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
Busiris don't remember where I saw it, but seems like 2012 was the date being thrown around for mandating brake override switches (maybe it was in that long PowerPoint?).
That was said "tongue firmly in cheek," right?
As to how many people have been killed by an "as-yet-unknown" fault of the car, versus "drive error" ?? We just don't know.
Just heard from my retired CHPS friend. He said that he indeed had to take special driver's training to become an officer. Said the training saved his life one time when he spun at 100 mph in the rain.
I think your slam against Officer Saylor doing school bus duty is uncalled for. Another friend of mine retired after 20 some years as an Alaska State Trooper. He then ran a safety program for the state under contract. Just because he was visiting school kids with a puppet show doesn't mean he wasn't highly trained.
Another guy I know (know his dad much better) is still a Trooper up there. He had years of experience before winding up in PR, but he still can handle his weapon and his car.
I don't buy your claim that you can get through California trooper school without rigorous, high speed driver training.
Two studies exist. National Academy of Scienses study is board based addressing SUA in all manufaturers. NASA engineers study is to address/investigate electronics & SUA - specifically in Toyota. Two studies are going at present. Can be confusing.
This link helps inform bloggers of National Academy of Sciences project scope. So far have not found any online info on NASA site regarding Toyota electronics SUA engineer study project scope
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/projectview.aspx?key=49236
My Whoops
NASA overhead topic outlines guides were vague, and I had posted earlier possibly their study may have not started. Did review again Strickland and Stupak speeches May, 2010 to Oversight Committee update meeting/hearing investigation - saw NASA study was well underway and was hoped to be completed by end of this August. National Academy of Science study to be completed by 2011. Whoops! And no excuse for me - as I had already quickly reveiwed update meeting testimony. Duh - Too quick it seems. Apologies to everyone.
Steve-
Re: California CHP - academy training - brief description of CHP Emergency Vehicle drivers training - see mention of 16 hour minimum training. Have not researched additional rules/requirements/QA oversight/re-licensure CEU requirements.
what California CHP http://www.chp.ca.gov/cadet/cadetlife.html
I am a retired CHP in CA and we had "advanced training" i.e. this is what we learned and indeed it saved my life on the CHP one rainy day. And in service training helped continue the high speed training et al every several years. I.e there is much training which helps the officers stay safe and do their job.
Yes we did have to learn how to high speed drive and they taught us by doing it. The Academy had a high speed track was like a race car track with "S" curve and the scary one designed like a inverted "U". We were told not to take it greater than 95 mph otherwise you could lose control. One cadet two years before me went too fast i.e. over 95 mph, crashed, and became paralyzed for life.
Also a skid pan area was filled with oil and water. You drove you car like it would be in snow, rain, and or ice. I learned by bouncing off some tires they had as safety barriers to prevent us going to the wall. It did teach us not to brake because inertia kept us going into the tires anyway.
It did help greatly as several times I got caught going over 100 mph in the rain (believe it ont) chasing a speeder on the Mac Arthur freeway in Oakland. One time I lost control at 100 mph, and started to spin 360 degrees. Did that for three revolutions, and I remembered not brake, and took my foot off the accelerator and just let it spin and tried to correct as I slowed under 60 mph. Luckily it stopped spinning and I was able to stop on the shoulder and then shake abit as the reality set in.
Now did this training keep us from getting killed? Obviously not as high speed and being exposed to traffic while on foot on freeways still kills many of us. However, the training and later on more training at the Academy helped us to stay alive especially in the metro areas aka below Bakersfield, LA proper, Bay Area.
I am retired however, our CAHP magazine I received last week had four CHP officer's photos that had died due to traffic last month. And they left families too. (And I say "us" because we are all bonded in the law enforcement fraternity even when retired.)
Good luck to all and stay safe.
jensad
Look, Steve. There was NO slam intended. I never said he wasn't "highly trained". My intent (which you very well know) was to demonstrate that the man was not a professional race-car style driver, which indeed does seem to be the case. A few hours on a track can certainly improve one's driving ability...Indeed, I have personally spent several hours st BMW's Performance Center on their closed track, and I do think it has improved my driving.
