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
According to one of the posters over in the SUA discussion, Saylor had the exact same on/off ignition button.
Return the car and pay a penalty?
What a strange policy!
I suspect the planes were much harder to fly 40 years ago then nowadays. The same may be the truth about cars.
Krzys
Somehow I doubt it.
I recently was able to see a restored DC3 that American Airlines supports. It is in the same condition now as the day it was delivered to the airline in the 1930's.
There is no comparason between its cockpit and controls as what one finds in a Boeing 737 or any other airliner.
Of course, both modern planes and cars have much more mechanical assisting functions (ie., power steering), but I sincerely doubt the original pilot of that American Airlines DC3 would have any idea how to get a 737 to taxi, much less fly.
Throw away the nostalgia and the same can probably be said for cars.
PS - one of the reasons the propliner cockpit is simpler is because there was little redundancy back then. If you look at a Connie or DC-6 there will be a bit more complexity than the WW War II vintage DC-3 you saw. Today's glass cockpits are a lot easier than say a B-707 or DC-8, the latter will really give a non pilot an eyeful!
Evidence is mounting that finally more Americans are " getting it ", and they are gradually shedding their addiction to toyotas. As proven by toyota's may sales increasing the least compared to American cars and other more trustworthy Asian brands.
They realize that their lives are INFINITELY more important than contributing to toyota's bottom line. They realize that its better to buy a dog and enjoy the safety and companionship of the dog than a king cobra who only god knows when it will bite its owner.
Once again, why buy a king cobra when you can buy a dog ? And king cobras are better than toyotas because they never lie. cobras make it known to everyone that they are dangerous and better avoided. toyota people are liars and their cars are completely unpredictable now. You never know when its YOUR TURN to get bitten.
Maybe toyotas in the past are dogs, but thanks to katsuaki watanabe, hiroshi okuda and the other toyota financial pirates, as described by former toyota top US exec Jim Press, today toyotas have turned from dogs to cobras.
To make matters worse, even if toyota in the end do change, millions of toyota cobras are already on the road, threatening to bite their owners anytime. If I am a toyota owner today, I will immediately SELL OUT and buy a dog.
Better be SAFE than SORRY. Obviously people who still buy toyotas today or still sticking with their toyotas, are never taught this motto by their parents !
However, one of these older pilots could never hope too successfully fly a modern airliner without substantial exposure to the newer technologies in the cockpit. It would simply overwhelm them.
Obviously, the FAA agrees as pilots are required to be checked out and qualified on each version of aircraft they fly.
As some of the high-line auto models are getting increasingly and consistantly more complex with all the technologies in their "cockpits", I sometimes wonder if we are heading towards a similar scenario at some point (requiring the purchaser to spend some amount of time learning how to use the features in his new vehicle).
As for the American Airlines DC3 I saw earlier this year, it was an absolutely beautiful plane. It looked 100% new. And, it appeared to have much more "leg room" than modern planes we fly today. Different times back then, when flying a plane was nothing like riding on a bus....
Isn't that your friend's fault for not reading and/or understanding the lease contract he signed? No one at Toyota put a gun to his head to sign for that Prius under the terms and conditions of the contract. Everytime I go to buy a car and get a loan with it, they want me to promise to get insurance with $500 deductibles maximum. Everytime they do that, I tell them to cross out $500 and put $1000 into the allowable deductibles. Contracts are negotiable.
Paranoid much? I feel safe driving in and around behind or in front of Toyotas all over Southern California.
When the government sells the shares of GM ownership that is when taxpayers will realize the 100% loss on our money we've been saying will happen all along. Sure it can be sold, but for pennies on the dollar at best. GM is worthless.
Possibly so. He had no idea he would be offered the pastorate in Hawaii. They could not find anything in the lease that forbid moving. It was not until they gave them a change of address that they found out that they could not take the Prius over with them. Toyota considered it the same as taking the car out of the USA.
So you could say it was their fault for leasing as that is the biggest rip-off. and you could say it was their fault for buying a Toyota. Sadly I had recommended the Prius when they wanted a high mileage car. Never again will I recommend a Toyota.
If they had read the manual they'd of both known how to turn off the car with the push button start. Prudent safe drivers they were not.
