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
WE DON"T WANT UNIONS PERIOD!
Let's see, what did I miss?
Escape is selling well. Boggles my mind. The basic design dates back to 2000, I think it's all the $13,999 specials and fleet sales that boosts those numbers. Still, wow. Must cost them nothing to build, ka-ching, profit.
Toyota's 2nd quarter was better then their first, but the bigger news is that the whole industry has cooled off. Anyone else see a double-dip recession looming large? We should remember that up 17% from incredibly bad is merely very bad.
F-series debate, I may leave that alone, except to note GM sells more pickups if you combine Chevy and GMC, so it's sort of silly to argue the point.
Hello from sunny Brazil where Ford sells the Ka, Fiesta, EcoSport, and the newer Focus, and Chevy sells a Celta, Corsa, and a Corsa pickup (ute)!
NHTSA admits that is has yet to find any sign of a problem with Toyota’s electronic throttle control system, the main system targeted by Sean Kane, and congressional hearings.
These below linked articles do reveal from multiple sources Gilbert and University of Illinois Auto Technology Department were indeed strong armed by Toyota as I had previously reported in past. Over the wekend AP wrote article after receiving documents requested unde the freedom of public information act. Not much was picked up by media outlets as majority of publicity re: Toyota's problems are presently old news and public is becoming complacent now. Washington expert researchers were quite impressed with Gilberts research. University of Illinois shut down Gilbert's research due to pressure from Toyota. Toyota indirect representative actually attempted/recommended Gilbert be fired.
Note article that reveals Washington hired University of Maryland auto researcher had duplicated Gilbert's findings. Most of Washington independent hired auto expert researchers were impressed with Gilbert's study based findings. And as we all know Gilbert always presented findings as only the beginning, but did indicate some problems existed with Toyota's fail safe system. Gilbert never said or
presented his research as a final report. Gilbert was only hired
by Safety Research and Stratgies when Toyota and our national safety agency did not want to pursue information with him.. This has been publicly known since beginning. Who do you believe?? - Exponent that was paid millions by Toyota or Gilbert who got only $4000 worth of equipment which was in written contract donated to University, and small $150/hour. Gilbert made no real big money for his research. Gilbert's research study was also approved by University.
Recent reports released by Washington also reveal these expert engineers also discovered same problems with Toyota's failsafe system too. But could only replicate in one area to date so far. But Toyota fail safe system was found to have flaw/s. Will we get the truth finally - I don't know. Seems pressure to conceal is rampantly present. And can see why since law suits are pending.
Interesting to now hear Washington hired present rsearchers investigating SUA had also discovered Toyota secretly had a claimed to be already installed break override system on older Toyota models. Researchers claim system was not part of the fail safe system. New letter was just recently sent to Toyota regarding this little secret. Seems purportedly Toyota did not tell govenment of these brake overrride systems already on older vehicles. And is interesting as Toyota has/had said these older models could not accept brake over ride systems. Washington hired experts know this is/was not true statement and have in black and white reported such. Older models could have brake overirde installed. I have not seen the actual document though as it was reported. Toyota saying systems can not accept is susposedly false. Is not publicly seen on House Commerce website. Cannot verify any actual validity to this date though. But you can access and find all the Toyota hearings on website. Click on the hearings and then oversight tabs.
Also note Exponent appears to be in trouble for their possible/probable Toyota biased based documents provided to Washington. This does not surprise me. As I have reported in past I already was aware of Exponent from their past involvement with PGE and human toxic chromium pollution here in California during 1980's. And found to be true actual false research published in medical journal and mispresentation of PGE biased expert witnesses.
Also familiar with their other untrue/biased medical research published involving different medical specialties in medical research. And is from my medical professional work during research discussion meetings with UCSF and Kaiser medical research experts. We had a meeting discussion on Exponent and that was how I became aware of this frim and who they are and what they do.
Washington has already proven that the hyped media presentation released by Toyota to discredit Gilbert was really an engineer fixed presentation and did not present Gilberts findings really factually correct. But was not illegal in the way it was presented.
