simply throwing out "what if's" does nothing to support one's point of view.
As far as Barnard's episode, all I know is what I read in the official police report.
The NipponDenso supplied DBW gas pedal has 2 gas pedal positional sensors for failsafe redundancy. The DBW control software first reads the primary sensor for a positional value and then reads the second sensor as a "crosscheck". If the second sensor's positional signal is not within a fairly tight range then the software sets an error code.
Insofar as I can tell it simply sets a code but does not go into limp home mode, it simply begins using only the primary sensor for validity.
But...
Although the sensors are specifically designed to NEVER give out EXACTLY the same positional sensor signal such that a short between the two could be easily detected the DBW control software IGNORES(***) that condition.
Why go to all the effort to design and install what is basically a fully redundant, FAILSAFE, DBW system and then ignore certain faults or even fall back to the use of only one sensor in the case of a KNOWN failure.
Explain this one - not that it could have been sticky pedal but "no error codes? http://www.safetyresearch.net/toyota-sudden-unintended-acceleration/toyota-sua-r- eal-stories/ excerpt Kevin Haggerty, owner of a 2007 Avalon, experienced SUA multiple times; he did not have accessory floor mats, and the OE mats were secured in place. Haggerty reported five SUA events. Several times, the vehicle accelerated without his foot on the gas pedal. The engine would return to idle after driving a few miles or after the Avalon shut down and restarted or was stopped and put into park. Haggerty’s vehicle was checked at the dealership, but they could find nothing wrong. According to his NHTSA complaint:
“Then on 12/28/09 I was driving to work on a major highway. The car began to accelerate without my foot on the gas pedal. As I pushed on the brake, the car continued to accelerate. At that time I was not able to stop my vehicle by pressing hard on the brake. The only way I was able to slow the car down was to put the car into neutral. I took the next exit, which was the exit for the Toyota dealership. I called the dealership and told the service manager to meet me outside because I was experiencing acceleration problems. I drove approximately 5 miles by alternating from neutral to drive and pressing very firmly on the brakes. As I pulled into the front of the dealership I put the car into neutral and exited the car. With the brakes smoking from the excessive braking and the car’s rpm’s racing the manager entered my car. He confirmed that the mats were properly in place and confirmed the rpm’s were very high.”
Toyota Response: The Toyota dealer contacted Toyota’s regional representative in Caldwell, NJ who later inspected the vehicle, but did not provide details of this inspection to Haggerty. However, Toyota Motor Sales authorized replacement of the throttle body and accelerator pedal assemblies and sensors and paid for the $1700 repairs and rental car costs. The Toyota dealer told Haggerty that the vehicle’s computer had stored no error codes and they were unsure whether the repairs would fix the vehicle.
I say Prof. Gilbert was right about lack of error codes and wonder if and whether the NASA/NESC team circumvented it.
Again, all hearsay and not reproducible. so we know nothing about what actually happened.
Think about this---a website is telling a story that haggerty told to NHTSA about what a Toyota dealer said to him !!!
Can you see how utterly inadequate this "proof" is when we really look at it? How come nobody follows up on any of this stuff?
I'm not saying it didn't "happen"--I'm sure something happened.
Here's what I would ask all parties concerned if I were in charge of the hearing:
Did the car continue to have UA incidents after the repair to the throttle body and accelerator pedal?
YES/NO
If "yes", then it's not a computer glitch, it's a singular component defect, right? You change a part, the problem goes away forever. Problem solved.
Even so, why did they replace two items at once? How would we ever know which one cured the problem?
If "no", the parts didn't fix it, and the problem continues, then we don't know what happened anymore than when we started, do we? We can't point to any defect other than to say "something happened".
Let me emphasize, my reservations about swallowing these stories whole is that all these stories are grossly incomplete and have a maddening lack of any critical, systematic diagnosis.
Also, some aspects of these stories are so bizarre, like the people who were convinced their car was so dangerous they could would not risk driving it but....they thought the Lemon Laws were too much of a hassle, so they had no problem trading in it !!! Did they think the dealer was going to junk it? Did we ever hear a peep from the next owner?
So much left unexamined in these stories, soooo much.
What Kevin Haggerty was experiencing are the classic symptoms of a "hard crash" (also known as a "live lock"). Everything's running, but the computer is hung up so that only resetting it will do anything at all.