Companies will try to run over you (not just Toyota) if you let them get away with it. American Airlines tried to tell me I couldn't take a cardboard box (check-in baggage mind you) on the flight with them. They said they had a new rule for no overweight boxes - a rule that was made effective after the date the tickets were purchased. So I told them the rule didn't apply since the tickets were purchased before said rule, and 2, the box wasn't overweight (under 50 lbs.) After further review and wasted time they came to their senses. They did the same thing to my brother but he was at another city/airport, and he didn't fight them, and so they got away with "running him over."
Toyota needs to get back to basics. They have screwed up with overly complex cars to where people cannot shift into neutral or shut them off intuitively.
You are so young and inexperienced. Try it sometime if you don't care about your credit report. They could care less if they have to put a late payment on your record. They will get all the penalty charges which can be more than the interest. So go for it. I have also run into stupid rules and fought over them. You win some and lose some.
Quite frankly paying on time for a car is foolish unless it is 0% interest.
Don't forget driver error getting blame. Saylor was incompetent in not trying to put it into neutral, and if I was on the jury, I'd assign 98% of the blame to driver error.
They won't get penalty charges. What is in "writing" will always win over. If they don't have it in writing that you can't go to Hawaii, then they will lose, it's as simple as that. They can say or do whatever they want, but you have a right to enforce the contract. Hawaii is a part of the USA. There either is language saying you have to be in the lower 48 or there is not.
Credit report information is challengeable.
Toyota isn't the only one using push button starts, so you need to spread out your criticisms more evenly across the board in order to be viewed as unbiased and impartial.
I haven't read the manuals in rental/loaner cars either (though I have skimmed through them in any car I've bought). However, if something happened that could have been prevented had I read the Owner's manual, I'd of had to blame myself and not the manufacturer.
It's like with my Beltronics radar detector, one time it went off but I didn't react quickly and I got a speeding ticket anyway. I looked at the manual and realized the default factory settings keep the "POP" radar detection turned off. Stupid that it defaults in the off position from the factory? Yes!!! But the manual clearly states that you have to turn ON the POP mode detection in order for the radar detector to warn you of that type of radar gun mode being used. I believe if I had read the manual I'd of maybe not had to fight that ticket (which I won in court anyway). But I wouldn't have had to waste my time if Beltronics didn't have a dumb default setting. Do I blame them? Of course not!!! I should have read the manual. I kicked myself for that one.
I have it on now, and best of all, I know how to turn it on/off.
Figured everyone moved to laser.
Radar in southern CA is a bonanza of revenue generation scams. In fact, I never got a radar ticket in Northern CA and I lived up their nearly 20 years. I moved to San Diego and started getting busted by radar like annually; that is, until I invested in a good radar detector. Now I'm limited to basically just being caught and paced from behind when I'm not paying attention, or if it's 7 in the morning on my way to work and I"m not fully awake and react like a turtle to my detector warning me. I looked first for a cop, rather than BRAKE first, which is what your supposed to do in that situation. Not only that, but it was at a known hot spot for the Santee Sheriffs to waste people's time with silly tickets/citations. Speed survey shows the speed limit is below the 85th percentile (CA law says speed trap is illegal and this qualifies; sheriff didn't bother to show up to court and be embarrassed).
Oh yeah, Nevada CHP uses radar too! They also have some insanely low speed limits that might apply in the winter when there's snow on the road but don't make any sense in the summer when they are out in force issuing revenue generating citations.
Once new models come out with new safety features, etc, then other people might go back to Toyota and give them a chance!
That is another reason why the 8th Gen Camry is going to be so absolutely important for Toyota next year; that thing has to be completely right with absolutely no hiccups, etc!
And normal cars don't refuse to shift to neutral under load and full engine runaway.
>don't jam the gas pedal down.
And most people would try pulling the mat if they felt the accelerator stuck to the floor with their right foot. Since some of these drivers appeared to have time to check, I am led to the assumption that the car was accelerating on its own without the pedal's being down on the floor, held by mat or by sticking.
It just doesn't make sense.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Ditto....
Even when the evidence is overwhelming ( as in the Saylors case), there will always be those who refuse to believe...for whatever reason.
Therefore, I see radar detectors as an effective safety enhancing device since they increase my sensory knowledge as a driver while driving (sort of a 6th sense).
2nd, I don't see speed limits as the "rules" or the "laws" since they are implemented way too low to serve revenue scams and schemes to generate said revenue from the motoring public (unwritten taxes really). The traffic laws should exist to enhance and enforce safety, not revenue generation. ALL Engineers agree speed limits should be set to the 85th percentile standard everywhere, and currently we do not follow this, especially in CA. I frankly don't even think speed limits are necessary at all (see Autobahn and former Montana State).