This is not just Toyota who commits these types of actions. Other
auto manufacturers have done the same when they were under investigation. We just need to continue to investigate, research the information to get to the real truth. And we must all realize there was many firms out there who can get hired by government/other enities that are basically hired to write documents that support a corporation/
political party's/entity's position. Good honorable medical research fights this paid for hire prostitution of fixed mainly biased based work endlessly. And these dishonest firms are quite good covering up the dishonest paper trail too. Same occurs in all areas. Good unbiased
truth can/may be difficult to get at many times. The present Diabetes drug Avandia investigation could be a good example of this, and may lead to finding that reveals just another drug left on market with biased based medical research for sole purpose of increased corporate drug revenue. All despite the purported/claimed possible further heart damage that can occur by taking this drug. Drug corporation may have attempted to cover up the cardiac effects of taking this rx with a baised research study. Actos which was in same drug family was taken off maket because of same side effect several years ago. Verdict is still out on Avandia.
In the auto industry we all have personal preferences, But I do think we all want and are entitled to the true facts. Toyota will make it through all of the bad publicity, but am hoping Toyota will learn and
hopefully change some of their business practice approaches
as a result.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5its6WBCViCPXVGG4OKwO8JtRgUkAD9- GSAEL00
http://www.safetyresearch.net/2010/07/12/every-time-we-learn-something-else-it-g- ets-worse-for-toyota/
http://www.safetyresearch.net/2010/07/02/toyota-washington-watch/
http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100629/Lentz.Toyota.2010.6.29.pdf
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-29/toyota-must-provide-data-on-older-model- s-brake-system-u-s-lawmakers-say.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704103904575337191890926482.html?m- od=googlenews_wsj
That fits right in with the slowdown in reported, media broadcast incidents at the same time Toyota was rapidly "installing" the new pedals. At that time I felt there was another, known reason for the UIA that toyota knew about and was fixing as they did the pedals. Now that is supported as an anecdotal observation when the old cars that toyota had said couldn't be retrofitted actually could be and may have been fitted with brake overrides. Amazing how the brake overrides would reduce the number of reported incidents.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
So far I have found no records of actual testimonies or reports online at these two meeting - first was June 30, 2010. Appears you may be able to request information under the freedom of public records act though. Darn - had hoped all would be online
This is the meeting that Strickland made his comments that the one article posted about his comments. Safety Research & Strategies stated he had made comments as well.
Government links of investigation project
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/meetingview.aspx?MeetingID=4462&MeetingNo=1-
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/projectview.aspx?key=49236
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/CommitteeView.aspx?key=49236
I have never encountered anyone who has had one of these runaway problems and I certainly haven't either. So who are these people anyway?
Anyway good to see real facts beginning to come to light thanks to the scientists and engineers appointed to investigate this mess. Rather than having to read all the hateful posts from those with no more information than their keyboards at least now real data and info are coming to light. This needs to be given wider viewership now that the WSJ has put it in print.
Errrr, I doubt you have any expertise in analyzing data from afar beyond the most posters whom you describe as having no more information than their keyboards.
>Real data and info are coming to light.
Is it all there? Did you read sharonkl's post about a short comment being meant to be picked up as a final answer when it's not?
A further shortcoming is that the electronic record is based on what the computer thinks it's reading. If it's misreading the throttle and brake pedal, then it will misreport those setting. How does the PCU brain record those? I thought the toyota had very little time recording before the crashes?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
4 out of 5 UA incidents involve Toyota products and there is something wrong there. Not with that data. With the Toyota automotive machine. In it's entirety, which involves it's hush-hush culture regarding car safety engineering issues.
The truth is out there. Mulder? This isn't over. You're off the case, Bond.
"Why? I'm on ta something special and I should keep working on it."
M replies, "I can't trust you anymore."
That is not to say that indeed a chunk of these are crappy drivers hitting the accelerator pedal with their foot of choice instead of the brake pedal and not being able to pull the vehicle back in to control after this happens. This goes for any make of car a crappy driver drives.
Need more info.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
There's nothing more that needs to be said. You be happy in your vehicles and I'll be happy in mine. Life is Good.
I think this whole affair reveals once again that the media has ill served the public. The ferocity with which they pursued the story scared Toyota owners to the extent that some actually parked their vehicles as a result. In the same vein, the daily focus on pictures of the escaping oil in the Gulf has devastated the Florida resort business even though only three beaches in the entire state have seen any oil.
Fora like this one are a great way to create some balance in the news world. Its taken 20 years and counting to resolve the Audi case, but the dust has pretty much settled and Audi has survived. Toyota will too.