It's also the single most compelling case that what's happening isn't merely human error or software. It's what the car does when the computer system crashes. And how well it cleanly resets itself and handles a scenario where it crashes. Examining the code, even by NASA, will reveal nothing at all wrong. Crash and error-handling routines are a whole other area of design that wouldn't be normally looked at. Especially if such an event is created by a (likely) external factor.
The code is fine. The hardware is fine. But add some EM interference or water or a short and what happens then? My educated guess would be a chafing wire somewhere in the wiring harness or a bad ground or something electrical that forces a crash in the main computer. Fine.. fine... frozen. Car still running and moving forward. Water or condensation would also cause such a scenario. I've seen electrical systems get all crazy at below freezing before. (note - this isn't necessarily Toyota's fault, either)
Case in point - my PS3 did this last night. suddenly, nothing - stuck frozen and I had to cycle the power. And this is a cutting-edge modern *IX based system designed to hardly ever crash like that. So it can happen to the most modern computer systems, let alone a built-on-a-tight-budget system like an auto maker would use. Yes, it is current and fully patched. It hasn't done that lately, but every 4-5 months, it does crash like that with no warning.
From an email from one of their members: For your information, the Committee's next meeting, with both open and closed sessions, is on March 3-4. This includes discussions with the NESC.
Perhaps a rep from Edmunds should go to the open meeting to see if any of the submissions to your contest has a snowball's chance in purgatory. Mr Shiftright - the cherry blossoms may be in bloom - nice trip for all your defense of Toyota?
pages 149-152 of the report summarize the software. My problem is their careful wording of the conclusion and no raw data:
"Software defects that UNILATERALLY cause a UA were not found". emphasis mine.
They used three code analyzers. Did they find thousands of defects or a handful?
I found nothing yet about the brake overriding the throttle in the logic tree. It is connected directly to the ECU in the diagram, which is good. They also show some of the design (but with much redaction).
It looks like they did a fairly good job but there are still many gaps which might be imaginary or real since they say what they used, and then the conclusion, but not much between.
I'm trying to defend critical thinking, not Toyota. If rational thought leads to Toyota's condemnation, so be it.
I think anyone who is really interested in finding the truth has to resolve to himself, before he starts, that he will go wherever the truth leads--even if it totally demolishes what he hoped for.
Again, the 'computer crash' theory falls down because the UA incidents "go away" and don't return. All these stories, as far as I can gather, are about a one time incident, and certainly not all lead to crashes or destruction of evidence---certainly not.
Where is this couple's "death car" that they traded in? Why don't we hear any more about it? Did Toyota crush it? Did the dealer sell it?
What has happened to basic journalistic skills in America?
Walter Cronkite would have figured all this out already. :P
you're right. Let's quit villifying Toyota over this one. It was floor mats people that caused the Saylor crash! Isn't the evidence-based data enough to figure this one out? It is for me. If Toyota builds a car I want I am going to buy it and I am not going to worry about its mechanicals. Until someone actually proves something worthwhile Toyota is clear mechanically, in my book.
Remember what Toyota is working on, people. Ahem!
Toyota FT-86
Just the best drifting car in the history of driftables. 'Nuff said.
I'm trying to defend critical thinking, not Toyota. If rational thought leads to Toyota's condemnation, so be it.
I think anyone who is really interested in finding the truth has to resolve to himself, before he starts, that he will go wherever the truth leads--even if it totally demolishes what he hoped for.
I forget who posted it... maybe it was you...
The comment I am referring to was that beliefs in things such as UA become similar to a religious belief, requiring only unquestioning acceptance but no critical analysis nor objective thinking.
I've asked the following question on this thread more than once.
No "believer" has ever given an answer.
I believe electronic UA (we all know mechanical defects can cause UA, so that isn't in question... and, they can be reproduced) is possible, but I need to see qualified and direct evidence of a vehicle assuming total motion control before believing it actually exists.
On the other hand, for those who appear to be the UA "standard-bearers", what (if anything) could convince you that "electronically-induced" UA doesn't exist, other than beyond one's "perception" that it is real?
If one can't supply a realistic answer to that question, then.... the "debate" is over, simply because it never was one to begin with...
Well that is always a good question to ask in any debate: "What would it take to convince you that your position is not viable?"
If the answer is "nothing can convince me", then the mind is closed and debate is futile, I would agree.
