do us a favor, and get over 1995. it was 15 years ago. look at how much 1995 civics sell for. you would not be 'rich' if you bought one and sold it now. if you bought a 1995 Toyota, you would not be 'rich' due to that decision either. so what is your definition of 'rich'? :shades:
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Well, since that Neon sold around 2000 or there abouts, its memory is only 10 years old, or less. It also cost about 5,000 in repairs I'd estimate. When traded in, I'd say it was worth another 5K less than comparable Civic. It cost only about 1K less.
If I'd of taken the 10K or so I'd of saved from 1994 to 2000, plus about $400 in tow truck fees, and put it in a good stock or mutual fund, it would be quite a bit of money right now. What if I had put it all in Toyota Stock in 1994? haahha.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The emergence of so many toyota-specific scams & scammers may hurt their bottom line even further with all the legal headaches from the scammers.
Andre, I'm sorry to hear of your bad experience with the skittle as well as the CHP - In the "Elias Guide to Civil Violation Roadside Etiquette and Paperwork" the CHP gets a solid 4 out of 5 stars.
No matter how sucky or non sucky the CHP may or may not be, even in their alleged lameness, did they somehow know to avoid buying a single toyota (or skittle) in their entire fleet ?! !?
Apparently this Sikes guy is a major scammer - we should have guessed that when his Blogoyovich-looking rug almost suddenly-accelerated all the way off of his head during the TV interview.
Yes, it was supposed to be a compact car, but not really an econobox.
No, it was most definitley an econobox, nobody (except apparently you) ever thought of it as anything but. and if you paid 15 large for a 1995 neon... hmmm....wow...I probly would have kept that to myself
What if I had put it all in Toyota Stock in 1994? haahha.
It would be worth about $17k today. Not a very good return on investment. If you had put that same $10,000 in Ford last year it would be worth $88,344. My best call ever.
If you put $10,000 into Toyota the same time it would be worth about $5700. I just don't see TM as a good investment.
If you had put that same $10,000 in Ford last year it would be worth $88,344. My best call ever.
Hahaha, now that's called market timing, and no one is really able to do that successfully. You have to look at what I'd of made had I invested in Ford for the same time period, so since 1994, I'm sure I'd be close to broke.
Don't be so sure it was a good call, Ford may yet still fall again. However, they do appear to be righting the ship and all without a bailout.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Every day I think I should sell. Then Toyota does something else stupid and Ford goes up even more. It is in my 401k so the profit does not get taxed till I have to withdraw. If I was able to call them like that every time, I would be on a Yacht and not blogging with you all on Edmund's.
Actually you would be better off with Ford over the same period from 1994, than you would Toyota. Worst thing about Toyota the US stockholders are in the dark.
My next best call was MCD. Talked my then girlfriend into buying at $14. The rest is history and she married me in 2004. McDonald's is now her largest stock holding.
gagrice....I did buy some Ford stock at around $2/share. It's rewarded me nicely. Like you, I keep wondering if I should sell. I think they're on a roll. And, they're the most likely to benefit from Toyota's problems. So, I'm thinking I'll stick with it for awhile.
I believe the Fusion Hybrid will continue it's run against the Prius...especially since it looks like the Prius electronics are still an issue. I think the new Taurus will continue to grab Camry sales. Lots of Tundra folks going to the F-150, too.
So, I'm going to hold on for a little while yet as I believe Ford will continue to take market share from Toyota. I think they're poised to do so in every market segment that Toyota plays in, be they hybrids, cars or trucks.
On a separate note, if State Farm says you have a problem, if the NHTSA says you have a problem, if Congress says you have a problem, if thousands of your customers say you have a problem, then Toyota.....YOU HAVE A PROBLEM!
You can tell Toyota has cranked up its PR and damage control machine. That doesn't change the facts, though. Toyota and Lexus have problems, pretty much up and down the model range. Even the hefty discounts won't change that....until Toyota fixes them.
It is disheartening that they've chosen to attack their customers, but that's what they're doing. That never is a good way to make friends and influence perceptions. That will bite them in the posterior at some point.
In the James, Colorado crash into the river that you can see on utube, the driver states she did not have the cruise on. So the cruise may be factor but not always. Maybe the facts ought to be referred to instead of pure speculation.
I thank you for your input,it is appreciated . The comment on GM I found not to be needed in this case. I like the fact things are getting to and staying on subject. You know I am GM pro or pro GM and enjoy engineering problems in any Car build. Toyota is looking for answers and if I have any thing constructive to help I will. I have asked if RF has any thing to do with the problem but only find one constant ,CHIP cars are in it more than once.
According to Toyota's "residential Hybrid expert," the Prius is designed to shut down if the brakes are applied while the gas pedal is pressed to the floor. In other words the Prius is has a brake override system which Toyota says will be installed in future Toyota models to cope with the problem of unintended acceleration.
Based on this information and the fact that investigators with Toyota Motor Corp. and the federal government were unable to make a Prius speed out of control as its owner said it did on a California freeway, a congressional memo questions the credibility of Mr. Sikes' reporting of events. Some Toyota supporters go as far (or as low) as accusing Mr. Sikes of trying to defraud Toyota by staging the run away incident. Mrs. Sikes said he and his wife have received death threats after the incident.
Even though the investigators of Toyota and the NHTSA found that the front brake pads were spent with nothing left and the rear brake pads had only 1/2 mm or about 0.02 inch left due to intense braking and in spite of the fact that the CHP officer saw brake lights on the speeding Prius and smelled the brake burning, that is still not good enough to convince the investigators that it is a case of unintended acceleration caused by malfunction.
If the Prius were not equipped with a brake override system, of course the it would be possible for someone to step on the gas pedal and the brake pedal at the same time to fake a runaway incident. However, the Prius that Mr. Sikes was driving was equipped with a brake override system. The fact that it was traveling at high speed with the brake lights on without deceleration and producing burning smell of the brakes can only point to the conclusion that the power to accelerate the vehicle had not been cut off even though Mr. Sikes was stepping hard on the brake. In other words, the brake override failed to work. That means there was a malfunction causing the Prius to accelerate even though the brakes were pressed hard. Whether the unintended acceleration was caused by a sticky floored gas pedal with a failed brake override or a computer glitch that caused the unintended acceleration when the gas pedal was not pressed at all is another matter to be investigated. The problem with computer glitches is that they can come and go like nothing wrong ever happened. Anyone who owns a home computer knows exactly what I'm talking about. That's why the brake override worked on the Prius when tested by the investigators does not mean it must be working during the incident earlier.