But, I am not a race car driver, nor superhuman behind the wheel. And, you and I BOTH know what my intent was here...To debunk the idea that any HP officer couldn't possibly make a driving error.
Do yourself a favor and remove the sensitivity chip from your shoulder... I have respect for the man and his family, and I have said before that he (and his passengers) never deserved the hand they were dealt.
But, you do yourself a huge dis-service by implying a law enforcement officer could never make an error while driving. It happens daily in the US.
And, while we have you, if I might ask a question...
What is the law enforcement opinion regarding the Saylors incident?
That's a side no one has shown here so far.
Does the "community" feel officer Saylors was caught up as a victim driving something like Stephen King's Christine, or is it more of a "unfortunate accident...there but for the grace of God go I" type of sentiment?
Thanks again!
(1)"You must realize why brake override was insisted by NHTSA. NHTSA had/has been pushing Toyota to do this for long time."
I goofed here saying they insisted. Sorry. Suggested or discussed should have been used. Per below news article NHTSA had suggested brake override to Toyota in 2007. And per below news article - appears was discussed 2008 .No law existed, and only so much pressure can be exerted. Bias could exist when other auto manufacturers not required as well. Had copy of actual memos, but can't access any longer. Some debate can exist about memo though. Think I had more bookmarked articles/info - just gave up looking after I found this though.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar/14/business/la-fi-toyota-brake14-2010mar14
(2)"Why auto manufacturers have balked installing, when some manufacturers have had since early 1980's is not good - guess is questionable corporate decision we can sure question.
I am a medical professional, my husband was executive officer of Ambulance Company and California State EMS Comissioner, my son is a doctor. Our first hand personal professional experiences and training developed our family human safety positions. I will always take a position for promoting something that will enhance human safety. I do, can, and should question corporate decisions made when implementation could lead to beneficial factors ultimately improving human safety.
Brake Override Systems - my comments "when some manufacturers have had since early 1980's is not good" - referenced decision some manufacturers choosing not to install/implement
Was referencing "some" and I didn't want to mention any specific
manufacturer as news articles seemed to vary with information. Was aware of German made autos. Years of implementation vary.
Who had seemed irrelevant for me. Technology has been present for awhile. Since I promote human safety -manufacturers decision to not implement - I would not consider decision good. And rightfully could question this decison made. Won't even begin to describe my professional medical experiences.
(3)"Existing failsafe system is not adequate for addressing all issues. The present autos high computerized electronics do indeed require a seen strong need for this."
This was made more for addresing human error factors involving
SUA and other points as well.. Was my main train of thought here. Brake Override should address/improve human error statistics in SUA and other areas, but not all. Also will address issues when
computer conflicting message is relayed of acceleration/braking same time. As for autos high computerized electronics - need is present. Engineeers know problems do/can occur. Can refer to government documents. Etc. Please refer.
(4)"Should have been law, & required long time ago"
This is personal opinion of mine, and has been opinion of others. Technology has been available for awhile. Would help improve human safety. Law earlier would have been great. Think we all want to protect and promote human safety. Smile - we are a good group
of conscientious bloggers here.
PR damage control consultants will step in/play role when a corporation/etc gets into trouble. But I do want to see honest PR strategy/action taken though.
Here is copy from Chairman Bart Stupak's presentation at Update Oversight Meeting May, 2010. -----
"Toyota engaged in damage control almost immediately following our hearing by continually asserting confidence that extensive testing proves the safety of the electronics systems and attacking those who disagree with them. But as Chairman Waxman noted in his opening, the record doesn’t support Toyota’s statements that it conducted extensive testing. The truth is that we don’t know whether electronics plays a role in sudden unintended acceleration and Toyota doesn’t know either. What’s disappointing to me is learning that Toyota seems to have focused more on discrediting its critics than on solving the problem.