3rd, I find that most highway patrolmen and police officers on traffic duty are either incompetent, tremendously lazy, and/or both. They also make mistakes (they are human). Therefore, one doesn't have to be speeding to receive a speeding ticket. One can also be found guilty in court despite being innocent because traffic court judges (usually not even real judges) forget that you are innocent until proven guilty and assume you are guilty until proven innocent in traffic court. I think we need to bring back jury trials for infractions to make this fair and just again.
Therefore, I find that a radar detector will help me to avoid a situation where the court's and my time will be wasted by an officer hiding behind a planter with his radar gun. Also, it'll help me to avoid being mistaken for a "speeder" when I'm not the speeder as I can avoid being in the "fast lane" and go EVEN slower than the speed limit so as to avoid any confusion or margin of error the officer might have to determine my speed. Their powers of observation really are not that good.
Case in point, coming back from Pahrump Nevada to Sunny San Diego, in Nevada my wife was driving the NV portion of highway home, and we saw a NV Highway Patrol vehicle from about 2 miles away (very distant) pulling from a dirt road towards the main highway which was probably a quarter mile away from the officer almost perfectly perpendicularly to our path of travel. He turned right onto our highway and we were then facing each other head on from about a mile away. As he got closer we had already long since slowed down to a very slow 65 since we spotted him so soon on this stretch of highway (I think the speed limit may have been 70 but was at least 65).
Anyway, officer's will often testify that they can estimate a vehicles speed moving head-on at over a 1,000 feet away. This is complete non-sense and FOOEY as NO ONE can accurately estimate a vehicle's speed from further than 1,000 feet away, especially going head on, yet officer's will often perjure themselves in court and say they estimated your speed, then took a radar reading, which confirmed the estimate. This is the lawful way to do it.
In reality they set their radar units to beep when they catch someone going over a certain preset speed. The officer will then take his eyes off the newspaper or GameBoy or Donut and look at who's coming and go after them. This is the truth of what happens, but inconveniently this won't hold up in court so officer's routinely fib in court.
This theory was proven by the Nevada Patrolman, because at about 1,250 feet or so the radar detector went BOOM from his POP radar burst and he had obviously taken a reading of our speed deliberately and suddenly (as if we hadn't yet recognized he was a police cruiser; which if we weren't fully alert, we might not have). But he did this despite the fact we were going about 64 MPH by this time, and the speed limit was over that. So I ask this, if they can estimate our speed accurately at over 1,000 and they are supposed to do so (as standard procedure) PRIOR to using their radar units as a matter of law, then why did he bother radar bursting us with radar to read our speed? He should have obviously known we weren't speeding from a visual estimate. The answer is they can't estimate our speed and have no clue as to how fast you are going at that distance w/o the use of their radar units. I wish I had that phony Ventura County judge in the car with me when that happened to question him (he's one who found me guilty). He blindly accepted the officer's testimony as an "expert" at speed estimation and accepted radars as "god-like" in their accuracy when they are far from it. RADAR is ancient technology really, and not a very good technology at that. It is terribly inaccurate at times, and prone to errors and interference. It really isn't well suited to traffic enforcement at all.
thanks for the laugh, it's been a while since you posted one of those funny monologues.
A 3 second shut down at a 120 MPH is an eternity. The place the Saylors currently reside.
thanks for the laugh, it's been a while since you posted one of those funny monologues.
I don't think I'm full of crap as my driving record speaks for itself. I've been driving for 16 years now with no at fault accidents involving another vehicle. I have one at-fault accident in which I wrecked my own vehicle but I was a "rookie" at the time and I believe I was under 20, and therefore, more than a decade ago.
I wish all the other drivers would "do as I do" and not have or create any accidents in their lifetimes involving another vehicle (and inconveniencing someone else). Not to mention the traffic jam and wastage of gas and time it causes. I admit when I teach new drivers "how to drive" I do mention a... do as I say, not as I do line. That is because you need like 10 years of experience to be a truly expert driver.
The scoreboard with officer's speaks for itself. I've fought ever ticket I've received after bowing out to my first one and pleading guilty when I wasn't. I have about a 55% win percentage since then.
Accidents I've caused involving anyone elses property = 0
Accidents Police Officers have caused involving me = 1 (cop rear ended me driving his Harley bike).
