Toyota Throttle Electronics Easily Confused
in [Technical]
|
From: jim beam on 25 Feb 2010 23:11 On 02/25/2010 02:54 PM, Tegger wrote: > "C. E. White"<cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in news:hm661q$p58$1 > @news.eternal-september.org: > >> >> "Tegger"<invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message >> news:Xns9D2A4B185CB99tegger(a)208.90.168.18... >> >>> Or it's simple pedal misapplication, which is the most common cause >>> of SUA >>> by far, and is essentially out of /any/ automaker's control. >> >> Not really - software that recognized both pedals are pressed could >> cut power to the engine. > > > Which Toyota is doing. > > But that doesn't affect pedal misapplication if only ONE pedal is > depressed. That situation covers the overwhleming majority of SUA > incidents. > > > >> The shift interlocks that force you to press >> on the brakes before shifting into gear were a "fix" for the Audi 5000 >> UA concerns. If the Safety Nazis get there way, there will be so many >> fixes for potential/theoretical driver errors, that cars won't be >> usable, or affordable. > > > And somebody, somewhere, will still find a way to make a car run away with > itself anyway. At some point you have to give SOME sort of control to the > driver. and ANY sort of control of ANY kind carries SOME degree of risk. > > Life is dangerous. And it's imperfect. And it is risky. At some point you > have to accept those facts, be your own last line of defense, and stop > blaming others. > > > but ed's /paid/ to blame others... -- nomina rutrum rutrum
From: jim beam on 25 Feb 2010 23:41 On 02/25/2010 01:43 PM, Ed White wrote: > On Feb 25, 10:09�am, "JoeSpareBedroom"<newstr...(a)frontiernet.net> > wrote: >> "C. E. White"<cewhi...(a)mindspring.com> wrote in messagenews:hm6346$ukt$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> "john"<johngd...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:632aabcb-70bd-4397-879b-f6da50eb972f(a)l12g2000prg.googlegroups.com... >>>> The floor mats and sticking pedal accounts for only 30% of the >>>> problems. The true cause of sudden acceleration is still not known so >>>> no real solution is possible. IMO it's the electronics. >> >>>> "In earlier testimony, David Gilbert, a Southern Illinois University >>>> professor, tells the panel he was able to produce in a lab environment >>>> a sudden-acceleration incident using a Toyota vehicle, in essence by >>>> introducing a short between two circuits. >> >>> Consider who is paying for this research....Trail Lawyers! >> >>> This is eerily �like the Audi 5000 frenzy. When 60 minutes did their >>> hatchet job on the 5000, they produced an "expert" who "proved" that the >>> 5000's automatic transmission could force a kick down of the accelerator >>> pedal, resulting in sudden acceleration. Good old Ed Bradly presented this >>> as some sort of scientific proof. Only later did we learn (and not from >>> CBS) that the expert added an extra hydraulic pump and external piping to >>> demonstarte this "failure" mode. >> >>> There may or may not be an actual problem with the Toyota electronics. But >>> an "expert" that creates shorts to "prove" there is a problem is not the >>> sort of expert I trust. >> >>> Ed >> >> I see no indication that any expert claims to have proven anything. �Maybe >> you're interpreting something differently than I am. Please highlight the >> words you read and surround them with five asterisks on either end of the >> phrase, *****like this*****.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > "Prove" was probably to strong a word. I suppose I should have said > "an expert that creates wildly unlikely shorts to demonstartes how the > electronics could casue the problem is not the sort of expert I > trust." > > Ed yeah, you just trust money. shill money. -- nomina rutrum rutrum
From: C. E. White on 25 Feb 2010 23:57 "Tegger" <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message news:Xns9D2AB50D8C0F4tegger(a)208.90.168.18... > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in news:hm66bl$rnb$1 > @news.eternal-september.org: > >> >> "jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message >> news:ksWdnXsZp4N7GhvWnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... >> >>> double-standard bullshit. frod bribed the entire congress into >>> accepting a lie about tires being at fault for a fundamentally >>> flawed vehicle design. where the heck were all you guys then? >> >> You have to quit repeating this lie. Explorers were no more >> "fundamentally flawed" than other mid sized SUVs from the 1990's. As I >> have pointed out to you multiple times, the accident rates, injury >> rates, rollover rates, etc. for Explorers were actually better than >> for most competitive vehciels and far better than for 4Runners from >> that period. Explorers actually had much lower injury rates that >> "Average" vehciles in that time period. > > > > The two vehicles are not really comparable. The Explorer and the 4Runner > attracted different markets, with the 4Runner's market being younger. > Younger is generally associated with higher accident claims. I oartially agree. However, it should be noted that the Explorer model with the worst safety record was the 2 Door Sport model, which also was attractive to younger people (mostly because it was cheap). The accident rate for the 2 Door 2WD Sport Model (which had a shorter wheelbase than the 4 door models) was