When Dr. Gilbert testified before this subcommittee in February, he explained that he had found a way to induce sudden unintended acceleration in a Toyota vehicle without triggering an error code in the vehicle’s computer. Committee staff have spoken with several academics who describe Dr. Gilbert’s experiment as “sensible,” and a “reasonable” way to begin to study unintended acceleration. Dr. Christian Gerdes (“Ger-Dess”), a professor at Stanford University who Toyota asked to review Dr. Gilbert’s work, told the Committee staff that Dr. Gilbert’s approach was a “legitimate starting point” for a more in-depth inquiry into the causes of sudden unintended acceleration.
Unfortunately, Toyota appears to have been more interested in messaging than scientific inquiry. After the hearing, Toyota hired a public relations firm to advise the company on its public response to lawsuits claiming that electronics plays a role in sudden unintended acceleration.
We know from the Committee’s investigation that the PR firm, Benenson Strategy Group (or BSG), conducted a poll to learn more about what Toyota could do to repair damage to the company’s image among educated consumers known as “opinion elites.” A presentation from Benenson Strategy Group shows that, among the “Key Findings” from the poll, Toyota learned the following:
Debunking Kane/Gilbert’s testing will be critical for restoring confidence among Elites and reassuring audiences that [electronic throttle control] is in fact NOT an issue.
[DOCUMENT: MARCH 5 TRACKING RESEARCH RESULTS]
We reviewed an undated BSG document showing the results from another Toyota poll to test some aggressive messages for possible use in future public statements or advertising. This poll referred to Dr. Gilbert’s experiment as “phony,” “shoddy science,” a “hoax,” and a “parlor trick” that “would never happen in real life.”
[DOCUMENT: FINAL DEBUNKING MESSAGES]
BSG summarized the results from this new poll in a presentation, dated March 8, 2010, suggesting that Toyota should try to damage Dr. Gilbert’s credibility by accusing him of having “monetary or self interested motives.”
[DOCUMENT: TOYOTA DEBUNKING KANE/GILBERT MESSAGE STUDY]
Toyota told the Committee that the company did not follow its pollster’s suggestion to attack Dr. Gilbert, but the documents suggest otherwise. On March 8, a Monday, Toyota held a press conference and released a report by Exponent criticizing Dr. Gilbert’s work. Two days before the press conference, the vice president of Toyota’s public relations firm noted in an email to a colleague the importance of finishing the poll before this event, saying:
[W]e really, really need to get this done, especially with elites. Toyota has a press conference on Monday and need our data to know what to say.
(DOCUMENT: MARCH EMAIL RE: TIMING OF POLL)
At that press event, before Exponent presented its findings, Toyota spokesman Mike Michels disparaged Dr. Gilbert’s work and said it was “paid for by an advocate for trial lawyers.”
The Exponent report on Dr. Gilbert’s research was a hit job, not solid science. Exponent confirmed the key conclusion that Dr. Gilbert had drawn in his report, but then disparaged Dr. Gilbert for not testing the likelihood of the faults he identified, even though Exponent never did this analysis either. Exponent added new steps to Dr. Gilbert’s experiment and mischaracterized others, all in an attempt to make his outcome seem unlikely and to invent flaws in his analysis. But independent experts have defended Dr. Gilbert’s approach, including a Stanford University professor who reviewed the report at Toyota’s request and described Dr. Gilbert’s experiment as a “perfectly reasonable starting point.”
When I look at Toyota’s approach, I do not understand why the company is attacking Dr. Gilbert for trying to identify a root cause of sudden unintended acceleration. This company ought to be undertaking a comprehensive review and encouraging automotive experts to come forward with their ideas for what could be causing the problem. Based on the Committee’s review of Exponent’s work for Toyota in this regard, we remain concerned that this is not occurring.
Link to full Bart Stupak presentation speech.
http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100520/oi/Stupak.Opening.Statement.o- i.05.20.10.pdf
I was disappointed about the Toyota/Exponent approaches that were taken. I expect honesty and lose respect for individual/groups if/when dishonesty found. Honorable actions taken are what determine if words said are actually true/have validity. At that point words mean nothing to me until actions support a change..
Hope this helps.
That's a jewel of a quote.
Here we have a PR flag waved to make people believe that because no electronic fault was found having left a trace that there therefore was no fault in the system.
This game has been the technique used all along: "We couldn't find anything. Your car is fine. have a nice day."