I'll wager any amount of money in the world that score will never go in the cops' favor (regarding accidents). I'm no longer 20 years old, I don't say this while being naieve. I'm now VERY time tested and real world APPROVED.
Yes, the system deliberately makes it a hassle to fight your unjust tickets and they get their "pound of flesh" even if you end up winning. You have to appear twice in court for hours each time to win a trial. That's a minimum of 2 appearances for at LEAST 2 hours each. Not only is this an incentive to not fight, but they basically bribe people nowadays to just plead guilty and save their own time and money (with reduced fine bribery, but only if you plead guilty at arraignment). Photo cameras are blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL yet local courts and govt's think it's OK to do it until someone rich takes it to an APPEALS court which is the first level you get COMPETENT honest judges (sometimes). Then the city will complain and reappeal on the grounds of "but we will have already wasted all this money and effort on these camaras and your outlawing them???"
Judges are definitely condescending and arrogant, especially to defendants pro se.
In traffic court the cop need not worry about acting too knowledgeable, because in some CA courts the judge appoints himself and the cop to the post of District Attorney and Prosecutor, complete with letting the WITNESS (the officer) get the closing argument and last statement in court. BALONEY!
In CA apparently we traded the right to public counsel and jury trial for the right to NOT have to face a real prosecutor/DA. Frankly, I'd rather face a DA then a judge who acts like he's one.
I'm sure the guy resting in eternity that called 911 is thinking that in the time it took him to pick up the cell phone, push "phone" and then push 9-1-1 and then put it up to his ear to hear the first ring took the same amount of seconds, three.
I can't say how widespread that practice is, but I do suspect certain municipalities use traffic fines as a source of revenue. Why else would you see city police cars monitoring traffic on Interstate highways?
That's not unusual here in SC. And, there is talk of installing cameras on I-95 for speed control in the lower part of the state. When I was a kid (living in GA), there was a saying that I heard more than one cop use... "A Yankee is a lot like a bale of cotton....Worth just as much, but a whole lot easier to pick".
Think red-light cameras. Read up on the history and implementation of that bit of technology.
Try it at home later. Cover yr gas pedal with yr floor mat and see if the gas pedal even moves one tiny bit !!
My 4 year old kid can even easily haul those things !!
They AIN'T HEAVY, Its just another stupid toyota lie !!
The Nissan GTR is faster and more powerful than the lf-a, and the Nissan uses a smaller engine, yet still more powerful than the toyota (talk about Nissan vs toyota expertise !) Thus the GTR is also more fuel efficient.
Can someone give me a reason why some people STILL sticks with toyota even though its been clearly proven that :
1. toyota is NOT even the car maker with the best quality. They have many many problems as evidenced recently.
2. They can't be trusted
3. They put money ahead of people's lives
Unless they are the only car maker around. Hey, we have many others BETTER than toyota and more trustworthy. You want American but don't like GM ? Don't like Chrysler ? Then go for FORD ! If you want Asian, or Japanese, go for Nissan, go for Honda, go for Hyundai !
Maybe Warren Buffett was right when he quoted a phrase from a song when he commented why some people fall in love with their stocks even though the company proved to be a loser " My wife ran away with my best friend and I STILL MISS HIM A LOT ! "
Same with the toyota loyalists. toyota has proven to be a jerk, and yet some of their consumers INSIST ON FALLING IN LOVE AND REFUSING to leave this damned car maker.
The song phrase should be re-written as " My toyota RAN AWAY KILLING MY SON and I STILL MISS that toyota.... ".....
That's good. I skip most of those posts, but I got the gist. There's a lot of that going around.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
1. toyota is NOT even the car maker with the best quality. They have many many problems as evidenced recently.
2. They can't be trusted
3. They put money ahead of people's lives
The same things could be said of Nissan and your precious GTR.
1. Nissan is not a quality automaker as the GTR's transmission routinely dies while under warranty.
2. Nissan can't be trusted as they routinely deny warranty coverage for the transmission (as posted by many on forums).
3. They put money ahead of common decency and honor.
Other makers have push-button starts. It's a change which will become more permanently entrenched. Don't fight it.
Everyone who owns ANY CAR needs to know how to put it into neutral. Can't blame Toyota for that.
You've expressed this sentiment before, and I told you then and again now: Progress will go on, cars will get more complex. It's both unavoidable and GOOD.