TOYOTA SEZ IT HAS [another] FIX FOR PEDAL ... DO YOU BELIEVE IT?
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: New Corollas Imported From Japan: Any ?
Next: PIC: Even the Toyota CEO doesn't TRUST driving TOYOTA cars
From: Mike Hunter on 12 Feb 2010 10:48 (Cross postings deleted, automatically) <clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:6pd9n5de6i9f9rpqld47jr8s5ka2r8nnfd(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:00:03 +0000, Clive <Clive(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk> > wrote: > >>In message <pes6n591t0kjjohmnd4bo6vcr3qnq354pt(a)4ax.com>, >>clare(a)snyder.on.ca writes >>>At the time of the recall
From: Mike Hunter on 12 Feb 2010 10:49 (Cross postings deleted, automatically) <clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:4qd9n51sblmthpapcej2sk85db86vv15oq(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:22:05 -0500, "Derek Gee" > <dgeeSPAMSUCKS(a)twmi.INVALID.rr.com> wrote: > >><clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message >>news:pes6n591t0kjjohmnd4bo6vcr3qnq354pt(a)4ax.com... >> > The vast majority of the cars that had the problem TECHNICALLY should > have been following the "extreme conditions" schedule. > Toyota
From: Derek Gee on 12 Feb 2010 21:29 <clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:4qd9n51sblmthpapcej2sk85db86vv15oq(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:22:05 -0500, "Derek Gee" > <dgeeSPAMSUCKS(a)twmi.INVALID.rr.com> wrote: > >><clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message >>news:pes6n591t0kjjohmnd4bo6vcr3qnq354pt(a)4ax.com... >>> No - but I DO know, from talking to they guys still there, that NO >>> vehicle that had it's oil changed every 5000KM or 4 months ever came >>> into that dealership with a sludge problem. Not a single one. >>> >>> Same at the local Chrysler dealerships. >> >>Doubtful. The news articles about the guys who filed the class action >>specifically mentioned they had PROOF in the form of receipts for oil >>changes from the Toyota dealers for the required service intervals. >>Unless >>the dealers were selling them sub-standard oil, the evidence clearly >>pointed >>to a bad engineering change. Toyota backed down and extended the >>warranty, >>which speaks volumes to me that the problem was very real and they knew >>it. >> >>Derek >> > It is not doubtfull at all - and what you said does not contradict > what I said. Read it again. And again - > I said with oil changed ever 5000KM - that is 3000 MILES, or every 3 > months. (sorry - I said 4 months - I meant 4 changes per year - every > 3 months) > The A schedule required maintenance allows significantly longer drain > intervals - and it is these longer drain intervals that caused the > problem in both Toyota and Chrysler - as well as Honda.. > > The vast majority of the cars that had the problem TECHNICALLY should > have been following the "extreme conditions" schedule. > Toyota extended the warranty because they allowed the longer drain > intervals and didn't design the engine to be able to accept those > longer drain intervals under adverse conditions. According to the Automotive News, the Extreme schedule is 5,000 miles and the extended is 7,500 miles. NOBODY should have been changing at 3,000 miles if they were following the service manual recommendation. If they were changing that often, I would expect there wouldn't be any sludging, but as you point out, Toyota didn't design for that interval! http://www.yotarepair.com/Automotive_News.html Derek
From: Mike Hunter on 13 Feb 2010 11:35 "Derek Gee" <dgeeSPAMSUCKS(a)twmi.INVALID.rr.com> wrote in message news:4b760e8d$0$4850$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > > <clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message > news:4qd9n51sblmthpapcej2sk85db86vv15oq(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:22:05 -0500, "Derek Gee" >> <dgeeSPAMSUCKS(a)twmi.INVALID.rr.com> wrote: >> >>><clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message >>>news:pes6n591t0kjjohmnd4bo6vcr3qnq354pt(a)4ax.com... >>>> No - but I DO know, from talking to they guys still there, that NO >>>> vehicle that had it's oil changed every 5000KM or 4 months ever came >>>> into that dealership with a sludge problem. Not a single one. >>>> >>>> Same at the local Chrysler dealerships. >>> >>>Doubtful. The news articles about the guys who filed the class action >>>specifically mentioned they had PROOF in the form of receipts for oil >>>changes from the Toyota dealers for the required service intervals. >>>Unless >>>the dealers were selling them sub-standard oil, the evidence clearly >>>pointed >>>to a bad engineering change. Toyota backed down and extended the >>>warranty, >>>which speaks volumes to me that the problem was very real and they knew >>>it. >>> >>>Derek >>> >> It is not doubtfull at all - and what you said does not contradict >> what I said. Read it again. And again - >> I said with oil changed ever 5000KM - that is 3000 MILES, or every 3 >> months. (sorry - I said 4 months - I meant 4 changes per year - every >> 3 months) >> The A schedule required maintenance allows significantly longer drain >> intervals - and it is these longer drain intervals that caused the >> problem in both Toyota and Chrysler - as well as Honda.. >> >> The vast majority of the cars that had the problem TECHNICALLY should >> have been following the "extreme conditions" schedule. >> Toyota extended the warranty because they allowed the longer drain >> intervals and didn't design the engine to be able to accept those >> longer drain intervals under adverse conditions. > > According to the Automotive News, the Extreme schedule is 5,000 miles and > the extended is 7,500 miles. NOBODY should have been changing at 3,000 > miles if they were following the service manual recommendation. If they > were changing that often, I would expect there wouldn't be any sludging, > but as you point out, Toyota didn't design for that interval! > > http://www.yotarepair.com/Automotive_News.html > > Derek >
From: C. E. White on 15 Feb 2010 08:31
<clare(a)snyder.on.ca> wrote in message news:tnd9n55dkm1b6jmcdb6plld7rhen6s7v5d(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:32:06 -0500, me <noemail(a)nothere.com> wrote: > >>On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:57:26 +0000, Clive >><Clive(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk> >>wrote: >> >>>Toyota accelerator fixes have already begun here in the UK. What >>>would >>>it take for the Merkin "big3" to get of their arses so quick, and >>>our >>>government hasn't even mentioned anything about Toyota. >> >>Interesting, since they don't appear to have confirmed diagnosis >>yet, >>let alone a fix. > They have confirmed both. They "say" they have a confirmed diagnosis. I looked into how Toyota diagnosed the problem with Tacoma pick-up truck sudden acceleration complaints from 2 years ago...they said that was caused by the internet.....and blamed it on the Customers. This is now a question of trust. Given Toyota's long history of dishonesty when it comes to "diagnosing" problems, do you think it is wise to believe them now? So far Toyota's handling of the unintented acceleration / stuck throttle issues have involved the following sorts of explainations: - It wasn't a problem - It was the Customer's fault (incompetent drivers) - It was the non-Toyota all weather floor mats - It was improperly installed non-approved floor mats of all sorts - It was the Customer's fault for improperly installing floor mats - It was the shape of the accelerator pedal, but this was still the Customers fault for improperly installing floor mats - It was something else too (not just the floor mats), but we are sure it is the Customers fualt - It was the pedal assembly Toyota was forced to buy from those incompetenet Americans (or Canadians). - Oh yeah, We (Toyota) will look back at those Tacoma complaints from 2 years ago too...but We are sure it is the Custoemrs fault... - There is nothing wrong with the Prius...well except incompetent Customers don't understand how the brakes work and panic when they don't stop the car... Untill forced by NHTSA, Toyota seemed perfectly willing to blame the Customers. Once forced to admit there was a problem they immedaitely tried to find a scape goat (CTS, Customers, floor mat suppliers, etc.). Oh What a Feeling. Ed |