The idea that toyota hasn't shared (my opinion) what they already know about the fault and since when the cars are brought back the fault left no record in the computer, there isn't a fault.
It's like saying we don't know what killed the person, therefore the person is not dead on CSI.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
One in a series:
"In response to recent quality issues/recalls, Toyota has dispatched its Swift Market Analysis Response Team (SMARTs) to follow up on approximately 3,600 complaints. What was once a five-minute phone call is now two technicians sent, within 72 hours -- and often in 24 hours or less -- to investigate a report. No mysterious unintended acceleration issues have been found as a result of SMART investigations, though the well-publicized floor-mat and pedal issues have been confirmed, Toyota said. Many of the alleged unintended acceleration incidents are different issues altogether, such as an idle-up when the air conditioning is running, Toyota said. Toyota adamantly said SMART investigators found no defects in its Electronic Throttle Control System with Intelligence (ETCS-i)."
Toyota Safety and Quality Seminar. (Edmunds Daily)
More:
Toyota Safety and Quality Seminar: Day Two
Toyota Safety and Quality Seminar: Day Three
Toyota Safety and Quality Seminar: Q&A with Akio Toyoda
You still feeling Gilbert's findings are bogus setup are just opposite of what government document statement findings reveal - that their independent engineers, Dr Gerdes Stanford engineer/researcher who Toyota asked to review Dr Gilbert's study, acually feel Dr Gilbert's study is good and good place to start. What Dr Gilbert, Oversight Committee, don't know is what further findings will reveal/find. Not known yet.
As for Sean Kane, yes he does work for attorney groups, CDC, government, individuals.public, etc. But he is also an advocate for public consumer safety. Documents on site do reveal attack mode many times, but has well done intense research on background of SUA. Have found accuracy of articles timetables are generally right on target. Know many here may not like him. Still good to read articles on site - history and info quite excellent. And see where he does many good positives. Am fully aware he is hired by attorneys and I always take that aspect into consideration. He is just one of the public advocate sites I visit and read. Do try to get as much info as I can. Feel I need to see as much as I can.
Don't see where you can consider ABC news story is a fake story. That one flashing shot of odometer does not negate whole story. Way too short of flash, and several people I spoke with never even noticed/remembered odometer shot. Editing team should not have made decision to insert that shot as was on parked car. And that was wrong decision. Not good and they received repercussions. I consider this too minor and brief, when I evaluated whole broadcast segment. Ojectively felt didn't warrant my throwing it under the bus.
Guess we wait to see if your predictions come true. Good luck. I prefer to stay wait mode for now. Still unfolding. Could be awhile.
Smile - H-mmm wonder what does what the idle up on my auto really means when air conditioning is off then. Same condition on or off - checked both ways. I was told by service agent is just way car operates. Haven't pursued as not big issue and auto apppears to now be now be operating ok. The light computer glitch that I identified will be addressed. Wierd to have a computer turn various lights on/off and then difficult to absolutely always always check to make sure it didn't. Day hours have gotten me three times. AAA. Have just totally turned off now to avoid. Car still works fine for me & my needs.
This game has been the technique used all along: "We couldn't find anything. Your car is fine. have a nice day."
The Toyota Service Managers are aided by the lame diagnostic software Toyota embeds, or does not embed into the vehicles ECU code. That was the premise of Gilbert's findings. A tech would not know if the car experienced UA, as no fault codes are recorded. Is that by design or just poor engineering?
"The other basis for Toyota’s assertions is the premarket testing that Toyota’s own engineers do before manufacturing vehicles for sale to the public. This testing occurs during the design phase of its vehicles’ production. As one of the Toyota engineers we interviewed told the Committee: once “mass production is initiated, then that means that the design is completed, so we do not conduct anything additional.”
This premarket testing has significant limitations. The company’s durability testing is done only on prototype vehicles and components. Toyota does not test the cars and parts that are used by actual drivers.
In addition, the sample sizes in many of Toyota’s design-phase tests are small. Sometimes only a single vehicle is tested. Independent experts consulted by the Committee have told us that Toyota would need much larger sample sizes to rule out potential causes of a rare and intermittent event like sudden unintended acceleration.
