I agree completely. The bottom line to the real purpose of this forum is can Toyota rebound from the quality issues that have been presented in the last couple of model years. They WILL rebound, but it will not happen overnight. This forum seems to have gotten off track with all the discussions about unintended acceleration. This has turned into a place where everyone gets to exhibit how smart they are.
>This forum seems to have gotten off track with all the discussions about unintended acceleration.
The hiding of the facts about the ever increasing number of SUA events and the attempt to manipulate the people within the NHSTA is what is still hurting the toyota-lexus image.
>This has turned into a place where everyone gets to exhibit how smart they are.
This forum seems to have gotten off track with all the discussions about unintended acceleration.
That is just one of many issues that Toyota has faced during the five years this thread has been going. The original post was pointing out how Toyota quality was going down hill in 2005. I think the changes made in especially 2007 were significant and show the true direction toyota was heading.
Toyota vehicle recalls double in 2005 WASHINGTON (AP) — Toyota Motor (TM), which is challenging General Motors (GM) to become the world's largest automaker, saw its number of recalled vehicles in the United States double in 2005, according to government records.
Yes, it has been educational to follow the unfolding of The Toyota SUA problems.
I just read the paragraph that you posted from a cut and paste of my post. Wow! My fingers sure went crazy on the keyboard. Sorry about all the spell typo errors. Whoops.
What Dr Todd Hubing presented at National Academy of Science meeting appeared to be good speech. His professional background is impressive, and feel no one would claim he is not a highly qualified Vehicular Electronics expert. Hope you noticed on that one link his wife is also listed as an outstanding engineer educator. I am disappointed full speech document was not available to evaluate online. Bullet points list topics discussed, but sure do not provide what he actually said. Noticed Dr Hubing had actually been doing UA research at Clemson University in their auto research center for over a year now. Found his examples topics pages quite good. Refer to pages 16-21. Appears these may be lists of the electronic problems he has found during his research testing of Toyota UA. If true he has found more possible UA problem causes than Dr Gilbert. Dr Gilbert's study focused on the Toyota ETC. His topics for short term recommendations and long term recommendations do seem good. Seems short term are brake override systems but gives BMW system type the nod. kill switch to override engine control module, more hardware redundancy & fault tolerant auto software design which would be inexpensive. Etc.
Guess we all wait to see what further research by NASA and Dr Hubing reveals. Dr Gilbert has been muzzled by Toyota pressure on university, and was foced to stop doing research, Dr Gilbert is out. Did see Dr Hubing has provided NASA with documents of his research.
Electronics is just one piece of the UA puzzle. I fully realize National Academy of sciences is evaluating many different aspects of UA.causes. We now wait to see how these discovered electronic cause problems and real world scenerios connect. Research is long tedious step progressive process. Lots of different aspects will be considered/evaluated as decisions and recommended approaches come forward. Auto manufacturers implementation costs, reputations, lobbying, detrimental business effects will play out to be huge factors. Approaches/decison findings may not be "black and white."
My RAV4 does have this irratic idle when it is stopped, more times than not. Then boom for some reason it will idle fairly smooth. Air conditioning does not have to be on. After I take auto for service checks, is drastically improved & idle sounds more smooth, but shortly after reverts back to same pattern. Service tech says is just way auto operates.
My neighbor and I were talking and he heard also. He does not feel car idle, even in normal idle state, sounds smooth. Smile - polite, but raised his eyebrows frowning. Stated their Lexus models did not display this irratic idle symptom. .
This issue is a little minor symptom of this particular auto. As long as it starts and runs, will not address.
I believe most cars have a "clutch" behind the fan that cools the radiator. This will cycle in and out (depending on operating temperature) regardless if the air conditioner is on or not, that is most likely what you are feeling. Most cars have this behavior. I guess if you spend enough money on a car (i.e. Lexus) it's dampened better.
once again your "Diane Sawyer" news reporting on this toyota SUA issue is the glue keeping this thread intelligent. Thank you so much. A friend of ours from Arizona had a 1999 Toyota RAV4 with an automatic tranny, and, ya know, I don't recall her having the rough idle problem or SUA of any sort. I would hope that mechanics from toyota could come on here and explain away the roughness problem at idle for you. If not, it doesn't look really good, but then again, you still can drive (and I assume enjoy) your RAV4. My wife and I had sort of a similar small SUV, we had a 2001 Kia Sportage 4X4 with a 5-speed manual tranny, I got a wild hair and had to have a 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS in March of 2007, so I drove up to Phoenix and traded it in. My wife reluctantly went along with me but still loves that Sportage 4X4 to this day. She loved "the Jeep-like design look" to it. It did drive like a champ and it saved me at least 3 times in snowy weather in Missouri and Idaho. That 4WD kicked in and delivered me from the ice gremlins. Loved the 4WD system and it's ease of use.
So the '08 Lancer GTS really had to be good to lull me away from the Sportage 4X4. And it is. Glad you like your RAV4 sharonkl, and keep up the great "Diane Sawyer" ABC news reporting. You're the rock of this thread, really.
Appears these may be lists of the electronic problems he has found during his research testing of Toyota UA. If true he has found more possible UA problem causes than Dr Gilbert. Dr Gilbert's study focused on the toyota ETC. His topics for short term recommendations and long term recommendations do seem good. Seems short term are brake override systems but gives BMW system type the nod. kill switch to override engine control module, more hardware redundancy & fault tolerant auto software design which would be inexpensive. Etc.
If toyota hasn't reclled millions of their rigs on the road by now and retro-fitted them with these brake-override systems, they should be forced to by our political machine that looks to be coddling them along here. If Congress had the intestinal fortitude they ought to have, they would force the retrofit immediately for even gagrice's Sequoia. gagrice, does your toyota SUV already have the brake override system installed?
Thank you for your kind words. Smile - I am sure not a Diane Sawyer though.
This rough idle symptom more frequently than not, is just what it is. The irratic ups and downs are another aspect. So far has not created any issues. My friends RAV4 does not do. Actually their auto idles fairly well. Car does work for me. At time I purchased it was only one of only a few(4) SUV's w adequate needed cargo space for two large wire dog kennels w good gas mileage. Tape measure was a must carry along, as listed cargo space many times inadequate
Glad you are enjoying your Lancer GTS. A good reliable 4WD system is a must for snow country. Rain, high winds, muddy country roads too. Etc.
FYI - I had also read a report Dr Michael Pecht, who heads the University of Maryland’s Center for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering (CALCE) and who advised Oversight Committee on Toyota UA. I can't find him listed though, and no speech outline guides seen. Am going to do more research and see if I can verify he was there.
As far as brake override, Toyota did install into certain selected models. Info is available on Toyota website as to which autos were part of recall & got this system.