If the brake override on the Prius had worked during the incident, the only way Mr. Sikes could have caused the front brake pads to burn to nothing and the rear brake pads to paper thin would be to speed up at full throttle to high speed then slam on the brakes, then repeat the process again and again while being observed by a CHP patrol car moving along with it. That's exactly what the Wall Street Journal speculated- that the brakes may have been applied intermittently. However no sudden jerky acceleration and deceleration were observed or reported by the CHP officer trying to help Mr. Sikes to stop the run away Prius. There are no grounds for the Wall Street Journal's absurd speculation at all.
As for the suspicion why Mr. Sikes did not shift the car to neutral as told by the officer over the phone, his explanation was that he had put down the phone to keep both hands on the wheel and was afraid the car would flip if he put it in neutral at such high speed. I find his explanation reasonable and consistent with nurdy drivers who are afraid to shift the gear in anyway while driving at high speed in an automatic. In spite of his not shifting the gear to neutral due to lapse of communication and fear, Mr. Sikes did follow the instruction of the officer from a loudspeaker to use both the foot brake and the emergency brake to slow down the car before turning the engine off at lower speed.
In conclusion, the fact that the Prius is equipped with a brake override system gives greater credibility to Mr. Sikes' account of malfunction of the Prius instead of casting doubts on it. The investigators of Toyota and NHTSA and the congressional memo drafting staffers need to stop distorting the truth and stop putting salt on the wounds of those hapless Toyota customers who survived in run away Toyotas.
There are no grounds for the Wall Street Journal's absurd speculation at all.
That was my impression as well. Much worse than ABC using a clip to show fast RPMS in the Dr Gilbert demo of UA with an Avalon.
stop distorting the truth and stop putting salt on the wounds of those hapless Toyota customers who survived in run away Toyotas.
This is a long time mode of operation for Toyota. Mostly at the dealer level. The Toyota loyal are not helping to improve the product by lining up behind anything Toyota does. There should be outrage that Toyota DBW systems are failing. One failure per million would be too many without a safety device to circumvent an accident. There are enough highway deaths caused by poor drivers. Why add failure prone equipment to the mix? That goes for all auto makers.
I don't understand; exactly which truth is being distorted?
I have seen no mention of the condition of the brakes before the incident. How worn were they? Why do you find Sikes' explanation reasonable? How do you know he is a nerdy driver? How did he turn the engine off at a "lower speed" and what was that speed?
On the other hand, if the Prius was equipped with a brake override, and it didn't work. Toyota bears some of the responsibility. But why do you hold Toyota to a standard of 100% perfection and Sikes is allowed to operate a car without knowing that he could simply shift into N and solve his problem.
And if Sikes wanted to create a hoax, could he have defeated the override feature?
I hope we can answer all of the questions raised in this affair; at the very least everyone now knows how to deal with UA. And short of connecting a cable to a red handle on the dashboard and the other end to a quick release battery cable, how can we achieve a 100% shutdown capability?
Regards, DQ
PS Sikes and his lawyer insist they are not going to sue. Why not, if they suffered at the hands of Toyota. Anyway, at the very least I bet he won't have to make up those 5 payments he is behind on the Prius.
I'm just a little bit troubled by those (like you) who are prepared to place all the blame on Toyota and none on Sikes.
I'm just a little bit troubled by those (like you) who are prepared to place all the blame on Toyota and none on Sikes.
From where I sit there are an equal amount that place all the responsibility on the consumer and none on Toyota. I am really curious if Sikes was able to circumvent the supposed fail safe system Toyota claims for the Prius. If he did, how many of the several hundred complainers on JUST the 2008 Prius have done the same. Most of the complaints are the car took off and the brakes did not stop me. By comparison the 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid that is essentially the same design has only one complaint and that the peddle was stuck down and the driver was able to stop.
I think Toyoda knows the problems at Toyota. They tried to get too big too fast and left out a lot of needed testing. Both Toyoda and Lentz said as much.
I think Toyoda knows the problems at Toyota. They tried to get too big too fast and left out a lot of needed testing. Both Toyoda and Lentz said as much.
On this, I think I can agree with you. Not so much on market timing of stock picking (as in, if you had bought Ford stock in say, 2005, where would you be now)?
I still don't understand how all of you are placing so much credibility on Sikes' version of the events when he has almost none. He supposedly was a member of a Corvette club. Do you think a Corvette driver would think his car will "flip" if put into neutral?
About his Prius' brakes specifically, in contrast to nmt's assertions:
The Wall Street Journal reports that “the investigation of the vehicle, carried out jointly by safety officials from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Toyota engineers, didn’t find signs the brakes had been applied at full force at high speeds over a sustained period of time, the three people familiar with the investigation said.
"The brakes were discolored and showed wear, but the pattern of friction suggested the driver had intermittently applied moderate pressure on the brakes, these people said, adding the investigation didn’t find indicators of the heavy pressure described by Mr. Sikes."
Maybe you all think Toyota is still trying to hide something, but wouldn't the NHTSA be honest at this point, given Ray LaHood's recent directives to the agency? Remember the CHP declined to investigate the car.
It is disheartening that they've chosen to attack their customers, but that's what they're doing. That never is a good way to make friends and influence perceptions. That will bite them in the posterior at some point.
Can you site specific examples of Toyota choosing "to attack their customers?" I haven't seen any. They didn't say Rhonda Smith was a stupid driver, for example, after her testimony in the congressional hearings..
One Audi executive said something to the effect that "Americans don't know how to drive," or something to that effect during the Audi 5000 sudden acceleration hysteria, and he was promptly sent home to Germany after that gaffe. Where did Mr. Toyoda or Mr. Lentz say something like that? I think all car companies know that you don't speak badly of your customers.
Hanging on to Sikes' version of events in ludicrous, not because of past "misfortunes" as in losing a job or falling behind in home, credit card, and even his Prius lease payments, but because of outright fraud on his part. And this Prius scam is just part and parcel of his M.O.
I think you know as well as anyone the WSJ version is tabloid conjecture. The brakes did not work as they are supposed to. The reason Sikes case is important is the witness factor. The CHP has not changed their version. Only Issa leaked misinformation to the WSJ. We know he has a vested interest in Toyota. Any brake pressure should shut down the HSD and go into regen braking. They did not get the Prius slowed down until they were on a steep uphill grade. When I imagine the battery was spent and we know the engine by itself is a weakling. Only then did he get the vehicle slowed to 55 MPH and shut off the engine. Toyota knows it has a BIG problem with Prius. Unless you want to smear the 100s of complainers on the ODI site that have experienced the same problems with the Gen2 Prius.
