Toyota just lost a sale
in [Technical]
|
Prev: Ford's "Easy Fuel" capless fuel filler?
Next: Chubby Cheddar on Today: There is no reason to use High Octane gasoline
From: tnom on 27 Nov 2009 08:46 >>And that's likely just the sort of thing Toyota is trying to prevent by >>jumping all over the issue the way they are. > >In the end folks will remember the lengths that Toyota went to to fix >it more than the initial problem. >Something the domestics never learned. You mean the length that Toyota went to ignore the problem until the news media couldn't ignore it any longer? You really think the gas pedal is the true fix? Just as the floor mat was a diversion, so is the gas pedal.
From: Nate Nagel on 27 Nov 2009 09:40 Ashton Crusher wrote: > After the news came out about the unintended acceleration problem that > killed the cop and his family one of the ladies in my office said she > was ruling out buying a Highlander as a result. She wants to get a > bigger car for her family and was looking at Highlanders but not > anymore. Frankly I was amazed that something like this would so > quickly turn off a buyer. I'm not... now I'm not a target buyer for a Prius, I always wondered about cramming that much electronics into a car and how good an idea it was to have that much fly by wire stuff, recent events have only made it less likely for me to buy one. I like nice direct connections between my feet and the throttle, brakes, clutch etc. - maybe not the most efficient but definitely the safest. nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 27 Nov 2009 12:50 On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:40:32 -0500, Nate Nagel wrote: > > Ashton Crusher wrote: >> After the news came out about the unintended acceleration problem that >> killed the cop and his family one of the ladies in my office said she >> was ruling out buying a Highlander as a result. She wants to get a >> bigger car for her family and was looking at Highlanders but not >> anymore. Frankly I was amazed that something like this would so quickly >> turn off a buyer. > > I'm not... now I'm not a target buyer for a Prius, I always wondered > about cramming that much electronics into a car and how good an idea it > was to have that much fly by wire stuff, recent events have only made it > less likely for me to buy one. I like nice direct connections between my > feet and the throttle, brakes, clutch etc. - maybe not the most efficient > but definitely the safest. I have had this same concern myself. Now, I am an electronics technician, so the thought of my Scion's drive-by-wire throttle quitting in the middle of East Overshoe, VT doesn't bother me TOO much; I have AAA 100 mile tow service and rearely venture further than that. What does bother me is that, perhaps when the potentiometer goes it also takes the ECU with it, and now what was a ~$10 repair is now a $1210 repair. Plus, a lot of people say it's in my head, but I NEVER stalled a car as much off the line as this one! There is a slight hesitation that you can correct in a car with a traditional throttle linkage that can't be trimmed out. I read in a Scion forum you can adjust the pot to take out the slack, but I found it only works until the ECU relearns the pot setting and...it comes back again. I don't even want to think of drive-by-wire steering or brakes. Anyone got an '88 Corolla for sale?
From: Tegger on 27 Nov 2009 13:22 AZ Nomad <aznomad.3(a)PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote in news:slrnhgul2h.655.aznomad.3(a)ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:36:52 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <invalid(a)invalid.inv> > wrote: > > >>And Audi had no problem to fix in the first place, which put them in a >>bit of a spot as to what to do before somebody came up with the idea >>of the brake interlock. > > And when the infamous audi unintended acceleration cases all vanished > with the addition of the interlock, it became obvious that the cases > were all ones where the driver had confused the pedals. I'm not too sure about the "all vanished" thing. Apparently there were about 10,000 cases of UA from 1985 to 2003. <http://articles.latimes.com/2003/jul/18/local/me-pedal18> And: <http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/george-russell-weller> Since by about 1991 just about all new AT-equipped vehicles came with brake interlocks, I suspect a good chunk of those 10,000 drivers managed to find a way to get a car to go out of control even with the interlock in the way. After all, the interlock only comes into play when moving out of Park. It's still possible to mess up afterwards. One of those incidents is mentioned in the LA Times articles I referenced above. -- Tegger
From: Tegger on 27 Nov 2009 13:33
tnom(a)mucks.net wrote in news:jplvg55p85d43qe7j8l4ajgmq4ejuh7ope(a)4ax.com: > >>>And that's likely just the sort of thing Toyota is trying to prevent by >>>jumping all over the issue the way they are. >> >>In the end folks will remember the lengths that Toyota went to to fix >>it more than the initial problem. >>Something the domestics never learned. > > You mean the length that Toyota went to ignore the problem until the > news media couldn't ignore it any longer? > > You really think the gas pedal is the true fix? Just as the floor mat > was a diversion, so is the gas pedal. > Hey, I just had a Jimmy Neutron-type Brain Blast! Just remove the gas pedal from the vehicle entirely. With only a brake pedal to push, it will be next to impossible to get yourself into an accident. Problem solved! My idea is so brilliant I'll have to consider patenting it. -- Tegger |