Where will all end? Guess eventually we shall find out. Well, whoops - I forgot & see NASA Study on Toyota UA & electronics may be completed the end of this month. H-mmmm. National Academy of Science UA Study all manufacturers is to last for approximately 15 months. If Dr Hubing from Clemson is left alone w no university pressure from whole auto industry, his present ongoing UA research for past year could swing into higher gear. University researchers dream & hope for possible opportunities like this. Gotta love the mind of a good university researcher.
Chuck - thanks for your insight. Smile - the idle up and down rev's are what they are. Do wish even engine normal idle would stay as it is just after each service check. Smile - just reverts back to old way in short time frame. Smile - but it does run. Smile - as long as I keep interior light off position. Do have a computer light glitch, where it likes to turn different lights on automatically, switches from front light position to back light position, etc. And yes, it is computer - already have addressed last check. But still exists.
sounds like your RAV4 may have a few wires crossed-literally!
And I can't blame that on toyota. toyota IMO still doesn't deserve the capitalization of their "t", not yet anyway. I want to see their engineering and production departments get going and make all of their rigs safer for drivers. Right now I highly suspect their engine and acceleration computer controls and implementation departments.
I was not the person who has released facts regarding SUA complaints. 3 of 4 cases involves toyota vehicles-and I don't know how much money toyota has paid the NHTSA to "relieve" toyota of any SUA blame in their vehicles, but that's not the way to solve problems. Taking hush and "instantly absolve us please" cash to release nonsensical reports on manufacturer vehicle safety is despicable and very, very sad. This is a large issue and it needs action taken on it, and buying a new toyota rig at this time makes about as much sense as crowning Charles Barkley U.S. President. Or even NBA Commissioner, for that matter. :P
zero percent for 60 months on Camry/Corolla plus at least 5k for your trade in. small print on the trade in, must be less than 12 years old and less than 150k miles on it. does not smell like success to me.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
OK, but an erratic idle is another example of a false report, i.e. it might cause an owner to file a report, but that's not going to cause an accident and count as a legit case of UA. Only a concerned owner perhaps over-reacting.
Same as imidazol's friend's airport-loud Corolla.
These types of false-positives account for the sudden surge in UA complaints to NHTSA.
There's just no way Toyotas would have half the problems as Ford until very recently (less than a year ago), and about the same as GM, probably less than Chrysler on a per-car basis.
Then suddenly, boom, that figure surges by a factor of TWENTY? From half to 10 times in 10 months? All the cars were bad, but they waited until these 10 months to go bad? Yeah, right.
Seriously, does anyone believe that data is consistent? TWENTY times? Totally and completely inconsistent. The only reasonable explanation is media hype and hysteria, and resulting false reports.
This report was presented in front of a Who's Who at NHTSA. Heads would drop if it were not accurate.
Ateixeira - here are couple more analysist studies that were done. I have more bookmarked, but due to number saved difficult to find. Some were done prior to recall.
This Consumers Report Study has some study faults as well. The report gives study project description - reveals they used autos w UA/SUA that were more serious - was for auto complaints that NHTSA discarded/did not consider in auto recalls per Toyota pressure. NHTSA only used very mild SUA/UA complaints for recall justfication off approach taken. Not too honorable NHTSA approach to address only the mild ones in earlier recalls.!! And not include all SUA/ UA events. Scientifically not good practice. http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/12/sudden-unintended-acceleration-sua- -analysis-2008-toyota-lexus-ford-gm.html
If I get time will attempt to search for some of the other studies I have saved - do have. And some were studies done prior to last fall's Toyota recall, if I remember correctly. We discussed at length quite awhile ago. We had blog posted links on these studies.
Irratic idle is not a SUA/UA issue. I sure hope you did not that is what I am saying in my blog post. I am not. Smile - just checking.
But I do find it difficult to imagine anyone would even consider filing a report for an irratic idle when vehicle stopped, and when car is not moving. Complaints I have read do not pertain to this.
Consumer filled complaints usually do increase during a highly publicized auto manufacturer recall. Multiple reason do exist for this. . And complaints decrease as publicity decreases. Again multiple reasons exist here as well. Both expected. NHTSA and experts realize this. But they still attempt to evaluate.
> I sure hope you did not that is what I am saying in my blog post
I believe some latched onto erratic idle speed control as an excuse that something minor was mistaken for SUA.
I keep thinking back to the car repair guy on the radio who said that he had experienced some toyotas with unintended acceleration early when this became a public knowledge event. He's never said anything more about it. I think I'm going to stop by his shop and ask about that one day this week.
This graph is great, but since no data project scope description is provided regarding what statistical data used, etc. - is scientifically impossible to objectively evaluate. NHTSA has always discarded the more serious SUA/UA events in past. Did they do same for this statitical data?? We don't know. I would hope data includes all complaints. Since no contained info description - can not objectively do evaluation. Wish I could. Sorry. Would be great for Toyota. And I would have liked to have asked this question to the speaker - expecially if he didn't explain in his speech. .
And I am always looking for good statistical data. Love analyzing the data. Thanks for showing - had already seen, but did not analyze contents of this particular outline guide data. Why? I was more interested in reviewing engineer speakers outline guides about auto electronics. Very educational. No conclusive opinions can be reached on the engineers speech, as only the outline guides exist. But educational value and guide topics intrigued my curiosity the most. A couple others too. Forget their names.
Gary you owe larsb an apology, clearly he was quoting hard facts and not speculating at all.
The post you responded to did not have any graph or link. It was his interpretation which is not very realistic. By October 2009 the other makers had their problems under control. And that number is the massaged number not the real count by the NHTSA.
The above graph you posted is very misleading. It shows UA reports since I believe 1998. When you look at the graphs by year and make you will see Ford's dropped dramatically in about 2005. While Toyota continued. As far as post 9/09 complaints that is even more simple to explain. It was all the pent up emotion from Toyota customers that were told there was nothing wrong with their car when they would bring it in for SUA. You all spin it any way you like. It is not resolved and will not go away by wishing and high paid PR.
Gagrice - you are correct for not totally accepting this data graph. As I have just posted - no data statistics project scope description given or listed on this slide or on any of the other slides. And yes - years that were included in this study were not listed either. If it covered too many years, that is faulty as is misleading and could undeniably damage the reputation of an auto manufacturer, etc. Example - that manufacturer may have had prior problems - but has corrected. and then graph would/may incorrectly leave wrong impression with readers. Etc. As for Ford - I have seen they generally are in second place in most data studies I have bookmarked - so sure hope they are addressing this.
Darn - wish facts were known on this data graph. Found contained info quite interesting,.but, I can not honestly or objectively evaluate without a data scope description.
Would be great news for Toyota, but as data slide is shown - data is of no help. Research scientists would have a field day of fun critiquing this data graph as presented without any info. I professionally worked with them frequently.
