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
Actually I enjoy a civil debate. Go to that other thread and check out the Sikes Believers. It's mob-mentality comedy.
nobody in the mainstream press ever needed to apologize to GM
Yet they did. GM had the lobbying power, so it happened. Toyota doesn't and never will.
The YouTube clip that reports is may be a hoax doesn't get 1/10th of the hits of the report of the UA.
Point is, it just doesn't get the same air time (online or on TV).
So since the Bad is getting 90% of the coverage and air time, I balance things out a little.
Plus another article on the subject.
http://jalopnik.com/5493693/america-you-brought-the-toyota-hoax-on-yourself?skyl- ine=true&s=i
Note it's the geezers that are reporting this. It's not random at all.
The data also does not match a normal rates of accidents.
This certainly doesn't prove anything, but it does show age is a major factor in these cases. Explaining why may not be so simple, but it is the #1 factor.
I presume that you read my on-board datalogging piece, so I thought I'd follow it up with a little fictional account based on elements that I believe already exist today.
Transcript from a service visit in the not too distant future:
Service Manager: Good afternoon, Mr. Jones. Thank you for coming over here so quickly. I wanted to review with you the situation surrounding your trucks power steering failure. You see, our service tech found traces of water in the PS fluid, well above the amount present from normal condensation. So we downloaded your ‘black box’ and focused in on your use of the vehicle in the month or so prior to your service appointment.
If you follow along with me, we see from the longitude/latitude data supplied by the tie-in to your dashboard GPS that you drove along this dirt road the afternoon of the 12th, and crossed this rather wide stream at a rather brisk 17 mph. We see that the engine stalled right about at this spot, and three long cranking events failed to restart it. The next engine-on data we have was 3 days later, 7 miles away at this spot on the map, which happens to be Gilbert’s Garage. We presume that you had the waterlogged truck towed there for restoration. We see from the on-board oil monitor that you had an oil change at that time, and probably had other fluids and filters replaced as well judging from the new condition of everything we looked at. Except, of course, for the power steering! The pump seized up 5 days later, which brought you here to us.
Mr. Jones, you violated the terms of your new vehicle warranty, so it is now null and void. If you leave quietly and without fuss, we won’t prosecute you under the statutes of this State for insurance fraud.
I'm not saying that Toyota is datalogging to this degree, but I believe that they do have useful data that they refuse to disclose. Why? The appearance of guilt only grows the longer they refuse to share what they know!
You mentioned 'benefit of the doubt', and 'innocent until proven guilty'. Remember that this flows both ways. Many a Toyota owner has become the victim, suffering either financial loss or injury/death. In the process of trying to find the truth, they are being stonewalled by a Corporation that is not sharing all that they know.
It wasn't long ago that Toyota blamed owners for sludge destroyed engines. Were owners the bad guys for pressing their case?
I looked into that other tread, but opted to stay away. A long way away! Some of those comments really scare me!
I'm looking forward to the government forcing them to disclose this information. If not, I would expect Toyota will be asked to disclose this data pursuant to litigation brought by an injured party.
-Brian
To some extent I agree - it should be shared with NHTSA, though, not the media, and certainly not the public. NHTSA and any agencies investigating accidents, yes.
I feel like you write that fictional story about me in Sandy, at the Pine Barrens. Heck, if that creek crossing did any damage, I should be the one paying for it!
I needed reading glasses the other day to read an IMEI number off a BlackBerry. Boy did that make me feel old.
Toyota will be subpoena'd and have to spill the beans. I'm sure we'll know sooner, too.
It wasn't long ago that Toyota blamed owners for sludge destroyed engines. Were owners the bad guys for pressing their case?
I remember that well. They were only asking for proof of one oil change per year, though, to cover them. People don't keep receipts, I guess.
In Toyota's defense, you wonder if owners are so convinced they're bullet proof that they could skip things like normal service.
Also, they added a Service reminder light that goes on every 5000 miles (my van has it), and sludge complaints disappeared.
The 1MZ V6 was affected, the 3MZ V6 was not. Guess which has the service light?
Oh, oh! Pick me! PICK ME!!!! :P
Don't know if you are aware of this, but some of the proposals in OBD-III include your car turning itself in to the State by transponder when it throws a code. If you do not act within X number of days/miles, the car shuts itself off (presumably by a signal sent by the local EPA office). How's that for forcing constant compliance?
And notice, I didn't mention the T company even once in this post!