I am not "smearing" the other complainers, but again, each complaint must be investigated on its own merits. How can I "smear" them when I haven't gone through the complaints? In fact, I'm getting tired of the "smear" word.
I understand some of the complaints do not provide a VIN or follow-up telephone # or e-mail contact, so NHTSA or Toyota have no way to validate such complaints.
And I'd hardly characterize the WSJ as prone to printing tabloid articles. For that, I'd go to Murdoch's New York Post.
One last thing, I find it hard to believe that until the Toyota sudden acceleration issue, all previous findings pointed to the driver as the main source of the problem, whereas now, the driver is always blameless.
We of course know of some Toyota vehicular issues, such as the mat interference problem that was the main factor in the Saylor crash and the sticky pedal problem, which to my knowledge, has not resulted in ANY deaths.
The conspiracists among you want to believe though that there's something else at fault here. Well, put your money where your mouth is. But I don't see any likelihood of Edmunds having to hand over its $1 million prize to anyone who finds the "real" problem.
If the brake override on the Prius had worked during the incident, the only way Mr. Sikes could have caused the front brake pads to burn to nothing and the rear brake pads to paper thin would be to speed up at full throttle to high speed then slam on the brakes, then repeat the process again and again while being observed by a CHP patrol car moving along with it.
Isn't it obvious he overheated the breaks before the CHP officer got there? The CHP Officer was not observing Sikes since the "beginning" of the incident. The Wall Street Journal is absolutely positively correct.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
One Audi executive said something to the effect that "Americans don't know how to drive," or something to that effect during the Audi 5000 sudden acceleration hysteria, and he was promptly sent home to Germany after that gaffe
But I'm an American and I agree with that statement!
I think most Americans do need to go back to driver's training school and improve themselves on the road. Bring that guy back from Germany as an instructor! :P
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
That is pretty convoluted thinking on your part. Sort of like we used to do in about the 5th grade. A variation of the old "heads I win, tails you lose" scam.
The Wall Street Journal is absolutely positively correct.
LOL...I love how your interpretations are always so definitive. No room for the possibility of error, or "This looks to be the case", but "absolutely positively correct".
I wish I could interpret the world around me with such absolute confidence.
I wish I could interpret the world around me with such absolute confidence.
It comes from reviewing the evidence and factual information at hand, and choosing the most likely scenario that fits it. Things are usually as they seem.
It is good to go with one's gut feeling more often then not, especially when one has a good mind to make these determinations.
If you can predict something because it looks like it, and then it happens to be proven because "it" was true, then it seems logical to conclude "it" was right all along. I knew Sikes was a bum before I knew about his financial history and record of insurance fraud. Those things only proved my hypothesis. The Wall Street Journal confirmed my conclusions.
As I said long ago, case closed, *slams gavel*
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Your logic is faulty, andres3. See if you can follow along here:
choosing the most likely scenario . . . Things are usually as they seem.
Yes, usually Toyotas don't accelerate unintentionally. Analysis of a puzzle like this requires the elimination of impossible scenarios, and not making the 'likely' scenario a postulate. For instance, if your television doesn't come on when you push the remote's on button, it's usually a dead battery or something amiss with the remote. But if the tv is unplugged (highly unlikely, but possible), you will fool around with the remote until the end of time and never make the tv work. So it's smart to check the plug first. Understood?
It seems to most of us irrefutable that this is an intermittent problem, because if it weren't, there would be far more incidents, crashes, deaths. Can we agree to state that definition of the problem as a coincidental and rare combination of actions by the driver and the Toyota's computer control system?
If you agree, then it should be clear to you that the driver being a 'bum' has nothing to do with a particular incident. There are hundreds of incidents, and a certain percentage of drivers are bums and/or frauds. Therefore, a certain number of incidents will happen to fraud artists.
By your analysis, if the driver is a fraud artist, the incident must be a fraud. Liars sometimes tell the truth.
By your analysis, if the driver is a fraud artist, the incident must be a fraud. Liars sometimes tell the truth.
I agree with your analysis. Liars and fraudsters sometimes are honest and tell the truth.
But to have this happen within a few miles of the Saylor incident? To refuse to put it into neutral as instructed? To hear ridiculous excuses? To hear a ridiculous story. It was just all too much to ignore.
If this SUA problem is real, then it should happen also to real people that are not "bums."
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
"I still don't understand how all of you are placing so much credibility on Sikes' version of the events when he has almost none."
Ah, a breath of fresh air.
He has no credibility. Reminds of the boy who cried "WOLF" one time too many and nobody would believe him.
You don't have to be a Toyota fanboy or supporter to know a shady character when you read about their background.
It is possible to smoke the brakes by barely applying the pedal if your speed is high enough. The brake light comes on as soon as the pedal is depressed a mere fraction of an inch. Try it. My understanding is that the brake pedal AND the gas pedal have to be floored, but that might not be true.
I wonder how many posters who are out to lynch Toyota even own one. They're starting to sound like nervous-Nelly busybodies.
Can we agree to state that definition of the problem as a coincidental and rare combination of actions by the driver and the Toyota's computer control system?
I agree with most of your post but not the question as you phrased it. I'd ask, "Can we state that definition of the problem as a coincidental and rare combination of actions by the driver, floormat interference, stickiness in the gas pedal, possibly the Toyota's computer control system, or some other aspect of the vehicle not yet identified?"
And Edmunds' $1 million is up for grabs for he or she who can successfully identify the computer and/or electronic aspects of the problem. I've already said I think their money is safe.
I wonder how many posters who are out to lynch Toyota even own one. They're starting to sound like nervous-Nelly busybodies.
I could not agree more. A lot of gum flapping and zero proof of anything. I think it is called puffery when someone states their opinion as if it was fact.
Where did all this resentment of Toyoto's success come from? U.A.W. perhaps?
Zero credibility or not, it doesn't mean it didn't happen. I hold no brief to defend Mr. Sikes, I just don't agree with discounting something happening based on someone's past history. It makes no more sense than to positively state that all blondes are bimbos because your last girlfriend was blonde and certifiably ditzy.