Furthermore, Toyota does no testing for multiple-event faults or faults that could affect more than one component in the same way at the same time, even though independent experts identified several potential causes of sudden unintended acceleration – like tin whiskers, corrosion, and electromagnetic interference – that could create multiple events or affect more than one component.
In addition, Toyota acknowledged to Committee staff that it does not control the testing performed on critical parts of the electronic throttle control system that are made by many of its suppliers. Toyota has no documentation to confirm the results of any tests these suppliers choose to perform.
The premarket testing regime described to Committee staff by Toyota engineers may be appropriate for testing the design of Toyota vehicles before manufacturing starts. But no amount of premarket testing can be a substitute for the rigorous examination needed to identify a post-manufacturing defect. And there is no evidence Toyota has done this post-manufacturing testing.
The results of our investigation raise serious questions. Toyota has repeatedly told the public that it has conducted extensive testing of its vehicles for electronic defects. We can find no basis for these assertions. Toyota’s assertions may be good public relations, but they don’t appear to be true."
http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100520/oi/Waxman.Opening.Statement.o- i.05.20.10.pdf
Nothing more.
Fair enough. But just to make this point, after catching up reading in this thread, Dr. Gilbert's testimony shouldn't have been disrespected by Toyota so badly. I would respect them so much more as a large worldwide automaker if they would just be honest and try to find ECU problems that might be linked to SUA problems. Dr. Gilbert was starting to discover something wrong IMO and that football should've been handed off to Shaun Alexander for another Seahawk's first down. Instead Dave Krieg waited too long in the pocket and was sacked for 4th down and the need to punt. Toyota is punting instead of gaining credibility yardage here and that is not just my opinion, the honest ones on here, even those who have spent big-time pesos buying Toyota products, support me and are turned off by the pompasity and dishonesty of Toyota. Think back about a year and Toyota was scrambling to cover up their tracks back then, now we've been hit by about a trillion "we're spending a million bucks an hour on safety" commercials. Leaves me feeling no better at all about Toyota products. Until someone proves to me it's only bulky accelerator pedals and misplaced, mis-sized floor mats, I will wonder about Toyota electronics software going buggy in their car's nerve centers, at horribly inopportune times. Period.
Ah...these long dog days of summer...NFL is only one and a half more months. :sick:
This Toyota SUA problem is far from being over. Buying off people to cover up problems is not being honest. Or is the Japanese way not one of overt honesty? I thought they were famous for that sort of thing...committing hari-kari, etc., when things fail miserably. Or should we leave that question buried underneath the stone...buried and shared with the SE Arizona scorpion?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
The progress in the undercover technique for trying to make the unanswered questions about the unintended acceleration go away is the very steps to be expected when they hire a large, aggressive PR firm to do their shooting for them. Obviously Toyoda and his crew failed miserably at misrepresenting their way out of the hearings in Congress.
Lots of advertisements, and sharply worded statements to try to discredit anyone still questioning e.g. "What was wrong with the toyota the person drove the dealer still racing it's motor and he survived by shifting into and out of gear?" Why haven't we been told exactly what happened there? It clearly would be a large hint as to the problems in the electronics of the other toyotas. Also lots of ridicule of anyone pointing to Officer Saylor's accident.
We will have attempts to control the blog discussions by trying to redirect the focus onto how wrong others are rather than actually finding what is wrong with the electronics. We'll see lots of blame of people pressing the wrong pedals? Are toyota's pedals that poorly differentiated that many people mistake them? Perhaps all toyotas should be taken off the road if that is the case. It was surmised that Audis had pedals that were more closely placed heightwise and were closer than the typical car and that some people misplaced their foot because of that design flaw. Does toyota need to rebuld all the cars they have built so other drivers can be safe?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU? Audi has yet to be proven at fault in a court of law.
Personally, I would have simply said that his research had yet to be demonstrated to be relevent. And, technically, until he or someone can show how the conditions he created can be found in the real world, his work is nothing more than a "what if?" demonstartion.
But, I don't think it served Toyota's purpose for anyone to attempt to attack him. Let the facts speak for themselves.