If I were asked the question, I'd have to say:
"I would have to see the UA event reliably reproduced without modifying the original system, and this event recorded with telematics and if possible, video---- and this reproduction would have to mimic the actual total failure of multiple components simultaneously".
So in other words, if someone showed me a video of a Toyota accelerating on its own, but they could easily stop it with the brakes, or easily shut it down with the ignition or neutral position, then I wouldn't be convinced that this was the same type of UA as depicted in the media.
Comments
I personally have never read that. It may be true, but the logic certainly escapes me... Down-shifting limits... yes, but not having the capabilities to shift to neutral....no.
As in the link I posted in #1663, that didn't appear to be the case in a Toyota Avalon, and while Toyota may make Lexus automatics with different operating characteristics, I doubt that would be one. Its simply much easier to put rev-limiting code into the ECU to protect the engine, because it works 100% of the time, even when in park or neutral.
Thanks - it is really hard to keep the facts straight on these.
Busiris, I found some comments on other sites (like this Yahoo one) but no definitive links the other day. I was hoping someone would chime in. People have said that the Lexus transmission prevented shifting into neutral at WOT to prevent transmission damage.
Then there's this:
"The other common defense tactic advised by experts is to simply shift a runaway vehicle into neutral. But the ES 350 is equipped with an automatic transmission that can mimic manual shifting, and its shift lever on the console has a series of gates and detents that allow a driver to select any of at least four forward gears.
The arrangement of those gear selections could make it difficult to shift from a forward gear directly into neutral in a panic situation, Toyota spokesman Lyons acknowledged." (LA Times)
Yeah, we have discussed that a few times here...but you would have to be in a complete panic or not thinking clearly to not be able to manage the gate.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I've never seen a floor mat jam a pedal to WOT. I'll bet none of us could even MAKE a mat do that. Really? to WOT? I'd like to see that demonstrated without using a cinder block. I'd be fascinated to see how that is possible.
As others have stated, performing a task at you leisure can be quite different under duress.
Reminds me of the movie The Dirty Dozen, when in training, the "recruit" can't fully climb the rope...until Lee Marvin's character starts shooting immediately beneath him with a machine gun.
Give someone the old "put the correct shaped object in the corresponding hole" test, then do it again, but this time, have someone start shooting real bullets in his direction.
Same test.... Most likely, different outcomes.
Sort of like the theoru of a "one-way" gate-guard that you find in some parking lots that have spikes depressed by cars leaving, but catch on the tires of incoming cars.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRexOM1ysK8&feature=related
I think the tabs designed to hold mats in place are way too light duty considering how some people get in and out of their car. I have seen really tall people 'push off' with their right leg when getting out. I have also seen them push forward once seated behind the wheel to position themselves. After a year or two of that, the originating tabs under the mats get folded over or broken off, which then allows the mat to start sliding around more easily. You take one or two big legs pushing on the mat and it doesn't take much to shear those tabs off.
Also it seems to me if the mat were the culprit, this would be evident the first time you got in the car and attempted to drive it. I don't see how a mat, especially a new one, could shift so much as to bunch up around the gas pedal, and....even if it did bunch up, how it could keep the gas pedal totally floored.
It's all very ???????
First a lot of people remove the mats to clean under them. I've been frustrated numerous times trying to put the mat back on the clips. Therefore they can get let "loose". Mine mats may not be on the clips right now.
Second is that some people replace the mats that come in the cars. many of the mats are cheap and what I call "fair weather" mats. I personally like the heavy rubber ribbed mats that places like Sears and Target sell. So the cheap mats are begging for replacement by generic aftermarket ones for holding snow/slush/water.
Then consider if the accelerator when pressed is going down to form a "V" shape with any rise in that area - what we used to call a transmission tunnel.
So if the accelerator is pressed down in a vehicle with that V-shape, and you have loose mats, and certain designs you certainly could get the accelerator stuck. A heavy rubber mat with ridges that can catch the edge of the accelerator would certainly do the trick. Stick such a mat in front of a door, and try to move the door over it.
Seems to me if there was a "V" or bunch up in between the gas pedal and the transmission tunnel you'd have a hard time pressing DOWN.
I'd really like to see it demonstrated in a Prius or Lexus. Or is this, once again, an unrepeatable event? I mean, a mat is a tangible thing---seems like someone could install it in such a way as to make it reliably create a WOT situation.
Here's why....