However, it's reasonable to assume that some small percentage of these incidents can be explained by fat feet, feeble minds, or fraudulent intent. The remaining cases could accounted for by pedals and floormats if it wasn't for the fact that there continue to be reports of SUA in vehicles that have had the fix.
So far nobody, with the possible exception of Toyota knows the cause, and if Toyota do know they aren't saying, and I think it's certain that even they don't know how to fix it.
The thing I find hardest to comprehend is Toyota's response, both to their employees and customers before the story broke in the media, and their disastrous handling of the PR situation afterwards.
Zero credibility or not, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
It certainly doesn't mean it did happen either. With some 300 million people in the U.S. a certain percentage are kooks. A lot more kooks than the number of alleged UAs.
These people just want their 30 seconds of fame. They see ufos, are captured by aliens, used to be George Washington in another life. There will be plenty more who come out of the woodwork. You name it and we've got em.
Zero credibility or not, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
It certainly doesn't mean it did happen either.
Exactly, it means nothing except the fellow is found to lack credibility. It proves nothing either way......and I did go on to point out that it's reasonable to expect that some reported incidents will actually be driver error or fraud.
Toyota says the Prius has a brake override system which prevents the car from having power for acceleration when the gas pedal and the brake pedal are pressed at the same time. As I mentioned in my previous post "The fact that it was traveling at high speed with the brake lights on without deceleration and producing burning smell of the brakes can only point to the conclusion that the power to accelerate the vehicle had not been cut off even though Mr. Sikes was stepping hard on the brake. In other words, the brake override failed to work. "
However, the investigators of both Toyota and the NHTSA only emphasized the fact that the brake override of that Prius worked during their test drives after the incident but intentionally or ignorantly failed to point out that if the brake override had not failed during the incident, it would not have been possible for Mr. Sikes to drive at high speed steadily with brake lights on and producing burning brake smell that the CHP officer witnessed.
To cause the front brake pads to burn out completely and the rear brake pads to grind down to 0.02 inch thin during the incident if the brake override were functioning normally, a drive would have to press hard on the gas and the brake alternatively for many times and causing the Prius to suddenly accelerate then decelerate repeatedly. But that was not the driving pattern of Mr. Sikes observed by the CHP officer driving along the Prius in an effort to help him stop the vehicle.
The truth is that the Prius has a brake override system gives greater credibility to Mr. Sikes' account of malfunction of the Prius. The investigators of both Toyota and NHTSA distort that truth by only mentioning the brake override worked during the test drives without pointing out that the brake override had to be malfunctioning during the incident to produce the driving pattern of the Prius observed by the CHP officer. It was not an outright lie but a kind of deceptive distortion of the truth by focusing on one truth that hints Mr. Sikes was lying about the Prius malfunctioned while totally disregard the other truth that indicates Toyota has a faulty product.
You ask "How worn were they"? (referring to the brakes of the Prius before the incident.) You also ask "And if Sikes wanted to create a hoax, could he have defeated the override feature? "
You are not trying to say that Mr. Sikes has somehow figured out a way to defeat the override feature and then intentionally tortured the brakes of the Prius somewhere else until the front brakes pads were almost completely worn out and the rear brake pads were only slightly thicker than 0.02 inch before driving the Prius with almost no brake pads to speed up on the freeway just to create a hoax, are you? That would have been suicide, not a hoax. The Toyota lackeys can be more unreasonable than I thought.
If Mr. Sikes had intentionally defeated the brake override before the incident then the investigator should have found out that the override had been defeated instead of working during the test drives.
You ask “How do you know he is a nerdy driver?” Well. I didn’t say I know he was nerdy. I only say being afraid to shift gear in an automatic while driving at high speed is consistent with a nerdy driver and Mr. Sikes is more likely to be one in my opinion as he owns a Prius which emphasizes on gas economy instead of performance related to speed.
You asked, “How did he turn the engine off at a "lower speed" and what was that speed?” “Once the car slowed to 50 mph, Sikes shut off the engine”. That was what the CHP officer said. So why don’t you ask Mr. Sikes and the CHP officer about your doubts instead?
So Mr. Sikes is having financial difficulties. Just the right kind of customer that Toyota can frame up to avoid culpability.
Oh, it was driven by a 56 year old woman. Just another right combinations that can easily be used to framed up the driver for mistaking the gas for the brake even though she insisted she had slammed on the brake.
The LA Times reports that “ More than 1,000 Toyota and Lexus owners have reported since 2001 that their vehicles suddenly accelerated on their own, in many cases slamming into trees, parked cars and brick walls, among other obstacles, a Times review of federal records has found. The crashes resulted in at least 19 deaths and scores of injuries over the last decade, records show. Federal regulators say that is far more than any other automaker has experienced.”
That far more Toyota owners complained about unintended acceleration than any other automakers is a fact that Toyota should not try to explain away with various excuses. No amount of commercial hype can save Toyota now if it continues to blame hapless Toyota owners who experienced sudden unintended acceleration.
1.The ECM indicated that during the incident the brake and the accelerator had been alternately depressed 250 times.
If Toyota had a decent EDR, like other auto makers, they may have been able to show that and have this behind them. Problem is they don't have a decent diagnostic package in their DBW systems to analyze these reported events. That means the consumer has the mike and Toyota gets blasted.
You are digging yourself a very deep hole that you will never be able to get out of once this crook either confesses or is found out. Shouldn't be long now. Then we can see how sound your "logic" is.
And the Ides of June and July too - it'll probably take that long for the SUA mania to calm down a bit, assuming no more cases make the national news.
Meanwhile, with the incentives in place, it's time to place your bets for March sales numbers. Anyone buying? Anyone want to hazard a guess whether Toyota's numbers will be up in a couple of weeks?
The Wall Street Journal reports that “the investigation of the vehicle, carried out jointly by safety officials from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Toyota engineers, didn’t find signs the brakes had been applied at full force at high speeds over a sustained period of time, the three people familiar with the investigation said.
"The brakes were discolored and showed wear, but the pattern of friction suggested the driver had intermittently applied moderate pressure on the brakes, these people said, adding the investigation didn’t find indicators of the heavy pressure described by Mr. Sikes."