You are absolutely correct about the graph in Question. It was designed with one objective, To make Toyota out the victim statistically. When in fact it has been the customers that are the victims of toyota dealerships and toyota corporate hiding evidence.
That graph shows better than many how a little bit of actual data can be made to say anything the creator desires. An honest analysis of the data used would easily show the fallacy. Those trying to protect the toyota image, for whatever reason, have a real challenge before them.
Imidazo - Gosh - I sure hope my posts regarding rough idle and irratic idle when car is stopped were not interpreted as SUA/UA. My auto displayed when it was not moving.
Let me know if you talk to this auto repair technician. Would love to hear what he says.
I have have 3-4 minor incidents of SUA/UA. After last fall service check where I reported complaint to them, incidents seemed to have disappeared. I am never willing to jump too fast on a claim until my evaluations of a problem are good enough - and yes they did happen. Not my error. Yes, they were UA/UA minor incidents easily controlled. To date have disappeared, so just always careful - and just continue driving. Had one after last fall's check, but then none.
And people can form their own opinion whether they did or they didn't. What matters to me, is I evaluated and I know they did. Not my error. And no clear answer from service center agent post check - cause is unknown. Won't go into the details. I had posted this info here a long time ago.
And please note - I am not attempting to do a Toyota bash. I will say good things about my RAV4 too. But will also relate the problem issues facts I have/have had with my RAV4. Each auto manufacturer and each auto has pluses and minuses and possibly complaint issues. Whether a person trades in or not for a problem/s, is another whole personal consideration/evaluation process. Smile - and I still have my RAV4 so far.
Any statistical data study may have faulty contents. Most usually do. And there are pluses too. Multiple factors exist. Wish I knew if NHTSA or author? used all SUA/UA complaints filed in study. Doesn't say.
And yes, many times we must keep in mind some big questions - who is author, any possible bias exist with author, any possible purpose for any bias re: written psychological effects intended to give/leave impression w the reader, actual statistical data info content and length of time covered in data, pluses and minuses of actual data, number used in study, etc. - goes on and on.
Since was presented at National Academy of Sciences meeting it is what it is. Is only an outline guide and I can only take as it is displayed. Guideline does not specifically relate any info description except data I see, etc. If it refers back to the first such outline guide(doesn't say), then it may cover 2000-2010. A 10-11 total year analysis is/may be quite detrimentally misleading for some auto manufacturers. Had related only one possible problem issue that could exist if was a total over last 10-11 years in my past post.
Guides do not indicate details. Wish they did. Darn. Possibly speaker covered this in his full speech. But we don't know as full speeches not available. Another darn. I do know there are some scientists on appointed committee panel. I hope they take time to carefully evaluate positives and negatives of data.
just got off a Tundra forum and the Toyota frame rust problem seems to be accelerating. Many are complaining about premature rust on trucks as new as 2006 model years. In addition to the Tacoma frame replacement program there is also a Tundra Program. One poster commented that his Chevy Silverado had a much more substantial frame than his Tundra. I live in New York and have zero rust on my 2006 Silverado frame.
This is and will continue to be a major problem and a huge financial hit for Toyota. If and when this hits the media in a big way Toyota is toast
What I find interesting. Japanese drill pipe is superior to US made drill pipe according to the people in the oil business that use it. Why do the Japanese have a problem building vehicles that do not rust in short order? VW/Audi had rust issues in the 1970s. Now they are great and have the longest rust warranty in the business. Toyota needs to match that with 12 years no mileage limit. Probably have to replace every vehicle they have built over that time period. Except the ones in So CA non coastal regions.
I sure hope you did not that is what I am saying in my blog post
No, I didn't think that.
I'm just trying to understand the sudden surge of complaints, by a factor of twenty.
Whatever NHTSA's criteria were, surely they were the same for Ford and Toyota prior to Nov '09. So why did the complaints go from half of Ford's to 10 times Ford?
larsb was talking about those slides. I shared an image of slide 18, which is the most interesting one, and shows how Toyota was at half the problem rate of Ford, both after manual review (apples to apples). No spin! Promise! LOL
By October 2009 the other makers had their problems under control
Do you really think that? Seriously? 400+ non-Toyota complaints in 2010 already.
And that number is the massaged number not the real count by the NHTSA.
That slide *is* by NHTSA staff, it was presented by and to an NHTSA audience. There's no Toyota involved here, it was an internal NHTSA meeting.
Look again at slide 37 - titled "Publicity Effects of Toyota UA VOQs". The spike occurs only after the recall was announced.
The spike occurs only after the recall was announced.
I wish I could make myself more clear so you would understand. The spike is normal for those that have been blown off by their toyota dealers. Not every one will file a complaint with the ODI. I would say less than 10% of drivers even know the agency exists. So when the recalls and accident reports hit the mainstream news. People will say that happened to me as well.
Look again at slide 37 - titled "Publicity Effects of Toyota UA VOQs". The spike occurs only after the recall was announced.
Yes the 128 slides with little or no explanation. Left for the media and others to interpret however they like. See above explanation. This debate no longer has much to do with SUA, and everything about spin. There is NO finalized data from NHTSA on their supposed investigation. I will believe that when I see it.
It is possible the poorly designed pedal and floormats will all but eliminate the problem.
By the way a bit of anecdotal observation. For all of you that consider the average Toyota owner an incompetent driver, I am beginning to believe you. Our trip to LA for a wedding was enlightening. I would say more Camry drivers are idiots hellbent on killing themselves and all in the vicinity, than all other drivers combined. They have passed up Volvo drivers if that is possible. Wallowing in and out of traffic. I only saw one CHP the whole drive. He had a Camry stopped. I think it was for Intended over acceleration.
That was on I5/405 to Cypress. Coming back we went straight to the PCH and had a leisurely drive down the coast, with a great breakfast in Dana Point at Proud Mary's.
Glad to hear you didn't think I thought those idle issue were SUA/UA. Thanks for replying.
Sorry, but I can't answer your question. If there were a data study project description could possibly answer some questions. But no info at all displayed. Can't even get off square one with the Ford/Toyota comparison you listed. Lots of unknowns. Sorry.
I couldn't even begin to compare or make any comment about any of the other auto manufacturers either. Sorry wish I could capture your wish and make it true. No way to fairly & objectively do this though.
I am more interested in what is occurring with a manufacturer over the past 2-3 years, and particularly 2009 prior to recall. I personally see both of these as a more desirable information basis to help me evaluate each auto manufacturer and their possible present status.. And of course all inclusive data study on all/every complaint/s filed.
The sudden surge would be expected - Toyota recall was "hot topic" big continuous news for awhile. Usually occurs.
I wish I could make myself more clear so you would understand
I understand you, I just don't agree with you, that's all.