A MINI gas pedal is hinged at the bottom, whereas most (maybe all) Toyota products have gas pedals hinged at the top, much like the pendulum of a grandfather clock. Create a condition where the arc's lowest point gets caught on, say, a misplaced floor mat, and it can't return to its idle point. Your foot forces the pedal beyond that point, but the return spring isn't strong enough to over-ride the resistance... therefore, it can't return to idle.
That's why Toyota shaved off several millimeters off the pedal bottoms, in order to add additional "ground" clearance.
Perhaps BMW's base-hinged pedals should be the standard in cars. As you experienced it, its very difficult to jam a bottom-hinged pedal.
Ask and you shall receive....
Read the offical accident report on the Saylors crash. A different driver ( I think his name was Barnard) duplicated the stuck floor mat a few days earlier in the very same car, and even told the dealership about it.
Unfortunately, his words fell upon deaf ears.
As did my post earlier today, including a You Tube link showing how a displaced mat can hook the pedal in a Sienna. Originally the question was general. Later the question asked for evidence regarding different Toyota products.
It begs the question if blinders are on, on purpose? Isn't there enough natural controversy in the world without creating it unnaturally? Question was not directed to you, busiris.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMEytyS_4KY
True, a dangerous situation to be sure but it doesn't sound like the same scenario as the accident to me. In the case of the mat pressing the pedal 1/4 the way down, the brakes should be able to handle this no problem.
Also the driver could easily slip his foot under the pedal, since it is a toploader. I couldn't do that in my MINI, but of course the mat can't catch the pedal in a MINI, so no comparison intended.
I'll not further entertain any rebuttal you could possibly have to my question.
(I had to resist posting this to busiris, since you seem to prefer to respond 'via' his posts??)
Anyway, the horse has been beat absolutely to death. It is obvious who is holding Toyota stock and who isn't.
Also the driver could easily slip his foot under the pedal, since it is a toploader. I couldn't do that in my MINI, but of course the mat can't catch the pedal in a MINI, so no comparison intended.
IMO, in modern cars (except really high performance/high horsepower models....maybe) brake systems are pretty sophisticated. I would think that a driver really laying on the brakes could stop almost any model with wide-open throttle, but it might very well take a great deal of pedal force. Even on high-performance models, brakes are upgraded accordingly, so I think stopping a hot-rod Corvette would be possible as well...
And, in my Toyota Tacoma, I actually simulated the foot under the pedal suggestion, with the ignition off. I depressed the pedal with a broom handle and attempted to get my size 11 EEEE underneath the pedal to free it.
I couldn't work my shoe up underneath the pedal to free it. Of course, the pedal was completely depressed, and I didn't try it at, say, 50%.
Then again, I wasn't speeding down the highway at 125mph under UA. I really can't say what I personally could/could not-would/would not do under those conditions. Unless one has actually been there, I doubt they could, either.
Still, in Saylor's case, I don't easily discount the testimony of the Barnard fellow. I can't see that he would have anything to gain from his story. To me, it sounds plausible...Much more so than electronic-induced UA.
But,, that's just my opinion...
They were that of a Lexus SUV, I thought everyone knew this. Are we still as "wide open" on this topic as ever, with Toyota fans full-out still protecting the Mother Company from any and all harm and non-blood foul? It looks like it as I catch up on lost posts on here.
Isn't it simply a stuck floor mat and nothing else? I sort of ruled out Toyota electronics several months ago and still simply believe it was nothing but a jammed floor mat causing the tragedy.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
It was rare when I floored a vehicle - once was after I checked out the plug and points I just had changed in my old Dodge Charger - and got a ticket.
Now Saylor was a cop so I'm sure he floored many a Ford police car in his day - none with a stupid kill button you had to hold in for 3 seconds.
Anyway - as I posted earlier - it ain't over yet. A new review:
Nevertheless, "it's very hard to assess whether this will have much effect," Goldberg says. The finding is likely to have very little impact at trial, though "It might have effect on settlement and it might have effect on the opinions of people in the jury pool," he says.
Further, a government report isn't infallible. In releasing the findings last week, NASA lead engineer Michael Kirsch said he couldn't rule out electronics entirely. Rather, he said, they aren't likely the source of unintended acceleration. The reports also don't absolve Toyota of the problems that led to the recalls in the first place: bulky rubber floor mats and sticky gas pedals.