My son reached a significant milestone for himself, so we had some "celebrating" planned for the evening. After that, I had a broomball tournament that involved two back-to-back games (because we won the first), which was exhausting, but we came out victorious and took home the "coveted" championship t-shirt. Don't worry... I made it home by midnight! :P
Here are some highlights from a game my team won about three years ago. Turn down volume, though. The song, while fast-paced like the game, does contain some questionable language. I'm the fella wearing lots of armor (hockey gloves, elbow pads, knee pads, etc) with white shirt and blue jeans. :lemon:
I'm pro-clean vehicles, in fact I paid more to get a PZEV Subaru, but things like that discourage honest people (adding cost, complexity) and do not deter dishonest people anyway.
14 mpg city for the Crown Vic, ouch, time to put it out to pasture.
http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/omar-ramos-lopez-is-accused-of-using-the-i- nternet-to-disable-cars/19404804
Not exactly the same thing as having the EPA do it, but is shows that the future is close at hand.
They'll also need to revisit this comparison when the 2011 Charger is released. Pentastar V6 and revised Hemi are in the works.
Charger will probably remain the best at all-out pursuit, but if the made-in-Australia factor doesn't come into play, I think the new Caprice may end up as the best all-around choice.
The annual Michigan State Police evaluation is still considered the standard by most police departments... Michigan State Police - 2010 Police Vehicle Evaluation. Be sure to check the EPA Unadjusted numbers on the fuel economy table... that's what the cars actually get during the EPA test... even the Tahoe gets almost 30 highway in the raw numbers. (It's the Unadjusted Combined figure that is used for CAFE calculations.)
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
Bob
Excerpt:
But we shouldn't jump to conclusions about dramatic new reported cases of unintended acceleration. More legitimate complaints may surface. But under the best of circumstances a significant portion of unintended acceleration cases are caused by driver error. And now that Toyota is wearing a big target, crazy people, neurotics and scam artists may find it fun or potentially profitable to drive really fast and claim unintended acceleration
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100322/OEM02/303229988/1424- #ixzz0ivQL8j3C
I have one of these GPS locators installed in my wife's Pilot. It's like Lojack- but using satellites and GPS. I can track where her car is, disable the starter, and it will call me if it exceeds a certain speed or even if the alarm goes off. It's pretty neat. But it doesn't have anything to do with the car's black box. It's added on.
I'm thinking about putting it in my son's car. Hopefully it will keep him a safer driver!
tom
Big brother exists. . . :surprise:
Clearly, Toyota brought this on itself by repeatedly underplaying reports of unintended acceleration over much of the past decade. The company had more complaints than other companies. But while in some cases there were few reports and no accidents, Toyota was cavalier about the reports and did little or nothing -- in part because the automaker's leaders in Japan turned a deaf ear.
So, my question would be: What did Toyota know and when did they know it? Many of us remember Toyota taking the same cavalier attitude when there were claims of "sludge" forming in engines.
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100322/OEM02/303229988/1424- #ixzz0iw8xYJgJ
Carbon Motors Press Release Mar 22 2010
In their story, Automotive News noted the expected layout and output is an inline engine (cylinder count was not mentioned) and 245/400. That's on par with the EcoBoost, the Hemi, and the GM 6.0 as far as torque, but 35-40% down on horsepower. In a typical full-size family sedan, that'd be ok, but in police use where high-speed high-rpm pursuit is a requirement of the tool for many police departments, the Carbon E7 may well find itself competing against the "plain" V6 police cars used by urban/small departments.
Just sounds to me like the E7 will come off the line like the pursuit-oriented vehicles, but will perform over the long haul like the standard V6s.
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
It will be interesting to see how this Carbon car prices out. It looks to be very expensive, as it is a purpose-built car that will only be sold to police departments; not unlike the old Checker Cab, which were originally only sold to taxi companies. That means a pretty low production run, so I would think the unit cost would be much higher than if it were produced off a mass-produced platform; and that BMW diesel/tranny certainly won't help in keeping costs down.
Bob
Just sounds to me like the E7 will come off the line like the pursuit-oriented vehicles, but will perform over the long haul like the standard V6s.
But in reality, how many cruisers really need to be high speed pursuit capable? IMHO, most police vehicles do nothing more than drive around suburban/urban settings all day.
Perhaps state police need something more pursuit capable.
IIRC, the business plan is to lease the vehicles to law enforcement and provide the service as well. That could bring the cost down sincle PD's will only pay for use and service - not the entire cost.
I don't believe Sikes for a minute.
They just disproved the case with the housekeeper in the Prius, too.
All I'm saying is we should have a healthy skepticism. Towards Toyota as well!
Oh yeah, it's also a blast to drive. The sales guy (Towson, MD dealer) had me take a nice winding road course; perfect to show of the car's driving abilities.
The one I drove was pretty basic, a 6-speed and stickered under $25K. It had run-flat tires, which were really pretty quiet. There was far less tire noise than my WRX has. Oil changes, even with the turbo, is every 15K. That's impressive. I think you get the first 3 years (or 36K) of service free too.
Loosh made a good choice here.