I suspect this is simply how business is handled in America today.
Steve Jobs on the iPhone 4... "You're holding it the wrong way (implied idiot)!" type of response.
Even those companies that know better have fallen into the trap. 25 years ago, Tylenol established the "gold standard" in dealing with serious product issues. It was expensive, but in the end, they won BIG TIME (in customer loyalty and $$$$$). Look how they have fallen in the last problem issue, by refusing to come forward and do what is right for the consumer.... Expensive up front, but it always pays HUGE dividends.
As for Toyota, I think they simply hired an American PR organization to handle PR the way its handled in the US... Which appears to be a really bad decision.
More importantly, no one has been able to reproduce a single case of Audi UA under normal conditions without changing the environment in such a way that the environment would not be reasonably expected to be found in the real world.
To me, a court only demonstrates who the most persuasive lawyer happens to be. Reality is often quite different than what's shown and decided in a courtroom.
At least, that's my opinion.
Also Apple surprised me too.
The present unfolding of Toyota approaches continue to unfold. And highly questionable actions are coming out.
I honestly do not know much about the case and I will not make judgments on other officers issues. I learned a long time ago that it is irrelevant to me what the cause was and I really don't know about Officer Saylors.
However, I probably read about the incident in our Association's monthly newspaper but there are CHP officrs dying every month all over Ca. Last month's issue talked about 4, (four) CHP officers that died in June 10 due to accidents and/or other drivers striking them as they worked accidents or were out of their vehicles on foot and were struck.
There were times on the Nimitz/Eastshore/MacArthur freeways that I jumped out of the way to avoid getting killed. And my partner and I got shot at off SR24 on the midnight shift and I had to fight for my life once when a dirt bag was going to shoot me on the shoulder of Mac Arthur freeway. I won and he had a broken jaw and went to jail and did not collect $ 200 nor pass Go.
(My wife delivered our second child 6 months later IN the VW as I am driving to Kaiser Oakland. But for the grace of God go I.)
Got to go. Good luck to all and stay safe.
jensad
Also read the testimony of Exponent representative - claim Exponent keeps no notes, and any info is just kept in their heads Documents reveal a former Exponent employee states this is what Exponent does to keep courts from getting docuemt proof - what is actually going on, and states is not good sound science investigation approach. Just a baised/ highly questionable business model that has been perfected over the years.
Was not impressed, and just seemed to reveal more of same Exponent past documented practices/shenenaigans. More will unfold, and just have to wait to see what NASA reports reveal. And what National Academy of Sciences broad base study on SUA all manufacturers considering various aspects will be. I do have lots of questions if National Academy of Sciences study will be able reach a meaningful study decision for the time table alloted. As I see in the project scope description on their website site, lots of SUA puzzle pieces for committee to evaluate.
Hope the full complete/factual/true NASA results will not be withheld from public to review/evaluate.
>"there is a single-point-fault mode that leads to sudden acceleration at high power."
This sounds like exactly the track that Dr. Gilbert was going along.
>The specific fault pointed out by the Swedish agency was a "bad solder joint" in the Hella cruise control used on 1981-83 Audis. All of the Audis experiencing sudden acceleration which are the subject of the class action were with cruise control systems.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Frankly, I don't know where folks like you come from. Putting it all on the line for a public that is, at best, mostly apathetic to your job conditions.
You have my respect. And, congrats on surviving so you could help deliver your newest family addition!
The phenomenon of sudden acceleration has drawn the attention of scientists around the world. Immediately following the Audi 5000 investigation in the US, several studies by various government agencies have tried but failed to resolve the cause of sudden acceleration. The only study to pinpoint a specific defect within the vehicle, "Risk Assessment of Cruise Control," by Mats Gunnerhed, was conducted by the Swedish Defense Research Establishment of the Department of Information Technology. Issued in May of 1988, it concluded that within certain types of cruise control systems "there is a single-point-fault mode that leads to sudden acceleration at high power." The specific fault pointed out by the Swedish agency was a "bad solder joint" in the Hella cruise control used on 1981-83 Audis. All of the Audis experiencing sudden acceleration which are the subject of the class action were with cruise control systems.
