Prev: More money for the dealer on Toytoa sales
Next: Toyota makes great cars, they are just overpriced
From: C. E. White on 14 Feb 2010 15:49
I know some people think the guys running Toyota are saints that only care
about Customers. You might want to read about how they dismissed the
complaints of problems with Tacoma Throttles...

Summary from NHTSA database:

Make: TOYOTA
Model: TACOMA
Year: 2007
NHTSA Action Number: DP08001
Summary:
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MODEL YEAR (MY) 2006 TOYOTA TACOMA EQUIPPED WITH A V6
ENGINE AND AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION. IN A PETITION SENT TO NHTSA'S OFFICE OF
DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) DATED JANUARY 10, 2008, HE ALLEGES HE
EXPERIENCED TWO INCIDENTS OF UNWANTED ACCELERATION WHILE DRIVING HIS TACOMA.
THE PETITIONER REPORTED THAT DURING BOTH INCIDENTS, WHILE APPLYING THE
BRAKE, THE ENGINE SPEED INCREASED OF ITS OWN ACCORD (WITHOUT ACCELERATOR
APPLICATION), CAUSING SUDDEN AND UNCONTROLLED ACCELERATION. THE PETITIONER
REQUESTED THAT THE AGENCY COMMENCE A PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE
OF A DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY INVOLVING THE ELECTRONICALLY
ACTUATED THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM. ODI REVIEWED THE PETITION, ASSESSED VOQS,
INTERVIEWED PERSONS WHO FILED VOQS, TESTED THE VEHICLE, AND REVIEWED
TOYOTA'S RESPONSE TO AN AGENCY INFORMATION REQUEST. THE COMPLAINTS FELL INTO
THREE GROUPS. A MAJORITY OF THE COMPLAINTS MAY HAVE INVOLVED THE TACOMA'S
THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM. SOME COMPLAINTS DID NOT INVOLVE A FAILURE OF THE
THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM. FOR THE REMAINING REPORTS, ALTHOUGH THERE MAY HAVE
BEEN AN ISSUE WITH THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM AS ONE POSSIBLE EXPLANATION,
WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DETERMINE A CAUSE RELATED TO THROTTLE CONTROL OR ANY
UNDERLYING CAUSE THAT GAVE RISE TO THE COMPLAINT. FOR THOSE VEHICLES WHERE
THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM DID NOT PERFORM AS THE OWNER BELIEVES IT SHOULD
HAVE, THE INFORMATION SUGGESTING A POSSIBLE DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE
SAFETY IS QUITE LIMITED. ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION IS UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN A
FINDING THAT A DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY EXISTS OR A NHTSA
ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT AS
REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONER. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND
PRIORITIZE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S SAFETY
MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED. PLEASE SEE THE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR
FURTHER DETAILS.

Letter from Customer to Toyota:

http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/docservlet/Artemis/Public/Pursuits/2008/DP/INOT-DP08001-34480.pdf

Letter from Customer to NHTSA:

http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/docservlet/Artemis/Public/Pursuits/2008/DP/INOT-DP08001-34481.pdf

An interesting point made in this letter is that there were 32 complaints in
the NHTSA regarding problems with the 2006-2007 Tacoma throttle control. No
other 2006/2007 truck model had more than 1 complaint.

NHTSA closing document for the investigation:

http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/docservlet/Artemis/Public/Pursuits/2008/DP/INCLA-DP08001-30130.pdf

This text is from that document:


"....A majority oft he complaints may have involved the Tacoma's throttle
control system. Some
complaints did not involve a failure of the throttle control system. For the
remaining reports, although
there may have been an issue with the throttle control system as one
possible explanation, we have been
unable to determine a cause related to throttle control or any underlying
cause that gave rise to the
complaint. For those vehicles where the throttle control system did not
perform as the owner believes it
should have, the information suggesting a possible defect related to motor
vehicle safety is quite
limited. "

The net was, NHTSA believed there was a problem with the Tacoma throttle
control system but couldn't figure out it was, so they just closed the
investigation.....Oh What A Feeling. Moving Forward - Out of Control...