So why did the CHP officer smelled the brake of the Prius burning when the Prius was not decelerating if no heavy braking was applied? So why the investigators found the front brake pads completely spent and the rear brake brake pads worn down to about 0.02 inch thin after the incident if the brakes had not been applied in anytime at full force? So why nobody on the freeway saw the Prius speed up then decelerate suddenly and repeatedly to intentionally wear out the brake pads if intermittent braking were the only cause of the pads being almost completely gone? So if the brake override had been defeated intentionally by Mr. Sikes so that he could step hard on the gas pedal and the brake pedals at the same time, then why did the investigators found the brake override working properly during the test drives?
The NHTSA has long been a silent partner in Toyota's cover up of unintended acceleration since Toyota launched its problematic drive by wire system in 2002.
It's obvious that the PR machine that toyota employed has been busily putting out information to help the people understand that there's no such thing as sudden unintended acceleration.
We have all the dirt on Mr. Sikes. I wonder why they dug for dirt on Sikes but didn't go for dirt on the Saylors. Couldn't there be a bad arrest made in the past by Mr. Saylor? Or he used his gun? Or he man-handled a person? I wonder why they haven't put the PR machine grinding out dirt on the California Police Officer?
And we're hearing the fax machine outputs that other companies have had more cases of UIA than toyota. Of course, I've missed those being in the news this last year--I guess there are so many Buicks taking off on their own and not stopping with the brake application that CBS just doesn't bother with stories on them anymore?
Gimme a break.
The first million, isn't that the number for Phoenix, will go into a wave of PR. I wonder how many millions toyota saved by not having to replace the actual parts with the problems in the cars? They can afford lots of PR money.
I think too much attention is being paid to Mr. Sikes and his credibility, or lack thereof. If it turns out he's a fraud it really doesn't help the Toyots cheerleaders much; his incident is just one of many and only reduces the list of reported SUAs by one.
Likewise it does little to increase the numbers even if it's proven correct. One more case doesn't make the anti-Toyota argument much stronger.
Whatever the truth behind the story is, the one thing I'm certain of is that he wishes he'd never driven his Prius that day.
Obviously the brakes were overheated before the CHP officer got there? Yes. Obviously Mr. Sikes intentionally wore down the brake pads to almost nothing before driving on the freeway? No. For the CHP officer to witness the brake lights on the speeding Prius and smelled burning brakes at the same time while the Prius was not decelerating, the only conclusion is that the brake override system failed during the incident. If the override had worked, that driving pattern witnessed by the CHP officer would not have been possible no matter how long the brakes of the Prius had been overheated by intermittent braking as speculated by the Wall Street Journal.
Comments
Thanks for posting the most sensible post so far. As with almost everything in life, the truth most likely lies somewhere in the middle.
Also, Steve, thanks for posting the link to the Prius video, very compelling.
look at how much 1995 civics sell for.
you would not be 'rich' if you bought one and sold it now.
if you bought a 1995 Toyota, you would not be 'rich' due to that decision either.
so what is your definition of 'rich'? :shades:
If I'd of taken the 10K or so I'd of saved from 1994 to 2000, plus about $400 in tow truck fees, and put it in a good stock or mutual fund, it would be quite a bit of money right now. What if I had put it all in Toyota Stock in 1994? haahha.
Andre, I'm sorry to hear of your bad experience with the skittle as well as the CHP - In the "Elias Guide to Civil Violation Roadside Etiquette and Paperwork" the CHP gets a solid 4 out of 5 stars.
No matter how sucky or non sucky the CHP may or may not be, even in their alleged lameness, did they somehow know to avoid buying a single toyota (or skittle) in their entire fleet ?! !?
Apparently this Sikes guy is a major scammer - we should have guessed that when his Blogoyovich-looking rug almost suddenly-accelerated all the way off of his head during the TV interview.
No, it was most definitley an econobox, nobody (except apparently you) ever thought of it as anything but. and if you paid 15 large for a 1995 neon... hmmm....wow...I probly would have kept that to myself
It would be worth about $17k today. Not a very good return on investment. If you had put that same $10,000 in Ford last year it would be worth $88,344. My best call ever.
If you put $10,000 into Toyota the same time it would be worth about $5700. I just don't see TM as a good investment.
Hahaha, now that's called market timing, and no one is really able to do that successfully.
Don't be so sure it was a good call, Ford may yet still fall again. However, they do appear to be righting the ship and all without a bailout.
Every day I think I should sell. Then Toyota does something else stupid and Ford goes up even more. It is in my 401k so the profit does not get taxed till I have to withdraw. If I was able to call them like that every time, I would be on a Yacht and not blogging with you all on Edmund's.
Actually you would be better off with Ford over the same period from 1994, than you would Toyota. Worst thing about Toyota the US stockholders are in the dark.
My next best call was MCD. Talked my then girlfriend into buying at $14. The rest is history and she married me in 2004. McDonald's is now her largest stock holding.
I believe the Fusion Hybrid will continue it's run against the Prius...especially since it looks like the Prius electronics are still an issue. I think the new Taurus will continue to grab Camry sales. Lots of Tundra folks going to the F-150, too.
So, I'm going to hold on for a little while yet as I believe Ford will continue to take market share from Toyota. I think they're poised to do so in every market segment that Toyota plays in, be they hybrids, cars or trucks.
On a separate note, if State Farm says you have a problem, if the NHTSA says you have a problem, if Congress says you have a problem, if thousands of your customers say you have a problem, then Toyota.....YOU HAVE A PROBLEM!
You can tell Toyota has cranked up its PR and damage control machine. That doesn't change the facts, though. Toyota and Lexus have problems, pretty much up and down the model range. Even the hefty discounts won't change that....until Toyota fixes them.
It is disheartening that they've chosen to attack their customers, but that's what they're doing. That never is a good way to make friends and influence perceptions. That will bite them in the posterior at some point.
Based on this information and the fact that investigators with Toyota Motor Corp. and the federal government were unable to make a Prius speed out of control as its owner said it did on a California freeway, a congressional memo questions the credibility of Mr. Sikes' reporting of events. Some Toyota supporters go as far (or as low) as accusing Mr. Sikes of trying to defraud Toyota by staging the run away incident. Mrs. Sikes said he and his wife have received death threats after the incident.
Even though the investigators of Toyota and the NHTSA found that the front brake pads were spent with nothing left and the rear brake pads had only 1/2 mm or about 0.02 inch left due to intense braking and in spite of the fact that the CHP officer saw brake lights on the speeding Prius and smelled the brake burning, that is still not good enough to convince the investigators that it is a case of unintended acceleration caused by malfunction.