I also own two Toyota vehicles. The 1990 model has no surging problems. The 2007 does surge forward while sitting at idle. I have mentioned this before and the Toyota defenders claim it is necessary for the engine idle to jump when the AC comes on. I accepted that sort of lame explanation. I also keep my foot firmly planted on the brake while at stop lights. I did not think much more about it until spending most of my driving time in my new to me, 2008 Nissan Frontier PU truck. It never surges while sitting at a light. I don't hear the engine rev higher when the AC is turned on. I have to believe Nissan has a better design than Toyota. I have hardly driven the Sequoia or LS400 since buying that PU truck. It handles great, stops better and has the acceleration I like, when I put my foot on the accelerator pedal. Toyota needs to spend more on engineering and less on advertising.
I am also waiting to hear from some legitimate sources on the SUA testing. Thanks Sharon for your efforts in digging out the truth.
Quite the contrary, it never happened. More Prius, Camry, and Corollas on the road here than anywhere else.
The final 'nail in the coffin' so to speak which for me confirms that most of the claims were bogus is that they've suddenly stopped - cold. Right after the NHTSA and Toyota said that they were going to investigate every one reported they stopped. Right after Sikes and that situation in Harrison NY were investigated the claims stopped. Suddenly the vehicles cured themselves.
Anyway as a long time and current owner I'm satisfied that my own experiences are being validated by the engineers and scientists given the job of investigating the issue. Life is Good.
Don't forget NHTSA legal counsel has interpreted law to protect auto manufacturers by not releasing some damaging information that could hurt a manufacturers business revenue or reputation. This law and intepretation can be found/seen on NHTSA online website. A manufacturer can make requests to keep information confidential, and confidentiality requests have been granted numerous times by NHTSA. Just a good and bad little legal tidbit. Many examples were brought forward during the hearings and news reporters investigations. Also some complaint problems are never released for public to see because of this interpetation of the law. I think I actually posted all this online information from the NHTSA site for everyone to review awhile back.
Now you also throw in politics, lobbyists. Lots of examples have presented themselves during this investigation.
The NASA investigation is the one through the Academies of Science and I just posted their online site links yesterday. You can also see who the appointed expert members are. Site does acknowledge some members have a conflict of interest, but were allowed to be appointed anyway. How much I don't know. Guess this will be for everyone of us to decide, research, etc. I have not done any investigation regarding these members. Saw some members are retired. And no online meeting information is accessible that I have found/seen.
The big question I have is information regarding the integrity and accuracy of Toyota's EDR. What does Toyota EDR test. What is the error/accuracy ratio?? Presenting apparent programming fault problems of EDR information?? As we all know all products have positives and negatives. Presently NHTSA has not tested these EDRs each manufacturers may have. No official standards exist at present. Auto manufacturers are soley in charge of the capabilities of these EDRs and how they are programmed. Where are the standards and testing???
Toyota has total control of their computer EDR information, and can change programming frequently as they feel necessary. And can change back easily as well. Some other manufacturers use Bose(may be misspelled). I would think Bose has control of EDR computer programming. But am not sure what actual contract argeements are between auto manufacturers and EDR manufacturers regarding the altering/switching of the EDR programs as they desire. Legally no laws exist at present regarding this.
So as I see it NHTSA is at the mercy of Toyota. Is anything going on here??? I have no idea. Can programming be altered easily??? I have talked with my son that professionally does auto engineering and programming - yes can be done easily by experts. We all know it is controlled by a computer program. Each EDR accesses Toyota's self controlled EDR data base for a readout. Individuals trained and performing the EDR readout tests would have no idea when/if program is altered. And yes, can be altered easily, and then reverted back as desired. Switching between programs is readily available and well known as an easy programming feature. My son's business sells program switchers to customers.
And at hearing I think Toyota said their EDR is only a prototype. Toyota had claimed they are not sure of the accuracy of their EDR. Toyota has in past made this claim in court also. But have noticed Toyota seems to change positions in court as court case circumstances determine. Some they said not accurate, some Toyota stand totally behind EDR. And Toyota does win these cases alot, despite conflicting EDR stances. Cases are only good if attorney is quite thorough and good, and has excellent presented document proof for case.
