TRUCK RECALL?!?!?!?
in [Toyota]
|
From: Clive on 14 Feb 2010 05:10 In message <806en5lp233fin1oa9jdolkd80p8linomk(a)4ax.com>, Registered User <n4jvp(a)ix.netcom.com> writes >On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:57:25 +0000, Clive <Clive(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk> >wrote: >>In message <4b76ddc9$0$10191$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net>, Mike Hunter >><Mikehunt2(a)lycos.?.invalid> writes >>>Better catch up, it that is what you want to believe. Most of the safety >>>recalls, all around the world, have been order by the various governments. >>>There have been at least 19 deaths, including four in California, thus far >>>and an undetermined number of injuries, according to published reports. >>I've said it before and I'll say it again. Although there are >>500million people in the EU compared to just 300million in the US, there >>has only been 4 accidents attributed to accelerator problems on this >>side of the pond and no fatalities. >Gross population numbers are meaningless. A more relevant point of >comparison would be the total number miles driven by each population >in a calendar year. In the US the number is an amazing 10k miles per >person in a calendar year. That's a quarter billion registered >passenger vehicles (cars, SUVs, pickup trucks) times an average of >twelve thousand miles per vehicle per year divided by 300 million. >The cited figures are from the US DOT for 2006. The standard UK figures are 12k per annum. >AFA as the numbers you quote concerning accidents and fatalities due >to accelerator problems, we must remember the EU consists of 27 >entities. When it comes to accident reporting each entity has its own >standards, definitions and investigative techniques. The exchange of >information between authorities remains inconsistant despite the >desires of the EU Commission. The figures are consistent, and agree with Toyota's own. >> Though in America everyone wants >>to blame someone else, I'm sure the truth will come out within a year or >>two. >Every year each automobile manufacturer issues tens of thousands of >technical service bulletins. No complex piece of equipment is >completely free of defects. Some defects are more drastic than others. >>Google is you friend, look up "Driving in Japan" and you'll see why >>the sales of American cars there is so small (no parking place >>ownership, no car etc.). >This is no secret while the supposed relevance is. >> I own two 2.2litre cars a 2002 Nissan Almera >>and 2009 Toyota Auris SR180, it's power to weight ratio is 120.27bhp per >>ton. >Brake horse power is only a measure of engine output. Effective horse >power considers drive train losses which can be significant, ten to >twenty percent. In any case your car's power/weight ratio falls in >line with the better super-minis. The major losses are those of the torque converter, never less than 10% (except during lockup) and infinite if holding a car still on the foot brake whilst in traffic. Very few of our cars have auto transmissions, It seems they just aren't liked on our side of the pond. >> My daughter owns two cars, a Vauxhall Corsa diesel and a Proton >>Gen2 1.6 litre petrol, my son owns a Toyota Yaris 1.3 petrol. After >>driving a few of the cars you have in America, The latest being a Dodge >>Avenger 2.4 petrol, I am convinced that few if any of you domestic cars >>could even go as fast as my sons Yaris, and I don't think even your >>muscle cars can hold a candle to my SR180. It's the p/w ratio that determines acceleration, top speed etc, how heavy are your muscle cars? >In what respect: zero to sixty, quarter mile times, top end, endurance >runs...? I doubt the few American cars you've driven represent what >passes for muscle cars in this day and age. Next time try something >with a V-8. The 2011 Shelby GT500s will use a 5.4L super-charged V-8 >(550 hp & 510 ft/lb torque). Its sibling the Mustang GT will be >powered by a normally aspirated 5.0L V-8 (412 hp & 390 ft/lb torque). >I wouldn't mind driving a SR180. I've taken it to the Nurburgring in Germany and it cruises sweetly at around 110 mph. -- Clive
