I hit the brakes while accelerator was depressed...

If you are near San Diego, take it over to the dealer handling the Sikes car and report the problem. They may be exceptionally sensitive to your symptoms.

Just for grins, make a digitized recording of your test. We have many videos showing it works and my 2010 stops like the Canadian video. BTW, does your cruise control turn off when your brake? A defective brake light switch might cause a similar symptom.

Bob Wilson

 

To the OP-I'm sorry that your accelerator is depressed. Maybe onc teh media attention subsides it will feel much better. for now, all we can do is take it out for nicne long drives and let it relax.

Make sure to pay proper attention to the brake pedal as well, we don't want the both depressed.

If they both become depressed, you'll find that your car will just stop, as is intended.

Good luck, and I hope you both journey on together for many, many more miles.

 

No. I'm not saying the car didn't slow down. Nothing turned down the motor, and it was clearly pulling and wanting to keep going. I do not think there is a brake cutoff in the traditional sense. Maybe there is some ecu logic that changes transmission behavior or the mix of powertrain drive force or something. However, it is wholly disingenuous to call what I tested a braking cutout or throttle override. Something that deep in the car is nothing but ecu logic.

As for video taping my test I think it's hard to represent the qualitative components of it without being behind the wheel. I guess I could put an accelerometer on the dash and a conclusions can be drawn from how quickly that changes, but I don't have an accelerometer laying around.

More to the point, some logic buried deep in an ecu that handles power distribution mixing or something and *does not* stop gas hitting the engine is useless. It is probably behind a controller ecu that can pump out whatever error causes a problem to all its slave systems so it's pointless. If this is what everyone is calling the throttle cutoff they are deluding themselves. It should be a simple system that powers down the gas or electric motor when throttle is max to near max and simply executes when brake lights come on.

 

This may have been mentioned before? Not sure? But it's been said, and shown in videos, and in car reports - many, many times over - that working brakes will bring a car (even one much more powerful than the Prius) to a complete stop at speeds well in excess of the speed limit on a highway - under open acceleration conditions.

The problem becomes when people think they need to "pump" the brakes. Don't pump the brakes. Pumping will only increase your stopping distance and could possibly cause the pads to over heat and cause brake fade. If you need to stop the car - apply firm pressure to the brake peddle.

 

You're kidding, right? Clearly you've never been in a court of law, or know very little about how the investigative process works?

It goes to:

(1) Motive
(2) Character of the complainant


Clearly, the complainant has motive to lie for possible finacial gain. No question that this dude needs some cash, and he needs it NOW!! Further, and IMO, the complainant has questionable character, which then goes directly to the validity of his statements.

But now we have the released facts from NHTSA that shows brake wear was not consistent with heavy/prolonged use of the brakes.

So, here's what we've got (in capsule form):

(1) He really wasn't trying to stop the car by applying the brakes consistent with trying to stop a run-away car.
(2) He didn't try to put the car in neutral. Is every car driver in California inept?
(3) He didn't try to turn the power off....after 25 minutes? Wth?
(4) After careful examination of the car, there is NO evidence of any abnormalities, including a stuck/depressed gas peddle. Gotcha.
(5) He's filed for bankrupsy (700K in the hole, of which $22K is still owed to Toyota).
(6) Filed false claims before..
(7) Runs an adult swingers web site/club.

Only circumstantial evidence? Sure, but a ton of it. If it walks like a duck. If it quacks like a duck. Mr Sikes is a duck, and his little charade has backfired. Quack, quack.

Even my - "buy American" - dad thinks this is a hoax....and he's from the "Show Me" state, Missouri.

 

A few people here are forgetting that even if the ECU went haywire (sending an erroneous signal for full throttle, failing to issue a braking signal, and also failing to override the engine with braking or neutral), then the car would STILL COME TO A COMPLETE STOP by laying into the brakes as Mr. Sikes claims he did. The hydraulic-mechanical aspect of the brakes would still overpower the engine/MGs to stop the car. In fact, Mr. Sikes was able to do this eventually with a little persuasion by the CHP, and the investigators were able to successfully stop the car numerous times under full throttle.

Yes, computer software glitches are certainly possible. I see them all the time (thank you, Microsoft). But you can still stop the car mechanically. So, our little "ghost in the machine" theory doesn't pass the test in this instance.

It is 110% clear to me that Mr. Sikes is lying about some aspects of his ordeal to cover an intended act of fraud, or that he is completely delusional. Based on other character flaws that the media have uncovered, the first one is more likely.

Yes, there may be legitimate issues with some Toyota vehicles and with Toyota's recent mismanagement of their quality control. But this one particular incident is a complete fabrication by an individual with alterior motives.

I firmly stand by "innocent until proven guilty". That goes for Toyota as well as any individual driver. But we are well past the "benefit of doubt" phase for Mr. Sikes. Unfortunately, Toyota needs to tread carefully in this no-win situation. Rather, it'll take a 3rd party to investigate and charge Mr. Sikes with fraud.

Some here are defending the veracity of Mr. Sikes' story to the death, and that is certainly your right. But it appears that you continuously discount all the character and technical findings which blatantly point to the likelihood of fraud. It is possible that he didn't, but it is much more likely that Mr. Sikes commited fraud than it is that his Prius had the claimed problem.

If anyone here advocates the "benefit of doubt" clause, keep in mind that Mr. Sikes is the Plaintiff, not the Defendant.