Toyota seemed to jump into yesterdays news too, declared EDR revealed driver error. Toyota claims SUA is not caused by their autos electronics. Yesterday NHTSA would not comment when asked by reporters per news reports. Toyota claims are still misleading and premature as statements only involve those recent investigated crashed autos. All is good news for Toyota with these recent tests, but government online sites do verify verdict is still out. Everyone here can access the government sites to verify this information.
Guess we still wait to evaluate the validity of the final causes of SUA and if computer electronics are possible cause . Saw the study was started this last spring and would last approximately 15 months.
And now I must state I presently have electrical computer programming problem with my RAV. Likes to turn lights on automaticlly without me touching/turning one front light on, or auto switches from front lights when door opens to only back seat lights. Have had to have AAA out three times recently for dead battery. I inadvertantly forgot to check to make sure inside lights off after click twice to lock door. Many times I have found one of front inside front lights are on when I never touched/turned any of the front interior lights on. Finally after last AAA service call just totally turned lights inside off to prevent. And have to manually turn back on. Since this is intermittant issue, not getting anywhere with dealer. Dealer did see when lights auto switched from front to back and did reprogramming though. Funny as I just visited friends in Lake County - they have a RAV too. Problems exist with theirs too. Dealer susposedly fixed, but now light on right side is intermittantly on/off again. Presently they have no problem with various lights coming on automatically though. Bottom line is I now have first had experience with an electrical computer glitch problem. And can happen with any make of auto if program faulty.
You had mentioned your Toyota autos have engine idle surges. . My RAV does too. Also had increase in number of engine surges following one tuneup. Took back in to dealer, and was resolved. How? Dealer agent was vague and gave no real technical answer. The dealer did tell me it was due to having air conditioning on. Not so, as happen anytime with or without air conditioner on. My neighbor has witnessed this, and is as perlexed as I am. Seems possible engine computer program problem quite aparent here
All and all RAV4 has done ok for me. Some problems do exist though. It does fit my desired and necessary needs for good gas mileage and needed cargo space to carry my two large wire dog kennels. Cargo space is actually larger than the Highlander. My tape measure revealed the truth when measuring actual floor space for no design interferences that may not accomodate both kennels. Of all the SUV's on Edmunds site at the time, found myself limited to just four vehicles. Gas mileage was very important factor.
First, there are too many variables at hand here. This is not a controlled experiment. As sharonkl points out Toyota is in charge of the meager data stored by their data recorder. And the data recorder's knowledge of the brake application is curious to me. Is it based on the brake light sensor? Is it based on a pressure switch in the brake lines? Second another variable is that toyota has had many of the cars in for throttle pedal and switch replacements. Was programming updating done on the computer controls at the same time?
>The final 'nail in the coffin' so to speak which for me confirms that most of the claims were bogus is that they've suddenly stopped -
That they've stopped being reported and spread by the media may be a result of many factors. Does that mean they aren't occurring? Or is it that the media is reluctant to propagate the knowledge. It's sort of like when the White House calls in reporters and tells them to stop reporting something that's detrimental or they'll lose their favored status for other information to be given to them: we stop hearing about that particular aspect of the news.
In other words, I'm not convinced that changes weren't made to computers while in the shop for the new accelerator pedals. I'm not convinced the events have stopped happening. I'm not convinced that NHSTA has certainty that the brakes weren't applied--rather than the computer has no record, just as the computer had no record early on of full throttle being applied. And it's odd that so much info is available from the data recorder because early on the statement was that toyota's storage for parameters was very low compared to GM's in terms of time. And how does the computer "sense" that the brakes are applied? Is it relying on a electrical function that fails during the unexplained acceleration event?
There's that story about how there was only one unit in the US to read the data recorders! That was after the ES350 crash killing the 4 people.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Extremely unlikely. Far too many techs would be involved in reflashing the chipsets for NO ONE to not report that, or EVERYONE to miss out on reporting that event.
I'm not convinced the events have stopped happening.
Nor am I, but there's little question that the reports have dropped by several orders or magnitude.
I'm not convinced that NHSTA has certainty that the brakes weren't applied--rather than the computer has no record, just as the computer had no record early on of full throttle being applied.
Obviously, there is a lot we don't know about the several investigations being done or already completed. However, until I personally see something that demonstrates the tests were "rigged" or performed by incompetents or based upon faulty assumptions, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
once the vehicle is plugged into the diagnostic computer, anything can happen.
