>>> > Drivers, cars are ill-equipped when panic sets in >>> > By DEE-ANN DURBIN, AP Auto Writer Dee-ann Durbin, Ap Auto Writer >>> > 56 mins ago
>>> > DETROIT You're driving down the highway and suddenly your car starts >>> > accelerating on its own. Knuckles white, going from 60 to 90 miles an >>> > hour in a couple of seconds, you do what comes naturally hit the >>> > brakes. But what if the car keeps going?
>>> > There are options: Put the car in neutral, or in park, or switch off >>> > the ignition. But experts say those choices would be almost impossible >>> > for most drivers to consider when they're in a panic, because >>> > frightened people often can't remember even simple steps to protect >>> > themselves.
>>> > -snip-
>>> > i'd say this happens all the time, and has been happening for god > >>> knows, 40 >>> > years. the story about the little old lady/little old man who > >>> accidentally >>> > steps on teh accelerator instead of the brake and plows through a >>> store >>> > front, or a crowd at a parade, etc. etc. happens all the time. >>> people >>> > freak out. sensory overload. even just losing traction on ice.
>>> "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power >>> to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour... >>> Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will. >>> Place no faith in time. For the clock may soon be still."
>> No, there really are a certain number of 'unintended acceleration' >> cases each year that are caused by someone pressing on the gas when >> they think their foot is on the brake pedal.
>> Probably the vast majority of cases are this, especially when the >> driver is elderly.
>> The degree to which toyota's rate of unintended acceleration is above >> the baseline of other manufacturers is probably a good indicator of >> the actual mechanical failure rate for toyotas.
>> Dave
> Anyone with a ford focus beware, the gas and brake pedals are too close > together, its easy to step on both at once. > John
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:53:27 -0600, Frnak McKenney
<fr...@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> wrote: > Isn't my >normal reaction to want to slow down, which I would normally do with >the brake pedal?
>And shouldn't that actually _stop_ the car, albeit with the engine >still revving loudly in my ear?
More or less, and that's exactly what happened *twice* in the most famous accident car, which was a dealership loaner. Initial investigation indicates that a heavy, incorrect, oversized, unrestrained, and out of place floor mat jammed the accelerator pedal. The first driver braked to a stop, put the shifter in neutral, dislodged the floor mat, and went on his way. He reported the issue, but nothing was done about it. The next driver had the same problem and got at least slowed down, but at some point the brakes got tired of the abuse. He had a full load of backseat drivers, and somebody had time to use a cell phone to call 911. Yet during it all apparently nobody thought to reach down to the shifter. It's all spelled out in excruciating detail here. http://autos.aol.com/gallery/saylor-crash-report (start at page 23 if you must)
>So why then do we have a report of someone who managed to get up to >120MPH _without_ being able to stop his car? Was it simply a case >where the driver, faced with a very unusual situation, panicked and >even given 30 or 40 seconds to react, failed to think of using his >brake pedal? Or am I missing something?
Read the report. The driver had lots of time, but most likely he suffered severe brain fade, followed eventually by brake fade.
Even at WOT, these cars will stop with brakes alone. According to Car and Driver, V6 Camry: 70mph-0 closed throttle-174 ft 70mph-0 full throttle-190 ft 100-0 closed-347ft 100-0 full -435ft
>The reported pieces just don't seem to fit.
Reporting is notoriously inaccurate and sensational, and this case is a perfect example. But the factual info is readily available and makes perfect sense. It's the public's need to imagine boogymen that's out of place. They and the media feed off one another.
On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:28:46 -0500, the infamous cl...@snyder.on.ca scrawled the following:
>Toyota is doing the push-button start/stop the "normal " way. How do >you shut off a computer when the ctrl/alt/del does not work??? >You press and hold the start/stop button for 3-5 seconds. >On just about every computer made in the last 10? years??????
20 years. But remember, they're dealing with the unwashed masses who can hardly steer a vehicle, let alone DRIVE one. There are documented cases of people turning on the cruise control and climbing into the back seat of their car to retrieve something. Google "stupid people tricks" for more. <sigh>
-- In order that people may be happy in their work, these three things are needed: They must be fit for it. They must not do too much of it. And they must have a sense of success in it. -- John Ruskin, Pre-Raphaelitism, 1850
> > The reported pieces just don't seem to fit. Frustrating.
> > Anyway, thanks for the feedback.
> They make even less sense when you consider that a fuel injected engine > doesn't throttle up just because the throttle plate has been opened. The > ECM sees the throttle position, the change in airflow, the drop in > vacuum, and the extra lean-ness as an order to add more fuel via the > injectors.
> Most cars also sense brake application, and won't continue to try to add > power (regardless of the throttle position) if the brakes have been > applied.
