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
Recipe for disaster:
1) Grow very fast. The sudden proliferation in models causes an explosion in part numbers and suppliers, without a proportional increase in your engineering and supply chain staff.
2) Control costs by reducing accelerated stress and real world testing. Lose visibility into an ever increasing list of failure modes/mechanisms.
3) Take on a 'we know best' attitude, and ignore the pleas of customers who tell you that you have a growing list of big problems.
It is unfortunately an all too common cycle as a company scores tremendous success and grown in it's market sector. Note to Subaru management: Be very careful and learn from the mistakes of the big boys.
Folks I talked to at the Portland Auto show universally panned that RAV4 feature.
....and while I can barely fit a '10 outback in my garage (and can still open its rear hatch), the RAV4 won't be able to open its rear door in the same space.
statistically insignificant failure rates
to this instead:
failure rates no higher than what is normally attributed to human behavior (human error).
In other words, in some of these cases the nut behind the wheel simply hit the wrong pedal.
Every case should be investigated, sure, but special attention (given limited resources) should be paid only to the most common cases.
Note that the european RAV4 has a shorter wheelbase than ours, so the US-spec may look a bit different.
I like it, though I doubt they'll fix the wrong-way rear door.
Who has the wisdom to make this determination? And as we know from the Audi case, poor engineering choices can promote human error. Remove the stumbling block, and the incidence of human error drops. Do we have to go back and review the case of the butterfly ballot?
Another factor that is coming to light is that until now most of the driving public has no idea who or what the NHTSA is, or anything about reporting an incident. Many of these problems are underreported. The Honda spring breakage is a case in point. People are coming to the boards reporting punctured tires and asking "Is it worth it to register a complaint?" DUH!!
In this context, note that Audi/VW have an override so if you hit the brakes the throttle is shut off completely, no doubt as a fail-safe due to the Audi sudden acceleration days. I forget who looked, but out of 7 models the only one they saw with no such complaints was the VW Passat CC. Probably not a coincidence.
The catch is this - as a manufacturer, now, how do you add that without admitting fault? It's risky. You can't advertise it, else people will ask why you made the change.
I can't tell you how many times I've shared the NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation link here on Edmunds. Dozens.
If events are not recorded they have nothing to investigate.
But is seems to me that this is more a matter of software enrichment than a major hardware change. The master brain feeding the black box already knows the throttle position and brake line pressure. I would think it would be easy enough to cut the fuel delivery in response to a foot on the brake. Few people today drive in two foot mode (an intentional foot on each) with an automatic. This will, however, be a pain for those with a stick trying to hold a car on a hill while slipping the clutch (unless you have a Subaru Hill Holder).
Net is that if I were the manufacturer, I be more worried about the consequences of what will happen if I'm not proactive about safety improvements. If it is within your power to fix it and you don't, there will probably be more fallout long term than if you simply bite the bullet and sell this to the public as an upgrade and a good new idea that they get for free! Yes, it's all about spin...
We might see a slight drop in 0-60 times (my Sienna was under 7 seconds in some car mags), but rolling acceleration should be the same.
I agree that this is a software fix - a reflash, no hardware to replace. In fact I wonder if that would have been cheaper than the original fix with the CTS pedals, especially since some supposedly affected models do not have CTS pedals to begin with! I think Denso supplies some of them.
It may be an issue of liabililty - if they say the software was bad, that opens them up to any lawsuits for any year/make/model with throttle-by-wire.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/02/18/acura-cold-weather-testing-in-minnesota/
AutoBlog tested SH-AWD Acuras against their AWD competitors, and they did very well.
Bob
It would be nice if Edmunds or some other neutral 3rd party would take several AWD systems up to that site for comparison purposes.
Acura hosted the event to they would obviously show the areas where it would be favorable. Hence the automatic Bimmer being more fun is a surprise.
I turn off the stability control on my Sienna in snow - it's too intrusive. Off means higher treshold in this case, not truly off.
Even sometimes on our Forester, when I want to have fun.
I should also mention that I enjoyed that article; it was well-written and I like the fact that the writer was appreciative of the BMW's driving experience and connection to the road while the Acura used technology to make up for the lack of both.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
http://z.about.com/d/cars/1/0/M/8/1/jf_08wrx_InstrumentPanel.jpg
Bob
Toyota, like Subaru used to do, imports stuff from Japan and sells it here - if successful, well and good. The RAV4 is apparently one of those products.
I wonder if Subaru does any of its testing there?
The Acura RDX also has SH-AWD, but unfortunately a coal cart ride and low ground clearance come with that model.
And alas, we only have one Acura dealer here in Portland.
Yeah, but easily explained away: The only other vehicles there were those that are most often cross-shopped against Acuras.
Bob
Europe gets a short one, and the USA gets a long wheelbase version.
They look similar, though, so the best way to tell them apart is to look at the length of the rear door. That's where the stretch happened.