From: jim on 14 Feb 2010 08:35 Clive wrote: > > In message <yrudnQlQs6lIy-rWnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d(a)bright.net>, jim > <sjedgingN0Sp(a)m.?.invalid> writes > > Obviously, the Japanese car makers forgot to consult your advice on the > >matter. They may well prefer to ship the finished part, but congress has > >managed to make the economics work out that the part gets made in the > >US. > > BTW, Most of the steel used in US autos comes from this guy: > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakshmi_Mittal > > > > > >> > >> > From the sounds of it Dana identified a particular batch of castings > >> > that were bad (Dana said that less than 2% of the parts shipped had the > >> > defect) > If Dana knew there was a defect in the steel, why did they use it, > surely they bear the responsibility for using a known faulty product? Surely, you are ignorant of the facts. The material the part is made of is not steel and the announcement did not say the material used was defective. The defect is said to be due to a failure in the manufacturing process control. And Dana is the one who reported the defect to the NHTSA. -jim
From: Registered User on 14 Feb 2010 09:05 On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:10:40 +0000, Clive <Clive(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In message <806en5lp233fin1oa9jdolkd80p8linomk(a)4ax.com>, Registered User ><n4jvp(a)ix.netcom.com> writes >>On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:57:25 +0000, Clive <Clive(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk> >>wrote: >>>In message <4b76ddc9$0$10191$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net>, Mike Hunter >>><Mikehunt2(a)lycos.?.invalid> writes >>>>Better catch up, it that is what you want to believe. Most of the safety >>>>recalls, all around the world, have been order by the various governments. >>>>There have been at least 19 deaths, including four in California, thus far >>>>and an undetermined number of injuries, according to published reports. >>>I've said it before and I'll say it again. Although there are >>>500million people in the EU compared to just 300million in the US, there >>>has only been 4 accidents attributed to accelerator problems on this >>>side of the pond and no fatalities. >>Gross population numbers are meaningless. A more relevant point of >>comparison would be the total number miles driven by each population >>in a calendar year. In the US the number is an amazing 10k miles per >>person in a calendar year. That's a quarter billion registered >>passenger vehicles (cars, SUVs, pickup trucks) times an average of >>twelve thousand miles per vehicle per year divided by 300 million. >>The cited figures are from the US DOT for 2006. >The standard UK figures are 12k per annum. MOT figures? Citation? >>AFA as the numbers you quote concerning accidents and fatalities due >>to accelerator problems, we must remember the EU consists of 27 >>entities. When it comes to accident reporting each entity has its own >>standards, definitions and investigative techniques. The exchange of >>information between authorities remains inconsistant despite the >>desires of the EU Commission. >The figures are consistent, and agree with Toyota's own. What EU agency is responsible for the data aggregation and where are is this data published? >>> Though in America everyone wants >>>to blame someone else, I'm sure the truth will come out within a year or >>>two. >>Every year each automobile manufacturer issues tens of thousands of >>technical service bulletins. No complex piece of equipment is >>completely free of defects. Some defects are more drastic than others. >>>Google is you friend, look up "Driving in Japan" and you'll see why >>>the sales of American cars there is so small (no parking place >>>ownership, no car etc.). >>This is no secret while the supposed relevance is. >>> I own two 2.2litre cars a 2002 Nissan Almera >>>and 2009 Toyota Auris SR180, it's power to weight ratio is 120.27bhp per >>>ton. >>Brake horse power is only a measure of engine output. Effective horse >>power considers drive train losses which can be significant, ten to >>twenty percent. In any case your car's power/weight ratio falls in >>line with the better super-minis. >The major losses are those of the torque converter, never less than 10% >(except during lockup) and infinite if holding a car still on the foot >brake whilst in traffic. Very few of our cars have auto transmissions, >It seems they just aren't liked on our side of the pond. >>> My daughter owns two cars, a Vauxhall Corsa diesel and a Proton >>>Gen2 1.6 litre petrol, my son owns a Toyota Yaris 1.3 petrol. After >>>driving a few of the cars you have in America, The latest being a Dodge >>>Avenger 2.4 petrol, I am convinced that few if any of you domestic cars >>>could even go as fast as my sons Yaris, and I don't think even your >>>muscle cars can hold a candle to my SR180. >It's the p/w ratio that determines acceleration, top speed etc, how >heavy are your muscle cars? Power to weight is especially important to acceleration from a standing start. An equally important consideration is the gear ratio. Changing the ring and pinion gears in a RWD automobile can greatly