Dr. Todd Hubing, a Clemson University professor of vehicle electronics, presented findings to the National Academy of Sciences panel charged by NHTSA with examining unintended acceleration. Hubing was able to replicate Dr. David Gilbert’s work and obtain wide-open throttle without the fault detection system setting an error code – but with only a single fault. Gilbert’s analyses found that first a loss of signal redundancy at the accelerator pedal sensor was needed followed by a voltage spike to create an unintended wide-open throttle. Hubing found that many of the faults created invalid signals that sometimes would be detected, other times not.
Interesting in that it substantiates what many who have experienced the SUA in their Toyotas were saying. Especially with Toyota dealer techs saying no error codes were detected.
Too many people would have to be involved and all remain absolutely silent.
Virtually impossible for that to happen.
But, believe what you wish. Sometimes the lure and appeal of the story is just too much for some to disbelieve, even when the facts say otherwise. Vaccinations and autism controversy is another great example.
And, I'll say is again. I do believe in the possibility of vehicle UA. But, I base my judgments in science and repeated testing.... not on ideas found in a suspense thriller novel.
What will come of these now documented second findings is good question. Don't forget a legal interpretation of NHTSA oversight disclosure law states some finding/problems/ etc. can be considered confidential if information can hurt a manufacturers reputation and business. NHTSA has withheld lots of dangerous safety information in past from public.
And an auto manufacturer saying no problem recorded is a typical easy and well used answer by auto manufacturers service centers. But problems could still exist, and enough times they do still exist. Service tech is just saying what he sees on the computer.
The real problem with Dr. Gilbert's test was that ...so far, no one has been able to demonstrate how the conditions he created in his test environment could be replicated in a real-world environment. Maybe this fellow is the guy, but I'm not familiar with his testing....so I can' say one way or the other.
In the AUDI "event" over 20 years ago, 60 Minutes did something similar, by modifying the transmission to cause a 'UA" event. And, just like Dr. Gilbert's work, they weren't able to demonstrate how the modifications they made would be applicable and obtainable in a real-world environment.
In the end, someone might be able to demonstrate how it could happen. If (and that's a big "IF") and when they do, their testimony will be in extremely high demand by a number of lawyers.
But, they will have to show how a design flaw or manufacturing defect could allow the event to occur 1- without any outside tampering or 2- from any outside influence not normally and reasonably expected to be seen in the automobile's operating environment.
Again, Dr. Gilbert's work didn't pass that test.
i don't know the answer, i am just not convinced either way.
my point is, the techs would have no clue what is happening once the car is hooked up to the network.
i don't know the answer, i am just not convinced either way.
my point is, the techs would have no clue what is happening once the car is hooked up to the network.
I appreciate your point of view and share it ... for the most part.
The answer does remain unknown, and it may remain that way. Of course, logic dictates that the longer it goes unknown, the higher the probability that UA doesn't exist in Toyotas (other than in unique instances, and not widespread...however one defines the word "widespread").
And, you could be correct in your assumption of the line-level techs not seeing "the big picture". However, no manufacturer's service organization is flat. The pyramid may have either a gentle or a steep incline, but they all have a pyramid structure of some sort. The lower level techies could be blind, but those with the higher levels of understanding on the Toyota engine/mechanical structure could easily detect what was happening, and I doubt they would all remain silent... Not to mention the independent shops.
does anyone think a 'vehicle health report' is a one way street?
get real. :surprise:
Toyota was one that did the live public broadcast with their for hire Exponent engineers to damage Dr Gilbert's findings to the public. These attempts to damage Dr Gilbert was discussed at length at an oversight meeting. Seems Toyota also had developed an auto owner survey saying Sean Kane and Dr Gilbert were only just working for attorneys and attempted to damage their reputation. Toyota also strong armed University of Illinois regarding Dr Gilbert. Managed to stop Dr Gilbert from doing further research and attempted to get him fired. As I posted earlier AP had requested information from University under the Freedom of Public Information Act. AP finally got documents as requested, and did article this past weekend reporting this pressure and attempts to have Dr Gilbert fired. But since Toyota problems are now old news no other news outlets followed up. AP has University document information to back up their report. Must remember Toyota had claimed they would work with Dr Gilbert to the oversight committee. This is definitely not what actually happened. This last AP news report just reconfirmed what I had heard earlier.