Not Cleared From All Wrongdoing
Plenty of people still have lawsuits pending because of those and other issues besides electronics, says David Sullivan analyst with AutoPacific, a California-based research firm. The reports may allow Toyota to more easily reconcile issues with some people, he says, "but it doesn't exonerate them of all wrongdoing yet."
See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/fvnGZS
And besides, what would make the one youtube video "correct" for the situation over the other?
If a phenomenon is variable over a spectrum of say 10 possible outcomes, then there is no one, predictable outcome.
Sometimes we assign the world "random" to this observation.
Stuck gearshift at WOT, I know we've beat this dead horse but we inquiring minds would love to know this. Malfunctions happen, especially if he was in cruise control.
Hey, does the report mention whether or not he was in cruise control or not? Was his rental sedan on cruise control at impact? Anyone know?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
http://autos.aol.com/gallery/Saylor-crash-report
- and I wonder if the confidential data in the NASA report checked the same Lexus model.
The black box was likely toasted - brakes were also - wonder if he knew not to pump them - sure his foot pressure was strong unlike a frail woman or old fart (note that crappy Toyota black boxes had access denied to other cases until the NHTSA / NASA team insisted). Normal Fault codes would not show anything about the pedals as PROVEN by Prof. Gilbert - likely not cruise control faults either.
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.
He proved that the electrical interruptions he could induce in a lab could happen, but NOT that it could happen in a "real world" environ.
As the previous poster said, Gilbert proved nothing of the sort. Do a little reading on what he actually said and did...
Your comment is just another example of one main reason why this issue has been so prolonged... Too many people getting their information from forwarded emails and you-tube.
Toyota's consultant Exponent showed that his shorts could not happen. I agree with that but they never showed there would be engine codes.
http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/document/Exponent_ProfGilbert_8Mar10.pdf
All the high-speed cases the dealer said "No problem sir" ( or Madam who did not have the pedal strength to overcome the acceleration even without pumping the brakes" The case where a driver limped into a dealer by putting it into neutral until he got to the service department - well there were NO CODES detected.
And remember, that then everything does back to normal and is subsequently not repeatable in the UA cases. (except for the crashed cars I mean--but even in crashed cars, computer modules are not destroyed).
Though they were burnt to a crisp they still saw two layers of burnt to a crisp floor mats in the car.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
When you reboot a "blue screen" PC..
The Corvette engine does not drive the front wheels in opposition to the primary braking resource.
Has someone asked Barnard how easy it was, or was not, to overcome the stuck gas pedal....?
What did he do to overcome the stuck pedal...?
Toyota's consultant Exponent showed that his shorts could not happen. I agree with that but they never showed there would be engine codes.
The problem with your (lack of) understanding of the situation is simple...
What Dr. Gilbert demonstrated was this... One can induce errors into the system that will not be recorded ONLY AFTER the circuitry logic has been modified.
He demonstrated no way that this could actually occur in the real world, and as far as I know, no one else has to date.
It all boils down to this... I can wire your home with a security system, putting a sensor on each door and window. Any intrusion will be detected as long as entry is made through one of these places, and the system is "armed" (Toyota's ECM Error reporting design).
Now, your house is robbed, but no sensor detected an "alarm" condition".
Why no alarm?
Simple... Because an earlier visitor tampered with one of the sensors, modifying it to where it is always in state of "closed" (Dr. Gilbert's action... he changed the conditions of the "circuit").
The alarm still functions as intended, but an extraneous "event" bypassed the logic of the circuit.
Don't accept that if you wish, but it is what occurred. Ask Dr. Gilbert himself if you doubt it.
In a way, I feel sorry for Dr. Gilbert. His work was bastardized by the media and he has been subjected to quite a lot of bad press. If he had it to do over again, I have no doubt he would have never made his work public.
Has someone asked Barnard how easy it was, or was not, to overcome the stuck gas pedal....?
What did he do to overcome the stuck pedal...?
I suspect any modern vehicle's brakes are sufficient to stop the car at WOT if the driver makes the concerted effort to do so, regardles if its front or rear wheel drive. Braking systems have improved immensely in the last 20 years.
Of course, you are most welcome to rent any model you choose and give it a test if you believe otherwise. Have at it... But, simply throwing out "what if's" does nothing to support one's point of view.
As far as Barnard's episode, all I know is what I read in the official police report.
Why not give him a call and ask him?
Insofar as I can tell it simply sets a code but does not go into limp home mode, it simply begins using only the primary sensor for validity.
But...
