Toyota Runaway Cause: Electronic Throttle/Cruise Control?
in [Toyota Prius]
|
Prev: ABC News Video: What to do if your car runs out of control
Next: U.S. criticizes Toyota for 'misleading' public in recall
From: Steve on 11 Nov 2009 11:47 >> >> What kind of idiot would unload the trunk with the engine running and >> the Parking Brake not engaged? > The parking brake was engaged. > Not if the car moved, it wasn't. "Engaged" doesn't mean "one click," it means ENGAGED enough to hold. Still operator error.
From: Steve on 11 Nov 2009 11:57 Vic Smith wrote: > > If it was the car wouldn't have moved. > But anyway, I never knew a driver that would thing twice about opening > the trunk with a car running in park. > Anybody who says they've never done it is probably lying. > Might be some anal types who use a parking break in flatlands. > I never do, and often get in the trunk or check trans fluid level with > the engine running and the parking brake not set. > Just put it in park. > Oh, I'm a real daredevil, ain't I? Evic Ksmith I am. > Might be more careful with a strange car, and use the e-brake, > but maybe not. Park is park. Park is park, but Park was NEVER intended to actually hold the car. Especially not back in the early days. Yes, I sometimes use it the "wrong" way too on flat land, and in most cases it DOES hold the car. But it warns ya right there in the owners manual! And if you've ever had a transmission on most any brand open and seen the spring *DESIGNED* to let the detent pop out if too much force is exerted, you'd never trust it with your life (or the car when parking on an incline) either. My first car was a '68 Ford Ranchero, and I knew damn well that it would drop into gear if you looked at it cross-eyed. The shifter detent mechanism was so sloppy that you also had to hold the gear selector in park with your left hand wrapped over the top of the steering column while turning your key with the right hand... took me a while to lose that habit after getting my '73 Plymouth. The really funny thing is that if you watch some old TV shows with Ford cars, you can see the actors doing exactly the same thing to start the car occasionally. It was standard Ford starting procedure in those days. MOST people knew better than to trust the shifter and used their parking brake.
From: Al Falfa on 11 Nov 2009 17:43 "Steve" <no(a)spam.thanks> wrote in message news:6_qdnVUeDo8Xd2fXnZ2dnUVZ_qpi4p2d(a)texas.net... > >>> >>> What kind of idiot would unload the trunk with the engine running and >>> the Parking Brake not engaged? >> The parking brake was engaged. >> > > Not if the car moved, it wasn't. "Engaged" doesn't mean "one click," it > means ENGAGED enough to hold. Still operator error. > What do you know about this? Nothing.
From: C. E. White on 11 Nov 2009 20:05 "Mr Ed" <ecamin(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:hJadnXIdqY48qGXXnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com... > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message > news:6Y-dnXElQaLDrGrXnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com... >> >> "Not Me" <Not.Me(a)Home.Base> wrote in message >> news:neWdnXKt3Y2WbGvXnZ2dnUVZ_uJi4p2d(a)speakeasy.net... >>> jr92 wrote: >>>> I had the same problem happen to me many years ago. My '76 Pinto had >>>> the throttle stick wide open. After about 8 minutes, and a top end >>>> speed of about 67mph, I found a cotton field and ran it into it, >>>> slowing me down enough that I could jump out of the car before it hit >>>> a fence post. I wasnt hurt, but it cost me 94 bucks to replace the >>>> bumper that was busted >>> >>> Lucky you didn't burn to death in the fuel fire Pintos were famous for. >> >> While Pinto's may have been famous for this, it was not a justifiable >> accusation. The facts are much different that the perception. Pintos were >> no more likely to catch on fire that other small cars from the same era. >> Pintos were the victim of a viscous smear campaign sort of like what is >> building over this Toyota floor mat / cruise control / unintended >> acceleration issue. >> >> Ed > It was a justifiable accusation. My son's car was rear ended and it > shortened his Pinto by 4 inches. We wrapped a chain around the bumper to > a tree, floored it and got 3 inches back. We looked at his gas tank and > it had the drain plug indentation in the gas tank metal. He was one of > the lucky ones. It didn't pierce it and explode. The drain plug should > have been placed elsewhere out of dangers way. Then if it exploded it > would be a normal accident. What drain plug indentation. Neither the gas tank nor the rear end had a drain plug. For Ford Pintos of that era you had to remove the differential cover to drain the lube. The facts are clear - Pinto were no more likely to catch on fire than other vehicles from that era of the same size. Many cars of that era had gas tank mounted in the same location in the same manner (for instance my 280Z had a similar tank location). Even more modern vehicles have gas tanks mounted in this manner. Late 90's Jeeps are now being investigated becasue the Ditlow gang is fishing for new clients. Ed
From: C. E. White on 12 Nov 2009 07:44
"C. E. White" <cewhite3remove(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message news:krOdnQ_SwdHqwmbXnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com... > > "Mr Ed" <ecamin(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:hJadnXIdqY48qGXXnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com... >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message >> news:6Y-dnXElQaLDrGrXnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com... >>> >>> "Not Me" <Not.Me(a)Home.Base> wrote in message >>> news:neWdnXKt3Y2WbGvXnZ2dnUVZ_uJi4p2d(a)speakeasy.net... >>>> jr92 wrote: >>>>> I had the same problem happen to me many years ago. My '76 Pinto >>>>> had >>>>> the throttle stick wide open. After about 8 minutes, and a top >>>>> end >>>>> speed of about 67mph, I found a cotton field and ran it into it, >>>>> slowing me down enough that I could jump out of the car before >>>>> it hit >>>>> a fence post. I wasnt hurt, but it cost me 94 bucks to replace >>>>> the >>>>> bumper that was busted >>>> >>>> Lucky you didn't burn to death in the fuel fire Pintos were >>>> famous for. >>> >>> While Pinto's may have been famous for this, it was not a >>> justifiable accusation. The facts are much different that the >>> perception. Pintos were no more likely to catch on fire that other >>> small cars from the same era. Pintos were the victim of a viscous >>> smear campaign sort of like what is building over this Toyota >>> floor mat / cruise control / unintended acceleration issue. >>> >>> Ed >> It was a justifiable accusation. My son's car was rear ended and >> it shortened his Pinto by 4 inches. We wrapped a chain around the >> bumper to a tree, floored it and got 3 inches back. We looked at >> his gas tank and it had the drain plug indentation in the gas tank >> metal. He was one of the lucky ones. It didn't pierce it and >> explode. The drain plug should have been placed elsewhere out of >> dangers way. Then if it exploded it would be a normal accident. > > What drain plug indentation. Neither the gas tank nor the rear end > had a drain plug. For Ford Pintos of that era you had to remove the > differential cover to drain the lube. Sorry, I got that wrong. The Pintos did have a drain plug, on the front side. I knew they didn't have one on the rear, but a Pinto expert told me they did have one on the front. Ed > > The facts are clear - Pinto were no more likely to catch on fire > than other vehicles from that era of the same size. Many cars of > that era had gas tank mounted in the same location in the same > manner (for instance my 280Z had a similar tank location). Even more > modern vehicles have gas tanks mounted in this manner. Late 90's > Jeeps are now being investigated becasue the Ditlow gang is fishing > for new clients. > > Ed |