Exponent does this biased work and this is type of firm they are. Exponent is hired to write only reports that support their clients. Exponent is also used by Toyota to give/write reports for law suits. They do a good job, but it is what testimony they provide or what reports they write that are biased or many times not true. Top University of California medical researchers had many derogatory comments about their biased based false work. Kaiser researchers said same. I was personally at this particular meeting about three years ago. And also have several bookmarked sites regarding their work from my research on them three years ago. Dr David Michaels called out the Menlo Park, California defense-litigation firm in his 2008 book Doubt is Their Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens Your Health. Dr Michaels is present Director of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
Washington oversight committee is not happy with Exponent at present.
Where the findings mentioned above lead - am not sure. Dr Gilbert had stated his findings were only a beginning. Guess we all wait to see how it unfolds and develops. Auto technology schools always introduce computer problems into lab autos for teaching their students.
Yes, engineers still need to prove how it relates to reality. Will they?? Don't know. Just not sure how thorough and extensive tests will actually be. Cost will be big factor. And then we all wait to see if it is watered down. If something is found, then heavy pressure will be applied to only release least damaging findings. This is just the way it all works.
Dr Gilbert's work is in no way comparable to that Audi "60 Minutes" segment. Dr Gilbert testified and only presented his research papers to oversight committee as only the beginning of the investigation. He said more investigation needed to be done. Verdict regarding Dr Gilbert's work according to oversight committee is still out, and wonder if we will find out. Don't forget another big University professor, researcher and expert in auto electronics field also duplicated and verified Dr Gilbert's findings. He also found fail safe system did not pick up many types of other errors. He just gave testimony to the Academy of Sciences who NHTSA assigned to do investigation on SUA. the end of June.
Must remember both NHTSA and Toyota are in the hot seat and being investigated by Oversight Committee. Present NHTSA administration is now dealing with all the problems of their prior administration.
It was too close to reality for Toyota to allow further testing. You do know that Toyota has pulled funding from the school and suggested they fire Dr. Gilbert. Would you keep testing if it meant losing your job?
Toyota Lashed Out At Professor David Gilbert During Big Recall
JIM SUHR | 07/10/10 09:16 PM | AP
CARBONDALE, Ill. — It's the kind of publicity any university might dream about: An instructor uncovers a possible flaw that's causing some of the world's most popular cars to accelerate suddenly. His ground-breaking work attracts interest from Congress and reporters worldwide.
But as Southern Illinois University's David Gilbert sought to show that electronics might be to blame for the problem in Toyotas, the world's largest automaker tried to cast doubt on his findings. One Toyota employee even questioned whether he should be employed by the school, which has long been a recipient of company donations.
Electronic messages obtained by The Associated Press show the automaker grew increasingly frustrated with Gilbert's work and made its displeasure clear to his bosses at the 20,000-student school.
"It did kind of catch us off-guard," university spokesman Rod Sievers said.
So did the fallout. Two Toyota employees quickly resigned from an advisory board of the school's auto-technology program, and the company withdrew offers to fund two spring-break internships.
The pressure on him continued to build. On March 8, Mark Thompson – identifying himself as an SIU alum and, without elaboration, a Toyota Motor Sales employee – voiced in an e-mail to the university's then-chancellor, Sam Goldman, his "great concern and disappointment" about Gilbert. Thompson said he was "deeply disturbed" by what he called Gilbert's false accusations about the automaker.
Thompson reminded Goldman that he and Toyota regularly contributed to the university – including a $100,000 check to the auto-tech program in late 2008 – and "due to the outstanding reputation your automotive technology program has, we donate much more than money," including cars.
"I ask you why your organization allows such activities to be performed by one of your professors and most importantly allowed to be reported to the media in a false manner," Thompson wrote. "I believe he should not be an employee of our fine university."
That was one of several threats from Toyota concerning Gilbert's position with the School. We haven't heard much from Dr. Gilbert since the Congressional hearings. I guess the threats worked.
does anyone think a 'vehicle health report' is a one way street?
get real
So, are you saying that Corollas and Camrys need no physical connection in order to modify their chipset programming?
If so, can you substantiate that with a link or other documentation?
Or, did I misinterpret the comment?