Although the sensors are specifically designed to NEVER give out EXACTLY the same positional sensor signal such that a short between the two could be easily detected the DBW control software IGNORES(***) that condition.
Why go to all the effort to design and install what is basically a fully redundant, FAILSAFE, DBW system and then ignore certain faults or even fall back to the use of only one sensor in the case of a KNOWN failure.
*** The point of Gilbert's proof.
Not possible with a FWD vehicle.
"...I suspect..."
Yes, so would I "like" to.
Can you refer me to the official police report wherein Barnard was interviewed. I guess I missed that somehow.
http://autos.aol.com/gallery/Saylor-crash-report/
As for the "burnouts", your confusing apples with oranges.
We're talking about stopping a car already in motion. Burnouts are a different situation altogether.
BTW, I have see front wheel "burnout" videos, so they are indeed possible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYjeAEy-bFQ
Here's a link on how to do it...
http://www.wikihow.com/Do-a-Burnout
http://www.safetyresearch.net/toyota-sudden-unintended-acceleration/toyota-sua-r- eal-stories/
excerpt
Kevin Haggerty, owner of a 2007 Avalon, experienced SUA multiple times; he did not have accessory floor mats, and the OE mats were secured in place. Haggerty reported five SUA events. Several times, the vehicle accelerated without his foot on the gas pedal. The engine would return to idle after driving a few miles or after the Avalon shut down and restarted or was stopped and put into park. Haggerty’s vehicle was checked at the dealership, but they could find nothing wrong. According to his NHTSA complaint:
“Then on 12/28/09 I was driving to work on a major highway. The car began to accelerate without my foot on the gas pedal. As I pushed on the brake, the car continued to accelerate. At that time I was not able to stop my vehicle by pressing hard on the brake. The only way I was able to slow the car down was to put the car into neutral. I took the next exit, which was the exit for the Toyota dealership. I called the dealership and told the service manager to meet me outside because I was experiencing acceleration problems. I drove approximately 5 miles by alternating from neutral to drive and pressing very firmly on the brakes. As I pulled into the front of the dealership I put the car into neutral and exited the car. With the brakes smoking from the excessive braking and the car’s rpm’s racing the manager entered my car. He confirmed that the mats were properly in place and confirmed the rpm’s were very high.”
Toyota Response: The Toyota dealer contacted Toyota’s regional representative in Caldwell, NJ who later inspected the vehicle, but did not provide details of this inspection to Haggerty. However, Toyota Motor Sales authorized replacement of the throttle body and accelerator pedal assemblies and sensors and paid for the $1700 repairs and rental car
costs. The Toyota dealer told Haggerty that the vehicle’s computer had stored no error codes and they were unsure whether the repairs would fix the vehicle.
I say Prof. Gilbert was right about lack of error codes and wonder if and whether the NASA/NESC team circumvented it.
Think about this---a website is telling a story that haggerty told to NHTSA about what a Toyota dealer said to him !!!
Can you see how utterly inadequate this "proof" is when we really look at it? How come nobody follows up on any of this stuff?
I'm not saying it didn't "happen"--I'm sure something happened.
Here's what I would ask all parties concerned if I were in charge of the hearing:
Did the car continue to have UA incidents after the repair to the throttle body and accelerator pedal?
YES/NO
If "yes", then it's not a computer glitch, it's a singular component defect, right? You change a part, the problem goes away forever. Problem solved.
Even so, why did they replace two items at once? How would we ever know which one cured the problem?
If "no", the parts didn't fix it, and the problem continues, then we don't know what happened anymore than when we started, do we? We can't point to any defect other than to say "something happened".
Let me emphasize, my reservations about swallowing these stories whole is that all these stories are grossly incomplete and have a maddening lack of any critical, systematic diagnosis.
Also, some aspects of these stories are so bizarre, like the people who were convinced their car was so dangerous they could would not risk driving it but....they thought the Lemon Laws were too much of a hassle, so they had no problem trading in it !!! Did they think the dealer was going to junk it? Did we ever hear a peep from the next owner?
So much left unexamined in these stories, soooo much.
It's also the single most compelling case that what's happening isn't merely human error or software. It's what the car does when the computer system crashes. And how well it cleanly resets itself and handles a scenario where it crashes. Examining the code, even by NASA, will reveal nothing at all wrong. Crash and error-handling routines are a whole other area of design that wouldn't be normally looked at. Especially if such an event is created by a (likely) external factor.