"That happened to me" phenomenon might, say, double, or maybe triple the rates of reports, maybe. Not by a factor of 20.
everything about spin
Who's spin?
NHTSA evaluates 58 black boxes, and you guys say the brakes/accelerator data was reversed because, get this - it happened once ... to a Chevy!
That means all Toyotas are backwards, because one GM was? Seriously? You say Toyota drivers can't drive, clearly we should conclude - neither can Cobalt drivers? Huh?
Talk about spin...
NO finalized data from NHTSA on their supposed investigation. I will believe that when I see it
OK, I'll give you that, it's still a draft, a work in progress.
But WILL you believe it when you see it? I don't think so, because a lot of people simply don't want to believe anything but Toyota=all bad.
Also, what we know so far is this (spin free, promise):
Fact: before Oct 09 the rate of complaints for Toyota was half of Ford, i.e. normal, not high. Source is slide 18.
Fact: the most complained about Camrys were 2002 and 2003 models, by far. Source is slide 40.
Just think about those 2 simple facts...
For 7 years, 2002 Camrys were just fine?
Sure, not everyone knows about NHTSA and the ODI, but if your car accelerated out of control and almost killed your whole family, wouldn't you find out?! No formal complaint for 7 years, then you file a complaint from memory?
I'm sure there are a few of those, like I said, maybe doubling or tripling the rate of complaints, but complaints rose by a factor of TWENTY!
The argument that nobody knows about NHTSA would also apply to Ford owners. Unless you want to argue that 10% of Toyota owners knew about NHTSA but 100% of Ford owners did. Doesn't make sense.
It is possible the poorly designed pedal and floormats will all but eliminate the problem
I think you meant to say "properly" instead of "poorly" and I agree 100%. Proper spacing, distance from floor/mat, plus a brake override. Let's remove all doubt.
I'm glad I looked again, because I observed another thing.
Remember the most complained-about models are 2002 and 2003 Camrys. Keep that in mind.
OK, now look at the graph - there is an increase in complaints filed in March 2004, when they conducted a 2004 ETC Investigation. The 02-03 Camrys were already on the road by then.
But then ... the rates drop back down again. And stay down for 5 full years.
Why wasn't the small spike in March 2004 sustained? It fizzled right out, yet the 02-03s were out there, driving around.
Now I will re-iterate your quote:
I am more interested in what is occurring with a manufacturer over the past 2-3 years, and particularly 2009 prior to recall
Over the past 2-3 years before the 2009 recall the rates were consistently low.
I think you meant to say "properly" instead of "poorly" and I agree 100%.
Yes I stand corrected.
If Toyota had not tried to cover up their POORLY designed Pedal in 2007. Several people would still be alive today. That still does not answer some serious questions concerning electronics. Only a fail safe BTO will do that.
Over the past 2-3 years before the 2009 recall the rates were consistently low.
Consistently low by who's measurement? You keep leaving out the Fact that toyota had 3000 complaints filed with the ODI PRIOR to October 2009 when the S*** hit the fan.
Who's chart is that? I do not see any identifying marks. The NHTSA does not endorse its authenticity. So is it more Toyota spin?
And what did Toyota do for those that experienced SUA with the 2002-03 model Camry?
Ateireixa - smile - see you are still using these graphs. As I said - no info is known & no data project description listed. Wish this info were listed, even a simple explanation on the bullet point outline guides would have helped a little, maybe not. I can't do without any description info. Would not be good science analysis application.
Here is another one of the data studies I have bookmarked. Took long time for me to find, so didn't look for more. Do note - I also have a few questions regarding this data study as well. Yes, this study has faults too. Another example of vague project description listed. Must always be alert data studies can also be done/setup in a way to hopefully reach authors desired/intended results.
This one is interesting as you can click on the years and actually see numbers of complaints. No graphs. I find listed numbers more valuable info for me. Too bad they didn't f/u w a graph then. That would be a good final comparison relating to their original given listed numbers. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124235858
My only advice is look at as many data studies as you can find. Analyze each study to see what is faulty, etc. Then compare all studies with open objectiveness. And also hopefully realizing/taking into consideration the limitations of each specific study.
Glad you are interested in last 2-3 years years too. I would need a good data all complaint/.accident inclusive & well explained project description study. So far I haven't found one that meets this criteria.
As far as any spikes and falls for any auto manufacturers in any data study - have to refer back to SUA/UA timelines, each manufacurers issues present/ still possibly exist forward, etc. ETC's were installed Toyota Camry 2002. And then expanded. One NHTSA Toyota service bulletin end of 2002 I believe and then another for service bulletin recalibration 2003. Etc.
Here are two sites that may assist with timeline info that may help. Is just for look at timeline in these sites. Timelines listed do seem to be accurate from what I checked in past. Not too many sites list this info.
Sorry. Good project description is the key that would enable a fair evaluation. If we had the full speech documents and the discusions - all of these blog posts regarding this may be answered. Darn - we don't
Greg - those slides were found in a NHTSA speakers outline guide at the National Academy of Science meeting June 30, 2010. I initially saw car space on data and thought was their study - but then I checked and discovered was actually at the above mentioned meeting and in those speech outline guides. Sorry I never mentioned my problems intitially too, and Ateixeira probably just assumed we all knew and didn't think clarification needed. Smile - think we are all on same page now. Whoops - I did same too.
I still keep saying can't analyze & no conclusions can be drawn - due fact no data study projection description listed.
Here is link
◦Daniel C. Smith, Associate Administrator, Enforcement
Link with all speakers outline guides - or should say most - some are missing it seems. Guess they had no outline guides maybe. Had seen couple news reports a Dr Pecht, one of the government consulted expert engineer/research used/consulted experts from University of Maryland spoke. No guides for him. Noticed another actual listed speaker did not have guides either. http://www.trb.org/main/uastudy.aspx
As far as what did Toyota do in past - refer to the two sites I just posted. The SUA/UA Timelines may help. I had checked their timelines in past and seemed ok. If a blogger doesn't like these two - just look at time lines and discard info you may personally feel is biased. Seemed to be best sites for timelines info.
I'm comparing Toyota's numbers to Ford's because they were both measured using the same scale (apples to apples) and that's the data that is available and can be compared to other manufacturers' baselines.
Who's chart is that? I do not see any identifying marks. The NHTSA does not endorse its authenticity. So is it more Toyota spin?
This chart is by NHTSA's own panel, actually. It was presented by Daniel C. Smith, per slide 2, from NHTSA's Enforcement division, with input from NASA (per slide 13).
I imagine they'll present this to the public in a watered down fashion and that'll be the final report you're waiting for.
Glad you are interested in last 2-3 years years too. I would need a good data all complaint/.accident inclusive & well explained project description study. So far I haven't found one that meets this criteria.