Bob
April Fools. :P
It was so timely. I had that photo saved for 8 months. We were just talking about police cruisers. I couldn't resist.
For simplicity and cost, most automotive systems are ‘single channel’. For demonstration purposes, lets use brake by wire as our example. You push on the brake pedal, and a sensor sends a signal to the brake CPU. It notes the rate of application and pressure applied, translates this to a signal to the wheel servos, and records the event for playback should it be called upon to do so. But let’s imagine that the pedal sensor dies. You push, but no signal is sent. The CPU never activates the brakes and you crash. The investigator reads the black box which tells the world that you never touched the brakes! It cannot report anything other than that, as it never saw a brake signal. Thus the failure of a single channel system.
Oops: Houston, we have a problem!!! And now that NASA has been asked to weigh in, I’ll bet that this will be one of the first things they attack.
How about a two channel system? We now install a second sensor to oversee the activity of the primary sender. You brake, but the primary dies. The CPU gets a ‘no’ from the primary, but a ‘yes’ from the secondary. What should it do? Brake on the premise that the primary isn’t working? Just as bad; if you weren’t intending to brake but the secondary sends a false ‘yes’ signal. Then you get braking for no apparent reason. Which sensor should the CPU listen to? Bad system .
Three channel system? Primary actuator with two independent monitors. Now we go with a 2 out of 3 vote. Chances are we will now always get the right decision as the chance of a double failure is slim. Plus if it isn’t a 3-0 decision every single time, the system will log the errors and report impending doom if it isn’t fixed immediately. This is the way aircraft that use fly by wire is done, and it has proven highly reliable. This will probably be on the first page of recommendations.
Now if you are building a Space Shuttle, you go 5x. Normally 4 channels are used, and the vote is 4-0 or 3-1. In the event of a 2-2 tie, a 5th channel made by a different supplier and feeding into a totally independent system acts as the tie breaker! OK, that’s way overkill for a car, but you get the picture.
So, relating this to the situation with Toyota, can we get a true answer reading out past stored date? Possibly not, unfortunately. By design, the fox cannot accurately report on the theft at the hen house no matter how honest he might be.
Plus, while redundancy is nice, but it also comes with cost, weight, and complexity.
And remember 99.99% of systems are fine, so everyone pays for that 0.01%.
How many times do you apply the brake pedal per day? Per year? A rate of 99.99% practically guarantees you at least one system failure per year in your car. The US market is worth 10 million new vehicle sales next year. If they all use brake by wire, as they surely will within 10 years from now, would you feel OK with each one of them having one or more failures each per year? This is an outcome with catastrophic implications!
And the best part is that with the current single channel monitoring, most of them could potentially report that the brakes were not applied - all the wrecks were driver error!!!
The numbers were made up for the sake of discussion, anyway.
all the wrecks were driver error!!!
They were before.
Remember when you could move a manual transmission car in an emergency situation by turning the starter with the vehicle in gear? :sick:
Some times safety features are added for good reasons.
Frankly, I think automobiles and the experience of driving are being destroyed by engineering toward the lowest denominator.
OK, but I was only responding to the numbers you suggested as an example. Either way, yes, we will have to pay a little bit more if we want a system that has:
1) A 10-100x greater reliability by having a backup on critical systems.
2) Can detect a partial failure of the system (the 2-1 vote scenario) that doesn't cause an accident now but could in the future.
3) In the event of an accident, can accurately report what really happened (unlike the current system that really doesn't know the whole truth).
all the wrecks were driver error!!!
They were before.
With mechanical systems, that might have been true. A reported failure such as a blown brake line was easy to show. First thing an investigator looks for is a fluid spray on the pavement and the body of the car. With an electronics failure, there is no telltale sign. Only the data recorder can say, and only if it has information from an independent monitor.
Then again, remember those Subi master cylinders that failed at low temps? Took a while for SOA to become convinced, but they did eventually replicate it and initiate a recall.
But even with the occasional mechanical failure, I generally agree with Wes. The state of mechanical auto systems is well enough refined that unless we go with the 3x redundant electronic systems, we'll be hard presses to equal the level of reliability. The current implementation leaves those of us in the know very uneasy.
Great. Are you familiar with the saying, "Ignorance is bliss?" Well, you just burst my bubble. :P
I'm a good candidate for laser eye surgery, but as I worked with excimer lasers for years, I could never see allowing someone to use one on me! Highly temperamental beasts.... zap, zap, zap, SPLAT, zap goes the repetitive pulses.
It's been 11 years and I'm still 20/20, though I do need reading glasses now 'cause I'm geezin'.
Still, it would have been even worse: bifocals.
They may be geezer glasses, but hey, I can see!
(By some people's definition, I'm at the geezer stage already!) :confuse:
Cheers!
Paul