Transport Canada, the Canadian equivalent of the Department of Transportation, issued a report entitled, "Investigation of Sudden Acceleration Incidents" in December, 1988, concluding driver error caused the phenomenon. Another study which could not determine the cause of sudden acceleration was "An Investigation on Sudden Starting and/or Acceleration of Vehicles with Automatic Transmissions," conducted by the Japanese Ministry of Transport and released April 27, 1989. It found no common mechanical cause for sudden acceleration, which it analyzed it conjunction with simultaneous brake failure.
The study conducted by NHTSA, "An Examination of Sudden Acceleration," drew a conclusion similar to that of the Canadian report, but emphasized human factors design errors in the layout of vehicle controls in the driver compartment of cars found to have high sudden acceleration rates. The NHTSA study is small solace for Audi in defense of product liability actions, as more and more successful cases used Audi's human factor design errors and failure to warn or recall as a basis for liability. The NHTSA study also found but failed to highlight that faulty cruise control systems can cause wide open throttle acceleration, and that cars with full acceleration take an average of 65 feet to stop. This report was released March 7, 1989. NHTSA officially closed its investigation of sudden acceleration in the Audi 5000 on July 11, 1989. (Investigative Report ODI Case No. C86-01.) In closing the investigation, one factor NHTSA relied upon was the fact that there had been three recalls and a service campaign attempting to correct the human factors design errors; 87V-008, 87V-009, and 87V-170. None of these recalls eliminated sudden acceleration in the Audi 5000.
Note the lower part of page 8 in the document.
Sorry, nothing of the sort.
All along Toyota has maintained that there is nothing at all amiss with the electronics. It's only internet posters ( a bunch herein ), grandstanding pols on Oversight Committees, and attention-grabbing media ( ABC & LAT ) that have blown this completely out of proportion. In fact none of these groups has one shred of data or evidence. ZERO.
It's always been ZERO and it continues to be ZERO. Thus Toyota on this issue has done nothing wrong.
Now the pedals are a different issue. They reacted in Europe before they notified the Feds here thus they were fined appropriately to the max.
Other than that case nothing unusual has transpired that wasn't going on all across the business community these last 16 yrs in this laissez-faire regulatory environment. Every large company was doing it because that was the way big business was done these last 16 yrs, well actually since Reagan's famous statement. It was perfectly acceptable in our lax regulatory environment for companies to fight the overseer's at every move; e.g. the entire oil industry; the entire coal-mining industry; the auto industry ( Ford, GM, Toyota, Chrysler ); and the list goes on.
OK the rules have changed and there's a new sheriff in town. OK new game, new rules. 'Play on' the referee says.
That speech was made in May. On June 30th actual data was presented by those with access to the engineering studies. That presentation stomps all prior 'opinions-without-facts' into dust ( Stupak's for example ). He's a pol that needs the limelight like we need oxygen.
Are you trying to say that unethical business practices of various types by toyota are acceptable in their cars because other companies have done things that you consider equal?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In fact nothing unethical was being done. You only see it as 'unethical' in hindsight. Companies were fighting and getting into bed with the regulators ever since Reagan demonized the government, with Bush I continuing, with Clinton continuing, with Bush II continuing even moreso.
This is the way all big business was done. Ford hid the Explorer weaknesses and was directly responsible for killing hundreds here in the US; GM took 5 yrs to react to continual complaints about Cobalts losing steering, Toyota tried to influence the NHTSA findings, then entire industry fought tougher CAFE standards; the coal-mining industry continues to fight safety regulations; the MMS was actually sleeping with those it was supposed to be keeping an eye on in the drilling industry; the financial regulators winked at Madoff; the woman who warned Greenspan about dregulated derivitives was told to shut her mouth or she would lose her job ( she didn't and she did ); GM was sued and fined tens of $Millions for faking its financial reports. ENRON, WorldCom, on and on and on.
Thank you very much Mr Reagan.
OK now the rules now are different. Judging past actions by current temporary ethical standards is fallacious. Tomorrow the current temporary standards will be different. Welcome to the world of Big Business and Government.