What I'd like to see is how the complaint rates for Toyotas compares to other manufacturers from 2004 to 2009, those 5 key years. The graph clearly shows a valley during that period. But what if we isolate just those years and compare to competitors?
We only have the total before Oct 2009, and after. Limited data, for sure.
I opened that NPR link but the data didn't make much sense to me - VW/Audi is pretty much consistently the worst, 3 times as bad as Toyota in 2008, yet they were the first to incorporate an override for the throttle when you apply the brakes.
Hard to draw any conclusions from that data. I bet those were not filtered with the "manual review" that NHTSA talked about in the slide show.
What I'd like to see is how the complaint rates for Toyotas compares to other manufacturers from 2004 to 2009, those 5 key years. The graph clearly shows a valley during that period. But what if we isolate just those years and compare to competitors?
We only have the total before Oct 2009, and after. Limited data, for sure.
Many years ago the LA Times ran an article about how poor the general public was at understanding risks and where dangers really lie. They used the example of how much publicity a loaded 747 crashing and killing 400 people would receive, yet pointed out that EVERY DAY the equivalent of two 747's "crash" due to deaths from smoking.
With Toyota, while I am no fan and agree they have let their quality slip a lot, the UA is receiving publicity all out of proportion to the problem, in terms of the actual danger to most Toyota drivers. Yet every day, many people are killed in car accidents, and a LOT of those are due to SUV rollovers. SUVs are much more likely to roll over in evasive maneuvers than cars. I'd like to see the data on how many people die in those accidents. I'm quite confident that those numbers would dwarf the Toyota UA deaths, probably by several orders of magnitude.
Thanks for replying. And your welcome. Assume you saw the other three also.
Yes, the NHTSA SUA/UA data study manuel review. I saw that particular guide. Still don't know what they did. No clear explanation once again. Sorry all still remains same.
No Toyota was not first to apply brake override. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you said. Some European autos have had for awhile already. Saw Hyundai quietly had implemented for all new models starting in Feb or March, 2010. A few American auto manufacturers susposedly had on some of their models already - but I have not confirmed. But Toyota implementing is good. Glad to see, but hope system is good. If not independent system problems could still arise. Not sure what they did.
And NPR site data study is faulty too, as I said.
"Filtering" may not always be good application process. Depends upon what filtering criteria the author used. And no real info exists- is only outline guide. Huge questions that would affect data study results. .
Personally, I think the smartest player in this whole Toyota SUA matter was Hertz. They loaded up with Toyota's at a great price, probably because they remembered the old Audi SUA fiasco.
Comments
The hiding of the facts about the ever increasing number of SUA events and the attempt to manipulate the people within the NHSTA is what is still hurting the toyota-lexus image.
>This has turned into a place where everyone gets to exhibit how smart they are.
Now that is off topic.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That is just one of many issues that Toyota has faced during the five years this thread has been going. The original post was pointing out how Toyota quality was going down hill in 2005. I think the changes made in especially 2007 were significant and show the true direction toyota was heading.
Toyota vehicle recalls double in 2005
WASHINGTON (AP) — Toyota Motor (TM), which is challenging General Motors (GM) to become the world's largest automaker, saw its number of recalled vehicles in the United States double in 2005, according to government records.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2005-12-01-toyota-recalls_x.htm
I just read the paragraph that you posted from a cut and paste of my post. Wow! My fingers sure went crazy on the keyboard. Sorry about all the spell typo errors. Whoops.
What Dr Todd Hubing presented at National Academy of Science meeting appeared to be good speech. His professional background is impressive, and feel no one would claim he is not a highly qualified Vehicular Electronics expert. Hope you noticed on that one link his wife is also listed as an outstanding engineer educator. I am disappointed full speech document was not available to evaluate online. Bullet points list topics discussed, but sure do not provide what he actually said. Noticed Dr Hubing had actually been doing UA research at Clemson University in their auto research center for over a year now. Found his examples topics pages quite good. Refer to pages 16-21. Appears these may be lists of the electronic problems he has found during his research testing of Toyota UA. If true he has found more possible UA problem causes than Dr Gilbert. Dr Gilbert's study focused on the Toyota ETC. His topics for short term recommendations and long term recommendations do seem good. Seems short term are brake override systems but gives BMW system type the nod. kill switch to override engine control module, more hardware redundancy & fault tolerant auto software design which would be inexpensive. Etc.
Guess we all wait to see what further research by NASA and Dr Hubing reveals. Dr Gilbert has been muzzled by Toyota pressure on university, and was foced to stop doing research, Dr Gilbert is out. Did see Dr Hubing has provided NASA with documents of his research.
Electronics is just one piece of the UA puzzle. I fully realize National Academy of sciences is evaluating many different aspects of UA.causes. We now wait to see how these discovered electronic cause problems and real world scenerios connect. Research is long tedious step progressive process. Lots of different aspects will be considered/evaluated as decisions and recommended approaches come forward. Auto manufacturers implementation costs, reputations, lobbying, detrimental business effects will play out to be huge factors. Approaches/decison findings may not be "black and white."
My neighbor and I were talking and he heard also. He does not feel car idle, even in normal idle state, sounds smooth. Smile - polite, but raised his eyebrows frowning. Stated their Lexus models did not display this irratic idle symptom. .
This issue is a little minor symptom of this particular auto. As long as it starts and runs, will not address.
So the '08 Lancer GTS really had to be good to lull me away from the Sportage 4X4. And it is. Glad you like your RAV4 sharonkl, and keep up the great "Diane Sawyer" ABC news reporting. You're the rock of this thread, really.
Appears these may be lists of the electronic problems he has found during his research testing of Toyota UA. If true he has found more possible UA problem causes than Dr Gilbert. Dr Gilbert's study focused on the toyota ETC. His topics for short term recommendations and long term recommendations do seem good. Seems short term are brake override systems but gives BMW system type the nod. kill switch to override engine control module, more hardware redundancy & fault tolerant auto software design which would be inexpensive. Etc.
If toyota hasn't reclled millions of their rigs on the road by now and retro-fitted them with these brake-override systems, they should be forced to by our political machine that looks to be coddling them along here. If Congress had the intestinal fortitude they ought to have, they would force the retrofit immediately for even gagrice's Sequoia. gagrice, does your toyota SUV already have the brake override system installed?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
This rough idle symptom more frequently than not, is just what it is. The irratic ups and downs are another aspect. So far has not created any issues. My friends RAV4 does not do. Actually their auto idles fairly well. Car does work for me. At time I purchased it was only one of only a few(4) SUV's w adequate needed cargo space for two large wire dog kennels w good gas mileage. Tape measure was a must carry along, as listed cargo space many times inadequate
Glad you are enjoying your Lancer GTS. A good reliable 4WD system is a must for snow country. Rain, high winds, muddy country roads too. Etc.