> That's why Toyota said "Apply the brakes. Do NOT pump them; just apply > them steadily and bring the vehicle to a stop." If you were to pump the > brakes, the ECM would alternately honor the braking signal and try to > increase power during brake-off times, negating the effect.
> LLoyd
Are there cars smart enough to sense the conflict? I would be a little surprised they'd gotten that far.
Anyway, the reason for not pumping the brakes is that at WFO (or any appreciable throttle) there's no engine vacuum to work the power brakes.
WFO, slam on the brakes, and you have power brakes. Pump 'em once or twice and the vacuum booster has no more vacuum, no more power brakes.
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:11:44 -0700, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>Even at WOT, these cars will stop with brakes alone. >According to Car and Driver, V6 Camry: >70mph-0 closed throttle-174 ft >70mph-0 full throttle-190 ft >100-0 closed-347ft >100-0 full -435ft
Right. Curb weight is 3263 lb. To stop it from 70 mph in 174 feet with constant deceleration would take 3.39 sec and the brakes would dissipate 213.8 KW (286.7 HP) during that time. The peak output of the V-6 engine is 268 HP but it would develop considerably less than this at most engine speeds even at WOT. Therefore, the brakes clearly have the capacity to overcome the engine and stop the car.
>>The reported pieces just don't seem to fit.
But they make Toyota look bad, which must be good for Obama motors, right?
>>Even at WOT, these cars will stop with brakes alone. >>According to Car and Driver, V6 Camry: >>70mph-0 closed throttle-174 ft >>70mph-0 full throttle-190 ft >>100-0 closed-347ft >>100-0 full -435ft
>Right. Curb weight is 3263 lb. To stop it from 70 mph in 174 feet >with constant deceleration would take 3.39 sec and the brakes would >dissipate 213.8 KW (286.7 HP) during that time. The peak output of >the V-6 engine is 268 HP but it would develop considerably less than >this at most engine speeds even at WOT. Therefore, the brakes clearly >have the capacity to overcome the engine and stop the car.
>>>The reported pieces just don't seem to fit.
>But they make Toyota look bad, which must be good for Obama motors, >right?
That might be a motive in a few cases, but mostly it isn't the problem IMO.
1. A large percentage of the population refuses to read up on anything other than say, celebrity shenanigans. We're getting dumber by the day (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/), and more proud of it. Some people even brag of a lack of grade-school math skills, without which it's hard to judge odds or estimate risk in any useful way. And a few are so far gone that they probably won't accept that they stepped on the wrong pedal unless they're shown pant-leg video.
2. Many of the people mentioned above believe that it's credible to use "somebody should have told me" as an excuse for not knowing what they should have. Which brings us to ...
3. A majority don't see anything wrong with refusing to take responsibility if they fat-foot their car into a fender-bender or worse. Much easier to blame electronic gremlins. Which may soon reach the popularity of angels and bad backs, partly because they're all so difficult to disprove. Some readers will think I'm exaggerating about the lack of morality, but here's proof of where we're at. http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/18/us/ghost-riders-are-target-of-an-in... The same attitudes that lead to crap like that are at work in fender-bender injury claims. Apparently there's hardly anybody left who's willing to walk away without a multi-thousand dollar parting gift, and frequently they're aided by winking doctors and lawyers. We've accepted that it's OK to cheat the insurance company out of a few thou for a sore neck, and have built a seemingly legitimate industry around it. So it shouldn't be a surprise that many are willing to take zero risk to save face, by pretending that their car has a mysterious presence. Coming soon, ghostbusters for your Toyota, which might look something like this. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/11/04/when-antisc...
4. There seems to a general trend to believe that money, other than salary, must grow on trees or something. It's little wonder that the same people who'll join the hysteria, and jump at any opportunity to get some "free" money, will also complain about the increasing costs of cars and insurance. See #1.
5. As with government, we get the press we deserve. "If it bleeds it leads" is their motto, and some of them (take Fox News, please) compete with their customers to see whose morals are worse. A few of the worst offenders will publish properly-researched articles as well eventually, but by then the meme of possessed vehicles will be well entrenched, and virtually impossible to dislodge because of #1.
Combine all that with predictable stupid-driver tricks and a few legitimate mechanical problems that are unavoidable, and the situation at hand makes perfect sense.
<fr...@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> wrote: >On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:12:52 -0600, Jon Elson <jmel...@wustl.edu> wrote: >> Frnak McKenney wrote:
>>> That's an interesting point. Has anyone heard whether the Toyota >>> problem involves the acceleration being locked on maximum, or only >>> (say) 1/4 maximum? That could have a _big_ effect on available >>> reaction time.
>> It is definitely a sticking pedal, so wherever you pushed it down, it >> will just stay there. At least, the detailed article that was posted a >> couple days ago, says that is what is going on.
>Jon,
>Thanks for the update. Last time I really listened to one of the >news stories I had the impression that it was thought due to a >software problem.