If the Prius were not equipped with a brake override system, of course the it would be possible for someone to step on the gas pedal and the brake pedal at the same time to fake a runaway incident.
However, the Prius that Mr. Sikes was driving was equipped with a brake override system. The fact that it was traveling at high speed with the brake lights on without deceleration and producing burning smell of the brakes can only point to the conclusion that the power to accelerate the vehicle had not been cut off even though Mr. Sikes was stepping hard on the brake. In other words, the brake override failed to work. That means there was a malfunction causing the Prius to accelerate even though the brakes were pressed hard. Whether the unintended acceleration was caused by a sticky floored gas pedal with a failed brake override or a computer glitch that caused the unintended acceleration when the gas pedal was not pressed at all is another matter to be investigated. The problem with computer glitches is that they can come and go like nothing wrong ever happened. Anyone who owns a home computer knows exactly what I'm talking about. That's why the brake override worked on the Prius when tested by the investigators does not mean it must be working during the incident earlier.
If the brake override on the Prius had worked during the incident, the only way Mr. Sikes could have caused the front brake pads to burn to nothing and the rear brake pads to paper thin would be to speed up at full throttle to high speed then slam on the brakes, then repeat the process again and again while being observed by a CHP patrol car moving along with it. That's exactly what the Wall Street Journal speculated- that the brakes may have been applied intermittently. However no sudden jerky acceleration and deceleration were observed or reported by the CHP officer trying to help Mr. Sikes to stop the run away Prius. There are no grounds for the Wall Street Journal's absurd speculation at all.
As for the suspicion why Mr. Sikes did not shift the car to neutral as told by the officer over the phone, his explanation was that he had put down the phone to keep both hands on the wheel and was afraid the car would flip if he put it in neutral at such high speed. I find his explanation reasonable and consistent with nurdy drivers who are afraid to shift the gear in anyway while driving at high speed in an automatic. In spite of his not shifting the gear to neutral due to lapse of communication and fear, Mr. Sikes did follow the instruction of the officer from a loudspeaker to use both the foot brake and the emergency brake to slow down the car before turning the engine off at lower speed.
In conclusion, the fact that the Prius is equipped with a brake override system gives greater credibility to Mr. Sikes' account of malfunction of the Prius instead of casting doubts on it. The investigators of Toyota and NHTSA and the congressional memo drafting staffers need to stop distorting the truth and stop putting salt on the wounds of those hapless Toyota customers who survived in run away Toyotas.
That was my impression as well. Much worse than ABC using a clip to show fast RPMS in the Dr Gilbert demo of UA with an Avalon.
stop distorting the truth and stop putting salt on the wounds of those hapless Toyota customers who survived in run away Toyotas.
This is a long time mode of operation for Toyota. Mostly at the dealer level. The Toyota loyal are not helping to improve the product by lining up behind anything Toyota does. There should be outrage that Toyota DBW systems are failing. One failure per million would be too many without a safety device to circumvent an accident. There are enough highway deaths caused by poor drivers. Why add failure prone equipment to the mix? That goes for all auto makers.
I have seen no mention of the condition of the brakes before the incident. How worn were they? Why do you find Sikes' explanation reasonable? How do you know he is a nerdy driver? How did he turn the engine off at a "lower speed" and what was that speed?
On the other hand, if the Prius was equipped with a brake override, and it didn't work. Toyota bears some of the responsibility. But why do you hold Toyota to a standard of 100% perfection and Sikes is allowed to operate a car without knowing that he could simply shift into N and solve his problem.
And if Sikes wanted to create a hoax, could he have defeated the override feature?
I hope we can answer all of the questions raised in this affair; at the very least everyone now knows how to deal with UA. And short of connecting a cable to a red handle on the dashboard and the other end to a quick release battery cable, how can we achieve a 100% shutdown capability?
Regards, DQ
PS Sikes and his lawyer insist they are not going to sue. Why not, if they suffered at the hands of Toyota. Anyway, at the very least I bet he won't have to make up those 5 payments he is behind on the Prius.
I'm just a little bit troubled by those (like you) who are prepared to place all the blame on Toyota and none on Sikes.
From where I sit there are an equal amount that place all the responsibility on the consumer and none on Toyota. I am really curious if Sikes was able to circumvent the supposed fail safe system Toyota claims for the Prius. If he did, how many of the several hundred complainers on JUST the 2008 Prius have done the same. Most of the complaints are the car took off and the brakes did not stop me. By comparison the 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid that is essentially the same design has only one complaint and that the peddle was stuck down and the driver was able to stop.
I think Toyoda knows the problems at Toyota. They tried to get too big too fast and left out a lot of needed testing. Both Toyoda and Lentz said as much.
On this, I think I can agree with you. Not so much on market timing of stock picking (as in, if you had bought Ford stock in say, 2005, where would you be now)?
I still don't understand how all of you are placing so much credibility on Sikes' version of the events when he has almost none. He supposedly was a member of a Corvette club. Do you think a Corvette driver would think his car will "flip" if put into neutral?
More on Sikes' shenanigans can be found here.
About his Prius' brakes specifically, in contrast to nmt's assertions:
The Wall Street Journal reports that “the investigation of the vehicle, carried out jointly by safety officials from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Toyota engineers, didn’t find signs the brakes had been applied at full force at high speeds over a sustained period of time, the three people familiar with the investigation said.
"The brakes were discolored and showed wear, but the pattern of friction suggested the driver had intermittently applied moderate pressure on the brakes, these people said, adding the investigation didn’t find indicators of the heavy pressure described by Mr. Sikes."
Maybe you all think Toyota is still trying to hide something, but wouldn't the NHTSA be honest at this point, given Ray LaHood's recent directives to the agency? Remember the CHP declined to investigate the car.
Can you site specific examples of Toyota choosing "to attack their customers?" I haven't seen any. They didn't say Rhonda Smith was a stupid driver, for example, after her testimony in the congressional hearings..
One Audi executive said something to the effect that "Americans don't know how to drive," or something to that effect during the Audi 5000 sudden acceleration hysteria, and he was promptly sent home to Germany after that gaffe. Where did Mr. Toyoda or Mr. Lentz say something like that? I think all car companies know that you don't speak badly of your customers.
Hanging on to Sikes' version of events in ludicrous, not because of past "misfortunes" as in losing a job or falling behind in home, credit card, and even his Prius lease payments, but because of outright fraud on his part. And this Prius scam is just part and parcel of his M.O.
