2008 Prius Touring Edition spontaneous FIRE

i hate when that happens.

'probably gave new cars to those affected?'

have you heard of 'insurance'?

she wasn't sasking for anything, just a replacement car.

 

If the car was not READY, then no high voltage was present anywhere in the car except the traction battery in the hatch. The auxilliary 12v battery is also in the hatch. If there was a short, that did not trip the fuse (unlikely) then the battery is what would have gotten hot and outgassed. Since the fire was not in the hatch area, it is not related to the batteries.

Under the hood, all the bits that get hot are liquid cooled. So physics says that they will not get hotter just sitting there until the liquid does too which is very unlikely in a car with the hood closed. They would have to get hotter sitting at idle 8 hours later then when driving and in use. Just doesn't happen.

The fuel pump is cut when the car is off, but there is still fuel in the gas line from the bladder to the engine. It does not suck it back in. That is the only potentially hazardous thing I can think of right now that would cause that. Add that to a rodent that likes the warmth of a recently run engine, when they gnaw through a fuel line, fuel drips. When they gnaw through the electrical harness, a slight spark, and voila... fire.

 

Toyota has a 10+ year history of this. Like when people had engines failing as early as 15-25,000 miles due to overheating (and sludging the oil). Toyota voided the engine warranties in each case, and after a decade of this nonsense, they had left millions of customers with $6000 repair costs (replacing the engine). Only after several state governments sued Toyota for voiding consumer warranties (thereby violating the law) did Toyota finally agree (in 2008) to refund everyone's money.

This should never have been an issue. If the engine is warranteed, and it dies, then the engine should be replaced by whatever corporation made it. This particular corporation demonstrated that their warranties are worthless. Citizens had to turn to the government for recompense.

The Prius G3 will be my first Toyota product I buy.
And my last.
They earned themselves a place on my "banned corporation" list along with Apple (their workers commit suicide due to poor working conditions), Microsoft (this company has always sucked), Hyundai, Kia (lying about their cars' MPG ratings), and so on.

 

Are you sure someone wasn't trying to steal the car and that person spontaneously combusted, causing the fire? Maybe they have insurance you can go after to replace the car?

 

Toyota also has a long track record of going above and beyond for customers. If the problem is real and they know it, they help. Ask any of the people who have had out of warranty work done on their vehicles and Toyota pays for half of the repair cost for no reason other than they ask and it was an early failure. An out of warranty failure Toyota has 0 obligation to fix at all, but they do anyways. In some cases they pay for the full part cost and you only pay labour. Or extreme cases they pay the full thing.

As much as I hate Apple myself, you can't blame Apple for the deaths at Foxconn. Almost all high tech companies have parts assembled at Foxconn. It is a city, like nothing you have ever seen in "the west". Hatred of Microsoft makes you seem like a bandwagon hater. Hyundai, Kia, Ford, and almost all of them lie about their mpg numbers. The Koreans were caught. Hate the idiots that believe the lies and are uneducated enough to realize what the EPA numbers mean and how they are tested. In the case where they lie outright it is not hard to do a test drive or rent one and find out for yourself.

 

This sort of thing would get reported to the NHTSA, right? It's not ok if the car lights itself on fire in the garage, burning half of one's home down or worse.

I don't see Toyota screwing me on a warranty issue. I went in twice to have a minor rattle nixed. They had their Sr tech ride along, acknowledging in promptly. Took a 2nd visit, but they took the car in right away and nixed the rattle.

What I don't like is Toyota's lack of attention to seating / controls detail. I have never seen a Honda with skewed steering wheels, low armrests and the like. Hondas always seem to be laid out just about optimally to my eye. But these issues seems to be so low on the totem pole around here, it is likely carry on in other new models.

 

Then why did they refuse to replace (under warranty) the millions of customers (over 10 years time) that experienced premature engine failure after only 15-25,000 miles? The wonderful company you describe, and what they *actually* did between 1997-2008, is like the difference between TV marketing and reality (not the same). Or EPA numbers and reality (not the same).

As for Apple, I don't boycott just them. I boycott any company that uses Foxconn to manufacture their product. I don't want to financially support a company that does not allow its workers to take mandatory breaks, or violates Chinese labor laws forbidding overtime past 70 hours. I'm strange like that. ;-)

And no I'm not a "bandwagon hater" of Microsoft. I've hated them since the 80s when most people never even heard of Microsoft (or were too young to use computers). They made crap product then, and although they've improved since they blatantly-copied Mac's desktop interface (in 1995), it's still a lousy product overall. Win8 is like the new Vista (crap). And I really hate the new ribbon interface in MS Office; takes up too much vertical screen space (space I need for development). The old single-line/compact menu was better. OH another reason to boycott MS is because of how they treat their employees (poorly).

I'm guessing you're including Toyota in there too. (If not then it shows your pro-toyota bias.) To me a company is a THING and nothing more. Loving a corporation makes no more sense than loving a rock or a building. IMHO

BTW my local Toyota dealer wouldn't let me have a proper testdrive of the Prius. They let me go one block from the dealership and that was it. They claimed, "Our insurance company won't let us go further than this." It's a bit hard for customers to estimate MPG when they're not even allowed to drive the thing (hence why the official EPA numbers are so important).