Dr Gilbert's work is in no way comparable to that Audi "60 Minutes" segment. Dr Gilbert testified and only presented his research papers to oversight committee as only the beginning of the investigation. He said more investigation needed to be done. Verdict regarding Dr Gilbert's work according to oversight committee is still out, and wonder if we will find out. Don't forget another big University professor, researcher and expert in auto electronics field also duplicated and verified Dr Gilbert's findings. He also found fail safe system did not pick up many types of other errors. He just gave testimony to the Academy of Sciences who NHTSA assigned to do investigation on SUA. the end of June
Well, actually...Yes...it is in the way I compared it...and that was that no one had yet been able to demonstrate how the "flaws" he found could occur in the real world. And, as I said, if/when someone is successfully able to do that, then someone will be on to something.
What I stated earlier...
In the AUDI "event" over 20 years ago, 60 Minutes did something similar, by modifying the transmission to cause a 'UA" event. And, just like Dr. Gilbert's work, they weren't able to demonstrate how the modifications they made would be applicable and obtainable in a real-world environment.
At this point, his work has demonstrated that one can tamper with a circuit in a manner it wasn't designed to operate under and get a result that was unexpected.
That's not surprising to anyone who understands what he demonstrated.
I made no other reference or comparason.
My congratulations to AP for bringing the real truth out. And they have the actual University documents to back up their story. Both the University and Toyota had claimed all was just fine. Just not true. My guess is this #1 auto technology school will not receive support from Toyota in the future. When University approved Gilberts research they had to have also realized retaliation could occur. Seems this University got some egg on them too for buckling to pressure.
Did Exponent's presentation convince you Dr Gilbert's study was faulty?
As you are aware - sorry I just have no respect for Exponent's work. Just have too much information on them. I had posted some of the bookmarked links long ago..
I don't believe we can just gently put this story to bed with the nightlight on. Too much iffi-ness surrounds Toyota and their 4 - 1 edge over all other automakers in building cars that suddenly just take on minds of their own and accelerate out of control.
Just because the NHTSA and some paid-off individuals claim that they can't replicate the problems of SUA in ECU-electrified action doesn't mean these things aren't happening. Electronics are a whole world of strange connections all their own. Of course they can't connect all the dots...they're not all showing up on the radar screens.
Might have ta build another method of electric testware to hunt for just this sort of gremlin, huh? Hewlett Packard might already be working on it for all we know.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Yup. toyota builds the safest and best cars in the world. That's what they want the public to think. And they are totally honest about everything they've done.
Looking at how they tried to pressure the University by letter and by withdrawing money, imagine how they treated the people in other areas, such as NHSTA, if they didn't do what toyota-lexus wanted them to do.
We can only imagine.
And I still believe there have been behind the scene changes and updates to the car's computers.
I also still find discrepancies between what toyota said was able to be changed in the computers of most of their cars to add a brake override and what they seem to have done now.
I also still believe they made more than pedal changes when they had the cars in for service.
I frankly don't think the company has been honest. And for the toyotaphiles, save your emails about how other car companies have done this or that in the past. We're not talking other companies nor are we talking past. We're talking present and toyota-lexus-scion, who spends a million dollars a minute worldwide on safety! :P That's horse manure in their ads.
How's that Kaizen working for you these days?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
No, it didn't.
And, for the record, I don't think it is necessarily faulty, other than in the way some attempt to apply his test results... which is what I and others have been saying all along.
Dr. Gilbert: quote: “What I have done is, I have shown that in the fault detection strategy of the Toyota systems, there’s a window of opportunity where [an error] could occur and not be detected.”
His tests appear to be duplicatable and repeatable in a controlled environment, so in that regard, I believe the results to be "true". Never have I read where he said he has proven UA in Toyotas or any other brand of cars.
The only issue I take with them is, again, there doesn't seem to be a way for his examples to "naturally" occur. If someone had shown how the conditions he assumed in his test could naturally occur, this discussion would be over, and Toyota would clearly have a UA problem. That may yet happen, and I'm content to wait.
As for Exponent, Toyota, etc. (on both sides of the issue), everyone has an agenda. I recognize that, and attempt to dig deeper to get the facts, beyond those making the headlines.
At the end of the day, we all share the road, and if there's an unsafe vehicle model out there, its in all of our best interest to see the issue resolved.
My father taught me a valuable lesson when I was young. He said," if the only way you can sell something is to bad mouth someone else, you have nothing of substance to sell". If the only response to Toyota quality issues is to say...." we suck...but GM sucks more"......then you are simply burying your collective heads in the sand.
