Toyota cover-up worse than GM coverup

Your linked post mentions that the 551ft from 62mph limit is for loss of the brakes. Is this measured when the throttle is closed and the engine at idle, or is it with the throttle wide open?

I don't think there is any failure happening with the brakes, but when this rare failure occurs, the brakes are fighting an accelerating engine on the front axle. Depending on the car's speed at the time of the event, the brakes may win, check the acceleration for the driver to take other actions, or fail from overheating. If the brakes can slow the car, it will be at a reduced rate. Then it can't be assumed that there is enough road for the driver to stop with that reduced braking rate.

 

That is a glaring loophole in the current regulations. The test is done only with the engine idling, not at WOT. It is as if the regulation writers were old-school, and assumed the driver could take the transmission out of gear.

In the recent past, when engines were typically smaller, relatively few cars had the engines to overpower the brakes. And more drivers knew how to take the car out gear, which is essentially a reflexive action with manual transmissions. That is one reason my SUA experience produced no damage.

Today, more cars have the horsepower to overpower and overheat the brakes, as the San Diego - Saylor crash showed. But as various tests several years ago demonstrated, most cars (average and smaller engines) still have braking effectiveness to come to a full stop, and the rest, have enough braking to slow the car before giving out.

My point is, the great bulk of reports were not alleging that the engine overpowered and overheated the brakes. Instead, they are claiming complete brake disablement, as if the brakes didn't function at all.

 

There was also more RWD cars in the past too.

And hopefully, if this ever happens to someone, they'll have the space to stop or slow the car before running off the road or hitting something. That wasn't the case with the incident that generated the Barr report.

The bulk of cases aren't this failure, but likely mistaken pedal. The potential failure Barr found would be a rare one. Toyota's fault is in ignoring best software practices, and not having the fail safes and protections in the code to keep this potential error from turning into a SUA.

I don't even think plaintiff's side even proved that this failure took place, but Toyota didn't have a defense for all the faults and poor coding Barr found.

 

Trollbate said:

“I don't think there is any failure happening with the brakes, but when this rare failure occurs, the brakes are fighting an accelerating engine on the front axle. Depending on the car's speed at the time of the event, the brakes may win, check the acceleration for the driver to take other actions, or fail from overheating. If the brakes can slow the car, it will be at a reduced rate. Then it can't be assumed that there is enough road for the driver to stop with that reduced braking rate.”

fuzzy1 said:

“That is a glaring loophole in the current regulations. The test is done only with the engine idling, not at WOT. It is as if the regulation writers were old-school, and assumed the driver could take the transmission out of gear”.

I think that they are both correct. Take a look at the engine torque map in the figure below. When sudden acceleration occurs, the engine speed suddenly increases from A to B, causing the engine to run at its maximum speed.



Then, when the driver applies the brakes, this puts a load on the engine which decreases the engine speed. But as the engine speed decreases, the engine torque INCREASES as shown by the change from point B to point C in the figure. The driver perceives this as pressure on the brake pedal causing a higher acceleration. This increase in acceleration when pressing the brake pedal has been noted by many drivers during a sudden unintended acceleration incident. The same effect occurs during dynamometer testing, when the throttle is opened a given amount causing the engine to go to a maximum RPM due to the absence of a load (or with only engine and drive train friction as a minimal load), after which placing increasing loads on the engine causes the RPM to fall and the measured engine torque to increase. This is how the engine torque map is produced and measured.

Normally, when the engine is not undergoing sudden acceleration, the engine speed is to the left of the maximum torque for any given throttle setting. In this case, the engine torque will DECREASE as the engine speed decreases, and the driver will NOT perceive that applying the brake causes the engine to accelerate.

Therefore, the speed of the engine during brake testing is very important, because at high engine speeds the engine will be fighting the brakes, while at low engine speeds the engine will not be fighting the brakes.

 

Oooooh, Eric Holder said there was inaccurate and misleading statements? All I can say is, it takes one to know one.

 

and tonights news? 'keyless ignitions are killing people, 10 car companies being sued.'

 

Maybe driverless cars are a good idea.......

"According to the complaint filed in federal court in Los Angeles, carbon monoxide is emitted when drivers leave their vehicles running after taking their electronic key fobs with them, under the mistaken belief that the engines will shut off."

 

So people blame car manufacturers for their own absentmindedness? More responsibility shirked along with relinquished freedom.

 

Note also carbon monoxide poisonings near (not inside) closed garages containing operating cars also indicates defective ventilation of the garages, defective air sealing of the adjacent rooms, and possibly a lack of operating CO detectors in the occupied space. How many more liable parties does this make?