 

O M G! Are you STILL going on about this?!

 

I can't see why you'd buy a Toyota at all if they're on your "banned corporation" list.

 

So far, I can't take this whole thing too seriously.

OK, it's a first post telling a tale of woe. But that doesn't excuse us from asking for enough
hard core objective data/information on which to make an informed opinion. Right
now all we have to go on is the necessary precondition for successful fiction; a
willing suspension of disbelief by the reader.

There just isn't enough info in the OP to even begin to 'get your teeth into.' Just
about anything of an objective nature is missing.

Lets start over, go back and get the OP to provide the basic stuff, such as:
* Photos
* Copy of Toyota correspondence
* copy of police report if they responded; if not why not
* Copy of fire dept invesyigator's report
* Copy of insurance adjusters report
* Mileage
* Possible under the hood mods

FWIW, what does the car being a Touring model have to do with anything?

Way back when, say, oh, in 2008 or '09 we got an initial report of a similar
incident; spontaneous combustion and all that. (Sorry, can't find the original
thread. ) After all the facts were in, it turned out to be a random vandalism/
pyromania event. The purp had fired off a self-sustaining railroad flare and placed
it on the front pax tire. Lots of smoke and flame, very difficult to extinguish, lots of damage in
the engine compartment…

But completely not the cars fault.

With what little we know now, who's to say this isn't the same thing again?
Especially if it has again happened in the SanFran area like the earlier incident, IIRC.

 

I agree with u

I think I will have another beer.

 

My 2008 Touring Edition BBQ went on fire, I called Sears to come take a look at it... Maybe they'll replace it for me? What do you guys think?

 

If you dig up the history on all vehicle manufacturers, you will find that they are in business to make money and have screwed the public in the past for it! I think you may want to look into building your own car from scratch so you could drive with a clean conscience.

I see that you drive the following: "Currently driving 70mpg Insight (greenercars.org score: 57) and 49mpg BeetleTDI (score: 48) and 27mpg Dodge avenger."

Honda screwed all their Civic Hybrid Owners with mileage that decreases as months not years go by. Volkswagon is known for electrical problems after the warranty runs out (I owned a Jetta, so I know), and the Chrysler group - owned two in my life - Transmission failed 100 miles out of warranty and the other was lemon lawed!

You can't pick and choose - they are all guilty of something! You should move to a deserted island and live off the land...

 

Source????
Millions..........really?
Need some factual data here bud!

 

not gonna get it.

 

Wikipedia:

Well researched article by the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/automobiles/04SLUDGE.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Even ConsumerReports called engine sludge a rare problem. They would be the first to attack this problem with a vengeance if it was anywhere near as common as Troy seems to think. And back to facts, Toyota acknowledged engine sludge as a rare defect years before the famous lawsuit occurred, but required proof of proper car maintenance before authorizing repairs. I am more than OK with that policy. The lawsuit had the effect of Toyota modifying its requirements to owner providing proof of 'reasonable' car maintenance.

Lastly, a breakdown of complaints by car model to a consumer group:

PHP:

MODEL MODEL  YEAR ENGINE  COMPLAINTS
Audi A4 1998-2004 1.8L four-cylinder turbo 26
Chrysler Concorde 1998-2005 2.7L V6 473
Chrysler Sebring 1998-2005 2.7L V6 293
Dodge Intrepid 1998-2005 2.7L V6 1,902
Dodge Stratus 1998-2005 2.7L V6 127
Lexus ES300 1997-2005 3.0L V6 27
Lexus RX300 1999-2005 3.0L V6 32
Saab 9-3 2000-2004 2.0L four-cylinder turbo 33
Saab 9-5 1999-2004 2.3L four-cylinder turbo 20
Toyota Avalon 1997-2005 3.0L V6 24
Toyota Camry/ Solara 1997-2005 2.2L four-cylinder or 3.0L V6 157
Toyota Celica 1997-2005 2.2L four-cylinder 5
Toyota Highlander 2001-2005 3.0L V6 24
Toyota Sienna 1997-2005 3.0L V6 77
Volkswagen Passat 1998-2005 1.8L four-cylinder turbo 36

Source: Center for Auto Safety.

If Troy is looking for companies to blacklist, he should definitely include VV, Dodge and Audi to his list.

 

Actually, the black sludge thing, didn't that have something to do with us including ethanol in our petrol here in the states?

Problems and Disadvantages of Ethanol Alcohol Blend Gasolines - E10.

 

It is clearly multi-factorial.

The common pathway is oil breakdown. Factors that lead up to it include oil temperature and oil contamination. I can imagine a host of engine design changes, aggravated by owner behavior, that put engines at risk. I don't doubt that changes meant to reduce tailpipe emissions increased the risk. I'm thinking of exhaust gas recirc, lower viscosity oils, and PCV as examples. The more surprising part of this story to me is not that it happened, but that Honda avoided it.