Another letter from the Customer blasting Toyota for covering up the defect:

http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/docservlet/Artemis/Public/Pursuits/2008/DP/INBC-DP08001-29183.pdf

This is Toyota response to a request for information from NHTSA:

http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/docservlet/Artemis/Public/Pursuits/2008/DP/INRL-DP08001-29004.PDF

Notice Toyta had 478 reports/complains of unintended accelration for
2004-2008 Tacomas.....Also notice that Toyota dismissed the complaints being
publicity inspired. Pure BS.

More documents at
http://nhthqnwws112.odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/documentList.do?docId=DP08001&docType=INV&fromPublic=true .

So now Toyota is going to investigate....

Ed

From: jim beam on 14 Feb 2010 20:29
On 02/14/2010 12:49 PM, C. E. White wrote:
> I know some people think the guys running Toyota are saints that only
> care about Customers. You might want to read about how they dismissed
> the complaints of problems with Tacoma Throttles...
>
> Summary from NHTSA database:
>
> Make: TOYOTA
> Model: TACOMA
> Year: 2007
> NHTSA Action Number: DP08001
> Summary:
> THE PETITIONER OWNS A MODEL YEAR (MY) 2006 TOYOTA TACOMA EQUIPPED WITH A
> V6 ENGINE AND AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION. IN A PETITION SENT TO NHTSA'S
> OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) DATED JANUARY 10, 2008, HE ALLEGES
> HE EXPERIENCED TWO INCIDENTS OF UNWANTED ACCELERATION WHILE DRIVING HIS
> TACOMA. THE PETITIONER REPORTED THAT DURING BOTH INCIDENTS, WHILE
> APPLYING THE BRAKE, THE ENGINE SPEED INCREASED OF ITS OWN ACCORD
> (WITHOUT ACCELERATOR APPLICATION), CAUSING SUDDEN AND UNCONTROLLED
> ACCELERATION. THE PETITIONER REQUESTED THAT THE AGENCY COMMENCE A
> PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR
> VEHICLE SAFETY INVOLVING THE ELECTRONICALLY ACTUATED THROTTLE CONTROL
> SYSTEM. ODI REVIEWED THE PETITION, ASSESSED VOQS, INTERVIEWED PERSONS
> WHO FILED VOQS, TESTED THE VEHICLE, AND REVIEWED TOYOTA'S RESPONSE TO AN
> AGENCY INFORMATION REQUEST. THE COMPLAINTS FELL INTO THREE GROUPS. A
> MAJORITY OF THE COMPLAINTS MAY HAVE INVOLVED THE TACOMA'S THROTTLE
> CONTROL SYSTEM. SOME COMPLAINTS DID NOT INVOLVE A FAILURE OF THE
> THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM. FOR THE REMAINING REPORTS, ALTHOUGH THERE MAY
> HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE WITH THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM AS ONE POSSIBLE
> EXPLANATION, WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO DETERMINE A CAUSE RELATED TO
> THROTTLE CONTROL OR ANY UNDERLYING CAUSE THAT GAVE RISE TO THE
> COMPLAINT. FOR THOSE VEHICLES WHERE THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM DID NOT
> PERFORM AS THE OWNER BELIEVES IT SHOULD HAVE, THE INFORMATION SUGGESTING
> A POSSIBLE DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY IS QUITE LIMITED.
> ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION IS UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN A FINDING THAT A
> DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY EXISTS

to repeat:
"THE INFORMATION SUGGESTING A POSSIBLE DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE
SAFETY IS QUITE LIMITED. ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION IS UNLIKELY TO RESULT
IN A FINDING THAT A DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY EXISTS"

what is hard to understand about that? should we chase every
unverifiable allegation regardless of it actually being apparent or
repeatable? how do we account for the "idiot factor"?

