electronic throttle
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: Toyota Provided No Evidence of Testing Electronic Throttle toUS Congress
Next: Increase your penis size and feel better about yourself!!
From: Grumpy AuContraire on 7 Mar 2010 00:10 Yadda wrote: > on 3/6/10 3:30 PM Bob Cooper said the following: >> In article<hmuep4$qd2$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, >> crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com says... >>> >>> >>> This is the most important part? >>> >>> It's nonsense! The gas pedal does two things, opens the throttle >>> plate and >>> closes the throttle plate. Period. >>> >>> You should ride the bus. >> >> Nonsense? Where have I heard that before? >> This is what you get if you're foolish enough to to let somebody who >> names himself after a whiskey, whose logic is limited to the HTML >> programming he's done for a Toyota fanboy website, and thinks EPS uses a >> pump - design automobile throttling. >> Don't worry, nobody in charge of such things is that foolish. >> Well, maybe Toyota was. And look where it got them. >> >> >> >> > > With car computers overriding the drivers inputs to correct an > unbalanced car that may involve applying power when the the driver is > using brake certainly implies complexity that if not exhaustively tested > with logic tables and safety checks on sensors could lead to unintended > outputs and maybe race conditions. I think it all boils down to the fact that cars have become nearly as complex as airplanes. Difference is that planes are "driven" by highly trained operators and the aircraft itself is highly maintained. This difference spells trouble at some point for consumers many of whom are morons to boot. We can thank the guv'ment for most of these "innovations. Guv'ment mandates safe cars so they naturally become heavier. Guv'ment mandates fuel efficient cars so they become gagetized with sometimes costly results and compromises in safety. Meanwhile the consumer becomes so dumbed down that they cannot react to basic emergency conditions adequately. Hell, how many Toyotas have malfunctioned in the whole scheme of things??? Not that many. Oh well, that's why I drive twenty-five year old junkers with mechanical throttle linkage... JT
From: jim beam on 7 Mar 2010 00:56 On 03/06/2010 08:42 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: > > > "jim beam" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote >> >> you should actually /read/ the papers. nobody has offered any evidence >> that there is a system failure. only allegation. allegation != >> evidence. just like our congressional witnesses car alleging all kinds >> of demonic behavior, but which was apparently driven 30k trouble-free >> miles after she sold it. odd how that happened. >> >> >>> Regardless of the reason, >>> something failed or it would not have made the news to the degree is >>> has. >> >> wow!!! exactly how wet behind the ears are you ed? > > >> i was at a party the other weekend, and a woman there was bleating >> about her prius having a stuck throttle. so i asked her some questions. >> >> did she crash? no. >> was she able to stop the car? yes. >> did this throttle problem occur before or after she'd heard about it >> in the media. after. >> did she have any problem before she'd heard about it? no. >> >> conclusion - some people are susceptible to suggestion. > > Your conclusion may be correct, but it may also be wrong. You have no > evidence either way, only testimony. Neither of you can prove your > conclusion. > > > >> no it wasn't. you're very politically naive. >> >> audi, had a successful 4wd sedan that had set the rest of the world on >> fire and that was threatening the profitability of domestic >> manufacturers that might have to follow suit. the hysteria was detroit >> smear campaign. just like we're witnessing now with toyota. >> >> of course, complete exoneration was years after the damage had been >> done and audi effectively chased from the u.s. market. > > So, no one ever had a problem in an Audi? Sure it may have been > exploited but that does not mean it never happened. It does happen with > all cars (see my post about brake interlock) but it happened more with > the Audi. It may be exploited this time around too as the media often > does, but that does not mean there never was a throttle problem. believe it or not, i'm wide open to the evidence on this, but where is it? all we have is a butt-load of politically charged allegation and hysteria, direct from the white house no less. with frod, all you had to do was look at the crushed cabin and the paper-trail of their dealings with the nhtsa, and all the evidence you ever needed was right there. with toyota, i see nothing to support the allegations, and nothing distinguish this from my grandmother pressing the wrong [mechanically linked] pedal in her frod. -- nomina rutrum rutrum
