Ray LaHood - out of context (FOX)

It's crazy how this problem is being hyped into a panic situation. I'm sure there is a political motive behind it.

I am disappointed in Toyota that they took so long to find a solution though. It seems as if they didn't attack the problem seriously until the negative publicity started building up.

I would bet that won't happen again.

 

Time to buy Toyota stock.

 

Off $4.48 so far today. I think I'll wait a few days for it to bottom out.

 

huh? European models actually use same CTS pedals... ones that use Denso parts are not recalled. Toyota Europe clarified today that Japanese built models that are sold in Europe are not affected actually.

 

Honestly, not to sound greedy or oportunistic but I'd wait until the hearings in Washington begin. I expect another wave of negativity born out of those hearings. I think it's going to get a little darker before the dawn.

But barring some Mayan Calender like revelations I'd then expect things to return to business as normal with Toyota.

 

All the current controversial Toyota defects are taking blame for about 20 deaths over 10 years. Because the inventory of affected models has increased over that period, lets distribute them as 1 per year in 1999, 4 per year now.

Until recently, the Light Truck / SUV exemption from passenger car crash compatibility standards was taking the blame for 2000 extra deaths, every year, in the cars they tangled with. This is just the extra deaths compared to collisions with non-exempt cars of the same weight as those trucks.

My Prius replaces a car that predates airbags, side impact beams, and the SUV explosion. While quite safe in its day, it is now especially vulnerable to encounters with those nonconforming SUVs. This Prius is immensely safer in such incidents. The other household cars are not as old, but still not up to the latest safety designs.

Even if Toyotas are completely guilty of all the current controversial defects, the realized risk from them is tiny compared to all the other safety improvements that this Prius adds to my household. 4 steps backwards also came with at least 1000 steps forwards.

I.e. even if this Prius is 'defective', it is still much safer than any 'non-defective' car I've ever had.

The version I remember was caused not just Firestone (defective tires), but also Ford (specified inadequate tires) and compounded by the drivers (overloaded vehicles / speeding / underinflated tires). The Ford-Firestone death toll could not have become so high without all three parties eating into tire safety margins.

 

Its 20 deaths caused by unintended acceleration. All other auto companies have been attributed 11 deaths. Most manufacturers have at a minimum some safety on the electronic accelerator to stop the throttle if the brakes are hit.

I see no GOOD reason that toyota did not at a minimum turn off the throttle when the brakes were hit. I'm sure lots of forum members would say it's either, a) just the way the gas pedal is supposed to work, or b) its never happened to them so the dead drivers must not have known how to drive their car.

Multiply 20 deaths by the average out of court settlement and compare it to the cost of the recall ($2Billion). If the first number is less than the second.....

 

This stat of 20 alleged deaths is repeated over and over by the haters but you like everyone else cannot name these poor people. No one anywhere has specifically linked any of these alleged names to any spedific defect anywhere, except the 4 in the Saylor case where the wrong mat, in the wrong vehicle, not properly installed was identified as the probable cause of the deaths ( dealer fault ).

You can continue your program of bashing and hatred but you will be called out everytime you post factless statements. IOW, post facts or Zip It.

 

This is exactly correct. It all came out in various court cases. It was the reason why it was Ford executives that had to visit victims to apologize for their paralyzing injuries and family deaths, not Firestone.

 

I think it was pretty sad that LaHood was asked during House hearings about what should the driver do (at the same time he made those comments), he did not know what is the reccomended procedure (apply brakes firmly, shift into neutral, park on the side of the road, turn off vehicle). He just blabbered something about turning off the car.

Makes it quite obvious he is more concered about building his career than about safety of drivers...

 

I tend to agree here with a few exceptions. The sludging issue was on 1990's-era engines which were actually designed in the late 80's, put into service in the 90's and developed some problems late in the 90's.

There were 12 mis-manufactured camshafts. End of that nonsense.

Rusting frames may have been a Toyota design or it may have been a Dana issue in fabrication. I was a supplier to Dana during this period. We sold steel to Dana for these and other makers' frames.

Now I do think that Toyota is trying to be on the bleeding edge of innovation and it's taking a lot of risks to move the entire vehicle from a purely mechanical operation to a purely electronic operation. Is this thrust without risks? Nope, they are paying for taking those risks right now in a storm of bad press. In addition while making this paradigm shift in the way vehicles are controlled Toyota has also been growing by leaps and bounds from the mid-90s to 2008. That's a double dose of risk.

I also think that there may have been some pressure from Watanabe to control costs, while implementing these bleeding-edge changes, while doubling sales volumes and while bringing a whole new model for motive force to market - the HSD hybrids. That's a plateful.

 

Watanabe become president in 2005... it was Cho that was was president prior to that, and Toyota had the highest warranty costs in history during 2004 (so cars sold between 2001 and 2004).