I understand some of the complaints do not provide a VIN or follow-up telephone # or e-mail contact, so NHTSA or Toyota have no way to validate such complaints.
And I'd hardly characterize the WSJ as prone to printing tabloid articles. For that, I'd go to Murdoch's New York Post.
One last thing, I find it hard to believe that until the Toyota sudden acceleration issue, all previous findings pointed to the driver as the main source of the problem, whereas now, the driver is always blameless.
We of course know of some Toyota vehicular issues, such as the mat interference problem that was the main factor in the Saylor crash and the sticky pedal problem, which to my knowledge, has not resulted in ANY deaths.
The conspiracists among you want to believe though that there's something else at fault here. Well, put your money where your mouth is. But I don't see any likelihood of Edmunds having to hand over its $1 million prize to anyone who finds the "real" problem.
Isn't it obvious he overheated the breaks before the CHP officer got there? The CHP Officer was not observing Sikes since the "beginning" of the incident. The Wall Street Journal is absolutely positively correct.
But I'm an American and I agree with that statement!
I think most Americans do need to go back to driver's training school and improve themselves on the road. Bring that guy back from Germany as an instructor! :P
He's probably comfortably retired by now!
You're right about one thing in your earlier post -- Sikes' Prius wasn't under constant observation by the CHP over the entire duration of the event.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
LOL...I love how your interpretations are always so definitive. No room for the possibility of error, or "This looks to be the case", but "absolutely positively correct".
I wish I could interpret the world around me with such absolute confidence.
It is the way young people are until reality slaps them in the face. He will learn over time if he lives to a ripe old age.
It comes from reviewing the evidence and factual information at hand, and choosing the most likely scenario that fits it. Things are usually as they seem.
It is good to go with one's gut feeling more often then not, especially when one has a good mind to make these determinations.
If you can predict something because it looks like it, and then it happens to be proven because "it" was true, then it seems logical to conclude "it" was right all along. I knew Sikes was a bum before I knew about his financial history and record of insurance fraud. Those things only proved my hypothesis. The Wall Street Journal confirmed my conclusions.
As I said long ago, case closed, *slams gavel*
choosing the most likely scenario . . . Things are usually as they seem.
Yes, usually Toyotas don't accelerate unintentionally. Analysis of a puzzle like this requires the elimination of impossible scenarios, and not making the 'likely' scenario a postulate. For instance, if your television doesn't come on when you push the remote's on button, it's usually a dead battery or something amiss with the remote. But if the tv is unplugged (highly unlikely, but possible), you will fool around with the remote until the end of time and never make the tv work. So it's smart to check the plug first. Understood?
It seems to most of us irrefutable that this is an intermittent problem, because if it weren't, there would be far more incidents, crashes, deaths. Can we agree to state that definition of the problem as a coincidental and rare combination of actions by the driver and the Toyota's computer control system?
If you agree, then it should be clear to you that the driver being a 'bum' has nothing to do with a particular incident. There are hundreds of incidents, and a certain percentage of drivers are bums and/or frauds. Therefore, a certain number of incidents will happen to fraud artists.
By your analysis, if the driver is a fraud artist, the incident must be a fraud. Liars sometimes tell the truth.
I agree with your analysis. Liars and fraudsters sometimes are honest and tell the truth.
But to have this happen within a few miles of the Saylor incident? To refuse to put it into neutral as instructed? To hear ridiculous excuses? To hear a ridiculous story. It was just all too much to ignore.
If this SUA problem is real, then it should happen also to real people that are not "bums."
Ah, a breath of fresh air.
He has no credibility. Reminds of the boy who cried "WOLF" one time too many and nobody would believe him.
You don't have to be a Toyota fanboy or supporter to know a shady character when you read about their background.
It is possible to smoke the brakes by barely applying the pedal if your speed is high enough. The brake light comes on as soon as the pedal is depressed a mere fraction of an inch. Try it. My understanding is that the brake pedal AND the gas pedal have to be floored, but that might not be true.
I wonder how many posters who are out to lynch Toyota even own one. They're starting to sound like nervous-Nelly busybodies.
John
I agree with most of your post but not the question as you phrased it. I'd ask, "Can we state that definition of the problem as a coincidental and rare combination of actions by the driver, floormat interference, stickiness in the gas pedal, possibly the Toyota's computer control system, or some other aspect of the vehicle not yet identified?"
And Edmunds' $1 million is up for grabs for he or she who can successfully identify the computer and/or electronic aspects of the problem. I've already said I think their money is safe.
I could not agree more. A lot of gum flapping and zero proof of anything. I think it is called puffery when someone states their opinion as if it was fact.
Where did all this resentment of Toyoto's success come from? U.A.W. perhaps?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
However, it's reasonable to assume that some small percentage of these incidents can be explained by fat feet, feeble minds, or fraudulent intent. The remaining cases could accounted for by pedals and floormats if it wasn't for the fact that there continue to be reports of SUA in vehicles that have had the fix.
So far nobody, with the possible exception of Toyota knows the cause, and if Toyota do know they aren't saying, and I think it's certain that even they don't know how to fix it.
The thing I find hardest to comprehend is Toyota's response, both to their employees and customers before the story broke in the media, and their disastrous handling of the PR situation afterwards.
1.The ECM indicated that during the incident the brake and the accelerator had been alternately depressed 250 times.
2. Sikes is a disgruntled Toyota owner. (among other things)
3. He caused the brake failure on purpose and faked the whole thing.
Conclusion: Balloon boy redux.
Regards, DQ
.
It certainly doesn't mean it did happen either. With some 300 million people in the U.S. a certain percentage are kooks. A lot more kooks than the number of alleged UAs.
These people just want their 30 seconds of fame. They see ufos, are captured by aliens, used to be George Washington in another life. There will be plenty more who come out of the woodwork. You name it and we've got em.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
It certainly doesn't mean it did happen either.
Exactly, it means nothing except the fellow is found to lack credibility. It proves nothing either way......and I did go on to point out that it's reasonable to expect that some reported incidents will actually be driver error or fraud.
As I mentioned in my previous post "The fact that it was traveling at high speed with the brake lights on without deceleration and producing burning smell of the brakes can only point to the conclusion that the power to accelerate the vehicle had not been cut off even though Mr. Sikes was stepping hard on the brake. In other words, the brake override failed to work. "
However, the investigators of both Toyota and the NHTSA only emphasized the fact that the brake override of that Prius worked during their test drives after the incident but intentionally or ignorantly failed to point out that if the brake override had not failed during the incident, it would not have been possible for Mr. Sikes to drive at high speed steadily with brake lights on and producing burning brake smell that the CHP officer witnessed.