>So if one happened to be pressing lightly when it stuck, and if one >noticed the lack of decelleration when one let up on the pedal >_before_ one pressed it further, the acceleration might indeed be >minor (but constant). And an accelerator stuck at a lower power >position would be easier to counteract by use of the brake pedal.
>But it would really nail the leadfoots. (Leadfeet?)
>> ... If you could get your >> toe under the pedal, you should be able to pull it up, too.
>Geez. Talk about dredging up long-lost memories, Jon! (I mean me, >not you. <grin!>). After reading your description I recall having >to do exactly that once or twice in my '65 VW (how can you not love >a car whose ignition switch has a position labelled "FAHRT"?).
>I know that used to press down hard on the pedal once and then let >up before turning the key, and this kind of press-release would be >the perfect occasion for a sticky pedal or cable to show up >(malfunctioning automatic choke on a cold morning?). The >transmission would have likely been in neutral, and in any case I >could have pressed the clutch pedal to effectively disengage the >engine.
>Which brings up yet another puzzle. These problem Toyotas all have >automatic transmissions, right? I've mostly driven "stick", where >if I brake to a full stop without also clutching I wind up stalling >the engine. Don't automatics have to have some sort of mechanism >that automatically disengages the engine/transmission from the >wheels when you step on the brake pedal?
Nope. Don't work that way.
>So... Imagine that I'm a Toyota driver. I step on my accelerator >pedal, the car starts speeding up, and it doesn't slow down the way >I would expect it to when I take my foot off the pedal. Isn't my >normal reaction to want to slow down, which I would normally do with >the brake pedal?
>And shouldn't that actually _stop_ the car, albeit with the engine >still revving loudly in my ear?
Nope. With drive by wire it would be good to make the throttle drop when the brake is pressed like an electric assist bicycle.
>So why then do we have a report of someone who managed to get up to >120MPH _without_ being able to stop his car? Was it simply a case >where the driver, faced with a very unusual situation, panicked and >even given 30 or 40 seconds to react, failed to think of using his >brake pedal? Or am I missing something?
Would have burnrd the brakes off - but shutting down the engine would have solved the problem, had he thought to do so.
>The reported pieces just don't seem to fit. Frustrating.
>Anyway, thanks for the feedback.
>Frank >-- > "...[W]hen faced with a problem you do not understand, do any > part of it you do understand, then look at it again." > -- Robert A. Heinlein / "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress"
>> The reported pieces just don't seem to fit. Frustrating.
>> Anyway, thanks for the feedback.
>They make even less sense when you consider that a fuel injected engine >doesn't throttle up just because the throttle plate has been opened. The >ECM sees the throttle position, the change in airflow, the drop in >vacuum, and the extra lean-ness as an order to add more fuel via the >injectors.
>Most cars also sense brake application, and won't continue to try to add >power (regardless of the throttle position) if the brakes have been >applied.
Actually VERY few link the throttle and the brake
>That's why Toyota said "Apply the brakes. Do NOT pump them; just apply >them steadily and bring the vehicle to a stop." If you were to pump the >brakes, the ECM would alternately honor the braking signal and try to >increase power during brake-off times, negating the effect.
The reason NOT to pump the brakes is there is virtually no manifold vacuum with the throttle open, and vacuum is required for the brake booster to function. There is enough vacuum for one or 2 applications - but not for pumping the brake.
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:42:26 -0700, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>3. A majority don't see anything wrong with refusing to take >responsibility if they fat-foot their car into a fender-bender or >worse. Much easier to blame electronic gremlins. Which may soon reach >the popularity of angels and bad backs, partly because they're all so >difficult to disprove. Some readers will think I'm exaggerating about >the lack of morality
>On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:11:44 -0700, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>>Even at WOT, these cars will stop with brakes alone. >>According to Car and Driver, V6 Camry: >>70mph-0 closed throttle-174 ft >>70mph-0 full throttle-190 ft >>100-0 closed-347ft >>100-0 full -435ft
>Right. Curb weight is 3263 lb. To stop it from 70 mph in 174 feet >with constant deceleration would take 3.39 sec and the brakes would >dissipate 213.8 KW (286.7 HP) during that time. The peak output of >the V-6 engine is 268 HP but it would develop considerably less than >this at most engine speeds even at WOT. Therefore, the brakes clearly >have the capacity to overcome the engine and stop the car.
>>>The reported pieces just don't seem to fit.
>But they make Toyota look bad, which must be good for Obama motors, >right?
Did you see the chart at Edmunds.com the other day? Obama Motors continues to have the highest complaint rate (database) of any mfgr, as they have for decades and decades. I think masochists buy them so they can complain. ;)
-- In order that people may be happy in their work, these three things are needed: They must be fit for it. They must not do too much of it. And they must have a sense of success in it. -- John Ruskin, Pre-Raphaelitism, 1850
