Toyota Plans Press Conference For Today To Release Findings

SUA is an industry wide phenomenon. The reports of it spread across every manufacturer. If you look at the complaints in NHTSA database, Toyota rank #17.

Why are you picking on Toyota?

 

Wonder if the CHP cop had a video camera in his vehicle. If so, that would certainly help to verify whether or not the brake application was cyclic. If the figure of 250 brake applications mentioned by Toyota occurred over a period of 20 minutes, that would average 4.8 seconds periodicity.

Sounds about right?

 

How many minutes was the CHP cop following him for before Sikes all of sudden decided to stop? I'd think the cop would by right next to him using the loudspeaker rather than behind, but who knows if Sikes changed his braking behavior right when he spotted the cop?

 

side note - I happen to like the reviews I've seen in C&D's 2009 new car guide. They evaluate from a driving enthusiast's standpoint, which has its merits.

back to topic...

 

Also you would think there would be a witness who perhaps saw his brake lights on all of the time during this wild event? Yeah the police video would have been nice.

I'm glad Toyota did this study.

 

Assuming they can keep up with him.

 

If Toyota's story really is that Mr. Sikes intentionally overheated the brakes, I don't buy it for a minute. It makes no sense, rumors about indebtedness, lawsuits, lawyers, etc., notwithstanding.

I can believe he didn't have the presence of mind to put it in neutral, etc.

FWIW I continue to drive my vehicle (same year and color as that of Mr. Sikes) with no fear whatsoever. I did check out throwing it in neutral with the gearshift while under acceleration. Worked like a charm. I also tried pushing the Park button while under acceleration. Worked like a charm as well. I didn't try holding the Power button for three seconds.

I feel like I am reasonably well prepared should such an incident happen to me.

 

Toyota should be able to determine that from the 250 event log they have of alternating between the accelerator and brakes. If he changed his braking behavior the event duration would then have to be longer. Any event log would have a timing mark associated with a particular event.

 

I sis an exepriment last night. At 80 MPH I deliberately pressed the brake gently with my left foot and kept it just before the accelerator cutoff. I was effectivly braking and accelerating simultaneously - if I kept it for 20 minutes I would have surely cooked my brakepads.

 

The current Tacoma is a much simpler vehicle with traditional PS, brakes, etc. The Tacoma can be purchased with a 4 cylinder with a stick shift. It's efficient, and it leaves the driver in full control. Shift Linkage == Big difference.

The Tacoma has only been recalled for floor mats. If my decision is ironic, then perhaps it is because you do not believe Toyota. If I have a stick shift, however, I do not care.

I guess you are right, I probably shouldn't be looking at another Toyota, but there are no other reasonable options. It's like voting for President. I'm rationalizing their failings as an overreach in electronic design, and I'm believing that Akio Toyoda will implement the reform that is needed.

Criticism, my friend, does not always originate from a desire to destroy.

 

The Tacoma uses electronic throttle. The driver is not in full control.

 

Yes, but the driver is still the weakest link in the system. :madgrin:

 

And mechanical linkages are still subject to failure. People tend to trust mechanical systems even when they are proven to be less reliable. I suppose it's the old "the devil you know" issue again.

Tom

 

If you look at failures from a mechanical/materials point of view, all failures are mechanical failures. Even so called electrical ones.

 

Yes, the driver will still confuse "sudden unintended acceleration" while using the cruise control with this and while coming to a stop with this.

 

Did you ever talk to Toyota? Or was it just the San Diego dealership? One of the common threads with most of the complaints seem to be because the dealer acted improperly.

Tesla may have the right idea- they own all of their "stores."

 

It may be awhile. Ms. Smith's Lexus was driven by the next owner for over 20K miles without a single SUA event.

 

Wasn't this made illegal in most states? I could be wrong, but I recall that laws were passed to protect dealerships from the manufacturer. I think the small guys were worried about being gobbled up by the big auto companies.

Tom

 

"Back in the 1950s, dealers secured franchise laws after convincing
legislators they needed protection against bullying manufacturers,
who otherwise might impose costly dictates on dealers and demand
sales and service concessions in return for advantageous inventory.
Some states also banned automakers from directly competing in
sales to ensure that distribution was "fair."

Lots more here: Traffic Jam. - Free Online Library

A very detailed discussion here:
http://www.cunef.edu/pdfs/publicaciones/Zanarone-vertical%20restraints%20&%20the%20law%20JLE%2009.pdf]