From: jim beam on 7 Mar 2010 00:58 On 03/06/2010 08:26 PM, Bill Putney wrote: > jim beam wrote: >> On 03/06/2010 11:48 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: > >>> ...Emergencies do happen and a driver should be competent enough >>> to shift into neutral. >> >> or stomp the brakes - which are three times more powerful than the >> engine,... > > I don't necessarily disagree with the rest of your post, but that part > of your post is definitely incorrect. Have you ever played with your > power brakes while simultaneously pressing the accelerator? Anything > more than one or two initial stabs at the brakes depletes the vacuum > stored in the booster, and with even slight power simultaneously being > demanded of the engine, the vacuum is not enough to directly power the > brakes, much less re-charge the vacuum in the booster. i have done this. with the engine off, the vacuum remains until the pedal is released - thus if you stomp the pedal and keep it there, you don't need to keep replenishing the vacuum. and you will stop the car. with the engine running, there is no vacuum issue, and the brakes are still powerful enough to stop the car. on my honda anyway. > > People don't believe that, but try it on your car: On a deserted road at > highway speed, stab the brake pedal a couple of times while holding the > gas pedal down a little bit to load the engine slightly (this works > anywhere from slight to WOT throttle). I guarantee you (unless your > brake booster gets its vacuum from something besides the intake vacuum - > like a separate electric motor-driven vacuum pump) that after two or > more stabs at the brake pedal, the braking power will be extremely low - > so low that the engine will have no trouble overpowering the brakes. No > vacuum in the booster essentially equals no brakes. with respect, i think you're confusing vacuum with fade. i've experienced that too, one particular time on a major hill in san francisco approaching a busy intersection. yes, it's scary stuff. but when i changed the pads on my civic from after-market to oem, all fade problems disappeared. even fully loaded, repeatedly decelerating from speed. [i learned my "honda oem is best" lesson that way.] > > Also, once the booster is depleted of vacuum during that experiment, the > vacuum charge in the booster will remain depleted until a second or so > after the throttle is released - IOW - deplete it and continue applying > the throttle (again - doesn't have to be anywhere near WOT) for several > seconds. Every once in a while, while still applying the throttle, try > the brakes again. You will not have any effective braking until *after* > you release the throttle. > > I urge anyone who doesn't believe what I claim above to try it before > commenting. i have. my results and comments are as above. -- nomina rutrum rutrum
From: jim beam on 7 Mar 2010 00:58 On 03/06/2010 08:36 PM, Bill Putney wrote: > Jeff Strickland wrote: > >> ...We have not explored the interaction of traction control and >> antilock brakes preventing the brakes from stopping a car with a >> throttle intent on being set to the maximum setting. We also have not >> looked at the issue of brake fade that comes from the brakes getting >> hot. If the brakes locked the front tires, the ABS would sense this >> and unlock them. The driver might keep his foot planted firmly on the >> brake pedal which has sunk to the floor, but the car still would not >> stop. The brakes get hot and fade badly, and the car wouldn't even >> slow down... > > Read my previous post. With throttle applied (even partial throttle), > the booster vacuum gets depleted *rapidly*. There is no way to use the > brakes to stop a car with an engine of any power at all with throttle > applied since, with throttle applied, intake vacuum drops to close to > zero. No vacuum = essentially no brakes. Try the experiment I described > in my previous post. > no dude. even with no engine running to replenish vacuum, there is still sufficient vacuum reserve in the booster to apply the brakes full-on three times. unless you have a leak of course, which could also be affecting your experience. -- nomina rutrum rutrum
From: dsi1 on 7 Mar 2010 00:59
On 3/6/2010 5:30 AM, jim beam wrote: > > this would not only address the "potential" for a runaway failure > [although how exactly a computer is supposed to fail such that it won't > switch off, disables brakes, disables transmission select, but still > runs its injection code is something i have never seen explained, even > by the most strident "but it must be the electronics" crowd], but it > would also remove the single most annoying thing i have ever experienced > in any vehicle driving experience: chevy's idiot idea that they need a > multi-second delay between foot pedal movement and e.t movement. anyone > that's ever tried to drive a chevy hhr on a winding mountain road knows > what i mean. I think most technically minded person would tend to agree that it's probably the control electronics. You're wrong in assuming that folks like us would think that unintended acceleration would be accompanied by failure of all the systems you cite. That's absurd. :-) > > y'all can now wait for at least 10 years for arrival, but i throw it out > there for what it's worth. I don't think it's worth as much as you think since it's likely that we'll be using electric motors instead of air pumps to move cars. |