FYI - I had also read a report Dr Michael Pecht, who heads the University of Maryland’s Center for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering (CALCE) and who advised Oversight Committee on Toyota UA. I can't find him listed though, and no speech outline guides seen. Am going to do more research and see if I can verify he was there.
As far as brake override, Toyota did install into certain selected models. Info is available on Toyota website as to which autos were part of recall & got this system.
Where will all end? Guess eventually we shall find out. Well, whoops - I forgot & see NASA Study on Toyota UA & electronics may be completed the end of this month. H-mmmm. National Academy of Science UA Study all manufacturers is to last for approximately 15 months. If Dr Hubing from Clemson is left alone w no university pressure from whole auto industry, his present ongoing UA research for past year could swing into higher gear. University researchers dream & hope for possible opportunities like this. Gotta love the mind of a good university researcher.
Best to you!!! Thanks again
And I can't blame that on toyota. toyota IMO still doesn't deserve the capitalization of their "t", not yet anyway. I want to see their engineering and production departments get going and make all of their rigs safer for drivers. Right now I highly suspect their engine and acceleration computer controls and implementation departments.
I was not the person who has released facts regarding SUA complaints. 3 of 4 cases involves toyota vehicles-and I don't know how much money toyota has paid the NHTSA to "relieve" toyota of any SUA blame in their vehicles, but that's not the way to solve problems. Taking hush and "instantly absolve us please" cash to release nonsensical reports on manufacturer vehicle safety is despicable and very, very sad. This is a large issue and it needs action taken on it, and buying a new toyota rig at this time makes about as much sense as crowning Charles Barkley U.S. President. Or even NBA Commissioner, for that matter. :P
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
small print on the trade in, must be less than 12 years old and less than 150k miles on it.
does not smell like success to me.
I guess the dealership is running a charity!! If it`s 5k for trade in -- he is selling for MSRP +mop and glo + all that rustproofing,etching,etc etc .
THIS data:
Clearly it was NOT speculation. There was indeed a very sudden surge of complaints.
Toyota went from having about half as many as Ford less than a year ago (!) to having more than 10 times as many as Ford.
Gary you owe larsb an apology, clearly he was quoting hard facts and not speculating at all.
Same as imidazol's friend's airport-loud Corolla.
These types of false-positives account for the sudden surge in UA complaints to NHTSA.
There's just no way Toyotas would have half the problems as Ford until very recently (less than a year ago), and about the same as GM, probably less than Chrysler on a per-car basis.
Then suddenly, boom, that figure surges by a factor of TWENTY? From half to 10 times in 10 months? All the cars were bad, but they waited until these 10 months to go bad? Yeah, right.
Seriously, does anyone believe that data is consistent? TWENTY times? Totally and completely inconsistent. The only reasonable explanation is media hype and hysteria, and resulting false reports.
This report was presented in front of a Who's Who at NHTSA. Heads would drop if it were not accurate.
Whoop-de-doo. I'm sure you'd have to pay MSRP plus fees to get that amount for your trade, read the fine print. Typical misleading dealer ad.
The domestics have 0% for 6 years on some models.
72 months loans - imaging how badly you'd be upside down the first couple of years. :sick:
This was Edmunds second study- Can find reference to the first. Both have study faults inherent for each study.
.http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/02/toyota-leads-in-nhtsa-unintended-accelerati- on-complaints-edmundscom-analysis-shows.html
This Consumers Report Study has some study faults as well. The report gives study project description - reveals they used autos w UA/SUA that were more serious - was for auto complaints that NHTSA discarded/did not consider in auto recalls per Toyota pressure. NHTSA only used very mild SUA/UA complaints for recall justfication off approach taken. Not too honorable NHTSA approach to address only the mild ones in earlier recalls.!! And not include all SUA/ UA events. Scientifically not good practice.
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/12/sudden-unintended-acceleration-sua- -analysis-2008-toyota-lexus-ford-gm.html
If I get time will attempt to search for some of the other studies I have saved - do have. And some were studies done prior to last fall's Toyota recall, if I remember correctly. We discussed at length quite awhile ago. We had blog posted links on these studies.
I have not fully analyzed Car Space study.
But I do find it difficult to imagine anyone would even consider filing a report for an irratic idle when vehicle stopped, and when car is not moving. Complaints I have read do not pertain to this.
Consumer filled complaints usually do increase during a highly publicized auto manufacturer recall. Multiple reason do exist for this. . And complaints decrease as publicity decreases. Again multiple reasons exist here as well. Both expected. NHTSA and experts realize this. But they still attempt to evaluate.
I believe some latched onto erratic idle speed control as an excuse that something minor was mistaken for SUA.
I keep thinking back to the car repair guy on the radio who said that he had experienced some toyotas with unintended acceleration early when this became a public knowledge event. He's never said anything more about it. I think I'm going to stop by his shop and ask about that one day this week.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And I am always looking for good statistical data. Love analyzing the data. Thanks for showing - had already seen, but did not analyze contents of this particular outline guide data. Why? I was more interested in reviewing engineer speakers outline guides about auto electronics. Very educational. No conclusive opinions can be reached on the engineers speech, as only the outline guides exist. But educational value and guide topics intrigued my curiosity the most. A couple others too. Forget their names.
The post you responded to did not have any graph or link. It was his interpretation which is not very realistic. By October 2009 the other makers had their problems under control. And that number is the massaged number not the real count by the NHTSA.
The above graph you posted is very misleading. It shows UA reports since I believe 1998. When you look at the graphs by year and make you will see Ford's dropped dramatically in about 2005. While Toyota continued. As far as post 9/09 complaints that is even more simple to explain. It was all the pent up emotion from Toyota customers that were told there was nothing wrong with their car when they would bring it in for SUA. You all spin it any way you like. It is not resolved and will not go away by wishing and high paid PR.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/02/toyota-leads-in-nhtsa-unintended-acceleratio- n-complaints-edmundscom-analysis-shows.html
Darn - wish facts were known on this data graph. Found contained info quite interesting,.but, I can not honestly or objectively evaluate without a data scope description.
Would be great news for Toyota, but as data slide is shown - data is of no help. Research scientists would have a field day of fun critiquing this data graph as presented without any info. I professionally worked with them frequently.
That graph shows better than many how a little bit of actual data can be made to say anything the creator desires. An honest analysis of the data used would easily show the fallacy. Those trying to protect the toyota image, for whatever reason, have a real challenge before them.
Let me know if you talk to this auto repair technician. Would love to hear what he says.
I have have 3-4 minor incidents of SUA/UA. After last fall service check where I reported complaint to them, incidents seemed to have disappeared. I am never willing to jump too fast on a claim until my evaluations of a problem are good enough - and yes they did happen. Not my error. Yes, they were UA/UA minor incidents easily controlled. To date have disappeared, so just always careful - and just continue driving. Had one after last fall's check, but then none.