particularly bad compared to the four door Explorer models. If you compare 4 door 4 wheel drive mid-sized SUVs from the 1990's Explorers did very well. The trial lawyer websites always seem to show pictures of mid to late model 4 Door Explorers when trolling for clients, yet these were among the safest mid-sized SUVs sold at the time. I do agree that the population of owners does have a significant effect on the accident statistics. But while 4Runners might have appealed to a younger crowd, I suspect 4 Door Explorers appealed to a lot of middle aged women.....I doubt they were the best equipped people to handle a top heavy SUV no matter who made it. It is hard to find demographics on who was driving which SUVs that rolled over, but two things are true - the mid-90's 4 door 4Runner had a worse "rollover rating" (using the NHTSA calculation system) than the 4 door Explorer and it had a weaker roof based on NHTSA tests. So I still content that if you are going to rant and rave about how dangerous Explorers were, then you need to rant and rave about 4Runners as well (and other also - like 2WD S10 Blazer). > I've never driven an Explorer, but I did spend two weeks driving an > Escape, > a few years ago. I was quite impressed with the truck's handling. For such > a tall vehicle, it was surprisingly nimble and well-controlled. Had I been > in the market for a small domestic SUV, I think the Escape would have been > my choice. I owned a 1996 4 Door 4 Wheel Drive Explorer for a year. It was OK, but I never really was enthusiastic about it. It did have great seats (best OE seats I ever had, they were the optional sports seats). My Explorer came with Goodyear tires and I never had a problem. (1 year and 32,000 miles) Around the same time, my Father had a Ranger that came with the infamous Firestone ATX tires. Long before the recall he had already replaced two of them because the treads split and He removed the other two and placed them in the barn. The two that actually failed did not suffer from a tread separation like the press talked about, the tread just split down the middle. When Ford recalled the tires, we swapped the two in the barn for something better. Even the cheap private brand tires my Father bought as replacements held up better than those OE Firestone tires. I will never buy the idea that Explorers were inherently dangerous (at least compared to other vehicles in the class), but I do think Ford deserved to be roasted for installing such crappy ties on their vehicles. Ed
From: larry moe 'n curly on 26 Feb 2010 00:24 C. E. White wrote: > > The important question is - who is funding Dr. Gilbert's "research? > My understanding is that it is funded by trail lawyers. Trail lawyers > don't care about facts or truth, except as they can be twisted to suit > their purposes. Are you calling trail explorer and attorney Daniel Boone a liar??? ;)
From: C. E. White on 26 Feb 2010 00:40
"JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:7RHhn.36485$K81.1840(a)newsfe18.iad... > "jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message > news:4vKdnXiljpeq1BrWnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... >> On 02/25/2010 06:56 AM, C. E. White wrote: >>> "john"<johngdole(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:632aabcb-70bd-4397-879b-f6da50eb972f(a)l12g2000prg.googlegroups.com... >>>> The floor mats and sticking pedal accounts for only 30% of the >>>> problems. The true cause of sudden acceleration is still not known >>>> so >>>> no real solution is possible. IMO it's the electronics. >>>> >>>> "In earlier testimony, David Gilbert, a Southern Illinois University >>>> professor, tells the panel he was able to produce in a lab >>>> environment >>>> a sudden-acceleration incident using a Toyota vehicle, in essence by >>>> introducing a short between two circuits. >>> >>> Consider who is paying for this research....Trail Lawyers! >> >> "trail" lawyers? com on ed, when you regurgitate the copy your minions >> draft for you, you really should proof read it before you put your name >> to it. >> >> besides, since when was a lawyer's ability to subpoena factual evidence >> the lawyer's fault? if frod hadn't done the math on cost of payouts to >> the families of the bereaved vs. profits on a vehicle they knew to be >> flawed, neither i nor any "trail" lawyer would be able to confront you >> with reality. >> >> >> >>> >>> This is eerily like the Audi 5000 frenzy. When 60 minutes did their >>> hatchet job on the 5000, they produced an "expert" who "proved" that >>> the 5000's automatic transmission could force a kick down of the >>> accelerator pedal, resulting in sudden acceleration. Good old Ed >>> Bradly presented this as some sort of scientific proof. Only later did >>> we learn (and not from CBS) that the expert added an extra hydraulic >>> pump and external piping to demonstarte this "failure" mode. >>> >>> There may or may not be an actual problem with the Toyota electronics. >>> But an "expert" that creates shorts to "prove" there is a problem is >>> not the sort of expert I trust. >> >> that's because you're a paid shill ed, and you have no technical >> expertise. seriously, if you could actually /do/ anything of societal >> value, you'd be doing it rather than poisoning the interweb with bullshit >> for money. >> >> >>> >>> Ed > > > Who are his minions anyway? I haven't seen his dossier. I wish I had minions. I wish I got paid for this. Ed |