<snip>

--
nomina rutrum rutrum
From: C. E. White on 15 Feb 2010 08:41

"jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
news:D9Sdnc9EoObyPuXWnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...

> to repeat:
> "THE INFORMATION SUGGESTING A POSSIBLE DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR
> VEHICLE SAFETY IS QUITE LIMITED. ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION IS
> UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN A FINDING THAT A DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR
> VEHICLE SAFETY EXISTS"
>
> what is hard to understand about that? should we chase every
> unverifiable allegation regardless of it actually being apparent or
> repeatable? how do we account for the "idiot factor"?

The usual practice is for NHTSA to request information related to the
potential fromt he manufacturer. The manufacturer responds with there
list of complaints and additioanl information. Toyota did repond and
there were hundreds of complaints against the Tacoma related to the
throttle control (over 400). This should have prompted NHTSA to
require an extensive engineering evaluatiaon. In response to this
request, all Toyota did was send an expalanation of how the throttle
control system was suppose to work and a claim that the compalints
were all inspired by bad publicity (this was back in 2008 before the
current media circus). Based ont this NHTSA closed the invetigation.
Does this seem reasonable to you? Do you hoinestly thing NHTSA would
have closed an investigation into to a Ford or GM "problem" that
involved 100's of complaints becasue Ford or GM claimed the complains
were all based on bad publicity?

Ed


From: jim beam on 15 Feb 2010 10:54
On 02/15/2010 05:41 AM, C. E. White wrote:
> "jim beam"<me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:D9Sdnc9EoObyPuXWnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net...
>
>> to repeat:
>> "THE INFORMATION SUGGESTING A POSSIBLE DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR
>> VEHICLE SAFETY IS QUITE LIMITED. ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION IS
>> UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN A FINDING THAT A DEFECT RELATED TO MOTOR
>> VEHICLE SAFETY EXISTS"
>>
>> what is hard to understand about that? should we chase every
>> unverifiable allegation regardless of it actually being apparent or
>> repeatable? how do we account for the "idiot factor"?
>
> The usual practice is for NHTSA to request information related to the
> potential fromt he manufacturer. The manufacturer responds with there
> list of complaints and additioanl information. Toyota did repond and
> there were hundreds of complaints against the Tacoma related to the
> throttle control (over 400). This should have prompted NHTSA to
> require an extensive engineering evaluatiaon. In response to this
> request, all Toyota did was send an expalanation of how the throttle
> control system was suppose to work and a claim that the compalints
> were all inspired by bad publicity (this was back in 2008 before the
> current media circus). Based ont this NHTSA closed the invetigation.
> Does this seem reasonable to you? Do you hoinestly thing NHTSA would
> have closed an investigation into to a Ford or GM "problem" that
> involved 100's of complaints becasue Ford or GM claimed the complains
> were all based on bad publicity?
>
> Ed
>
>

so let's clarify your position:

1. do you think all complaints are merited?

2. what account are you taking of the idiot factor?

3. do you think that complaints that end up being unsubstantiable should
somehow be pursued, while those of other manufacturers that simply kill
hundreds of people can be ignored?

because that's how you're reading to me.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum
From: Clive on 15 Feb 2010 11:37
In message <O-udndKkgLSo8-TWnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net>, jim beam
<me(a)privacy.net> writes
>2. what account are you taking of the idiot factor?
Personally, I've driven into another vehicle (4mph), and it was my
fault. For years Id driven a car with no rest for your left foot when
not using the clutch. When I got a new car, it had a foot rest so I
used it, I was in a queue of traffic and as the vehicle in front of me
stopped I thought I had my foot on the clutch pressed harder and pressed
the next pedal for the brakes. A second later after hitting the
vehicle in front I realised what I'd done, and luckily for me no damage
to either vehicle. It came as a shock that I could have made such a
stupid mistake, but it was not the manufacturers fault (Nissan). It
was my idiot factor as you so kindly put it.
--
Clive

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: More money for the dealer on Toytoa sales
Next: Toyota makes great cars, they are just overpriced