And people can form their own opinion whether they did or they didn't. What matters to me, is I evaluated and I know they did. Not my error. And no clear answer from service center agent post check - cause is unknown. Won't go into the details. I had posted this info here a long time ago.
And please note - I am not attempting to do a Toyota bash. I will say good things about my RAV4 too. But will also relate the problem issues facts I have/have had with my RAV4. Each auto manufacturer and each auto has pluses and minuses and possibly complaint issues. Whether a person trades in or not for a problem/s, is another whole personal consideration/evaluation process. Smile - and I still have my RAV4 so far.
And yes, many times we must keep in mind some big questions - who is author, any possible bias exist with author, any possible purpose for any bias re: written psychological effects intended to give/leave impression w the reader, actual statistical data info content and length of time covered in data, pluses and minuses of actual data, number used in study, etc. - goes on and on.
Since was presented at National Academy of Sciences meeting it is what it is. Is only an outline guide and I can only take as it is displayed. Guideline does not specifically relate any info description except data I see, etc. If it refers back to the first such outline guide(doesn't say), then it may cover 2000-2010. A 10-11 total year analysis is/may be quite detrimentally misleading for some auto manufacturers. Had related only one possible problem issue that could exist if was a total over last 10-11 years in my past post.
Guides do not indicate details. Wish they did. Darn. Possibly speaker covered this in his full speech. But we don't know as full speeches not available. Another darn. I do know there are some scientists on appointed committee panel. I hope they take time to carefully evaluate positives and negatives of data.
also a Tundra Program. One poster commented that his Chevy Silverado had a much more substantial frame than his Tundra. I live in New York and have zero rust on my 2006 Silverado frame.
This is and will continue to be a major problem and a huge financial hit for Toyota.
If and when this hits the media in a big way Toyota is toast
Here is the forum:
http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/blog/2010/05/06/toyota-launches-00-03-tundra-f- - rame-replacement-program/
Toyota Tacoma 2004 and Earlier Frame Problem
No, I didn't think that.
I'm just trying to understand the sudden surge of complaints, by a factor of twenty.
Whatever NHTSA's criteria were, surely they were the same for Ford and Toyota prior to Nov '09. So why did the complaints go from half of Ford's to 10 times Ford?
larsb replied to a post from busiris, which actually did have this link:
http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/07/100630DOTSlides.pdf
larsb was talking about those slides. I shared an image of slide 18, which is the most interesting one, and shows how Toyota was at half the problem rate of Ford, both after manual review (apples to apples). No spin! Promise! LOL
By October 2009 the other makers had their problems under control
Do you really think that? Seriously? 400+ non-Toyota complaints in 2010 already.
And that number is the massaged number not the real count by the NHTSA.
That slide *is* by NHTSA staff, it was presented by and to an NHTSA audience. There's no Toyota involved here, it was an internal NHTSA meeting.
Look again at slide 37 - titled "Publicity Effects of Toyota UA VOQs". The spike occurs only after the recall was announced.
I wish I could make myself more clear so you would understand. The spike is normal for those that have been blown off by their toyota dealers. Not every one will file a complaint with the ODI. I would say less than 10% of drivers even know the agency exists. So when the recalls and accident reports hit the mainstream news. People will say that happened to me as well.
Look again at slide 37 - titled "Publicity Effects of Toyota UA VOQs". The spike occurs only after the recall was announced.
Yes the 128 slides with little or no explanation. Left for the media and others to interpret however they like. See above explanation. This debate no longer has much to do with SUA, and everything about spin. There is NO finalized data from NHTSA on their supposed investigation. I will believe that when I see it.
It is possible the poorly designed pedal and floormats will all but eliminate the problem.
By the way a bit of anecdotal observation. For all of you that consider the average Toyota owner an incompetent driver, I am beginning to believe you. Our trip to LA for a wedding was enlightening. I would say more Camry drivers are idiots hellbent on killing themselves and all in the vicinity, than all other drivers combined. They have passed up Volvo drivers if that is possible. Wallowing in and out of traffic. I only saw one CHP the whole drive. He had a Camry stopped. I think it was for Intended over acceleration.
That was on I5/405 to Cypress. Coming back we went straight to the PCH and had a leisurely drive down the coast, with a great breakfast in Dana Point at Proud Mary's.
Sorry, but I can't answer your question. If there were a data study project description could possibly answer some questions. But no info at all displayed. Can't even get off square one with the Ford/Toyota comparison you listed. Lots of unknowns. Sorry.
I couldn't even begin to compare or make any comment about any of the other auto manufacturers either. Sorry wish I could capture your wish and make it true. No way to fairly & objectively do this though.
I am more interested in what is occurring with a manufacturer over the past 2-3 years, and particularly 2009 prior to recall. I personally see both of these as a more desirable information basis to help me evaluate each auto manufacturer and their possible present status.. And of course all inclusive data study on all/every complaint/s filed.
The sudden surge would be expected - Toyota recall was "hot topic" big continuous news for awhile. Usually occurs.
Even toyota's rust is suffering Unintended Acceleration!!!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I understand you, I just don't agree with you, that's all.
"That happened to me" phenomenon might, say, double, or maybe triple the rates of reports, maybe. Not by a factor of 20.
everything about spin
Who's spin?
NHTSA evaluates 58 black boxes, and you guys say the brakes/accelerator data was reversed because, get this - it happened once ... to a Chevy!
That means all Toyotas are backwards, because one GM was? Seriously? You say Toyota drivers can't drive, clearly we should conclude - neither can Cobalt drivers? Huh?
Talk about spin...
NO finalized data from NHTSA on their supposed investigation. I will believe that when I see it
OK, I'll give you that, it's still a draft, a work in progress.
But WILL you believe it when you see it? I don't think so, because a lot of people simply don't want to believe anything but Toyota=all bad.
Also, what we know so far is this (spin free, promise):
Fact: before Oct 09 the rate of complaints for Toyota was half of Ford, i.e. normal, not high. Source is slide 18.
Fact: the most complained about Camrys were 2002 and 2003 models, by far. Source is slide 40.
Just think about those 2 simple facts...
For 7 years, 2002 Camrys were just fine?
Sure, not everyone knows about NHTSA and the ODI, but if your car accelerated out of control and almost killed your whole family, wouldn't you find out?! No formal complaint for 7 years, then you file a complaint from memory?
I'm sure there are a few of those, like I said, maybe doubling or tripling the rate of complaints, but complaints rose by a factor of TWENTY!
The argument that nobody knows about NHTSA would also apply to Ford owners. Unless you want to argue that 10% of Toyota owners knew about NHTSA but 100% of Ford owners did. Doesn't make sense.