This is all a bunch of gibberish.
Move on. Nothing more to see.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Understand corporations well from insiders perspective. The good and the bad. Yes, our legal regulatory system had been weakened. Hope we see improvement. Another whole hot topic issue, and will leave alone.
Outcome/what happens pending.
I am still waiting for you to post full documents(not the outline guides) so we can reveiw. We would all really appreciate you doing this.
If you are still referring to outline guides - those donot stomp all prior 'opinions-without-facts' into dust. This would be premature based on incomplete document proof.
Full documents please
But something was wrong that clear and starry night of April 14,1912. It was unusually cold and there were icebergs dotting the north Atlantic. Several ships had spotted icebergs and he ignored the wire warnings and really didn't want to talk to his officers about it, either.
The same can be said of those Toyota faithlings who cling incessantly to the huge carmaking "ship". Can they do something wrong that hasn't been, or, they won't allow others, to find out? Or course they can!
You faithlings want to just sit back and watch and find amusement in those who would dare shake the Toyoda foundation further apart than it has already split apart.
"I'm not at all concerned about any silly icebergs. In fact, I've ordered the last two boilers lit. We're speeding up!"
Sudden, unintended acceleration? In of all things a modern Toyota motorcar?
Hey, they lead the industry 4 ta 1 in reported SUA incidents. Don't ya at least feel even the slightest bit curious what might be going on in those little Toyota electronic nerve centers?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Sorry, we spent 5 days in an isolated resort so no access the past few days (heck yes it is very nice!).
There are no major brazilian brands, but 4 have been here for ages: VW, Ford, Chevy, and Fiat. Funny thing, though, is they sell euro models here in Brazil, not American ones. So we get the Corsa, Astra, Vectra, etc, but no Cobalt.
Import taxes are KILLER here, I'm talking over 100% (and we thought the chicken tax was bad...). So basically to sell any volumes here you have to build cars in a Mercosul country. Think NAFTA for latin america.
For that reason an imported RAV4 can cost over $60,000, and no that's not a typo. But they do build the Corolla in Brazil and those are fairly common, my brother has one. Honda builds the Fit, Civic, and City. Peugoet, Citroen, and Renault also make cars here now.
Still, the original 4 dominate. "Popular" cars include the 1.0l models of the Uno and Palio from Fiat, the Ford Ka and Fiesta, the Chevy Corsa and Celta, and the VW Gol (not Golf, not Polo).
Ethanol - yes, all over the place. Most new cars carry the "Flex" label so can run on any combination of gas or ethanol. Gas costs $5.41 per gallon here but ethanol is cheaper, at about $4 per gallon, plus Brazil produces more than enough of both, but the government taxes the daylights out of fuel to keep cars efficient. You should see how many small motorcycles get around.
Diesel is dirt cheap here but it's not the low-sulfur variety, bummer. Plus to buy a diesel vehicle costs much more, a Hilux SW4 diesel (4Runner relative) runs US$100,000, even made here.
Strange and interesting. Yesterday I stopped at a Fiat dealer and checked out a 500 Abarth!
I'm not nearly caught up on my reading (except AN editorials that come to my BlackBerry), and won't any time soon since I'm on vacation, but I did notice a lot of references to the Saylor case with no mention of the name Bernard, the person who had the same loaner and also experience UA due to a stuck floor mat on that very same car!
Here's my post with the details:
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.efda853/8930#MSG8930
I think it's odd to debate CHP driver training and ignore the fact that that problem happened more than once to that very same Lexus and is in fact no mystery at all.
Just saw a Hilux SW4 diesel 4x4, very neat truck.
Too bad it's imported and costs a whopping US$100,000.
Yes, Saylor family crash was old news for past bloggers. Newer bloggers may not be fully aware of all details. Guess why this blog is available.
Nice group of people, and opinions good as helps us all learn/research more what going on.
Enjoy your vacation!
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/toyota-criminal-probe-11233308
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/toyota-criminal-probe-11233308
Wow. Very scientifically stated by Ms. Claybrook. I love where at the end she clearly states the agency does not have the expertise. Period.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,