So they did make the US-spec RAV4 bigger, and it has done well in sales, even as it ages.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/112_1002_2010_nissan_patrol_drive/perfo- rmance_and_engine.html
Bob
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20100219/CARREVIEWS/100219881
Bob
I'm really feeling the size of the van lately. All the parking spots are small because of huge piles of snow. I often have to pass on spots the Forester might squeeze into, and the Miata would fit with room to spare.
202" long, not too bad I guess.
Boy, 400hp, 7 speeds, DI, AWD, 4 wheel indy, is that spec sheet complete or what?
I find it interesting that both Toyota and Nissan have taken their large 4WD so considerably up-market. The previous Nissan GU Patrol was essentially the same as the coil spring GQ introduced in 1987. They are a very robust and long lived truck, fun to drive off road, but a bit of a handful in the city. A mate has one which I drove a few weeks ago; great workout for the shoulder muscles and a bit of a shocker to lock the front wheels on.
Given that robustness, Nissan apparently intend to continue selling the GU side by side with the new Patrol, which appears more targeted at luxury buyers and competition with the likes of Range Rover.
The latest Toyota Landcruiser has also gone dramatically up-market and Toyota effectively direct their workhorse customers to the parallel Landcruiser 70 series which has been around since 1984. The Landcruier is ubiquitous throughout Outback Australia, with pretty much every second vehicle being one, often ancient and patched together from dead Landcruisers. This is especially the case, in the Aboriginal settlements scattered across remote central Australia
That means that many Australian 4WDers are edgy about their options for the future. The newer models are remarkably complex and not easily repairable in remote locations. The appeal of the older Landcruisers (and to a lesser extent Patrols) was their ease of repair when far from sophisticated service centres.
It throws up an interesting question; is there a similarly hard wearing vehicle that is simple to maintain, but rugged enough for serious off-road work?
Cheers
Graham
Yes, but the LR Defender 90 hasn't been available since about 1997 over here in the US. Don't know about availability down under. Used ones bring top dollar here.
They finally gave it a worthy V6, though.
I test drove it before it got the new V6. That engine was wheezy and felt more like a 4 banger in power and smoothness. It was also small for me, about the size of the old Forester perhaps.
I think Suzuki is overdue for an update.
Bob
Well, there's Suzuki, they offer some small (and relatively simple) but very able off-roaders; and of course, the Land Cruiser 70, which you mentioned. Other than that, you may have to look to Russia, China or India. Not sure if any of those are available in Oz, however.
It does seem that the major name players are going the route of more complicated IFS/IRS with their traditional off-roaders, as this latest Nissan Patrol attests to. It will be interesting to see how these new-think 4-wheelers fare in 3rd-world situations.
BTW, I always like the LC 70 series. Wished they were offered here.
Bob
Bob
I understand where you're coming from. Even so, today's vehicles, with their extremely complicated control systems, are light-years more reliable than the far simpler vehicles that were offered in the past.
Bob
So a cheap sensor would have left him stranded in the middle of the [pick your favorite hostile environment], and they could have dehydrated in the middle of nowhere because of one cheap part.
The unresolvable breakdown a long way from help is a real problem in Australia. I flew over central Australia yesterday and was reminded of just how large (and unpopulated) our country is. A colleague was off today to inspect damage to outback properties including five graders and a helicopter that appears to have sunk during recent rains. It is not what you expect in the middle of a desert!.
Cheers
Graham
I think it's really the ultimate endorsement, when an auto scribe spends their own money on a car.
I thought it was funny that Pat Bedard had always been critical of Toyotas (too soft) but then retired and bought an Avalon.
The video inadvertently shows how asymmetrical the drivetrain is, however. Something Subaru likes to drive home consistently.
I would like to see a similar video that demonstrates the operation of Subaru's center differentials, both to see how they differ within the brand and how they differ from the Audi CD.
This video was on Top Gear this past week. It's incredible. Enjoy.
Bob
-Brian
MIL: (3 weeks back) - Given the weather & rode conditions, I need an AWD car to replace the Camry. Something affordable, only have about $16k max to spend on a car.
Me: (2 weeks back) - Ma, I took a look at several CPO '08 Legacy sedans, and I think you will like the car.
MIL: (10 days ago) - Steve, why didn't you suggest a new Impreza? Not much more than the used Legacy. Great car. Liked how it drives.
Me: I thought it would be too small for you. You thought that the Camry was tight at times. Figured that the Legacy was a better fit. But I'm glad that you found something you like.
MIL buys the Impreza on 2/27 and drives it for 6 days....
MIL: (this past Saturday) - Steve, not happy with the Impreza... Too small.
Me: I was worried you'd come to that conclusion. That's why I didn't suggest it.
MIL: Yes, you were right. So I visited the dealer on Friday and told them they had to take it back and upgrade me to a new Legacy. They agreed (!!). Full credit towards a discounted Legacy. Picking it up on Wednesday.
Me: Wow, times must be tough in the car business for them to take back a car with 200 miles (been registered, so it is now a used car...)!