It is possible the poorly designed pedal and floormats will all but eliminate the problem
I think you meant to say "properly" instead of "poorly" and I agree 100%. Proper spacing, distance from floor/mat, plus a brake override. Let's remove all doubt.
So was I, and Toyota's problem rates were not high.
This graph isolates it by month:
I'm glad I looked again, because I observed another thing.
Remember the most complained-about models are 2002 and 2003 Camrys. Keep that in mind.
OK, now look at the graph - there is an increase in complaints filed in March 2004, when they conducted a 2004 ETC Investigation. The 02-03 Camrys were already on the road by then.
But then ... the rates drop back down again. And stay down for 5 full years.
Why wasn't the small spike in March 2004 sustained? It fizzled right out, yet the 02-03s were out there, driving around.
Now I will re-iterate your quote:
I am more interested in what is occurring with a manufacturer over the past 2-3 years, and particularly 2009 prior to recall
Over the past 2-3 years before the 2009 recall the rates were consistently low.
For 5 years, actually.
Yes I stand corrected.
If Toyota had not tried to cover up their POORLY designed Pedal in 2007. Several people would still be alive today. That still does not answer some serious questions concerning electronics. Only a fail safe BTO will do that.
Consistently low by who's measurement? You keep leaving out the Fact that toyota had 3000 complaints filed with the ODI PRIOR to October 2009 when the S*** hit the fan.
Who's chart is that? I do not see any identifying marks. The NHTSA does not endorse its authenticity. So is it more Toyota spin?
And what did Toyota do for those that experienced SUA with the 2002-03 model Camry?
Here is another one of the data studies I have bookmarked. Took long time for me to find, so didn't look for more. Do note - I also have a few questions regarding this data study as well. Yes, this study has faults too. Another example of vague project description listed. Must always be alert data studies can also be done/setup in a way to hopefully reach authors desired/intended results.
This one is interesting as you can click on the years and actually see numbers of complaints. No graphs. I find listed numbers more valuable info for me. Too bad they didn't f/u w a graph then. That would be a good final comparison relating to their original given listed numbers.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124235858
My only advice is look at as many data studies as you can find. Analyze each study to see what is faulty, etc. Then compare all studies with open objectiveness. And also hopefully realizing/taking into consideration the limitations of each specific study.
Glad you are interested in last 2-3 years years too. I would need a good data all complaint/.accident inclusive & well explained project description study. So far I haven't found one that meets this criteria.
As far as any spikes and falls for any auto manufacturers in any data study - have to refer back to SUA/UA timelines, each manufacurers issues present/ still possibly exist forward, etc. ETC's were installed Toyota Camry 2002. And then expanded. One NHTSA Toyota service bulletin end of 2002 I believe and then another for service bulletin recalibration 2003. Etc.
Here are two sites that may assist with timeline info that may help. Is just for look at timeline in these sites. Timelines listed do seem to be accurate from what I checked in past. Not too many sites list this info.
http://www.safetyresearch.net/toyota-sudden-unintended-acceleration/toyota-sudde- n-acceleration-timeline/
http://www.autosafety.org/toyota-sudden-acceleration
Sorry. Good project description is the key that would enable a fair evaluation. If we had the full speech documents and the discusions - all of these blog posts regarding this may be answered. Darn - we don't
I still keep saying can't analyze & no conclusions can be drawn - due fact no data study projection description listed.
Here is link
◦Daniel C. Smith, Associate Administrator, Enforcement
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/ua/100630DOTSlidesSmith.pdf
Link with all speakers outline guides - or should say most - some are missing it seems. Guess they had no outline guides maybe. Had seen couple news reports a Dr Pecht, one of the government consulted expert engineer/research used/consulted experts from University of Maryland spoke. No guides for him. Noticed another actual listed speaker did not have guides either.
http://www.trb.org/main/uastudy.aspx
As far as what did Toyota do in past - refer to the two sites I just posted. The SUA/UA Timelines may help. I had checked their timelines in past and seemed ok. If a blogger doesn't like these two - just look at time lines and discard info you may personally feel is biased. Seemed to be best sites for timelines info.
Who's chart is that? I do not see any identifying marks. The NHTSA does not endorse its authenticity. So is it more Toyota spin?
This chart is by NHTSA's own panel, actually. It was presented by Daniel C. Smith, per slide 2, from NHTSA's Enforcement division, with input from NASA (per slide 13).
I imagine they'll present this to the public in a watered down fashion and that'll be the final report you're waiting for.
Gary keeps saying only a tiny percentage of them are even aware of NHTSA's existence.
What I'd like to see is how the complaint rates for Toyotas compares to other manufacturers from 2004 to 2009, those 5 key years. The graph clearly shows a valley during that period. But what if we isolate just those years and compare to competitors?
We only have the total before Oct 2009, and after. Limited data, for sure.
I opened that NPR link but the data didn't make much sense to me - VW/Audi is pretty much consistently the worst, 3 times as bad as Toyota in 2008, yet they were the first to incorporate an override for the throttle when you apply the brakes.
Hard to draw any conclusions from that data. I bet those were not filtered with the "manual review" that NHTSA talked about in the slide show.
We only have the total before Oct 2009, and after. Limited data, for sure.
Many years ago the LA Times ran an article about how poor the general public was at understanding risks and where dangers really lie. They used the example of how much publicity a loaded 747 crashing and killing 400 people would receive, yet pointed out that EVERY DAY the equivalent of two 747's "crash" due to deaths from smoking.
With Toyota, while I am no fan and agree they have let their quality slip a lot, the UA is receiving publicity all out of proportion to the problem, in terms of the actual danger to most Toyota drivers. Yet every day, many people are killed in car accidents, and a LOT of those are due to SUV rollovers. SUVs are much more likely to roll over in evasive maneuvers than cars. I'd like to see the data on how many people die in those accidents. I'm quite confident that those numbers would dwarf the Toyota UA deaths, probably by several orders of magnitude.
The thing about being the #1 import brand is this - you will have a LOT of enemies.
Yes, the NHTSA SUA/UA data study manuel review. I saw that particular guide. Still don't know what they did. No clear explanation once again. Sorry all still remains same.
No Toyota was not first to apply brake override. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you said. Some European autos have had for awhile already. Saw Hyundai quietly had implemented for all new models starting in Feb or March, 2010. A few American auto manufacturers susposedly had on some of their models already - but I have not confirmed. But Toyota implementing is good. Glad to see, but hope system is good. If not independent system problems could still arise. Not sure what they did.
And NPR site data study is faulty too, as I said.
"Filtering" may not always be good application process. Depends upon what filtering criteria the author used. And no real info exists- is only outline guide. Huge questions that would affect data study results. .
Aaaah. The toyotas are rental fleet fodder now!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,