I recall how the foreign car owners in the Camry and Accord discussions in the beginning of the 2000's pushed how awful every thing US was and how wonderful their cars were. They never had any problems (that the owners knew of) and they just drove them forever and got money back when they traded them in because they were worth more than they paid for them!
My how things have changed :P since in 2002-3 when some brave owners dared complain about things that were wrong on their cars even when new. They were roundly put into their place by owners of the other perfect cars of that group.
I said regression to the mean had started. I recall the bragging that their cars were so good the dealers didn't have to use customer incentives like the US brands. Of course, the companies used incentives to the dealers, sometimes hidden from the end consumer who paid extra no knowing there was a spiff to the dealer.
I think toyota-lexus has ended up below the mean, partly by their own excesses, much as did the US makers and the Unions with whom they were saddled (along with overpaid and incompetent management).
So now toyota has employed Exponet, a very capable company at twisted PR, and they have had huge incentives. They got caught in bed with the NHSTA. They are using techniques nastier than UAW or GM ever used against people who exposed them like the good professor.
What a change.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I agree. This tactic is widely used in the world of politics, so its only natural to see it in other areas of discussion.
IMO, there's little question that Toyota sold a large part of its "soul" in the race to get to the top. Well, they made it, but I wonder if what they found at the top is what they expected (and hoped) to find.
I do think they can recover, but only if they revamp the company's goals and objectives, and go back towards making quality the first priority. And, that means giving up the "requirement" to be the biggest.
I have no idea how this will play out. But, the big difference between Toyota and, say GM, is that Toyota still has cash and the ability to "fix" itself, independently from the political meddling that comes along with bail-outs. I don't know if it has the will....
David W. Gilbert, PhD.
Professor of Automotive Technology
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
He didn't decide to investigate this issue on his own out of intellectual curiosity. He was paid by a slimy tort-attorney mouthpiece. This came out in the Congressional hearings. He concocted his Rube Goldberg scenario to indicate what might happen if all the planets lined up in order...then the sun shut down.
Then to exacerbate his problem he allowed ABC News to film him and allegedly show how a moving Avalon might encounter this. Except that the Avalon was not moving. ABC (News?) staged it but it omitted to make that clear. Neither did Dr Gilbert. He allowed it to go to press and be shown to the public. This was no different than NBC's staged exploding gas tank fiasco. Notice that ABC (News?) has shut up completely since then. The Wonderful World of Disney apparently has imposed the power of Mickey on the bozo's at ABC.
For these two reasons he should be ready to take all the heat brought to bear on him...he asked for it. Poor baby.
Presentations seem to possibly indicate possibly no actual testing has been done to date. Appears all that has been done so far is development of the actual research project guidelines paperwork. And that is huge project. But since they already found some older Toyota models already had brake overrride installed post factory release - have to guess some testing has also begun. I forget which/what engineers discovered this little secret. Most of the oversight committee were not happy when this was brought forward. Of course some politicians are supporting Toyota. Issa is one. His position is not surprising though since his prior corporation sold auto security systems to Toyota, and is presently still on the board of this corporation. Again just reality of how Washington politicians may work. I just hope enough politcians are on this oversight committee that actually go by the presented facts, and can't be bought off with corporate money.
Project will last for approximately 15 months per information I saw. Can foresee we all may have to wait awhile for actual NASA research findings. Only time will tell. Complaints of owners about SUA to NHTSA will quiet back down too since news is becoming older now too. Multiple reasons exist for this.
Presentations seem to possibly indicate possibly no actual testing has been done to date.
Appears all that has been done so far is development of the actual research project guidelines paperwork.
...have to guess some testing has also begun.
Those quotes are good examples of "clouding the issue"...long on opinion, short on fact.
Sorry, but I see that method of commenting no more than a "stoking of the fire" as it relates to inflaming the segment of the population already convinced that UA is a given fact.
Of course, you are perfectly entitled to state an opinion, either pro, con or neutral towards the issue.
That's not the way I recall it - what I heard was that Gilbert had a Toyota available to him so he played with the part. When he was able to make the part fail, he contacted Toyota. They ignored him. That's when he contacted Kane.
I'd be curious to see a link that says otherwise (I believe the above is what Gilbert essentially testified to under oath to Congress).
OK so other than stating the obvious....what's YOUR point?