To cause the front brake pads to burn out completely and the rear brake pads to grind down to 0.02 inch thin during the incident if the brake override were functioning normally, a drive would have to press hard on the gas and the brake alternatively for many times and causing the Prius to suddenly accelerate then decelerate repeatedly. But that was not the driving pattern of Mr. Sikes observed by the CHP officer driving along the Prius in an effort to help him stop the vehicle.
The truth is that the Prius has a brake override system gives greater credibility to Mr. Sikes' account of malfunction of the Prius.
The investigators of both Toyota and NHTSA distort that truth by only mentioning the brake override worked during the test drives without pointing out that the brake override had to be malfunctioning during the incident to produce the driving pattern of the Prius observed by the CHP officer. It was not an outright lie but a kind of deceptive distortion of the truth by focusing on one truth that hints Mr. Sikes was lying about the Prius malfunctioned while totally disregard the other truth that indicates Toyota has a faulty product.
You ask "How worn were they"? (referring to the brakes of the Prius before the incident.)
You also ask "And if Sikes wanted to create a hoax, could he have defeated the override feature? "
You are not trying to say that Mr. Sikes has somehow figured out a way to defeat the override feature and then intentionally tortured the brakes of the Prius somewhere else until the front brakes pads were almost completely worn out and the rear brake pads were only slightly thicker than 0.02 inch before driving the Prius with almost no brake pads to speed up on the freeway just to create a hoax, are you? That would have been suicide, not a hoax.
The Toyota lackeys can be more unreasonable than I thought.
If Mr. Sikes had intentionally defeated the brake override before the incident then the investigator should have found out that the override had been defeated instead of working during the test drives.
You ask “How do you know he is a nerdy driver?”
Well. I didn’t say I know he was nerdy. I only say being afraid to shift gear in an automatic while driving at high speed is consistent with a nerdy driver and Mr. Sikes is more likely to be one in my opinion as he owns a Prius which emphasizes on gas economy instead of performance related to speed.
You asked, “How did he turn the engine off at a "lower speed" and what was that speed?”
“Once the car slowed to 50 mph, Sikes shut off the engine”. That was what the CHP officer said. So why don’t you ask Mr. Sikes and the CHP officer about your doubts instead?
So Mr. Sikes is having financial difficulties. Just the right kind of customer that Toyota can frame up to avoid culpability.
Another runaway Prius, Hit a stone wall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J11SC8rr5Gk
Oh, it was driven by a 56 year old woman. Just another right combinations that can easily be used to framed up the driver for mistaking the gas for the brake even though she insisted she had slammed on the brake.
The LA Times reports that “ More than 1,000 Toyota and Lexus owners have reported since 2001 that their vehicles suddenly accelerated on their own, in many cases slamming into trees, parked cars and brick walls, among other obstacles, a Times review of federal records has found.
The crashes resulted in at least 19 deaths and scores of injuries over the last decade, records show. Federal regulators say that is far more than any other automaker has experienced.”
That far more Toyota owners complained about unintended acceleration than any other automakers is a fact that Toyota should not try to explain away with various excuses. No amount of commercial hype can save Toyota now if it continues to blame hapless Toyota owners who experienced sudden unintended acceleration.
If Toyota had a decent EDR, like other auto makers, they may have been able to show that and have this behind them. Problem is they don't have a decent diagnostic package in their DBW systems to analyze these reported events. That means the consumer has the mike and Toyota gets blasted.
Not to worry, I will remind you when it happens.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Meanwhile, with the incentives in place, it's time to place your bets for March sales numbers. Anyone buying? Anyone want to hazard a guess whether Toyota's numbers will be up in a couple of weeks?
"The brakes were discolored and showed wear, but the pattern of friction suggested the driver had intermittently applied moderate pressure on the brakes, these people said, adding the investigation didn’t find indicators of the heavy pressure described by Mr. Sikes."
So why did the CHP officer smelled the brake of the Prius burning when the Prius was not decelerating if no heavy braking was applied?
So why the investigators found the front brake pads completely spent and the rear brake brake pads worn down to about 0.02 inch thin after the incident if the brakes had not been applied in anytime at full force?
So why nobody on the freeway saw the Prius speed up then decelerate suddenly and repeatedly to intentionally wear out the brake pads if intermittent braking were the only cause of the pads being almost completely gone?
So if the brake override had been defeated intentionally by Mr. Sikes so that he could step hard on the gas pedal and the brake pedals at the same time, then why did the investigators found the brake override working properly during the test drives?
The NHTSA has long been a silent partner in Toyota's cover up of unintended acceleration since Toyota launched its problematic drive by wire system in 2002.
Shame on you Toyota! Shame on you NHTSA!
We have all the dirt on Mr. Sikes. I wonder why they dug for dirt on Sikes but didn't go for dirt on the Saylors. Couldn't there be a bad arrest made in the past by Mr. Saylor? Or he used his gun? Or he man-handled a person? I wonder why they haven't put the PR machine grinding out dirt on the California Police Officer?
And we're hearing the fax machine outputs that other companies have had more cases of UIA than toyota. Of course, I've missed those being in the news this last year--I guess there are so many Buicks taking off on their own and not stopping with the brake application that CBS just doesn't bother with stories on them anymore?
Gimme a break.
The first million, isn't that the number for Phoenix, will go into a wave of PR. I wonder how many millions toyota saved by not having to replace the actual parts with the problems in the cars? They can afford lots of PR money.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If it turns out he's a fraud it really doesn't help the Toyots cheerleaders much; his incident is just one of many and only reduces the list of reported SUAs by one.
Likewise it does little to increase the numbers even if it's proven correct. One more case doesn't make the anti-Toyota argument much stronger.
Whatever the truth behind the story is, the one thing I'm certain of is that he wishes he'd never driven his Prius that day.
Obviously Mr. Sikes intentionally wore down the brake pads to almost nothing before driving on the freeway? No.
For the CHP officer to witness the brake lights on the speeding Prius and smelled burning brakes at the same time while the Prius was not decelerating, the only conclusion is that the brake override system failed during the incident. If the override had worked, that driving pattern witnessed by the CHP officer would not have been possible no matter how long the brakes of the Prius had been overheated by intermittent braking as speculated by the Wall Street Journal.