alter the performance characteristics of the vehicle. There are many contributing factors besides raw power. Starting with raw power doesn't hurt though ;) The weight figures for the 2011 Shelby GT haven't been released but previous models weigh in at less than 4000 avoirdupois pounds. That is about seven pounds per hp. The Auris' ratio is somewhat higher at over eighteen pounds per hp. But this is an apples to oranges comparison. >>In what respect: zero to sixty, quarter mile times, top end, endurance >>runs...? I doubt the few American cars you've driven represent what >>passes for muscle cars in this day and age. Next time try something >>with a V-8. The 2011 Shelby GT500s will use a 5.4L super-charged V-8 >>(550 hp & 510 ft/lb torque). Its sibling the Mustang GT will be >>powered by a normally aspirated 5.0L V-8 (412 hp & 390 ft/lb torque). >>I wouldn't mind driving a SR180. >I've taken it to the Nurburgring in Germany and it cruises sweetly at >around 110 mph. Better on a closed course than a public thoroughfare. Too many drivers over-estimate their skills and abilities. Once thing to remember about Americans and our cars is the vastness country itself. North to south Great Britian is approximately 600 miles long. In this country a one-way trip of 600 miles is not uncommon, that is almost the distance between Atlanta GA and Washington DC. When traffic and fuel/rest stops are factored it becomes twelve hour drive. As fine a car as the Auris appears to be it might not be suitable for such an extended journey. There are drivers' cars and then there are drivers' car, much depends upon the drive itself.
From: Mike Hunter on 14 Feb 2010 10:03 Get real! That may be your opinion but when a supplier builds to a manufactures specs how can you blame the supplier, particularly when the supplier must use material REQUIRED by that manufacturer? If a part fails it is ether a design deficiency or a failure of the materials specified. The steel Dana uses for Toyota is from Nippon of Japan Dana makes truck frames for Ford using Mittal Steel made in the US and you don't see Ford frames rusting or fracturing Try searching Metalworking News magazine for the truth, WBMS ;) "Hachiroku" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:pan.2010.02.13.21.50.23.813000(a)e86.GTS... > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:51:03 -0500, Mike Hunter wrote: > >> Then you Toyota loyalist should stop posting in other NG in their futile >> effect to deflect from Toyotas numerous recall problems, those are the >> ones >> I have set to delete automatically. >> >> What difference does it make where Toyota choose to assemble the parts >> made >> to ITS specs? > > None whatsoever. It depends on whether they're getting GOOD parts, or junk > parts from suppliers trying to save a few pennies. > > Dana has already proven twice, that they are doing things WRONG. > > > >> >> >> >> "Hachiroku" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >> news:pan.2010.02.14.00.28.33.328000(a)e86.GTS... >>> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:02:21 -0500, Mike Hunter wrote: >>> >>>> Just ONE MORE of Toyotas on going world wide safety recalls it appears. >>> >>> >>> BZZZZT!!! US and Canadian models ONLY. >>> >>> Trucks with parts MADE IN JAPAN are NOT included. >>> Only Dana junk. >>> >>> And STOP cancelling the cross postings. If I WANTED the post only in >>> toyota, I'd MAKE it only in Toyota! >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>> news:hl58sa$b6j$3(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>I think I heard they're recalling Toyota trucks because the front >>>>> propellor shaft can separate (probably at the U-joint...) >>>>> >>>>> Oh, boy... >>>>> >>>>> >>> >
From: Mike Hunter on 14 Feb 2010 10:05
Then obviously the Nippon steel is not up to specs LOL "jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message news:D4ednbEvVo-erOrWnZ2dnUVZ_qdi4p2d(a)speakeasy.net... > On 02/13/2010 12:54 PM, Mike Hunter wrote: >> Get real! Nippon makes the steel Dana is required to use by Toyota and >> Lexus models that are being recalled are made in Japan > > that's utter bullshit. /any/ steel conforming to spec will do. > > and DO NOT cut out the cross-postings other people have used. > > >> >> >> >> "Hachiroku"<Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >> news:pan.2010.02.14.00.32.02.859000(a)e86.GTS... >>> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:12:27 -0500, Mike Hunter wrote: >>> >>>> (Cross posting deleted, automatically) >>>> >>>> Why would Dana be sweating? The problem is in the steel that is made >>>> by >>>> Nippon LOL >>> >>> Then why is it only US made trucks? >>> >> >> > > > -- > nomina rutrum rutrum |