The code is fine. The hardware is fine. But add some EM interference or water or a short and what happens then? My educated guess would be a chafing wire somewhere in the wiring harness or a bad ground or something electrical that forces a crash in the main computer. Fine.. fine... frozen. Car still running and moving forward. Water or condensation would also cause such a scenario. I've seen electrical systems get all crazy at below freezing before.
(note - this isn't necessarily Toyota's fault, either)
Case in point - my PS3 did this last night. suddenly, nothing - stuck frozen and I had to cycle the power. And this is a cutting-edge modern *IX based system designed to hardly ever crash like that. So it can happen to the most modern computer systems, let alone a built-on-a-tight-budget system like an auto maker would use. Yes, it is current and fully patched. It hasn't done that lately, but every 4-5 months, it does crash like that with no warning.
The NESC appears to have used a good code checker:
http://www.grammatech.com/news/2011/releases/02-14-11.html
Wonder if it is as good or better than MISRA
http://www.oregonsae.org/Meetings/misra_C.pps
Hopefully the National Academy will resolve some issues for all SUA.
http://www.trb.org/PolicyStudies/UnintendedAccelerationStudy.aspx
From an email from one of their members:
For your information, the Committee's next meeting, with both open and closed sessions, is on March 3-4. This includes discussions with the NESC.
Perhaps a rep from Edmunds should go to the open meeting to see if any of the submissions to your contest has a snowball's chance in purgatory.
Mr Shiftright - the cherry blossoms may be in bloom - nice trip for all your defense of Toyota?
And which group of attorneys do you work for? Or Ford maybe?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
"Software defects that UNILATERALLY cause a UA were not found". emphasis mine.
They used three code analyzers. Did they find thousands of defects or a handful?
I found nothing yet about the brake overriding the throttle in the logic tree. It is connected directly to the ECU in the diagram, which is good. They also show some of the design (but with much redaction).
It looks like they did a fairly good job but there are still many gaps which might be imaginary or real since they say what they used, and then the conclusion, but not much between.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Have a mechanic install a large, bright red button in the middle of the dash panel that completely kills the power to the engine ECM when depressed.
Problem solved. No more UA.
I think anyone who is really interested in finding the truth has to resolve to himself, before he starts, that he will go wherever the truth leads--even if it totally demolishes what he hoped for.
Again, the 'computer crash' theory falls down because the UA incidents "go away" and don't return. All these stories, as far as I can gather, are about a one time incident, and certainly not all lead to crashes or destruction of evidence---certainly not.
Where is this couple's "death car" that they traded in? Why don't we hear any more about it? Did Toyota crush it? Did the dealer sell it?
What has happened to basic journalistic skills in America?
Walter Cronkite would have figured all this out already. :P
Remember what Toyota is working on, people. Ahem!
Toyota FT-86
Just the best drifting car in the history of driftables. 'Nuff said.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I think anyone who is really interested in finding the truth has to resolve to himself, before he starts, that he will go wherever the truth leads--even if it totally demolishes what he hoped for.
I forget who posted it... maybe it was you...
The comment I am referring to was that beliefs in things such as UA become similar to a religious belief, requiring only unquestioning acceptance but no critical analysis nor objective thinking.
I've asked the following question on this thread more than once.
No "believer" has ever given an answer.
I believe electronic UA (we all know mechanical defects can cause UA, so that isn't in question... and, they can be reproduced) is possible, but I need to see qualified and direct evidence of a vehicle assuming total motion control before believing it actually exists.
On the other hand, for those who appear to be the UA "standard-bearers", what (if anything) could convince you that "electronically-induced" UA doesn't exist, other than beyond one's "perception" that it is real?
If one can't supply a realistic answer to that question, then.... the "debate" is over, simply because it never was one to begin with...
If the answer is "nothing can convince me", then the mind is closed and debate is futile, I would agree.
If I were asked the question, I'd have to say:
"I would have to see the UA event reliably reproduced without modifying the original system, and this event recorded with telematics and if possible, video---- and this reproduction would have to mimic the actual total failure of multiple components simultaneously".
So in other words, if someone showed me a video of a Toyota accelerating on its own, but they could easily stop it with the brakes, or easily shut it down with the ignition or neutral position, then I wouldn't be convinced that this was the same type of UA as depicted in the media.
of the 2012 Toyota FT-86. They keep honing down the design.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick