A Car With A Mind Of Its Own

mindriot writes "When Hicham Dequiedt, driving on a highway between Vierzon and Riom in central France in his Renault Vel Satis this Sunday, was overtaking a truck, his car began accelerating to 120 mph on its own, apparently due to a defect in the cruise control system. Stomping on the brakes proved pointless and, having a magnetic card for a car key, he could not cut the ignition. After calling the police from his cell phone who then attempted to clear the streets of any danger to him, in what he described as the most fearful event of his life, he raced down the highway for another hour before finally managing to stop the car. Read about the incident here or, in more detail, in this article by the German 'Spiegel' (translation). The case is still under investigation. Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?"

Comments

Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[garcia]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.

If you are traveling at a high rate of speed losing power steering/braking will cause more problems for you. First try neutral and even a lower gear if for some reason neutral isn't engaging. It's going to over-rev the engine but personally I'd prefer to replace a transmission or the entire engine rather than my blood or organs.

I couldn't read the translated article as it just wasn't working so I don't know if this was suggested or not but if it wasn't suggested by the police I just can't understand why not.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[jargoone]

Yeah, getting the car into neutral would be my first thought, too. This car probably had that option. However, some newer, fancier cars also have the gear selection electronic. The BMW 745 comes to mind. I suppose it's unlikely that two systems would fail simulatneously, but who knows?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

Maybe it's just me, but if you buy a car you can't handle if the power assist systems fail, you bought the wrong car. It's like these tiny women on harley-davidson motorcycles, how the fuck are they going to pick those things up if they drop them? Just ignorant.

If you can't steer and/or stop your car with the power off, you need less car. Of course, soon we're going to see cars that eliminate all the hydraulic systems on the vehicle, and even the steering linkage will be gone - if the car loses power you won't be able to do anything. That ought to be interesting - look for it to happen in the US in 2006. I believe there's already at least one production auto which is completely drive by wire in terms of throttle and steering, but I'm not sure about that one. It might just have electric power assist steering. The brakes are going to be going electric soon as well, which is pretty reasonable when you consider the unreliability of automotive hydraulic systems. Using electric brakes with metallic pads means no brake fade, ever, up to the point where you warp your rotors. There's no brake fluid to take on water and boil, not necessarily in that order.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Dr. Evil]

Hmmm... does this work for a Tiptronic transmission?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[CmdrPorno]

Also, you risk engaging the steering wheel anti-theft lock, effectively making it impossible to steer. I can't fathom why this went on for half an hour, the driver could have put the car in neutral or "applied the brakes as hard as he could" earlier in the game. The car's engine will not overpower the brakes if they are functioning properly.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[JJahn]

Ha! My 1994 manual power-nothing Civic doesn't need such pathetic implements as power steering and braking! I'll do whatever I damn please with my ignition and you can't stop me!

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[linuxtelephony]

I wonder if the electronic transmission has "safety sensors" that won't shift to a lower gear if it might cause engine damage. If so, even if you put the selector down to the first gear, the computer would override the driver in order to protect the engine.

Hmm, the computer overriding the human for self-preservation. That could be interesting.....

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds to me like you think that people who can't operate the car when power-assisted steering fails because of insufficient strength shouldn't be using power-assisted steering.

Tell that little old lady that she can't buy a car with power-assisted steering because in the unlikely chance that it fails, she doesn't have the strength to steer the car. Yeah, right. The trick now is finding a car that doesn't have power-assisted steering that isn't the cheapest piece of Kia or Daewoo crap.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right, but for the wrong reasons.

Have you ever driven a car without power steering? You won't notice a difference at higher speeds, actually the difference between manual and power steering becomes negligible as soon as you're going faster than 20 kph or so. Losing power brakes is bad, but the brakes do still work, and you'll slow down quicker than by just going into neutral.

The dangerous thing is that you might LOCK your steering by pulling off the ignition key!

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, most brake systems are such that you don't lose power brakes immediately, though you will almost certainly lose anitlock. Now depending on the weight of the vehicle, it is actually easier to steer the vehicle at high speeds. As for the drive by wire systems, I believe that will require a legislative change since current requirements are for a mechanical linkage for the steering. And folks depending on how important it is to stop use the old rally trick of the hand/parking brake.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Losing power steering dosen't matter above about 15 mph. Porches turn theirs off above that so they don't have to spend that extra couple horsepower to drive the hydrolics of the system.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[cbelt3]

This happens in Hardware, too, guys. Envision a combined catastrophic failure- automatic transmission locks in gear (they do, ya know- it's basically a hydraulic switch that gets gunked up), accelerator cable jams in full-on position (again, it CAN happen). Oh, and to add insult to injury, the power switch on the bad boy is jammed somehow. Once you are up to speed (say 100kph plus), the parking brake (which only acivates the rear brakes) will happily burn up the rear brakes, if it works at all (most automatic transmission drivers never use the parking brake, and it's not adjusted, so full pull/push will only result in minor or no brake application). Pushing on the transmission selector doesn't do anything because it's jammed internally with lots of hydraulic pressure. Holding down the brakes will cause 'em to burn up if the engine has enough HP to overcome them.

I can personally recall a wild ride in a manual transmission car where the accelerator cable stuck in full-on. I had the presence of mind and fortune to shut the engine off before it spooled past redline, but in traffic it was an interesting experience.

As we get more into software driven automobiles, the opportunity for failures like this continue to climb. For example --->

If Microsoft made cars, and other true stories

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[garcia]

You ever had the steering wheel lock on you when you have the car in the off position? Could you imagine if you had turned the ignition all the way off and had to avoid an object in the road... You overcompensated and locked the wheel. What happens now?

Don't think you are so high and mighty.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Oddly_Drac]

"If you can't steer and/or stop your car with the power off, you need less car."

Did you mean with brakes, or by hand? If the latter, I'm going to be really polite to you.

"Using electric brakes with metallic pads means no brake fade, ever, up to the point where you warp your rotors. There's no brake fluid to take on water and boil, not necessarily in that order."

Fade is gaseous buildup from the pads ablating against the disc, which is why you do graduated braking on a non-fancy car, but personally I wouldn't trust a solenoid to do the force multiplying work of a caliper.

As for the brake fluid taking on water...if you have a non-tight hydraulic system you'll be screwed anyway, let alone getting to the point where you have water in it. Compare the relatively low tech and _reliable_ cylinder and caliper system with the voltages/currents required to produce braking forces and you'll probably notice that there's going to some power applied.

"unreliability of automotive hydraulic systems."

Probably _the_ most reliable portion of the average motor car, if maintained and kept in good repair and not driven with utter faith in the ability to tailgate other drivers at 80mph. Most accidents involving brakes are people locking the wheels at speed.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[maxume]

Most planned electric brake systems are more a less a switch from belt power over to electric. There is still a hydraulic pump(or two) that provides the braking power...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

If I turned the key off too far I'd deserve what I got. However my car requires that a I push a little button down to turn the key far enough to lock the steering, probably for that reason. However, it's a Nissan, and their engineers actually understand what they're doing. (Shit, even my distributor can only be installed one way. I wish more engines were like that.)

It's not that I'm high and mighty, it's that I consider driving to be a privilege and a responsibility.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[racer19]

In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking.

Actually, the fact that the wheels are still turning and the car is in gear will likely keep the motor turning and, therefore, keep the power steering pump pumping and provide the vacuum needed for the power brakes.

The more important problem is that if they turn the ignition off, they'll likely engage the steering wheel lock and then you're REALLY screwed.

Parent is correct, however, that putting the car into neutral is the best bet. In regard to over-revving after putting it into neutral, though, that's not going to happen as ANY modern car has a rev-limiter that prevents throttle-induced over-rev. You can only over-rev if it's mechanically induced via an ill-advised downshift or such. It'll *sound* like it's going to explode (and will after a long time), but it's likely not going to do any harm.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[jimmyfergus]

You'll only lose power steering and braking in with an auto gearbox (which most europeans shun), or if you're in neutral, or if your car is one of the few with electrically assisted steering.

If the engine's turning, you'll still have power steering and brakes in most manual tranny cars. The former is mechanically run off the engine, and the latter from vacuum, which is there in spades when the ignition is off but the engine turning.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[james72]

If you turn the ignition 'part way' off (so that the engine stops - most cars will still loose power steering and brakes. They are generally powered from the engine, and are not electric. Some more modern cars do have electrical power-steering, I think.

-James.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[pklong]

I've heard this said before but I don't completely believe it.

The servo assistance for the brakes runs off the intake vacuum (At least in my car) so providing I didn't dip the clutch or put it in neutral I should be O.K. Of course even without assistance you can still brake. You have to stand on the peddle, but you can still brake.

My car doesn't have power steering (shock horror) but if it did (and you kept the engine spinning by not dipping the clutch / putting it in neutral) then surely the power steering pump would keep on rotating. Also I can't believe than steering would be impossible. Just abn awful lot harder than you are used to.

Of course if you were to completely turn it off you would engage the steering wheel lock.... And this won't work for automatics at all.....

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[dykofone]

I've got a 97 Landrover Discovery, so not exactly a new car, but it does what you talk about. If you shift down to 1st while going at high speeds, it won't shift until you've decelerated enough to avoid damaging the engine. If you keep your foot on the gas, it won't ever shift down.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a little news flash for you. On most automatic transmission vehicles (I can't speak about those produced in Lower Elbonia) you CANNOT shut the ignition entirely off (thereby locking the steering wheel) if the car is in gear thus preventing your little "locking the steering wheel while rolling" scenario.

Seems the guys who designed the vehicles gave that scenario a little thought and decided it was not desireable and put safeguards in place to prevent it from occurring.

Don't be so high and mighty yourself.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[MustardMan]

I've seen a 110 pound woman pick up a Fat Boy that weighed 600 pounds dry. Knowing the technique is half the battle.

Not to mention, the smallest harley, an 883 Hugger Sportster, is light enough that even without a good technique most people can pick it up. My sister, who has chronic back problems and is about as strong as a six year old, managed to pick up her Sportster no problem. You seem to be of the impression that every Harley is a monstrous oversized beast suited only for giant musclebound bikers. Who's the ignorant one here?

There are large touring bikes out that that are virtually impossible for ANYONE to pick up. Does that mean they shouldn't be ridden? The difference is, you shouldn't be riding a bike like that unless you are experienced enough to PREVENT it from dropping. Little woman or big burly fatass, you should buy a bike within your skill range that is comfortable to ride, weight be damned.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Bradee-oh!]

Tons of auto manufacturers have been doing throttle-by-wire for years now - my 2000 VW Jetta is just one of the dozens of examples. As far as brake-by-wire goes... I've read about other high end/luxury automobiles implementing it or planning to but Mercedes-Benz was the first. Their overview of the safety features of the E-class mention this but the brakes also come on the S, SL, CLK, and the Mayback models.

However the 2004 recall that was due to a braking system defect rate of 1 in 500 cars will likely make the industry think things through quite a bit more before rushing these advances to market.

Personally I like the direct mechanical link between my foot on the brake pedal and the actuators at the discs. You can feel the road as you're braking and there is no chance for a computer failure. A mechanical failure, yes - but a mechanical failure can also occur in the electro-hydraulic brakes. The computer control just adds another possible point of failure.

But I guess in a few years, I likely won't have a choice. *sigh*

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[jargoone]

I would imagine it does, considering that "normal" automatic transmissions have this capability. At 60 MPH in an automatic, you can pull the shifter into "1", but it won't downshift. Similarly, my wife's Acura TL with tiptronic automatic will upshift at redline, even if you forget/don't want to.

So yes, they do have self-preservation already.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[FlopEJoe]

Oblig: I can't let you do that, Dave.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[teeker]

I wonder if the electronic transmission has "safety sensors" that won't shift to a lower gear if it might cause engine damage.

Bingo. I bet this is the case...many (most?) modern cars have this...hell even my old Buick Park Ave wouldn't allow a manual downshift if it would redline the engine..it would only go down as far as engine speed allowed and no lower.

And as for cutting ignition and losing power steering and braking, well every car I've ever seen has a vacuum reservoir that will give power assist for a couple stops if the engine stops providing vacuum (stops running). After that, they still work but you do have to push much harder. All cars (in the US at least) have to allow the steering and braking to control the car in the event of an engine stall, albeit with increased effort. While it may make things more difficult, it's still probably your first best chance to come out of the ordeal alive.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[thedillybar]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off...

1) If you kill the ignition in this situation, you're not going to immediately lose power steering and power braking. The engine is still going to be turning over (at least a little bit, even in an automatic transmission) since it's in gear and the tires are spinning. As long as you have the engine turning, you have power steering & power braking; these systems (for most cars) don't rely on electronics.

2) You can control a car without power steering or power braking.

3) You have 2 options.
a) Run the car at 120mph until you run out of gas.
b) Kill the ignition and try to handle it.

4) This guy was probably just out having some fun. He managed to stop it before he killed himself by hitting a toll booth. I don't believe one word of it.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it's just me, but if you buy a car you can't handle if the power assist systems fail, you bought the wrong car.

That's the whole point of technology, to use things that you would otherwise not be able to do without the assistance. Driver error and inattention are much more common than system failures, it's just that the latter get more sensationalized. But I haven't seen any car that can't be handled without the power assists. Power steering is mostly useful at low speeds, so its failure isn't catastrophic. And power failure in brakes just means you have to push harder, it'll take the driver a second to realize what happened, but in an emergency the adrenaline takes over and makes you push harder anyway.

It's like these tiny women on harley-davidson motorcycles, how the fuck are they going to pick those things up if they drop them? Just ignorant.

I'm sure the women will have no trouble finding a strong man to pick up the bike. But why do you stop at that? Why not whine about drivers who can't push their cars off the road by themselves? Or people who live in apartments so high up they can't get there without an elevator? Looks like you're the one who's ignorant.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fcjunk]

this happened to me recently; throttle cable shredded pulling the throttle fully open at 50 mph. At 70 mph, with both feet on the brake - no effect. The above poster is correct- shift into neutral and then apply the brakes. The only problem I had with the engine afterward was that the engine had gotten so damn hot it killed my starter motor. this story sounds fishy...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[johndeeregator]

Nothing's better than my friend's 88 Pontiac Bonneville in high school -- you could pull the key straight out of the ignition while driving the car, and nothing would happen. Boy was he surprised when someone, as a joke, locked the keys in the trunk with the engine running!

Good ol' American engineering.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[dthree]

How quaint. I haven't had a car with a distributor for years. Even on my cheap car.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

" "It was impossible to slow down! Stomping on the brakes proved pointless, nothing worked. "

if hitting the breaks does not solve the problem, pushing in the clutch or shifting to neutral does.

Come on people this is drivers training stuff.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[mobets]

Last I heard, tiptronics were just automatics with a fancy shifter that let the driver think he is cool while inefficently shifting. Could be wrong though.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GreyPoopon]

And folks depending on how important it is to stop use the old rally trick of the hand/parking brake.

But you need to be *very* careful about this at 120 mph.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ljavelin]

do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking.

Of course, power steering and brakes are specifically designed to work if the power component fails.

Losing power steering at a high rate of speed is not a problem - you turn the wheel very little when at speed. Power steering is only important when you're going very slowly and/or stopped.

You can easily lock up the brakes using your own leg power alone. Power brakes are just a vacuum booster, to make it way-easy to lock up the brakes. Without power, you just have to press harder. But it certainly is far from being impossibly difficult. And in any case, the vacuum ramains in the booster for some period of time. Just try it the brakes in your garage with the engine off, and you'll get a feeling for it.

Of course, many cars of the up into the 1970's didn't have power brakes or steering. And do you know what? They were steerable and stopable at all speeds. Basic steering and braking systems have NOT changed at all since then.

The only significant danger is enabling the steering wheel lock while turning off your ignation at speed. Watch out if you turn off your ignition while moving - you don't want to mistakenly LOCK your steering wheel while at speed.

Mod down parent.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy remedy for the problem. Start making it mandatory to have a fuel pump switch easily accessable to the driver. As far as a magnetic card used for driving the car, how exactly do you turn off the car?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason for that was so that you could leave the the ignition key in the ignition always and carry the door key with you. You could also leave the ignition unlocked and anyone can start the car with no key. This was convienent on the farm when you had many people using the vehicle but only one set of keys that you didn't want to lose. You could also open the trunk without shutting off the ignition. I wish I had that since my current vehicle has no inside trunk latch. It was all for convienence. My Dad's old owners manuals suggested these practices. I guess in this modern age we care about buzzwords like safety and security.

I remember freaking out my sister one day by taking the key out of the ignition while driving down the road. She thought we would crash and burn.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GuyinVA]

4) This guy was probably just out having some fun. He managed to stop it before he killed himself by hitting a toll booth. I don't believe one word of it.
I agree. He eventually stopped the car by pressing the pedal hard enough. Why couldn't he press it hard enough 1 hour ago????

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Aheinz1]

At that speed it would just be the "make the car smell funny brake."

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[matth]

Besdies this.. if you turn the key all the way off you lock your wheel usually hehehe

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[TigerNut]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.

It would help if you had a clearer understanding of automotive systems before trying to give advice such as this. The ignition can be either "on" or "off", and if you turn it off, the engine will stop running (barring stupid card-reader implementations such as described in TFA). If the engine stops running, you lose the hydraulic assist for the steering, as well as the vacuum assist for the brakes, but the steering assist is mostly required at parking speeds, so you'll still be able to steer the car, it just takes a little more effort. The vacuum canister for the brakes is usually large enough that you can get a couple of pumps of the pedal in before the assist goes away, so you will still have power brakes for an all-out stop even after the engine stops.
What is dangerous is that turning the ignition key "all the way off" engages the steering column lock, which keeps you from using the steering at all, and THAT can be fatal if you're moving at speed. Cars with a steering column automatic shifter typically have an interlock that prevents you from turning the ignition to the 'lock' position unless the shift lever is in the 'park' position.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[bhtooefr]

Used cars?

Also, I took it as that someone should only buy a car that they can handle without any power (steering, brakes) working. So, he's not saying "screw the New Beetle because it has power steering" (I'm not sure if it does, but I wouldn't be surprised), he's saying "if you can't handle a New Beetle when the power steering goes out, don't get one". Now, if you can't handle a New Beetle (not something like the RSi), you can't handle most cars.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[maxwell demon]

Indeed, the Spiegel story linked to another one, where a truck driver had a problem with the (physical) gas pedal: It wouldn't go up again. The result was of course similar to that of this story.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Grishnakh]

Huh? Brakes aren't "powered" by belts. The assist comes from engine vacuum, which is connected to a brake booster. There is no hydraulic pump involved, except the pumping action of your leg.

The coming electric brake systems use an electric motor in place of the hydraulic caliper. If there's no power, then there's no brakes.

Please don't post about something if you have no clue what you're talking about.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[untaken_name]

It's like these tiny women on harley-davidson motorcycles, how the fuck are they going to pick those things up if they drop them?

The same way tiny men do: straddle the bike, and use leverage to shift the bike on the natural fulcrum provided until both handlebars can be grasped. I've seen 4-foot sub-100-pound women manage this easily with extremely heavy bikes. It isn't about how strong your arm is in this situation, it's about your understanding of physics.
If you only lift bikes while standing off to one side of them, you are doing it wrong.

Just ignorant.

Yes, that sums the first portion of your comment up nicely. You'd fail the buyer test in my local Harley dealership. They take you out back where they have a rusted-out chopper. The owner tells you he won't sell you a bike you can't pick up, so you must demonstrate that you can pick up that old rusted bike. Standing to one side and pulling, unless you are extremely strong, will not help you. If you don't straddle the bike, you probably aren't going to move it. He'll show you the trick, though, if he likes you.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Grishnakh]

- my 2000 VW Jetta is just one of the dozens of examples.

But I guess in a few years, I likely won't have a choice. *sigh*

Who's forcing you to buy a new car? My 1994 Acura Integra still runs like new, and I don't have any plans to replace it. I'm certainly not replacing it with any car that doesn't have mechanical connections to any of the controls.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[AviLazar]

Lowering the gear is a better choice then neutral by far. In neutral you will GREATLY over rev the engine - blowing pistons...while unlikely a piston could fly your way (and yes they can punch a hole through your engine block).
Also, putting the car in a lower gear will drastically slow your car, and by going all the way down to first gear you can get your car slowed down to about 25 (downhill), and even slower on flat ground or if lucky, uphill.
Some steep downhills in PA have these dirt uphill "off ramps" that are in place if a truck loses control. These allow the truck to get off the road, as well as go uphill to come to a stop.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GreyPoopon]

Have you ever driven a car without power steering? You won't notice a difference at higher speeds, actually the difference between manual and power steering becomes negligible as soon as you're going faster than 20 kph or so.

Erm, you do know that on some power steering designs, a power steering failure is VERY different from a car that doesn't have any power steering to begin with, right? Admittedly, it still gets easier at high speeds, but my Dad used to have a luxury car with full power steering that I would challenge even the strongest man to be able to steer effectively at anything less than about 35 mph. In fact, I think the steering column would have broken first.

I used to have a '93 Ford Probe GT with power assisted steering. One day the tensioning wheel for the belt popped off and I was left without the power assist. Since the car uses 225/50R16s, it was incredibly difficult to turn into the service station even at 20 mph, and I was concerned that the steering wheel would break. I can only begin to image what it would have been like if it had used the same power steering mechanism as my Dad's car.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to get your brakes looked at. On any street legal production car the brakes are able dissipate much more power than the engine can produce at maximum output. Your brakes are not functioning correctly.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[bhtooefr]

Try a Dodge Ram 250 without power steering (pump failure) at 55mph, and post again.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[PiGuy]

Indeed, I've a Hyundai Elantra that will remain in neutral if you shift into reverse while it's still moving (yes, I did do this by accident once!).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[demonbug]

There are large touring bikes out that that are virtually impossible for ANYONE to pick up. Does that mean they shouldn't be ridden? The difference is, you shouldn't be riding a bike like that unless you are experienced enough to PREVENT it from dropping.

It isn't a matter of being experienced enough "to prevent dropping" - as any truly experienced rider will tell you, it isn't if you will be going down, it is when you will be going down. It doens't matter how good, how quick, or how smart you are, at some point you will hit a patch of gravel or a slick of oil and you will be down before you know what happened. If you think otherwise you are merely fooling yourself.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Grishnakh]

That's the whole point of technology, to use things that you would otherwise not be able to do without the assistance.

No, the point of technology is to save labor, and make things easier to do. There should always be a backup way of doing things, in case the technological way fails.

I'm sure the women will have no trouble finding a strong man to pick up the bike. But why do you stop at that? Why not whine about drivers who can't push their cars off the road by themselves? Or people who live in apartments so high up they can't get there without an elevator?

If a high-rise apartment doesn't have any stairs to escape during a fire, then it's a deathtrap and would never be built. Thousands escaped from the World Trade Center using the stairwells, and those were two of the tallest buildings in the world. Who's the ignorant one now?

I'd agree with the parent; if you can't push your car off the road, or pick up your fallen-over bike, you need a smaller vehicle. Most fit people have no trouble pushing their normal-size cars if the need arises. It's not easy, but it's possible. No one "needs" a 7000-lb SUV to go to the mall.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[HTH NE1]

This has happened to me several times with the after-market cruise control added to my Honda Civic (no other mods or "go-faster" decals). It doesn't always happen, and only when I hit Resume to go back to my cruising speed (interstate, 75 MPH). The car will calmly accelerate to that speed, and then floor itself, only letting up at around 95 MPH when it alternates between coasting and flooring (only once did I have enough clear, straight road to see how high it would go).

I've had the logic module of the CC replaced twice. So I'm assuming that there's a bug in the module that hasn't been detected and fixed.

Thankfully I have always been able to get it to disengage by tapping the brake, and I haven't had occasion to use it for the past year. Unfortunately I've never been able to reproduce the behavior for a technician, so the problem is still there, waiting to be triggered again.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drew]

while i could understand that power braking would be an issue, i dont see how the loss of power steering would hurt- power steering really only helps at relativley low speeds. i've driven cars with and without power steering up to ~95 mph and its actually easier to control a car at high speeds without power steering. my understanding is that more modern speed sensitive power steering systems disable the amount of power assist as speed increases, leaving you with essentially no power steering above maybe 45 mph anyway.

the bigger issue is that if you turn your car all the way off, you will engage the steering wheel lock on most cars, which would definitely be a big problem.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[macdaddy]

For many years now the steering wheel on cars with automatic trannies can not be locked into position unless the car is in Park. Given the scenario we've all been talking about I suppose one could shift into Park. However that Park pin won't last very long and would thus be very ineffective. An absolute idiot could however shift into Park and then turn the car ignition off, thus locking the wheel. However since that involves 2 steps and knowing the fact that most people are idiots and can't handle multiple step operations (especially under stress such as your car going AWOL with you inside) it's safe to deduce that it's extremely likely someone will be able to lock their steering wheel in such a scenario. Since the people we recognize as having the most trouble dealing with such an emergency (gas pedal sticks or car goes AWOL) predominantly drive vehicles with automatic trannies, we can also deduce that this key elements necessary to make this scenario happen are even less than previously determined.

Bottom line most cars are automatics. The people that would have trouble in theis scenario predominantly drive automatics. It requires multiple steps to get your steering wheel locked in this scenario (shift into Park and completely shut off ignition, in that order). Thus it's very unlikely that this will ever happen.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Smidge204]

Actually, I used to drive a Chevy station wagon with a hydraulic power booster instead of a vacuum one. It was connected to the power steering pump (thus the same pump provided power assist for both steering and braking)

Not only was it amazingly expewnsive to repair, but when it failed you basically had NO brakes at all. Fortunately I was only going about 3mph when that happened...
=Smidge=

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[macdaddy]

Well put. I picked up my 1100 ACE when I dumped it no problem, even with my aching back.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[visgoth]

Some cars have the parking brake mounted to the front wheels, which would definitely have a negative impact upon vehicle stability at 120 mph.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ReTay]

"And folks depending on how important it is to stop use the old rally trick of the hand/parking brake.

But you need to be *very* careful about this at 120 mph." /wipeing laugh tears from my eyes

Very well put...

And me without mod points......

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

You think that's scary? There are actually cooling fans that run off the power steering pump. Talk about bizarre. If your power steering fails, your car overheats.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Retric]

Ahh but as a 24 year old any new car will be realy old by the time I hit 65.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[nolife]

Losing the power steering and power brakes is a slight inconvienence but something a person is easily able to overcome the a little added force applied (if said person can not overcome that increase in resistance, they should not be driving a car to begin with). The problem with shutting off the car "completely" is the steering wheel will mechanically lock if the steering column is so equiped with such a device (which I believe 99.9% of cars are).

I did not read the referenced article yet but I find it VERY hard to believe the cars brakes were less powerful then the engine. Even worse is this same situation of failed brakes and stuck accelerator comes up often (search google) in garages, parking lots etc.. There was one study that showed certain year Jeep Cherokes actually had the gas pedal a little closer to the brake pedal then the average car implying that people were getting confused when the panic stuck. Further tests revealed the brakes where more then powerful enough to stop the car from full speed at full throttle and the car did not move at all from a dead stop with the brakes and the gas to the floor. I can not belive that a gas pedal sticking and brakes failing at the same exact time could possibly be that statistically high for how many people claim. Keep in mind for the brakes to fail themselves, it would require two seperate faults as the brake system is divided into two seperate hydralic systems on all cars, either one front and one back brake (most often) or front and back. I guess the brake pedal itself could fail as it is common to both. Two or three failures all at once. I don't know...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[nomadic]

If this happens to you you've already lost power braking so not much point in holding onto it. Why not turn it off? Losing power steering just means that it takes more effort to steer, not that the car can't be steered at all.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[robmandu]

re: "If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way."

The vast majority of power-assisted steering and brakes on cars are powered by hydraulic systems which get their power from the engine... while it's running.
Turning off the engine, even while leaving the auxiliary power on won't help a bit.

One of the very newest trends in cars is to power brakes and steering electrically. There are a couple of production models with this capability, although engineers are still working on the way they feel. For those, I'd be curious to know if they can still operate off aux power.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Retric]

O how times have changed. I had a 240 volvo from 91 lose power assist and I could not tell a difrence unless I was going 5mph or so. Yea it was a little worse but not all that much.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

I've got a 97 Landrover Discovery, so not exactly a new car, but it does what you talk about. If you shift down to 1st while going at high speeds, it won't shift until you've decelerated enough to avoid damaging the engine. If you keep your foot on the gas, it won't ever shift down.

I have a 1999 Ford Ranger. The only restriction it has on shifting is I cannot go straight from 5th to reverse. This is good, because the two times my wife tried driving it, she got confused and tried to do just that. I think I can put it into 1st at highway speeds, but I have not tried it. Once or twice I got curious and inched it almost into gear to see if it would lock like reverse does, and it did not. Even with the clutch in I do not have the balls to risk wrecking my transmission.

Of course, that is the crux of the issue with regards to the story -- I will never have the problem of a throttle stuck open. The worst that will happen is I will put the clutch in, coast or brake to a stop, then worry about fixing the problem. Even in my car with an automatic transaxle I can shift to neutral while driving. Yes, it will put extra wear and tear on the gears, but it sure beats putting extra wear and tear on my skull and the windshield as I slam into something at 120 mph.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ras_b]

All cars (in the US at least) have to allow the steering and braking to control the car in the event of an engine stall, albeit with increased effort

I had this happen to me in an old jeep cherokee (~1990?). I could not steer nor brake. I was young and had no idea what to do as i was heading for an intersection. i put the car in park which was probably totally wrong because i heard some horrible noises from the car, but eventually came to a stop.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

Eh? You're on crack. The only serious danger to turning off your car in this situation is the possibility of being able to pull the key out and the steering wheel locking. If your car has an automatic transmission and was made in the last 15 years, you can't pull the key out without putting it in park and there's no danger.

As soon as the engine cuts off, you have enough power stored in your brake booster for a fairly lengthy pedal push (the vacuum boost, hyrdo-boost is supposed to have some residual power left in the system as well). So you may not necessarily be surprised by a sudden lack of power brakes, but you will notice the pedal getting stiffer and stiffer.

At high speeds, power steering cuts off anyway. Some cars use engine vacuum to cut it off, but most (newer) cars use an electrical solenoid signaled by the actual speed given from the speed sensor in the transmission. I can't stress this enough, power steering is only active at very low speeds. Pretty much as soon as you pull out of a parking lot your power assist has cut off. So losing your power steering at high speeds you've lost nothing, it wasn't on in the first place. (There are some older, stupider cars that are an exception to this, but if you're driving one of those, this will never happen to you anyway, and you still won't notice the power steering cutting off at high speeds) Now, you should bear in mind that as the car slows down it will get harder to steer than you're used to, but the risk of crashing due to unfamiliarity with the steering system without power assist is so low that it's almost not even worth mentioning.

In this situation, the *best* thing you can do would be to move your key back to the accessory position. That kills the engine. Moving the transmission into neutral would be good just to make sure you're coasting, but leaving it in drive shouldn't matter either. Depends on the transmission.

If you can't do that, and you're driving an automatic, try putting the transmission into reverse. I don't actually know what would happen at high speed, but at low speeds all that happens is your engine dies and the car coasts.

Another option, (haven't read the article yet, it's loading) is to open up your fuse box, find the fuse for the cruise control, and remove it. While *I* can do this fairly painlessly in all of my vehicles, I suggest you try something else before trying this. It is very dangerous, even at regular city speeds, to muck around the fusebox while driving. Frequently fuseboxes require all sorts of weird maneuvering to reach, and that's what makes it dangerous while driving. If you have a passenger, have him either do the deed or take the wheel from you. If you can't locate the cruise fuse easily, locate the ECM fuse. Pulling it will kill the engine for you. You don't want to pull fuses willy-nilly, but many of the fuses are safe to pull if you can't find the one you're looking for easily. The ones to be careful with are ABS, lights (surprisingly enough), and that's all I'm coming up with. You're safe to pull the ABS fuse, but you will lose anti-lock brakes when you do it. That just means your brakes will be able to lock, so be careful, especially if you're a slave to the ABS system. Just remember that under federal law a car must be capable of stopping with the hydraulic brakes even in the failure of power assist and ABS.

Of course, the most obvious solution is to just shift the car into neutral and slowly apply the parking brake. :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[afidel]

Not sure about the breaks but I know for sure that my power steering pump is fed off of the accesory belt of my engine. Of course I lost power steering to a dead seal and was still perfectly able to drive my full sized sedan, it just made parking a bit of a chore.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Anybody find the original article at leparisien.fr, as mentioned in der spiegel article? I couldn't. I agree with those who suggest this story smells like fish. Anybody would have the sense to throw it into neutral and hit the brakes - and as one observant reader mentioned, we are talking about THREE unrelated glitches (cruise, brakes and transmission) if THAT wouldn't work.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and the increaded effort was nearly enough to cause an accident when I was going 25 mph and a vacuum hose split open on my Oldsmobile...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[SCHecklerX]

Maybe cars are the first step to skynet/the matrix

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Sique]

However, it's a Nissan, and their engineers actually understand what they're doing.

You know, Nissan is partly owned (40%?) by Renault and the Nissan cars share some components with the Renaults ;)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drew]

you probably drive a stick. that little button has been on every stick i've ever driven, but not on a single automatic. the first time my wife drove my old jeep, she had to ask me how to turn it off, because every car her family ever owned was an automatic.

i don't think it would help in this case- pushing that button becomes an automatic act that is just part of turning the key. anybody who doesnt know enough not to turn the car all the way off (and thus engage the wheel lock) will not be stopped by that button....

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[RealAlaskan]

do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking.

Losing power steering is not a problem if you're moving.

I had a '78 F150 (18-foot long pickup) with power steering. The power steering pump shattered one cold winter day, and I did without for a few weeks. With the power steering dead, it was almost impossible to turn the wheel, unless the truck was moving. Even at 20 miles per hour, steering was heavy but entirely adequate. At highway speeds, you hardly noticed that it was off. Parallel parking was a real problem, though.

Power brakes are nice, but you can still stop the car without them. You just push really hard. Furthermore, as another poster already pointed out, the vaccuum reservoir will give you two or three power-assisted brake applications, so just turn the engine off, depress the brake pedal, and don't let it up!

Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.

That doesn't match my experience. What I've found is that eithr the engine is turned on, and you have power assist, or it is off, and you don't. No in-between.

From the article:
Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?

If you have to ask, the answer is yes.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

This story is obviously a fake. Renault's don't reach 120.

Seriously though, on dropping gear, both (sensors or not) would appear to be effective in stopping or at least slowing the car substantially. I would do it 1 gear at a time instead of just dropping to 1st immediately, but still:

If you drop gear and there are no safety sensors, the engine blows, car stops, steering and braking should still work. Or at least slows due to the gear difference.

If you drop gear and there are safety sensors, the car slows substantially, again due to the lower gear, in addition to the safety limits. A lot depends on the engine and gearing, but last time I had my car in 2nd gear by accident, it was whining at 40 or so I think, so I would imagine nearly any regular car in 1st gear would probably be under 30. I'd rather have an accident at 30 than 120. At that point, your brakes should slow the car more and your parking brake would take up any remaining power.

I wonder if it hit 120 only because of the limiter.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

Every motorcyclist I've ever talked to (Except you - assuming you own one yourself) has said that it's not if you fall off the bike, it's when. Circumstances beyond your control may conspire to drop you off the thing. This is why squids make me laugh - the tank top, nylon shorts, and flip-flops aren't going to be much protection.

Every Harley IS a monstrous beast as compared to the equally-performing Japanese bike. In addition they are sold only on the merits of their looks because they are technically inferior to basically every other motorcycle sold today.

Anyway, yes, I think that no one should ride a bike outside their picking-up ability, and I am not suggesting that they be able to dead-lift them either. If that means no one could ride a gold wing, so be it. Most of the people who ride those things are horrendously annoying on twisty roads anyway; I've lost count of the times I've been stuck behind gold wing riders well under the speed limit in my sports car. Good riddance, I say.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Lethyos]

And as for cutting ignition and losing power steering and braking, well every car I've ever seen has a vacuum reservoir that will give power assist for a couple stops if the engine stops providing vacuum (stops running).

Interesting mention. This is exactly what gasoline-electric hybrids like the Civic Hybrid and the Prius rely on when they shut off their engines. I've personally found that this reserve braking power can do quite a bit for stopping your car. (Basically, the Civic Hybrid will restart the engine if it detects this reserve running low. So, after coasting down a hill and reaching high speeds with the engine off, I can easily bring the car to a stop without the engine kicking back in.)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you lose the power steering and power braking, it's not that dangerous, because you dont need it! You're on the freeway and have many kilometres of braking distance, and the road is broad!
*S*

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[dfn_deux]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.

This is completely incorrect. Power brakes are merely power-assisted by a vaccuum servo and will still work fine without the engine running, they will take a bit more pedal pressure to achieve the same ammount of stopping power. Power steering is also a power-assisted type system and will work fine without the pump turning. Power-steering mostly helps to steer in low speed situations such as a parking lot when the friction of the tires is higher, at a high speed the rolling motion of the wheel negates the effects of the resistance to turning effectively meaning you only have to overcome the self centering affect of the suspensions caster...
I do agree that attempting to put the car in neutral should be the first thing done though, as it will increase the effectiveness of the brakes as well as stop the car from accelerating.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[dougmc]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering

Power steering -- who cares? The faster you're going, the smaller angles you're likely to turn your wheels at, so the less energy you're going to be putting into turning. You really only need power steering when you're going very slowly and trying to do something like parallel park. At highway speeds you barely notice it.

I could easily steer my Taurus station wagon at highway speeds without power steering (and $1200 later, it works again) but it required some serious effort to do low-speed things like parking.

A bigger problem is complete loss of steering. Most cars I've driven lock the steering entirely when the key is removed -- it's an anti-theft thing. And it locks *completely*.

As for the power brakes, well, if your brakes don't do anything anyways, you're not giving up a lot there.

But yes, as you've said, don't remove the key. But not quite for the reasons you've given. The biggest problem is the *complete* loss of steering.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

My car does indeed have a five speed. I've only owned a couple of automatics and one was from 1960 and the other from 1978, so I'm not sure they count.

Anybody who doesn't know enough not to turn the car all the way off shouldn't be driving.

Is it just me, or is it particularly stupid that the bar for driving is lower than the bar for owning a gun? They're both deadly weapons in the [in]appropriate hands. Actually, I think we should require a far more strict driving test before we license drivers, and we should require a gun safety course before we license gun owners - I only add that in to show how even-handed I am :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[nate1138]

True for the steering, but not for the brakes. Most cars have a pressure reserver for just such an occaision. It's enough to do 1, maybe 2 full stops. Additionally, just because the power assist is dead does not mean that the brakes stop working, they just require much more effort. Now if the steering wheel locks when you kill the engine, then yes, you are fscked.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[bmwm3nut]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.

nope, turning off the ignition just cuts the power to the coil. if the engine is still connected to the wheels through the transmission then it'll keep spinning. if it's spinning, then it'll still create a vacuum to power the brakes, and the pulley will still be turning the power steering pump. it's just like if you take your foot off the gas while going down hill - the wheels will try to push the engine and the vacuum will slow you down. if you turn off the ignition, you'll also not be igniting the fuel so you'll get slowed even quicker.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[herohog]

Every motorcyclist I've ever talked to (Except you - assuming you own one yourself) has said that it's not if you fall off the bike, it's when. Circumstances beyond your control may conspire to drop you off the thing. This is why squids make me laugh - the tank top, nylon shorts, and flip-flops aren't going to be much protection.

What? No DoD Sig? Dod#8177, KotSFAQ

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod this post up! Good rebuttal to the misinformed parent. This is what I would've said but they got here first.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GreyPoopon]

I had a 240 volvo from 91 lose power assist and I could not tell a difrence unless I was going 5mph or so.

Actually, most of the newer cars use power assist (my Probe included) rather than pure power steering, but having really wide tires makes a *huge* difference. Your Volvo used 185/17R14s compared to the 225/50R16s on my Probe. Believe it or not, that actually makes a pretty big difference. However, being very safety oriented, Volvo may have also engineered the steering mechanism differently to make it easier to use in a loss of power event.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

My car is a 1989 Nissan 240SX, so naturally it has a distributor. All newer Nissans are DIS or COP. As it is, the only things in my distributor are an optical crank angle sensor and the rotor. (Which reminds me, it's about time to replace my cap and rotor.) The vehicle does have electronic spark control, and setting the timing just makes sure that the rotor is going to be in the right place when the spark fires. I plan to swap to a JDM engine with COP. Since 2000 or so by far the most common ignition system is COP, with DIS (waste-spark) systems in second place, and basically nothing using a distributor.

My car has 263,000 miles and is still running strong, although basically everything but the engine seems to be disintegrating around me, and as rapidly as I fix one thing another thing breaks. Of course, when I get it all fixed, I'll know every inch of the car and have something that I know is going to be reliable, but really that's just making excuses. My car is both transportation and hobby :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

Ok, some words.

By federal law, in order for a car to be sold in the US, it must be manufactured to:

1. Steer without power assist. So if your power steering system fails, you can still steer the car.
2. Steer without power! No electricity for some reason? You *must* be able to steer the car.
3. Stop without power assist. So if your engine cuts off, you can still stop the car.
4. Have a secondary braking system capable of stopping the car with at least two wheels that operates independently of the main brakes. That's usually called an Emergency Brake but is more correctly called a Parking Brake, and if you have to use it, you're already fucked.

I would expect congress to get all luddite over drive-by-wire. In order for drive-by-wire to work in applications where it's already used you find heavy maintenance regulations and a draconian regulatory body overseeing the things. Such a system is pretty impractical for cars, and drive-by-wire becomes a worthless engineering feat if you still have to make the same systems work with mechanical backups.

Using electric brakes with metallic pads means no brake fade, ever, up to the point where you warp your rotors.

This is inaccurate, to say the least. A great deal of brake fade happens because your rotors are too hot and are no longer capable of discharging heat. Since your brakes work by converting inertia into heat, if your brakes cannot discharge any more heat, they stop working. Basic physics here. No matter how the pads are actuated, the system still has to disperse the heat.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drew]

ummm..... neutral pretty much by definition means that the engine is not connected to the wheels in any way. every car i know of has a rev limiter that will keep you from doing serious damage to the engine while in neutral. you are probably more likely to over-rev the engine by down shifting, as the rev limiter will be useless while the engine is physically connected to the wheels and must rotate at a fixed ratio to the speeds the wheels are turning.

i've experienced this first hand twice in a manual, when the driver accidentally downshifted from 5th to 2nd instead of 5th to 4th. i would imagine most automatics wont let you downshift at all if it would redline the engine.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

Heh, I was driving a Honda Accord, um, 1985 hatchback, with an auto transmission. Honda's ignition system is to just push the key. So over time, you get used to pushing the key when you turn off the car.

So, the car stalled on a 3-lane road on Christmas Eve. It stalled because I ran out of gas. I was in the center lane (median to the left). Nothing else to do, I pulled the key, got out, and was about to start walking to the gas station. Then a cop pulled up behind me and asked what happened. He didn't offer to take me to get gas, but he did say he was going to push the car. I thought "I've pushed plenty of cars, it'll take a little while to get down the road, but then the car will be safe". So I got back in and was ready.

So the cop edges up until his bumper was up against mine (remember that cop cars have those battering rams on their cars). Then he floors it, I guess. He pushed me up to 45 mph. So, at 45mph, he pulled off and left, figuring I'd coast to the turn off on my right that was coming up. Well, the turn came up, so I grabbed the wheel and turned it hard to right.

And of course it locked.

I was damn lucky actually, the steering wheel had locked at enough of an angle that I still made the turn, and I was able to put the key back in quickly enough to finish the turn next to the curb. And my underwear was still clean.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, manual transmissions can't let you shift into reverse while you're moving forward. It has less to do with it being a safety feature and more a side-effect of the design of the transmission.

It may make a lot of gear-grinding noise, but the teeth physically can't mesh. This means your engine is safe (even if it's a bit rough on the transmission gears) Nice, huh?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[stanmann]

And at that point unless the car is out of warranty, any damage is the dealer's problem ANYWAY. And pain/suffering/emotional distress/manufacture of a deathtrap/etc

If a car I own behaves like that first the car goes into neutral, then the parking(emergency for those old-timers) brake, then if automatic.... Parking pin... all the while with brakes fully enabled.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[deathazre]

Actually, if the vehicle will stay in gear with the ignition off, that is the best thing to do. The wheels will driving the engine, powering the power steering pump and creating vacuum for power brakes. And the engine being engaged will also help to brake the vehicle.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[AviLazar]

A few people have said this, but I have seen too many modern day cars that let you keep reving the engine until your RPM gauge's pin is looking at 5 o'clock.
Also around 1996 a person i knew had a Pontiac Bonneville that got stolen and trashed (piss on the seat, drugs all over the place, was crashed, etc)...to ensure that the insurance company wouldn't just try and repair it he put it in neutral, put a brick on the pedal and let it run for a bit...eventually it stopped running - and not for lack of gas...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

That's a rare bird, although Chevy is one of the few companies to put hydro-boost in consumer-grade cars (BMW, Porsche, and the fancy ones have all used it, though).

The GP was right in that most power brakes use a vaccuum booster. I'd say "all" just because the chances that someone drives a hydro-boost for daily driving or in their family car are pretty slim, they just haven't been widely deployed. Hydro-boost is still less common than no boost at all, in fact. Well, in my subjective experience.

What cars have hydroboost?

The ones I have worked with are BMW 8-series, certain Chevies (usually very large vans, box vans, and a few trucks, common on Chevy diesel pickups), a Jaguar (forgot the exact model), and I think the old Alfa-Romeos (it was a co-worker's car, actually, but a customer brought one into the shop and I got to work on it). That's literally all the hydroboost I've seen, and I've done close to a thousand brake jobs. I'm not saying that's all that's out there, just that it's extremely uncommon.

And, for the record, if your chevy has hydroboost, a vacuum booster will bolt right in. :) I've made that conversion before, when the customer didn't want to spring for the hydro-boost unit (it was the third one she'd have bought).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Smidge204]

While that is an incredibly stupid design, I've never heard of someone bursting into a busy intersection or driving off an overpass because their car overheated. :)
=Smidge=

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Power steering is only needed at low speed, and power brakes will still operate as well, but with more pedal effort.
As a mechanic, my advice to people who insist on owning such over-featured ghey vehicles is to fit
a large industrial kill switch on the dash. Being able to afford said vehicles means you can pay for a professional to fit the switch. :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[AndroidCat]

Just pop some downloaded music into the player and the RIAA will stop you.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GlassUser]

I tried that once at just under 90 mph. I wound up spinning across IH10 at just under 90 mph. Thank GOD there was no traffic or concrete divider.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[RocketScientist]

I have a drive-by-wire. At least, throttle-by-wire. And electrically-assisted power steering.

Link here.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Grishnakh]

Wow, I've never heard of this.

Why would you want a system like this anyway? It sounds like a very bad idea: if your belt breaks (which isn't that uncommon), you lose your braking assist. Vacuum-assisted brakes almost never fail.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

I can push my 71 Chevy half-ton pickup off the road myself. It's all a matter of just knowing what the fuck you're doing. Most people that push cars don't actually know what they're doing. :)

I've pushed some pretty big monsters in my time. I've even lifted the rear end of a Ford Escort half an inch off the ground, while my roomate pushed on the side of it (we were hiding it from our landlord who didn't want non-running cars in the driveway). For that matter, I've picked up heavier cars.

It's all a matter of knowing where the real strength in your body is and (damn corporate speak) leveraging it properly. (I might probably should mention that in this same time period I could bench press 5-speed manual trannies from rear-wheel drive jap cars and trucks)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[razathorn]

WHAT WHAT WHAT? I don't agree with this at all. Turning off the engine 'part of the way' -- what the heck is that... it's either running or not. IF it's running, you have power brakes and steering. If it's not running, you don't. It's a boolean operation here. Also, if you do turn it off, don't turn it off without first taking it out of gear or else you're going to slow down pretty quick ;). Other than that, losing power steering and brakes at highway speeds will NOT make you lose control. At highway speeds, you do not need power steering at all. Power steering only really helps you at low speeds when turning the tires is hard. Same with the brakes. How often do you have to STOMP on the brakes to slow down on the highway. The brakes aren't going to be as effective, that's really it... just push a bit harder and your fine, it's not like they go out.

Just two weeks ago, my RSX thew it's drain plug, spraying oil all over the road and my exhaust (making large quantities of smoke) when I was going about 40. I thank my dealer for the experneice, they're the ones who changed the oil last. I pushed on the clutch and turned the key one position back to kill the engine instantly (this saved the engine). I then coasted to a turn in and turned in with a *bit* more effort on the wheel since I was slowing down... note that this was turning 90 degrees, you don't have to do this on the highway... all you have to do is pull over (barely changing direction). I then stopped too with my non power brakes. Oddly enough, I didn't fly into anything or blow up.

Another interesting tid bit about power steering at highway speeds. It turns out that my RSX cuts power assist at highway speeds by quite a bit to give you a more 'connected feel' to the road instead of the 'tap the wheel and fly in another direction' feel that some cars have. It's a feature that acura/honda markets! They obviously understand that you need much less power assist at highway speeds so it's not just me that thinks like this.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

I'll do whatever I damn please with my ignition and you can't stop me

We won't need to. We'll just need to change lanes, because as soon as you remove your ignition key and try to turn, your steering wheel is going to lock. :)

Worst case for us? Ride in the shoulder, slow down, and watch you crash on the next curve. Hm, maybe that's not worst case. ;)

Now, my 71 chevy pickup, on the other hand. 3 in the tree, none of that other power crap, and no locking steering wheel. I pull into gas stations all the time with my key in my pocket. People are always asking me if I ran out of gas. :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[babyrat]

I will agree that putting the car in Neutral would be the best bet, but were that not possible:

Losing power steering at a high rate of speed wouldn't affect you much - if you are going at a high rate of speed and need to turn enough to require power steering you are not going to make the turn anyways. A lot of sports cars have variable assist power steering that cuts the amount of assist in relation to your speed. The faster you go the less it assists. Give a much better feel at high speeds.

Regarding the power brakes, if the option is to allow your car to continue accelerating against the power braking effect or lose the acceleration and do manual braking, manual braking would be the preferred method. Just stomp harder!

In either event, power steering and power brakes generally have NO dependency on electrical power through the ignition (unless you are in a car with brake by wire, and in that case I believe the brakes still have a mechanical component for emergencies). Power steering is simply a pump spun by the drivebelt and power brakes are are 'powered' by engine vacuum. If you are in gear and your wheels are spinning, you should still have power steering as the drivebelt is spinning, and you will still have power brakes as the pistons will still be moving up and down generating vacuum.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[revmoo]

Your not going to be able to shift from 5th to reverse while moving, because reverse doesnt have synchros ...perhaps you could double-clutch it into reverse, but that's just silly :p

As far as my car, the transmission doesnt allow you to downshift if there is more than a 3000 or so rpm deficit between the gears.

Also, to the GP who said never to turn off the ignition in a moving car...you can surivive without power steering, in fact *GASP* some cars don't have it to begin with.

Braking is more of an issue but that's why cars are equipped with emergency brakes.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

The hydro boost still stores a charge just like your vacuum booster, so if the belt brakes it still works fine.

I'd say that in my experience people's engines stall more than their belts break, so I'd rate a belt breaking as a non-issue.

What's more important is that while hydro-boost does provide more power assist than vacuum-boost, the hydro booster isn't actually more reliable than the vacuum booster. Remember, less parts, simpler system, more reliable. A vacuum booster only has like 3 moving parts, and two of those don't require the third to work anyway.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[JustKidding]

The ignition can be either "on" or "off", and if you turn it off, the engine will stop running

Unless, ofcourse, your car happens to run on diesel fuel, in which case, it'll just keep running happily, because it doesn't actually have an ignition.
Most trucks have a seperate "engine break", which is just a valve in the exhaust, to stop the engine.
However, I've never come across luxury car that had an engine break. I don't know about france, but here in the Netherlands, quite a large percentage of the luxury cars run on diesel fuel.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[MustardMan]

The IF vs. WHEN thing is a moot point here. It's not a question of IF you are going to get into a car accident, it's a question of WHEN. Everyone screws up their car or has it screwed up by someone else at some point too.

If I wrap my car around a telephone pole, I'm sure as hell not going to be able to pry it free myself. Does that mean I shouldn't be driving?

If a rider is skilled enough to handle the massive bike on which he/she sits, yes there may be unavoidable circumstances where the rider will go down. However, that doesn't mean the rider needs to be able to pick the bike up solo. There's a great sense of comraderie amongst those who ride and I've never seen someone having mechanical problems with a bike sit on the side of the road very long.

Every Harley is NOT a monstrous beast. I've ridden both an 883 sportster and an 800 volusia. The volusia rode like a piece of shit compared to the Harley. I don't personally own a Harley. I probably never will, as it's not my personal style in a flavor of bike. However, there is a lot more to wanting to purchase a Harley than merely looks. Harley zealot, japanese bike zealot, sportbike zealot - any zealot is an idiot for not being able to appreciate all bikes for their individual merits.

Most people who ride gold wings are annoying because they are trying to relax and enjoy the scenery of that beautiful twisty back road. The same guy driving a convertible would most likely be going just as slow.

Yes, I am a motorcyclist myself. Yes, I do believe that all riders will go down eventually. Yes I've gone down myself. I also believe all people who drive a car will get in an accident eventually. If someone is skilled enough to handle a bike of a certain size, I say more power to them, I hope they enjoy the road and keep the shiny side up. If they don't, I'll be more than happy to stop by the side of the road and give them a hand lifting.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Moofie]

Really? Which cars? I'm curious.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

That's not drive-by-wire, and throttle-by-wire is irrelevant. Most fuel injected systems are pretty damn close to throttle-by-wire already (and some, starting back in the late 80s, already were, it's nothing new).

Drive-by-wire is when there's *no* mechanical connection from the steering wheel to the steering wheels, brake pedal to the brakes, and shifter to the, um, gears. Electro-hydraulic assist doesn't cut it. Um, federal regs are supposed to ban sales of cars in the US that don't provide a mechanical steering system that works even when all power assist systems fail.

Brakes are in the same boat, plus federal regs require a mechanical backup to the main system. I thin kthey pretty much require the backup be cable, but I could be wrong.

As for the shifter? Irrelevant. As long as your steering and brakes work, you can get yourself out of 99.999999999999999% of tense situations when any other single or group of systems fails.

(for the record, the older auto transmissions aren't "drive-by-wire". Placing the car in one of the gears actually opens and closes valves in the valve body. The valve body, and indeed the whole transmission, is essentially a hydraulic computer. Newer, fancier auto trannies, I don't know about. I'm talking the fancy stuff on the hybrids)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

Actually, manual transmissions can't let you shift into reverse while you're moving forward. It has less to do with it being a safety feature and more a side-effect of the design of the transmission.

Actually, mine will not shift into reverse from 5th. If I sit in my driveway with the engine off and try to shift it into reverse from 5th, it will not do it. I can go from any other gear into reverse, just not 5th. I assume this is so someone does not bump the shift lever down and destroy the transmission. This has nothing to do with the synchronizer gears meshing. The gears will not even get close. There is a safety feature in the transmission that prevents this.

It may make a lot of gear-grinding noise, but the teeth physically can't mesh. This means your engine is safe (even if it's a bit rough on the transmission gears) Nice, huh?

I think the damage would be worse than you say, but I am not about to test it on my own truck. I just wrote a check to pay off the lien, I am not about to try insurance fraud next ;-)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is simply, and dangerously, wrong. Power steering and brakes are VERY heavy if they lose power. They use the power to reduce the amount
of movement the driver needs to make, so a large car without power steering takes a lot of twirling of the steering wheel to steer it. With power steering you get a much quicker response because they don't gear it down so much.

With brakes, old-style drum brakes have a built-in self-servo effect that does not happen on disc brakes. I once tried turning the engine off and pumping the brakes a few times to empty (fill?) the vacuum reservoir. I walk and cycle quite a lot so my legs are fit but I found it very difficult to get any braking at all. DO NOT TRY THIS ON THE ROAD, YOU WILL PROBABLY CRASH.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[whoever57]

Actually, I used to drive a Chevy station wagon with a hydraulic power booster instead of a vacuum one. It was connected to the power steering pump (thus the same pump provided power assist for both steering and braking)

Not only was it amazingly expewnsive to repair, but when it failed you basically had NO brakes at all.

Citroen cars had (have?) a hydraulic-power braking system. Not power-assisted, but power operated. This was back in the '70s at least, and maybe earlier. However, they built the cars with a large pressure reservoir, so the pump could fail and you would have plenty of pressure in the system to stop the car. The same system also powered the self-leveling suspension and if the pressure failed, the suspension would fail before the brakes.

It was a very nice system. I had Citroen with this. Unfortunately, there was a design flaw: one of the high-pressure fluid lines was just in front of the (inboard) front disk brakes. If the hose failed, it sprayed mineral oil (used at the fluid in the hydraulic system) all over the brakes -- not conducive to fast stopping.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

A lot of that has to do with the car itself. Mind you, power steering cuts off after the vehicle reaches a certain speed, and it tapers to the cutoff.

My truck has power steering. :) It has a big ol' steering wheel, and that's it's power steering.

Many cars manufactured with power steering have teeny tiny steering wheels. If you put a bigger steering wheel on the car, you'd have an easier time steering it when the power steering breaks. :)

Useless trivia: to pass inspection in the state of Texas, your steering wheel must be at least as big as the steering wheel that came on the car when it was manufactured brand new. So you can't slap on a small, stylish, chain steering wheel. You actually have to make sure it's as big as the original wheel was. (most inspectors don't care and will still pass the car, but they're not supposed to)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Glendale2x]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.

If you are traveling at a high rate of speed losing power steering/braking will cause more problems for you. First try neutral and even a lower gear if for some reason neutral isn't engaging. It's going to over-rev the engine but personally I'd prefer to replace a transmission or the entire engine rather than my blood or organs.

In all of the cars I've driven, including my parents' cars, power seeting and power brakes still work fine as long as the vehicle is in motion and the transmission is in gear. It feels basically like a power take off to keep things critical to control the vehicle running in the event the engine stalls. My current car (a Ford Focus) does this, too. If I turn the car off and leave it in gear, it keeps going just fine, although without the engine it will eventually just stop. Since I have a manual, if I depress the clutch, I can feel the power assist go away. Release the clutch and it comes back and the car doesn't handle any different than if it were actually running. The only difference is the warning lights and the tach reads zero while the speedometer still indicates current speed.

The danger in turning the key is that the steering wheel will lock. Although you will still have power brakes and power steering, the steering wheel ends up locked and you're going to be stuck in whatever direction it hits the lock at. If you're going fast, a locked steering wheel could lead to a quick disaster.

I wouldn't recommend that anyone try this with their own cars unless you're sure of your ability to handle the vehicle in case something goes wrong. If you must, go find an empty parking lot to find out what your car does when you turn it off while in motion and how to do it safely.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[AmericanInKiev]

Yeah, and if you're unlucky - you will lock the steering wheel in the far left position.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

Why don't you drive your Dodge ram 250 to my house and I"ll show you the cutoff valve? Maybe it's broke.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Glendale2x]

Ack, first two paragraphs are from the parent. My comments start with "In all of the cars I've driven...". Even used preview, too.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[YrWrstNtmr]

Of course, many cars of the up into the 1970's didn't have power brakes or steering. And do you know what? They were steerable and stopable at all speeds. Basic steering and braking systems have NOT changed at all since then.

They were designed to allow a normal strength human to steer/stop it. When you design in power assist, the engineers can change the ratios to account for the power assist. A car built with power steering is pretty hard (but not impossible) to drive when it quits. I had an 'interesting' ride in my fathers '75 Ford Torino when the pump quit one night on a twisty downhill road. Very hard to steer more than a couple of degrees.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[karnal]

There's only one thing that will make you stop driving a car you truly love.

Mechanical damage.

Either by the car just falling apart, or someone smashing the hell out of it with their car. Then you will need to find a new car (especially with anything >10 years old..... Insurance companies love to "total" what they see as worthless cars.)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Dravik]

This is why you should always drive a manual transmission. Push the clutch, put in neutral, coast to stop. Best case car stops when out of gas, worst case engine and tranny gone.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't say you did that and not say why. So, why?? Fun? Certainly not profit ;)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds good in theory. The best advice I've heard is to put it in neutral and potentially destroy the engine by overrevving. Hopefully the engine will have rev limiters that prevent that.

The problem is the transmission that will not downshift if the revs are too high. So your doing 120 in overdrive, so you go down a gear. Your still doing 120, only the engine is now revving higher. So you go down another gear, this gear would overrev the engine. Therefore, the transmission will not downshift to the next lower gear because that would damage the engine. So you never get to downshift and slow down that way.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Bob Hellbringer]

Luckily, in this case, my POS can't hit 120.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, neither power steering nor power brakes reduce the amount of movement the driver needs to make, they only reduce the amount of force needed to move it. I've driven long distances with power steering offline, it's not that hard. And when the engine cuts out, there's still enough vacuum for the brake booster to help you stop, your mistake was pumping the brakes.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[N3Bruce]

Turning the ignition off does more than just killing power brakes/steering. Most keys have a steering wheel lock built in. Guess what! You won't be able to steer, so make sure you only turn it back to the first detent.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[HoneyBunchesOfGoats]

The reason you don't want to turn off the ignition is that on most cars doing so locks the steering. Much more troublesome than losing power assist.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exactly why I keep an anchor in the trunk. Never know when you might need to drop that baby.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GTIChick]

Actually, there are methods that allow us "tiny women" to pick up bigger bikes:

http://www.pinkribbonrides.com/dropped.html

Skert has even shown how to pick up a Gold Wing, and she's 5'4" and less than 120 lbs.

GTIChick
'99 EX-500 (for sale!)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Youssef Adnan]

I agree to what you say here except that losing power steeing at high speed is not going to be a real problem. Steering without "power" is not as tough at high speed.

One thing I learnt from my dad is - when losing breaks, not car trying to accelerate on its own - is:
- Your life and other peoples' lives are more important than any mechanical machine. Alywas act on this
- Get to neutral. This will help
- Try the hand breaks smoothly
- Then start lowering gears one by one. In automatic cars, I guess trying 2 or L. It may break your transmition, but refer to point #1

That should help. but the point of the article is- we're getting too fancy that most of this won't apply when I tell it to my son!

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DeputySpade]

That is perfectly normal. Power steering is almost always a belt-driven hydraulic pump assisting an otherwise horribly heavy steering system that can be used indefinately without the assistance. Power brakes, on the other hand, are almost always vacuum assisted with a vacuum reservoir to give a few extra assisted stops after engine failure. While unassisted steering in a power steering system is hard but doable, unassisted braking with a power assisted brake system is very very difficult.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice spin you've put on my comments:

If a high-rise apartment doesn't have any stairs to escape during a fire, then it's a deathtrap and would never be built.

What you're talking about is the equivalent of using the brakes without power. It can be done and will be done during an emergency. But I specifically said "people who live in apartments so high up they can't get there without an elevator." Requiring people to go down the stairs is one thing, requiring them to go up the stairs is another. The latter is equivalent to picking up a motorcycle. If the elevator's broken you can just stay in the lobby until someone comes and fixes it (yeah yeah, make your smartass remarks about your sick aunt who's stuck up there all alone).

if you can't push your car off the road, or pick up your fallen-over bike, you need a smaller vehicle.

So we should scrap all 18-wheelers? concrete trucks? moving trucks? That's total bullshit. What is required is that, in the event your vehicle becomes disabled, you place proper signs around your vehicle warning others of the hazard while you wait for assistance. It is also required that other users of the road pay attention at all times for hazards, including fallen motorcycles or disbaled vehicles.

Or, as others have mentioned, all drivers should be able to fix their cars? Hm? Should all office workers also know how to fix the elevator in their office building? Fix the smartcard-reader to the front door?

No, there should be, and there is, no requirement that users be able to do everything manually, that's bordering on ludite. The real problem is people refuse to adapt to new technology. They refuse to slow down when approaching disabled vehicles, they refuse to equip themselves and learn how to put up warning signs, they refuse to stop and wait for an hour for the elevator to be fixed, and worst, they act like elitists making half-assed remarks about SUVs* and insisting that everybody operate at the technology level of 1940s.

*I agree that SUVs are bad, but not because their drivers can't push them off the road, that's the stupidest reason I've ever heard. They're bad because they create unnecessary risks on the road, they consume way too much resources, etc. Stop making up stupid excuses, you're hurting the fight against SUVs more than you're helping.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[the hopthrisC]

Yeah, getting the car into neutral would be my first thought, too. This car probably had that option.

No, it most probably did not have the option, since almost every european car is fitted with gear shift.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[plague3106]

I wonder if the electronic transmission has "safety sensors" that won't shift to a lower gear if it might cause engine damage

probably, my 2003 acura tl type s does..

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ultranova]

Wouldn't it be more efficient to use a small electric engine to provide the vacuum than restart the gasoline one ?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DeputySpade]

Or wet grass, or just an untied shoelace when trying to walk the bike through a 3 point turn, or a kickstand that sinks on thin asphalt, or... I've laid down my fair share of bikes including some that were way too big for me at the time. My last two close calls were from forgetting to take my new front disk lock off and the back tire kicking out to the right on wet grass, and some loose gravel that just happened to be in the right place just as I was shifting coming out of a curve. One of those saves was me being a complete idiot and getting lucky, and the other was a testament to experience. You're absolutely right. It's not a question of if. It's when.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BigT]

That would seem to break the first and second laws of robotics in favor of the third, wouldn't it?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[phsdv]

Of course it is a software problem! Could he not just press the reset button?

But seriously an electronic fail is not totaly impossible. The automotive industry has very high demands for quality for their electronics. They do not accept any technology with more than 10 fails (parts) out of 1 milion chips (10ppm). And they are moving to 1 ppm. For a reference, consumer electronic (eg your cell phone) is more like 300ppm. This means that 1 in 100,000 cars could have some electronic prolems (that is for each chip they have)

If only software could be as reliable as this, imagine a OS that only chrashes on 10 out of 1 milion computers.... I guesstimate that windos has a fail level of 100,000 ppm and I am bing nice here.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[robfoo]

perhaps you could double-clutch it into reverse
When it's moving forwards? Good luck!

that's why cars are equipped with emergency brakes
Huh? Oh, you mean the handbrake (I guess "emergency brake" is an Americanism, as it doesn't make sense). It only brakes the back wheels. I'd like to see a guy doing 120mph pull up the handbrake to try to stop.
Also, I think you'll find that you can still use the (foot) brake with the engine off. All you lose is the booster (usually provided by engine intake vacuum, hence only works with engine running), and although the brakes will be a lot harder to apply, and a lot softer, they will still work. Formula one cars don't have brake boosters, and they stop like a motherfucker :)

As someone else pointed out, turning the ignition off usually has the side effect of locking the steering column. That won't help much. Coupled with your 'pull the handbrake' idea, you've taken your mostly controllable (albeit speeding) vehicle and turned it into sliding, spinning, death-on-a-stick.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[bhtooefr]

It was the pump. We got that fixed.

It's a piece of sh!t Dodge. Most of it's problems are with the electrical system, as with every Chrysler we've had. (OK, it blew a transmission when we were on a trip, and the power steering pump blew, but for the most part, problems were with the electrical system)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DarkHand]

Actually the '94 Civic does have power brakes. :) Pretty much any car since the 70's does too. Look right behind the master cylinder (where you add brake fluid) at the round black thing. That's the brake booster. It uses engine vacuum to amplify the force you apply to the brakes with your foot. Without it you'd be just about standing on the brakes every time you wanted to slow down. :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Carnildo]

An ignition usually has four settings:
1) Lock: This locks the steering and lets you remove the key
2) Accessory: Unlocks the steering wheel and provides power to things like the radio, but not the engine
3) On: Provides power to the spark plugs
4) Start: Provides power to the spark plugs and starter motor.

You can safely turn the key from "on" to "accessory" if you need to stop the engine while driving. Normally, turning the key further into the "lock" position requires extra effort, such as pushing a button.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[RedWizzard]

I've driven long distances with power steering offline, it's not that hard.

It very much depends on the car. I drive a Mitsubishi 3000GT, and it's virtually impossible to steer at all without the power steering. With the car stationary I find it very difficult to turn the wheel, my wife can't turn it at all. If the car was moving it'd be somewhat easier, but still difficult. I wouldn't want to have it happen at highway speeds.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fucksl4shd0t]

Actually, my point was that at 55 mph you shouldn't have noticed a loss of power steering unless the loss of power steering also caused the mechanical portion of the steering to become inhibited somehow (like a piece of rubber getting stuck in the gearbox). There's a valve that tapers off your power steering so that at highway speeds you don't have power assist on the system anymore.

So, there's a valve that controls it. If your truck was fuel injected, there's a strong possibility that valve was opened/closed by a solenoid using signals from the speed sensor/ECU. Most people aren't aware of this so they don't even think to fix it when it breaks, and most mechanics don't care enough about it to tell a customer (if they even know, it's not common knowledge, even if it is blatantly obvious on so many cars).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[robfoo]

Really? So you're saying the steering wheel in a ~1990 Jeep Cherokee is not physically connected to the wheels?
I find it hard to believe that a car manufacturer would design a car that would not steer under loss of power. Over here in New Zealand, we call that illegal.
My guess is you lost power assistance to the steering, and "being young", you panicked. That's ok. It happens.
This is why I think driver education should be more like flight training, armed forces training, etc. You should (in a controlled environment, of course) be forced into situations where things fail, and you have to react.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[tzanger]

Um -- the engine is still going to be turning, you will definitely have power steering and very likely brakes too even with the engine off but turning. I'm not an automotive guru but I'm fairly confident this is true.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[visgoth]

The Citroën 2 CV 6 has them on the front wheels. They were last built in 1990, and as far as I can tell they were one of the few "modern" cars that had the parking brake linked to the front. A friend of mine found this out the hard way. Who'd have thought anyone would put them up front, but I guess its best to find out about these sorts of things.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[yiantsbro]

Great idea. Next time I am late I'll just cell call the police and say "Hey, my car is accelerating out of control...I can't stop it...please clear the way". After I reach my destination, hey amazing, it just happened to stop. Damned electronics.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DavidTC]

I've never heard of a car where you could turn the key to 'lock' while in gear, even with pushing a button. That would just be stupid...how often do you need to physically remove the key while the car is in motion? (What, you're in such a hurry you need to unlock your front door while your car slams to a halt, plastering you against the steering wheel and ripping out your transmission?) All you want to do is stop the engine from running.

Now, I've heard of cars where you can't turn the key to accessory when the car's not in neutral or park, but never actually seen them, and I'm not actually sure they exist...I think it's just people making assumptions about their car. If anyone actually has a car that will not do that, please respond to me. (I'm talking physically, here, not weird-ass drive-by-wire cars that you turn off electronically, like in this article.)

My automatic Pontiac Sunbird would not only let you do that, it would also let you 'push start' it. Of course, you had to be going like 30 mph or so, so you couldn't actually push start it unless you had a damn big hill, but if it stalled while driving down the highway, you could just flip the key to accessory and then back while in gear.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Moofie]

2CV? Modern?

That one is just too easy, friend. I'm going to leave it right where I found it.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Lazy T]

The only significant danger is enabling the steering wheel lock while turning off your ignation at speed. Watch out if you turn off your ignition while moving - you don't want to mistakenly LOCK your steering wheel while at speed.

This actually happend in my town. A stupid guy turned off the ignition to save gas in a slope. He also pulled the key out of the ignition... Well the steering wheel locked and he hit a tree head on killing some of the passengers.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[russotto]

Too bad there's no moderation(-1, wrong)

You will not lose power steering or power brakes by turning off the ignition. Power brakes are driven off manifold vacuum which will be present as long as the engine is turning(regardless of whether there's ignition or not). Power steering is driven off a belt which again, will be turning provided the engine is turning.

You shouldn't turn the ignition to 'lock', though, because THEN you'll be unable to steer. Not because you lost power steering, but because the anti-theft lock device cut in.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Alan Shutko]

Only if you're in park, in my experience.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[CharlieHedlin]

Well, you aren't ever going to want to turn the key all the way off, as that could engage the steering wheel lock. If your brakes don't stop you in time, you won't be changing directions no matter if you had power steering or not.

Some cars have the seq. of Accessory, Lock, on, start. Those would be very hard to turn off safely.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ckaminski]

Every car I have ever been in has a (N)eutral option that ALWAYS works. Use it.

Most cars will auto-shutoff anyway once the RPMs redline (My taurus and voyager do this).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[bleckywelcky]

I had my engine stall while going 50 mph through a winding mountain road (was a '96 or '97 vehicle). Freaked the hell out of me, but I was able to stomp on the brakes and brute-force the steering wheel so I wouldn't drive off the side of the mountain. It took a lot of effort (as I suspected) and I don't know if really young drivers, seniors, or someone with just-below-average strength could have handled it. Luckily I found a turn-out fairly quickly and was able to pull off the road and check my vehicle out to see what had happened.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Grishnakh]

What you're talking about is the equivalent of using the brakes without power. It can be done and will be done during an emergency. But I specifically said "people who live in apartments so high up they can't get there without an elevator." Requiring people to go down the stairs is one thing, requiring them to go up the stairs is another. The latter is equivalent to picking up a motorcycle. If the elevator's broken you can just stay in the lobby until someone comes and fixes it

So you're saying that people can't climb stairs? Anyone that out of shape should seek medical attention, or be in a nursing home. If your apartment is on the 20th floor, and you can't get to it when the power is out, you shouldn't be living there. Obviously, it's going to take a while to climb 20 flights of stairs, even for a fit person, and should only be done when absolutely necessary (and anyone attempting this should probably take breaks every four stories or so). But it beats sleeping in the lobby just because a local transformer blew up and the power company will take 6 hours to fix it.

So we should scrap all 18-wheelers? concrete trucks? moving trucks? That's total bullshit.

How many people drive 18-wheelers and concrete trucks? This is a rare exception that doesn't apply to normal people who don't drive heavy vehicles for a living.

Or, as others have mentioned, all drivers should be able to fix their cars? Hm? Should all office workers also know how to fix the elevator in their office building? Fix the smartcard-reader to the front door?

What the hell does fixing anything have to do with this discussion? No one said anything about requiring people to fix anything, just that there should be a reasonable expectation of being able to do things manually in the event of a failure.

If your office elevator fails, you should be able to take the stairs. (If your office is on the 100th floor, and you're at the bottom, I would think that you have reasonable cause to call in and say you're taking the day off.) If the smartcard-reader fails, you again have good cause to take the day off, assuming the company is so stupid that they rely on this and don't just open the door manually and have a security guard or someone keep unauthorized people out.

they refuse to stop and wait for an hour for the elevator to be fixed

I've never seen an elevator repair take only an hour. Usually when they fix an elevator in my building, it's out of service for a whole day. Luckily, there's three of them, and if they're all dead, the building is only 4 stories tall, so it's easy to take the stairs if you aren't lazy.

insisting that everybody operate at the technology level of 1940s.

No one is insisting on stopping technological advancement. What people are insisting on is planning for technology to fail, and not "painting yourself into a corner" by creating systems with no backups or safe failure modes. The steer-by-wire and brake-by-wire systems that some automakers are trying to push are examples of this; we're simply not ready to eliminate mechanical linkages in these systems, because electrical systems aren't reliable enough.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[shepd]

>Oh, you mean the handbrake (I guess "emergency brake" is an Americanism, as it doesn't make sense).

Or, perhaps in countries outside America they don't sell vans and trucks. Must be interesting getting cars from the factory to the dealership without putting miles on them. :-)

In these you operate your so called "hand"brake with a foot. No, I'm not talking about the pedal just beside the gas. I'm talking about a totally separate pedal with a latch release.

Ergo, it is no longer a handbrake. The term "embergency brake" works better as it covers any method of operating a manual brake for the rear wheels only.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[bleckywelcky]

This happened to me when I was 20 driving through the Sierra-Nevada mountains.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[lindsayt]

THe biggest reason for this is that unlike cars without power steering, which generally have a direct system of gears between the steering wheel and the mechanism, a power steering system actively alters the steering mechanism. No concern is given for making sure the system works well without it, and the system itself becomes a drag on the steering.

Think of this: power steering intercepts your commands and assists you with them. When it is dead, not only are you working against the road (as in a non-power-steering car) but you're also working against the dead power steering system. The stronger the power steering system when functional, the stronger it will fight your steering commands when it's dead.

Click and Clack (the tappit brothers: cartalk.com) did an article about this, basically saying, "look knuckleheads, just because cars without power steering work just fine, don't expect that your car with power steering will work fine without it." I'm too lazy to find their story; but go to the link and search.

Also, the point about the steering wheel locking is a very real and serious concern.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[visgoth]

Note the "modern" :) I was feeling generous, perhaps a bit too much so.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't work by vacuum any more: most modern cars (at least those in Europe) use electric power assistance.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[upsidedown_duck]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off...

I disagree. In this situation I would want to put the car into neutral and turn off the ignition but still leave the steering wheel unlocked. Even without power, the steering and brakes will still work just with greater effort. There is also the manual emergency brake.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[SnappingTurtle]

In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking

As my buddy and I learned going down a mountain once. Hey, we were teenagers, we thought it was hilarious.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[jmcmunn]

Having driven a call with no power steering (93 ford escort), I can say that this is not as big of a deal as it seems. In fact, the no power steering actually makes almost no difference when you're traveling highway speeds. Anyone who has driven a car with no power steering knows this is the case. The lack of power breaks would concern me more.

The bigger problem would be that on many new cars, when you shut off the car, the steering wheel engages the anti-theft lock and you can no longer steer the car at all. Trust me, I found this out on one occasion trying to be "stealthy" when returning from a late night excursion without my parents knowing. I almost hit a tree in the driveway before slamming on the (no longer powered) breaks.

I would say try to put it in neutral first, then if that doesn't work try turning off the ignition, but only into the accessory position, so you don't lose steering. If neither of those is an option, pull that emergency hand brake and burn it up, or else burn up the regular breaks or throw the car in reverse.

If all else fails, find a nice long guard rain on the highway and grind the side of the car into it until you slow down. :-) Better to do lots of financial damage than to lose your life.

All that said, I still don't ever want to test my theory in person, that would be freaky. I often wonder just how much I would trust a car if it was doing all of the driving itself. I like to have control over where I am going, and how fast.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DavidTC]

What kind of goober would do that, anyway?

So you've cruising down the freeway, and your throttle sticks, and for some reason you don't turn the key to accessory to cut the engine.

So you brace yourself and put it into park.

Okay, now that you've shifted into park, slamming into the steering column, skidding all over the road, why the hell are you going turn your key any more? You're in park.

What, you think the car is telepathically moving you forward because the engine is going? Does it normally move forward when you're sitting in park revving the engine?

And this is granting the absurdity of doing anything after you shift a car suddenly into park. Either you just stopped, bam, and what you do doens't matter, or you're completely screwed because you're sliding down the road on your tires at 100 miles an hour. You're not going to be screwing around with your ignition at that point, you're going to be screaming and trying to keep the car from turning sideways and rolling down the road.

I mean, yes, if people did shift to park, remove their key, and lock their engine, it would just lock their steering wheel and they'd probably crash. OTOH, if they climbed out on top of their car's hood and tried to break with their feet, they'd probably get themselves killed, too. Let's not worry about such stupid people. ;)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[horza]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking.

Far worse than this. If you turn the ignition all the way off then the moment you turn the wheel the steering lock will engage (making it impossible to turn the steering wheel).

Phillip.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Moofie]

OK, maybe you can verify something for me. My French teacher was a Crazylady (tm), so she might be wrong, but she told us that 2CV first stood for "Deux Chevaux", or two horsepower. True? False?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you turn the key off enough to kill the engine, you will typically lose both power steering and brakes, but will still be able to control the car although it will require higher effort for steering and brakes.

Most power brake systems will give you 2-3 pumps on the brakes before the boost is all gone, hydraulic power steering typically dies instantly with the engine. I'm not sure if electric power steering still provides boost if the key is in the 'accesories' position without the engine running.

As mentioned in another post, you don't want to turn the key all the way off, as this will engage the steering lock on most cars build in the past 30 years or so.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BlueUnderwear]

she told us that 2CV first stood for "Deux Chevaux", or two horsepower.

Yes, but that's two fiscal horsepower, not actual engine power (which is more powerful than that, obviously).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GreyPoopon]

Luckily, in this case, my POS can't hit 120.

Funny. Just this week, I hit close to 120 mph in the rental car I'm driving: Ford Focus with a tiny little engine full o' gerbils. And the best thing is that it was perfectly legal. (I'm in Germany this week)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[mdarksbane]

You can easily lock up the brakes using your own leg power alone. Power brakes are just a vacuum booster, to make it way-easy to lock up the brakes. Without power, you just have to press harder. But it certainly is far from being impossibly difficult. And in any case, the vacuum ramains in the booster for some period of time. Just try it the brakes in your garage with the engine off, and you'll get a feeling for it.

Indeed. I drove a dump truck at work that never should have been certified for commercial use, as it would stall at idle quite randomly. If I can stop a 27,000 lb loaded dump truck rolling down a hill without the power brakes, pretty much anyone can handle a normal car. You've just got to grab onto the wheel and try to drive your foot through the floor.

Of course, I was scared shitless the entire time and praying I would be able to stop, but the thing did eventually stop moving.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Moofie]

Fiscal horsepower? So it's an accounting scheme? Wow. French people are complicated.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

French cars often have their handbrakes on the front wheels. Dunno why. Maybe it is because the parking space in Paris is too cramped and the police needs to tow vehicles *that* often and *that* easily ;)

Citroen has them in the front, I know for sure.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

All cars (in the US at least) have to allow the steering and braking to control the car in the event of an engine stall, albeit with increased effort.

Can anyone confirm this and state what year it came into effect? My Suburban Silverado (tow vehicle; anti-suv fork unnecessary pls) certainly didn't have this, and there are plenty of older vehicles on the road. (Excepting rock salt country, of course.)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

I should add that this 'burban model was classified as a car for all anti-pollution devices, not a truck, so there's a fair chance it was classified as a car for other measures.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[deacon]

No, you usually have to turn the key one extra position off for the steering to lock.

And in any case, if the steering should lock, you can turn the key again to free it after the engine has died, about 5 seconds. The engine will not restart in neutral or with an automatic transmission.

You can even repeatedly turn the key on and off to control your average speed.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Dfasdf]

The vacuum on most engines is provided by the air intake on the engine... using the electric would require a vacuum pump... while on an IC engine there is always vacuum at the intake..

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[GlassUser]

You can't say you did that and not say why. So, why?? Fun? Certainly not profit ;)

You're going to laugh. If you don't just shake your head.

I warned you.

Stealth-braking. No brake lights. I already knew that my car has rear wheel manual brakes. It shouldn't have been a problem. Just a gradual slow tug on the handbrake, then the ass end came out from her and she spun around four or five times. That I remember. She finally skidded into the median. I had the top off and got grass and dirt all in the interior, but I and the car were totally unharmed. The engine died, so I walked around, kicked the tires, turned her back on, and drove off.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[unixdad]

Maybe cars are the first step to skynet/the matrix

If so, they showed their hand a little bit too early!

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DarkVader]

well, I'm reasonably sure that all the trucks chevy made in the '70s had that feature.

I've driven chevy trucks as old as '76 with power brakes and power steering, and if the power assist fails, it's still driveable. (and in a '76, you can be sure it's failed while I've been driving before.)

My current '95 tahoe still has the feature. The brake booster died a few years ago, and while a stop sometimes took two feet pressing the pedal, it was certainly stoppable.

It's also controllable with the engine off - so it works without the power steering.

I suspect that they've not removed these features from newer models.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[47F0]

Ummm... Some brakes (btw, folks "breaks" are what happens to your bones when your "brakes" fail) ARE powered by belts. Quite a number of the Cadillac ElDorado series had hydraulic brake boost rather than vacuum boost. Yes, I had one (1978), Yes I broke a belt, and yes, that much steel (the ElDorado that year was the heaviest Cadillac) with no brake or steering boost is quite a handful.

Please feel free to post about something chastising those who have no clue when you are in fact, truly and sadly clueless.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Alioth]

I'm a sort of skinny geek (at the time I weighed 140lbs, I don't weigh much more now). I had a Ram 150 - an old one - but when the engine quit one day, I could still steer it with the inoperative pump and pull into a gas station to try for a restart. The steering was pretty heavy, but not so much that I couldn't maintain adequate control.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Grishnakh]

I'm not sure this is a valid comparison.

Most large commercial vehicles have air brakes, not hydraulic brakes. If you lose air pressure, the brakes fail so that they're locked up. So when you're pressing the pedal (with the engine running or not), you're just releasing air pressure, which causes the brake shoes to apply pressure to the drums.

In addition, large trucks usually have drum brakes, which operate completely differently from disc brakes. Disc brakes require far more force to achieve the same stopping power.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[kaladorn]

The problem is partly this: Leverage. With the hydraulics down for the count due to the pump being out of operation, you'll find it gets very hard to steer a several ton mass of metal, even rolling on wheels.

In the olden days, if you look at the elder cars, they put large diameter steering wheels on cars, which provided a lot of leverage in these kinds of situations (many such cars didn't even *have* power steering!). They were actually harder to muscle about at slow velocity than at higher speeds. But it could be done, and the larger the wheel, the greater the mechanical advantage given to the driver.

This of course makes the modern trend of putting these dinky racing steering wheels on cars even funnier...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

...was able to pull off the road and check my vehicle out to see what had happened.

So don't leave us hanging here. What happened??!?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Dr. Evil]

I drove one, they're a nice alternative for automatic, but you don't put it park or drive like you do with an automatic.

It's more like a computer controlled manual transmission where the shifter is replaced with a joystick and the clutch is removed.

If you try to use them as a manual, you'll find they shift slowly, you can't skip gears easily, but you can use your transmission to slow you down long hills or help you in bad weather.

My point being that it's fully electronic, if the comptuer failed, I wouldn't know how pull it out of gear, and if cruise control was stuck... all I'd have is steering and the parking brake.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BlueUnderwear]

Fiscal horsepower? So it's an accounting scheme?

Yes, indeed. You pay more taxes on bigger (stronger) cars. But strangely enough, tax administration uses a different definition of horsepower than anybody else...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[visgoth]

Not sure about it standing for "Deux Chevaux", but the engine in the 2CV 6 was a 2 cylinder beast that pumped out a massive 29 bhp @ 5750 rpm allowing for a blistering 115km/h top speed.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Moofie]

I understand French pretty well, but I'll never understand the French people.

: )

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[jrumney]

Put some air in your tyres. No car's steering should need power assistance at highway speeds, and even around town it might take some effort, but its not unmanageable.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming you pull the handbrake while going in a straight line and lock both rear wheels, the car should tend to remain straight in the abscence of any radical steering input. If you do start to go sideways, Simply release the brake, and you straighten up again in a hurry. Possibly on the dry it could be enough to roll, maybe it should not be released if you are more that 45 degrees out of line.
I use this technique often in the snow to induce oversteer and find the results similar to but more controllable than blipping the throttle on a rear-wheel drive vehicle to acheive the same effect. I reason it is because the rear wheels locked with the handbrake spin up and go to a static friction condition faster than the spinning rear wheels can lose their less controlled excess rotational inertia. Also, the overall effect is to slow every thing down with the brake, as opposed to adding speed with a blip of the throttle.

Throwing a front wheel drive in park at 120mph, now that could be intresting.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Holi]

Actually losing power steering is worse at low speeds then at high speeds though I agree with you regarding the brakes.

Take this from someone whos power steering pump has a leak.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BlueRibbon]

Turning off the car doesn't lock the steering, at least in every car I drove (about 10 different, I guess). The steering will only get locked if you turn off the ignition and pull the key from the ignition.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

I can only assume that the Renaults are gaining more from the Nissans than vice versa, because the modern Nissans I've seen are (at least superficially) very much a Nissan. I can't imagine that Renault would buddy up with Nissan and then fuck them all up by transferring technology in the wrong direction.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Ribald]

You think that's scary? There are actually cooling fans that run off the power steering pump. Talk about bizarre. If your power steering fails, your car overheats.

I don't think that's quite how it works, at least on any vehicle I'm familiar with. There are one or more belts on the front of most engines. At least one is connected to the crankshaft, and power is distributed from there to the pulleys that run the airconditioning, alternator, power steering, water pump, fan...

They're connected, yes, but the fan is driven off the crank, just like the PS pump.

--Ribald

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Stephen Samuel]

many people are sooo used to power steering that they don't know what it's like to be working with 'armstrong steering' (as some people refer to manual)..

The car manuals that I read actually suggested that you find an unused stretch of unpopulated downhill road, turn off the ignition, pump the breakes a couple of times to get rid of residual pressure, and then get used to using the vehicle without power support 'just in case'.
It's a very different feel.

Obviously, this person never tried that.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

The engine will not restart in neutral or with an automatic transmission.

I have two vehicles, one manual, one automatic. Both start in neutral, even if the vehicle is moving. Maybe some cars do not, but mine do.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

Your not going to be able to shift from 5th to reverse while moving, because reverse doesnt have synchros ...perhaps you could double-clutch it into reverse, but that's just silly :p

I have a reverse synchro. First, I regularly shift between 1st and reverse when parking and the truck is moving (maybe 2-3 mph). Even at such slow speeds, without a synchro, it would either not engage or crunch a bit if it did. On my truck, the gear shift slides right in. The other reason I know is because I asked Ford and they said so. My 3rd gear synchro is starting not to synchronize so well, and the Ford mechanic gave me a crash course on Ranger transmissions.

Also, to the GP who said never to turn off the ignition in a moving car...you can surivive without power steering, in fact *GASP* some cars don't have it to begin with.

Yes, steering works, but can be difficult. For example, I had a faulty alternator that made the engine stall every once in a while. One time I almost hit a concrete sign going 40 mph. Steering was tough enough that I could not make the turn. Luckily I have strong enough legs that I could make up for the lack of power brakes and stop in time. Being a manual my hands were kind of busy and in the split second I did not have time to crank the engine again. Quick thinking and strong feet saved me from face planting into the airbag.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

Trust me, there is at least one vehicle which literally uses the power steering pump to drive the fan. It is not that they are sharing a belt. If that's what I meant, I would have said so. I don't remember what vehicle it is, but if you want I can talk to my automotive electrical instructor (it's a six unit class, and covers basically every element and aspect of automotive electrical systems) and ask him what car it is that he was talking about.

It really makes no sense to run a fan any way other than electrically these days.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[DaveVoorhis]

Nonsense. On modern non drive-by-wire cars, the real danger is that the steering lock will freeze the steering. Normally, that can't happen, because the transmission linkage won't allow the key to be turned to "lock" unless in Reverse.

As for loss of power steering, that's no big deal. At highway speeds, you don't need it. I've lost power steering in '67 Oldsmobile Toronado, which is several tons of massive front wheel drive, and it only becomes difficult to steer at less than 10mph. Even then, it's manageable with some effort.

I've lost power brakes, too. Braking requires considerably more effort, but stopping distances are essentially unaffected. --

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[RedWizzard]

Lack of air is not the problem. It's a heavy car with 4WD and 4WS and without power steering it's very difficult to turn the wheel when the car is stationary or moving slowly (i.e. being pushed). I haven't tried it at highway speeds so I'm not saying it's impossible to steer in that situation, but it would be difficult. I can't understand why anyone would want to cut the ignition anyway. Use the clutch and/or neutral.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[timpaton]

>> I guess "emergency brake" is an Americanism, as it doesn't make sense).
>
> Or, perhaps in countries outside America they don't sell vans and trucks.
> In these you operate your so called "hand"brake with a foot.

No, in countries outside America they sell vans and trucks with predominantly manual transmissions, and these typically have a hand brake - often an "umbrella handle" type that you pull from the dashboard, if there isn't room for a conventional lever on the transmission tunnel. Sure, there are a few that have a foot-operated "hand brake" (a fourth pedal next to the clutch), but they're the exception rather than the rule.

That said, here in Australia at least, there are a growing number of (American derived/designed) cars with a foot-operated "hand brake". They are one of the factors leading to the more widespread use of the term "park brake".

Back to the article...if you cut the ignition on a car, you do NOT lose your power-assisted brakes. As another poster has pointed out, the brake booster is "energised" by manifold vacuum - but there is a non-return valve in the vacuum system, so the booster holds a vacuum even when the manifold has none (ie under high load, turbo boost, or when switched off).

With the engine switched off, you'll still get a couple of boosted brake applications before it dies. And even then, most regulatory bodies - particularly the EU - have a requirement for brake effectiveness with the booster disconnected. True, the brakes won't have the same nice feel as when they're boosted, but you can certainly stop without boost.

Most key ignition switches have several positions. These are, generally, "lock-off-on-start". Sometimes you even need to take the key out before the steering locks; on others, you need to push another button (or push the key in) to turn the key to the "lock" position. In every car I've seen, you can turn the ignition off without locking the steering.

I have no idea how one usually kills the ignition on one of these card-access cars - I would assume there's a "start" and a "stop" button. Not sure why the driver didn't try this...or why it didn't work if he did.

As for downshifting to slow down - if the cruise control was locked on, this wouldn't make any difference. The cruise control would just try to open the throttle to bring the car up to the requested speed anyway, regardless of what gear it was in...short of bouncing off the engine's rev limiter (or other system control limits). And an electronic auto would probably refuse to shift.

I had a similar thing happen to me, in a car without cruise control. The throttle cable jammed as I crested a hill...so the car kept on accellerating. At the time, the best I could think of was to stomp on the brakes and bring the whole thing to an engine-stalling stop...in a cloud of stinking brake smoke. That said, it was a much less powerful car, and the throttle was only jammed mostly open - not under control of a crazed computer intent on applying enough power to maintain 120mph! In the heat of the moment, the option of switching the engine off never occurred to me...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[mr i want to go home]

Not quite true.

It's a play on words - in French. The symbols '2', 'C', 'V' in French are pronounced du-zso-vo (my attempt at phonetics) which sounds like "two horses" - Deux Chevaux. I don't know for sure, but I'd guess that the original 2CV's had a bit more than 2 horse power.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[sjames]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking.

Of course when the engine blows (and it will) you'll lose power stearing, brakes, and possibly visibility (as oil and smoke covers the windshield).

I have yet to find a car I couldn't bring to a safe stop without power assist.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[compuserf]

I had an exciting moment on a bike when I overtook someone and the throttle stuck wide open. Not so easy to kick into neutral with a sequential gearbox, so had to reach down to the key and switch off. Fun in city traffic...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BrokenHalo]

A friend of mine has a Hyundai Excel that won't start unless it's in first gear. Supposedly a safety feature, but I don't see how. How's about that for idiocy?

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, the computer overriding the human for self-preservation. That could be interesting.....

"I know you went into the capsule so I couldn't hear you, Dave, but I could still see your lips move." (or something like that) -- "2001"

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BrokenHalo]

I used to drive road trains (also in Australia) for a living, and the park brake (as I was taught) is called that for a reason.

It is used to stop the truck moving when it is parked. It is either on or off - none of the shades in between you have with a car handbrake. And believe me, you don't pull that button while the truck is in motion unless you want to cause a nasty accident.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[vsprintf]

If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off

This is a sweeping statement that, like most in this discussion, ignores the huge variation between auto makers and the age of the vehicle. It also ignores the question of whether we've placed too much dependence on computer-controlled systems in automobiles - and the answer is yes (IMHO).

Arguably, the worst computerized automobile ever was the Chrysler Cordova/Dodge Diplomat. This piece of automotive offal used a computerized black box to handle ignition and severely retarded (no it's not a joke) timing at idle to meet EPA/SCAQMD requirements. The problem was the box could not stand the environment of an engine compartment, and the failure mode was *limp home* or idle timing. Try that on a freeway. The cars were instant junk because you couldn't find a replacement module, new or used after five years. This is why I always root for Kirk over Khan whenever I watch the movie (Ricardo Montalban did the commercials for the Cordova/Diplomats).

There was a problem a little later with a BMW power system caused by thermal creep on the processor chip. It was a black box under the dash, and the official fix was to whack it from underneath with a baseball bat, which reseated the chip. Definitely a low-tech solution for a high-tech problem.

Gimme that old time religion: a coil, contact points, a condensor (capacitor), and centrifugal advance. Flip a switch, and it's dead. Otherwise, it's pretty hard to make it fail.

If I were in my old SS 396 Chevelle with the throttle stuck open, I would just turn off the ignition - no problem (well, maybe a backfire).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Mr. Shiny And New]

In my driver training course we actually had to drive down a (long, empty) parking lot and turn the car off while driving. The steering doesn't lock if the key isn't in the position where you can take it out; and every car I've ever driven won't let you take the key out (and hence lock the wheel) unless the car isn't in gear.
Don't rememember what happens in a manual transmission though, been too long since I drove one.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[CityZen]

My old (1976) Saab 99 had the hand brakes on the front wheels. Made you want to carry around chocks in order to change a front wheel (since the rear wheels couldn't be locked).

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Stealth Potato]

Hmm, the computer overriding the human for self-preservation. That could be interesting.....

But that's impossible! The Third Law can never override the First Law! ;-)

Judging from situations like these, it seems that maybe Asimov's Laws should be given more consideration; if not as actual "robotic" laws, more as fundamental design principles in safety engineering. Any computerized system upon which human lives depend that is not equipped with an independent and redundant (preferably mechanical) override system is truly alarming.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Proudrooster]

I know that BMW motorcycles have rev-limiters which will turn off the engine if you over-rev it. A friend on mine was trying to keep up with a sportbike (Ninja) on his BMW and pulled into oncoming traffic to pass a car when his engine suddenly shutdown due to the BMW rev-limiter feature. He about shit his pants and nearly became a hood ornament.

This just goes to show that technology that thinks for you might make a decision that you don't necessarily agree with and get you killed. However, this is german engineering and they probably value their perfectly balanced BMW engine over that of human life :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[toddestan]

That's true for the Nissan's too. The stick shifts have the little buttons, but the automatics don't.

The reasoning, I believe, is that if you have the automatic in any gear but Park, it won't let you turn the key all the way to lock. Atleast that's the way my Infiniti (upscale Nissan) works. So with the automatic, it is impossible to lock the steering while the wheels are rolling.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[heydonms]

My 1987 Ford Falcon does exactly that, I would be surprised if new cars didn't do the same

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[timpaton]

I'm guessing the park brake on a truck is a transmission brake - locking the drive shaft and hence the rear wheels of the prime mover. I can imagine that being an... intereting... manoeuvre with three loaded trailers behind you!

Even in a car - you want to know what you're doing before you apply on the park brake while in motion.

The park brake almost [1] invariably acts on the rear wheels only. Rear wheel lock-up is a very dangerous condition, and one which all carmakers work hard to avoid. Most regulations require that the front wheels lock before the rear.

With the front wheels locked, the vehicle continues in a more or less straight line - depending what it bounces off ;-). Even if you were turning, you're now going straight. The rolling rear wheels make it a stable condition. And cars are built to hit things front-on with least risk to occupants.

With the rear wheels locked before the fronts, you're most likely to start turning laps of yourself. Especially if the front wheels aren't steering straight ahead.

"Steering" with the handbrake can be fun if you know what's going to happen - and it's a standard rally technique, to induce oversteer and slide into a corner - but it's not something you want to be doing in an emergency...

And besides, with the uni-shoe "drum-in-hat" park brakes on the back of many modern disc-braked cars, the noise alone will put you off applying the park brake while moving. [1] 80s-vintage Subarus had front wheel park brakes, just to be contrary. I'm sure there have been others. They're not much good for doing "handbrake turns".

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Never happen. "Turn the engine off" does not mean to turn the key all the way to the withdraw position. I have turned my engine off and coasted from the street into a mall parking place and into a parking spot on many an occasion. (Looked cool back in my teens when I would use the technique to pick up chicks. Wasn't ever successful getting the bitches, but at least I know you can turn your ignition off without locking your steering.)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ergo98]

So don't leave us hanging here. What happened??!?

It turned out that the chick was a dude!

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[macdaddy]

I think you've missed the whole point of my arguement. Only an absolute abnormal goober would be able to lock the steering wheel by putting the vehicle in park. The point is that it's all but impossible. That's the point.

Also, a vehicle suddenly thrown into park when traveling down the highway at highway speeds wouldn't go skidding down the highway. In fact it won't slow down at all. The park peg will simply break off under those conditions. Short of the damage causd inside the tranny, the vehicle will continue as before.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[laemas]

you dont turn it all the way off, just into "aux" :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, many cars of the up into the 1970's didn't have power brakes or steering. And do you know what? They were steerable and stopable at all speeds. Basic steering and braking systems have NOT changed at all since then.

Uh huh... well in case you didn't know (and I see you don't) the manual brakes used a different pivot hole on the brake pedal arm to connect the master cylinder pushrod. Power brakes use the hole farthest away from the upper pivot, and manual setups used the upper one that gave much better mechanical advantage. There is a HUGE difference in force required b/w the two positions. So much, in fact, that if you accidentally use the power setup without a booster, even I, who can snap chains and break pedals on bicycles, have a hard time gettin' the pig to stop. Really! Now the booster itself extracts a toll too, so its even worse than it appears. This means that if you lose vacuum to the brakes, then it will be SIGNIFICANTLY more difficult to stop the car. It is not just simply losing the boost effect and being left with a normal manual setup, it is BROKEN!

Same goes for the steering. With the pump stopped, you now have to not only turn the car, but also push all that fluid around. go ahead and try it one day!

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BrokenHalo]

I'm guessing the park brake on a truck is a transmission brake - locking the drive shaft and hence the rear wheels of the prime mover

Err, no. It's a pneumatic brake that has flexi hose connections to each trailer (otherwise a fully laden set of trailers would have no problem dragging a prime mover downhill).

That loud hissing sound you hear when big trucks park is the sound of the park brake being applied.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[agallagh42]

"I had an exciting moment on a bike when I overtook someone and the throttle stuck wide open. Not so easy to kick into neutral with a sequential gearbox, so had to reach down to the key and switch off. Fun in city traffic..."

Why didn't you just pull the clutch handle in?.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[agallagh42]

"This is exactly what gasoline-electric hybrids like the Civic Hybrid and the Prius rely on when they shut off their engines."

Actually, no. The Prius and Civic Hybrid both use electric assist for their power steering and braking systems.

The steering is a simple electric motor that assists with steering force, and the brakes have an electric vacuum pump to maintain vacuum in the system.

The Prius actually uses a "brake-by-wire" system (with hydraulic backup), so the computer controls the braking pressure that gets applied. It does this because the regenerative braking system causes the brakes to be twitchy, so the computer has to make adjustments to smooth it out.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[CakerX]

unless they were ment to fail...

muwahahahah

Renault, the same lovely company that made the engine for the delorean. From one POS to another.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[BasilBrush]

Manuals obviously start in neutral. But automatics normally refuse to start except in PARK.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[turpie]

OK then call it a Parking Brake, because its still not going to stop a vehicle in an emergency.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Koguma]

Having done insane things with both manual and automatic transmissions, here's what I've found:

Manual Transmission:

5th to Reverse is blocked as a safety feature, and the poster (somewhere above) is wrong that the gears will not mesh when switching to R going forward. I've switched from 1st to R while moving forward. You have to jam it in hard, otherwise the gears will grind, and you also get a nice clang for your efforts. This on a Daihatsu Terios (small SUV, no low gear).

Automatic Transmission:

1973 Bonneville. Brooklyn Bridge going 30mph. Playing with the automatic transmission, D1, D2, D, D1, D2, D1, D2, D1, D2, R ooops!!!! Surprisingly. Not much happend. The car clanged, and engine instantly shut off, the car died on the spot. Started up fine, drove home real slow. went to sleep.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

Every automatic I have ever driven started in neutral. Yes, I try these things out, usually because I am used to driving a manual transmission so I do weird things with automatics. Since buying the car (automatic) I am not as bad, like when I almost hit a tree moving my mom's car. I figured I should rev the engine a little in case the gas pedal was stuck, then give it a little gas and pull up on the clutch. The steering wheel was off-center, so I wound up almost hitting the tree in her front yard. Lesson learned... think before I do something stupid :-)

Because of that incident, I always make sure the wheels face directly forward now. Sometimes my wife will be an ass and leave it with the wheels off-center but the steering wheel centered (i.e. one full turn to one side) just to fuck with me. Grrrr.... anal-retentive obsessive-compulsive husband, careless and sloppy wife...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

OK -- this was discussed to death years ago when there were a batch of supposedly defective Audi's, I believe.

You have to understand that every single car on the planet is engineered such that the braking systems have the ability to dissipate more energy than the power plant can generate. Do I think the guy panicked? Yes. Do I believe for a second that he did not have the braking capacity to slow down and ultimately stop his car? No, I do not. And that's assuming, as someone else mentioned, that he could not shift into neutral...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

I have seen several vehicles like that. Since the clutch has to be in anyway, what does the gear matter? I am just happy I do not have one of those stupid shift lights. I have driven two Jeeps and both of them had those stupid things.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Spangston]

Actually, the proper term is "emergency brake", as some "handbrakes" (your term, which is actually North American "slang", thank you very much, you British Person) are foot-operated here on a few cars. I've even read Top Gear and BMW Car, which both use either term, though "e-brake" is proper.

In addition, the steering lock won't operate until the key is retracted from the steering column switch. It is a physical mechanism, not electronic.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[surprise_audit]

Reminds me of something I heard in a bike shop in London about 20 years ago. I'm not sure what preceeded it, but the guy behind the counter was saying, "and in Japan, they won't let you buy a bike without laying it on the floor and watching you pick it up again." Sounded fairly sensible really.

I've had a few occasions when I've dropped a bike on ice or slick roads. Let me tell you, the adrenalin rush you get trying to pick up with traffic whizzing past really helps... :)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

First, just a few months ago I had my '98 Honda Accord stall going 40mph and was able to slow down from an busy street and make a 90 degree turn onto a side street... and stop. Now my car is not a heavy weight but it isn't a compact car. I had absolutely no problem controlling and stopping it. The brake booster probably had residual vacuum.

Now years ago I had a master cylinder fail... stopping a car with only half of the braking power (one front disc, one rear drum), now that was difficult.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Koguma]

An ignition usually has four settings:
1) Lock: This locks the steering and lets you remove the key

INCORRECT. I'm curious what you drive. What I drive, only locks the steering column, upon the PHYSICAL ACT of REMOVING THE KEY. In fact, you can feel & hear it. Once the key door-guard comes down, there's a "clang" and the steering column locks.

You can safely turn the key from "on" to "accessory" if you need to stop the engine while driving. Normally, turning the key further into the "lock" position requires extra effort, such as pushing a button.

Ok, on OLD cars, turning the key to "accessory" means turning the key the "other way" past "off". Thereby according to you, the steering column would already be locked... then unlocked!
On NEW cars, you're correct, except for the column lock.

Unless of course, different manufactureres do it differently. Hence, a test-drive would be quite beneficial before you make that I'Robot death-on-four-wheels purchase.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, Dave. I can't let you do that.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[kl76]

Not just in France...there used to be a definition of horsepower in Britain (originated by the RAC I believe) where 1 hp was considered to be equivalent to 100cc of engine capacity. By this definition, the 2CV had about 6.5hp (652cc engine IIRC)...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

I had an '89 pontiac GP with a failing ECM that had to be rebooted from time to time. Even while doing 75MPH down the freeway. The ECM would freeze and all engine functions would cease, and the car would stall. The quick fix was, push the leaver from D to N then switch the key to the off position, and then back to on. Since the car was already cruising at 60+MPH it would start itself the second I pulled the leaver back to D and run for a few more hours. But most of the time I would start it in N just to see if the reboot worked, sometimes I had to do it more than once at a time.
And there was no way to lock the steering wheel w/o putting it in Park. There is some mechanincal linkage between the ignition switch and the gear handle that prevents it from doing that.
I would bet many other cars are the same way.
Try it, I would bet your car is similar.
And the ones that have a button, are most likely manual transmission as there is no way to mechanically link the two.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Skynyrd]

If you're on the freeway, you shouln't need to steer much (which you *can* do with no engine power, it's just difficult) and you'll have one or two stabs left on the brakes.

You can kill it, then shift to neutral, and fire it back up.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ultranova]

Except when the engine isn't running :).

Obviously, it makes more sense to use the combustion engines vacuum effect when it's running, but my post was referring to having to start the engine up (in a hybrid car) just to create a vacuum, which seems pretty wastefull to me.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[timts]

I just dont believe the story, I think he must have done something wrong and refuse to admit it.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drew]

running at redline will overheat your engine in rather short order (much faster at standstill obviously because you wont be taking any air into the engine to cool it off) but your engine won't immediately rev to the point where you will lose pistons or cause other irrepairable damage.

in this particular case, i would imagine the amount of time required to bring the car under control and turn it off with the transmission in neutral would not be long enough to cause lasting damage to the engine.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[tompaulco]

Interesting. In my car, to get it into reverse, you have to put it in 5th first. Then you have to pull up on a collar on the shifter stalk while pulling the stalk down into reverse.
Also, my model didn't have power steering until 1994. It does have power brakes, though. The rear brakes are axle mounted about 18 inches in from the wheels.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[mink]

A smart person instead of acting like there is no solution but death, might turn the key to the "unlock but dont start" position upon discovering the wheel is locked.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[rssrss]

BMW 7 series logic is run by Win CE. You Would be on a lot of Trouble.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

I drive a Mitsubishi 3000GT, and it's virtually impossible to steer at all without the power steering.

This sounds like a dangerous car! Just think about what can go wrong when driving on the highway. You could run out of fuel, or the distributor cap could fail, or the computer could screw up and shut down the fuel injection. And what happens next? ... your engine stops! And with that, your power steering and braking are gone!

It sounds like certain death. Sure, maybe it hasn't happened yet, but your car WILL stall some time in the future. It's inevitable.

I would bring this car to the dealer IMMEDIATELY and have them address this problem. Your car is NOT supposed to be deadly if a simple failure occurs while driving on the highway. Something is VERY wrong. Get it addressed for your wife and the other people on the road.

Sadly, my next door neighbor has a 3000GT. Hopefully he'll get rid of it soon.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

Interesting. In my car, to get it into reverse, you have to put it in 5th first. Then you have to pull up on a collar on the shifter stalk while pulling the stalk down into reverse.

This is not all that uncommon in older vehicles. It actually makes sense as a safety feature if you understand how the inside of a manual transmission works.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[racermd]

Quick point - My General Motors truck (yes, I'm from the U.S.) starts in either Park or Neutral.

In addition, the steering columns on most, if not all, of GM's newer trucks don't lock.

Both of these behaviors have occured in my 2001 Silverado 1500, which I traded-up in July for a new-for-2004 Yukon XL.

The reasons for the steering column not locking isn't entirely clear, but I imagine it has to do with a combination of cost-savings (fewer parts to put into the vehicle) and the addition of other security measures that reduce/eliminate the need for it, such as RFID keys for the ignition matched to the vehicle and a simple contents-theft alarm (horn goes off and lights flash if the door is unlocked and opened without the key or the keyless remote). However, the transmission CANNOT be shifted out of Park unless both of the following two conditions are met: the ignition is in the "ACC" or "RUN" position (proper RFID key isn't needed, as the engine need not be running) and the brake pedal is pressed. This is a designed safety feature.

As far as the starting in neutral or park, every vehicle I've driven with an automatic transmission operated this way - from an '88 Toyota Camry, a '90 Chevrolet Cavalier, a '99 Ford Ranger, the '01 Silverado, and the '04 Yukon. And these are only the vehicles I've owned. Others owned by my family at one point or another - a '92 Toyota Tercel, an '82 Pontiac Phoenix, a '97 Toyota Camry, a '96 Jeep Cherokee, a '00 Dodge Caravan, and a pair of '02 Saturn SCs. Every one of these are designed to start in either Park or Neutral, again, as a safety feature. Imagine this scenario:

You're driving at 60 MPH on the highway, and your engine stops, whatever the reason might be. You're still travelling at 60 MPH down the highway, although you would be slowing down. Remember, a vehicle with an automatic transmission is designed to allow you to coast in gear under reduced- or no-power situations (such as this). If you were only able to restart your engine with the transmission in "Park", you'd need to come to a complete stop to safely shift, then you would be able to restart your vehicle. With the ability to restart your car in "Neutral", however, you'd be able to get the engine started again while moving and possibly prevent any number of potential problems that a stopped vehicle on the highway might cause.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Politburo]

However, the transmission CANNOT be shifted out of Park unless both of the following two conditions are met: the ignition is in the "ACC" or "RUN" position (proper RFID key isn't needed, as the engine need not be running) and the brake pedal is pressed. This is a designed safety feature

There is always a manual override to this feature. If you look around the gearshift there is generally a slot where you can stick your key or a screwdriver to disengage the lock. It may be cleverly hidden behind a cover. My 97 Pontiac recently lost power (alternator) and the manual override had to be used to get the car out of park as the interlock between the key/brake pedal/transmission is electric.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

This sort of thing hapened to a friend of mine a couple of years ago. I was in the back of the car (a brand new BWM) while she drove me and a few friends around town when after stopping on a red light the engine reved up to full throttle. She kept the brakes on so it wouldn't take speed and cut the ignition. A good choice in that case. Later we took the car to a BWM garage nearby and they checked the car and found nothing wrong with it.
This happened in Germany, in BMW's own hometown and the car's owner (my friend's father) worked for BMW... Weird.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Loosing power steering at high speeds will not even be noticable. Cars have Power ASSISTED Steering. At high speed the boost is minimal.
2. The breaks will work with the engine off. It just requires more effort. Plus the vacuum accumulator holds enough for sveral press with the engine off. (Try it)
3. Do you think a car company want the law suit "I crash becuase the engine stalled?

4. 60 minutes (??) did a report on the Audi "problem back in the day. The found that the breaks will stop the car even with the gas pedal to the floor (I would not try it)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[ethanms]

Although I know this isn't your point... A manual tranmission car could not have accelerated to 120 on it's own... so it's moot... push the clutch in, the engine will just rev out of control, probably hitting a rev limiter before redline, and you'll slow down on your own...

My Saturn will physically not let me shift into gears that would result in radical engine overspeed... you have to be going slower then 10mph, or at cycle 3-2-1 to get into 1st if you're moving. And doing 75 I was not able to put the shifter into 2nd gear position either...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[atallah]

Nah... There is nothing "emergency" about it.
"Parking brake" is a much better term than either "hand brake" or "emergency brake".

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[hob42]

Little late to the party, but I thought I'd make a note here.

I've accidently left my '91 Aerostar in drive when turning it off before, and it let me lock the column and take the keys out without a complaint. However, it's also one of those two-handed systems - have to push a button with the left hand while turning the cylinder to lock with the right hand - so it's not likely you'll lock the column if you don't mean to. Also, the accessory position is *past* lock, with just "off" between run and lock which definately kills power-assist.

More troubling, though, is that I did the same thing in the past with my '86 Park Avenue and '94 Cutlass (yes, it's a bad habit of mine), and they didn't have the inconvenient two-handed feature. I obviously never tried it, but I would assume from this experience you could lock the steering wheel while in motion on these cars and many others. The worst part is, it won't lock until you start turning the wheel, and then it won't let you straighten it out.

My fiance's family used to tell their kids that if they were riding in a car and the driver passed out, take the keys out of the ignition because an out of control stopping car is better than an out of control speeding car. I had to correct her and teach our kids to turn it off and then try to control it, but *don't* try to take the keys out...

-jupo

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[|<amikaze]

Being a manual, you would not have had to crank the engine again. Simply by leaving it in gear would keep turning the engine over much faster than the starter ever could.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[fitzsimj]

Only in furrin' cars, in my experience.

US-built cars (perhaps not late-models, but definitely my 1990's Jeep) use:
Accessory-Lock-On-Start

So you'd have to pass Lock to get it into the Accessory position. And you can't get a typical automatic into Lock until you have the transmission in Park...

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

and you couldn't just use the clutch... why?

-j

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

My old 1983 Honda Accord would let me do that, and for a while, I had to. It was starting to have electrical difficulties, so many a time I'd turn it off while in 5th and driving down the freeway, and then turn it back on again. Scared the hell out of the friends that would ride with me ;)

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a 99 ford contour that was like that, but you didn't have to put it into 5th first. I loved it, because the odds of me accidently pulling up and shifting into reverse were far less than the odds of me accidently shifting into reverse when I was meaning to downshift into 3rd from 5th.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[shyster]

Power steering doesn't really make that much of a difference at cruising speeds. And you're not likely to be pulling sharp turns at 50 mph...if you are, then you need to reevaluate your driving habits. Now, in a parking lot at -5mph, that's where power steering pays off.

OTOH, power braking does significantly reduce the effort required at all speeds.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[The Snowman]

Being a manual, you would not have had to crank the engine again. Simply by leaving it in gear would keep turning the engine over much faster than the starter ever could.

Yeah, but there is a clutch switch on the starter. Keeping it in gear will turn the engine, but I have to disengage the engine from the transmission for the ignition to start. Spinning or not, if the ignition system turns off, the engine will stop firing. This will work when popping the clutch to start if the starter motor dies, but that is a different issue entirely.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Shanep]

All you lose is the booster (usually provided by engine intake vacuum, hence only works with engine running)

Isn't it manifold pressure?

I was of the belief that with manifold pressure high after the engine has been running, you can still get braking assistance with the engine off, but it fades as you bleed that pressure away (with brake usage). Each subsequent application of the brake becoming less effective.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Ribald]

My apologies--I'm used to dealing with my less mechanically-inclined friends. I would be interested in the vehicle type, as I've not heard of such a system. Then again, my power steering pump drives my brake assist, so I'm sure it's possible.

Electric fans are great for smaller engines. Most of these are mounted transversely these days, so that's about the only kind of fan available. Large engines in trucks, though, are a bit harder to fit with an electric fan. Towing vehicles, especially. I've known people to try using the largest available as replacements, and most have experienced overheating. For sheer airflow, it's hard to beat a large engine-driven (through a clutch) fan.

--Ribald

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[drinkypoo]

Towing is the best time to have an electric fan, because you frequently are turning low RPMs, and a clutch fan won't be pushing as much air as an electric type. A lot of people make the mistake of putting the biggest fan they can on, which usually doesn't fit the radiator very well - it's usually better to use multiple smaller fans, perhaps as many as four of them for very large radiators. The primary problem with using an electric fan is that it's hard to get full radiator coverage. My 240SX came with a clutch fan, but I installed a 15" electric which definitely does a good job. However, I'm going to be putting on a different radiator soon, one I pulled from an infiniti, which has dual electrics that completely cover the radiator.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Ribald]

Diesel engines are pretty constantly turning low RPMs, and the fan systems are designed for that. I have yet to see a system of electric fans that will work as well as the one large belt-driven fan mounted on my truck. The thing sounds more like a propeller.

Electrics are great for cars and smaller trucks, but when you really start up the displacement ladder...

--Ribald

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Anonymous Coward]

All cars (in the US at least) have to allow the steering and braking to control the car in the event of an engine stall, albeit with increased effort.

Everything else would be very stupid, because there is always the possibility that you run out of gas while driving. Also towing away a car would be impossible if steering or braking would not work without the motor running.

Re:Never attempt to turn off the ignition.

[Hognoxious]

many people are sooo used to power steering that they don't know what it's like to be working with 'armstrong steering' (as some people refer to manual)..

You're totally correct - you don'tknow what you've got till it's gone. I rented a van once and I didn't realise the power steering had gone until I was going through some mountains (think it was near Canyonlands national park, or chequerboard mesa). Taking some of those hairpins was pretty hairy, because if I went slow enough for the curve, the steering was really heavy.

I also pulled over once to take a photo (somewhere in the Sierra Nevada) and stupidly turned the engine off before putting it P (a little Pontiac this time, not the van), the thing started rolling and it took a heck of a lot of leg power to stop it. I'm not a ten stone weakling, either.

"Nothing to see here, move along"

[FooAtWFU]

Maybe they could do something similar with the Slashdot effect- clear the servers ahead of time so there's not that nasty burning wreck effect... :)

all your brakes

[havaloc]

In A.D. 2004
Trouble was beginning.
Driver: What happen?
Car: How are you gentlemen !!
Car: All your brakes belong to us.
Car: You are on the way to destruction.
Driver: What you say !!
Car: You have no chance to slow down make your time.
Car: HA HA HA
Driver: Take off every 'cell phone'
Driver: Move cars off road.
Driver: For great justice.

Re:all your brakes

[mcmonkey]

In 2014, the car drives you.

Re:all your brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

hah! I've been waiting for this to rear its ugly head again :-)

Re:all your brakes

[untaken_name]

OMFG. How could you misquote the single most widespread line of this horrible game?

It should be:
Car: All your brakes are belong to us.

Sheesh.

Re:all your brakes

[MustardMan]

my car doesn't have cruise control, you insensitive clod!

who wants to do the next overdone /. joke?

Re:all your brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

I see that you've read the translated article.

Actually, I couldn't understand it after the first couple of paragraphs since the article is all over the place.

First it says that the car stopped and disappeared, quickly. Perhaps it utilized the flux-capacitor and reached 88mph - I don't know.

It then describes a drug bust involving 200 hits of speed at the airport.

Like I said, I couldn't follow the article.

Re:all your brakes

[acceleriter]

Actually, it should be "All your brake are belong to us." Brake should be singular.

Re:all your brakes

[untaken_name]

I stand corrected. :)

Re:all your brakes

[RobertB-DC]

hah! I've been waiting for this to rear its ugly head again :-)

I'm proud to be the owner of a rare 2004 +5 mod on an "All Your Base" riff. This guy didn't even do all the lines, and his mistranslation of the title line (as noted in another thread, it should be "All your brake are belong to us") is jarring! It's a shame, he had some great material to work with.

Here's mine, from May: Safe "Engineered" Fugu, Sans Gene Manipulation

Re:all your brakes

[acceleriter]

I never thought I'd see the day I'd be pedantic about something like that :).

Re:all your brakes

[untaken_name]

ehehehe. I never thought I'd see Zero Wing again....and then that damn internet craze hit....
My phone still says 'Main screen turn on.' when it powers up, though.

The Raven Translation

[stecoop]

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary

It was worse than a nightmare: A normal route on the motorway

Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore-

To be stopped suddenly will the car ever faster, is no more

While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping

Well one hour long hunted a French driver with speed 200 over the runway, in the Slalom around the other cars

As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door

Debt is to have defective electronics, the manufacturer examines the incident

"'T is some visitor," I muttered, "tapping at my chamber door-
Only this and nothing more."

The Tempomat of its Renault Vel Satis was defective -
A cause for the Horrortrip

Ah, distinctly I remember it was in the bleak December;

The pressestelle of the manufacturer Renault confirmed the incident;
which occurred on Sunday

And each separate dying ember wrought its ghost upon the floor ...
- nevermore - nevermore

Re:The Raven Translation

[arodland]

This has nothing even resembling meter, and any rhymes you added in the right places are purely accidental.

Re:The Raven Translation

[Marxist Hacker 42]

I just like that one translation- Horrortrip caused by a defective Tempomat.....

good thing

[degraeve]

It's a good thing he was on the freeway.

Re:good thing

[dtfinch]

And he even managed not to exceed the speed limit.

Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[abrotman]

But what about .. uhm .. say Neutral .. ? or don't european cars have that?

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[DeDmeTe]

Um.. ya, all the swiss cars have it!

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Actually most european cars are stick shift. Pop the clutch. Sure you will redline the engine, but at this point throwing a rod seems less dangerous than a high-speed collision.

Besides, your warrently doesn't cover "embedding oneself into concrete."

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[stienman]

But what about .. uhm .. say Neutral .. ? or don't european cars have that?

No, Europeans don't believe in neutral. It's either forward or backward, but never neutral!

Don't ask which gears the American's don't believe in...

We need a "If nations were tansmissions..." page. We;ve got automatic, manual, continuously variable, single speed, bicycle derailleur, hydraulic, no transmission...

-Adam

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[michael path]

It's a French car. It just surrenders.

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[twoflower]

But what about .. uhm .. say Neutral .. ? or don't european cars have that?

Only Swiss cars.

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, Europeans don't believe in neutral. It's either forward or backward, but never neutral!

True in all parts of Europe except Switzerland.

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[TummyX]

No, Europeans don't believe in neutral


What about the Swiss?


That guy: Switzerland is small and neutral! We're more like Germany: ambitious and misunderstood.
Amy: Look, everyone wants to be like Germany, but do we really have the pure strength of will?

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[El]

But what about .. uhm .. say Neutral .. ? or don't european cars have that?

Only in Switzerland.

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[Trailer Trash]

But what about .. uhm .. say Neutral .. ? or don't european cars have that?

Only in Switzerland...

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[fucksl4shd0t]

Um, technically, "popping the clutch" is when you've got the clutch disengaged (pedal down) and you slide your foot of the pedal. The clutch engages suddenly, and the pedal "pops" up.

/pedantic off

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[dildatron]

Yes the best thing to do would be to press the clutch pedal in. The car more than likely has a rev limiter which may event prevent major engine damage. Once you came to a stop you could open the hood and start pulling plug wires to get the engine to stop.

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[Bingo Foo]

But when Swiss cars are in neutral, they still profit from the other cars both in forward and reverse.

Re:Maybe I'm an idiot ...

[goodydot]

And ALL of those types can be ruined by a bad BUSHing.

Hey!

[darkmeridian]

Shouldn't he have shifted the car into Neutral? Or then slowly applied the handbrakes?

An hour? That's bad driving.

But we do put a lot of trust on cruise control. On really wet surfaces, the wheel will be spun really fast because it slips and the car is trying to speed itself up. Once it grips, the car goes flying.

But we derive a huge benefit from the trust we have in technology. Elevators fall sometimes, but we love not walking, don't we? This is just something we have to deal with, because otherwise, our society will get stuck.

Re:Hey!

[Anonymous Coward]

Elevators cannot fall, it's a great myth.

Actually, they have a pretty neat security mechanism. Use google if you don't believe me.

Re:Hey!

[drinkypoo]

Of course most modern cars are offered with traction control, at least as an option, which uses the ABS to slow down the slipping wheel in order to stop things like that from happening. You're never supposed to use cruise control except on the freeway with no other cars immediately around you, so this is really a non-problem to begin with. Most cruise control systems shut off below a certain speed, as well, like about 35 mph.

Re:Hey!

[Rasta Prefect]

Or then slowly applied the handbrakes?

Engaging the handbrake will not stop the car. You can drive with it on, and it will heat the brakepads until they're useless. Then you have no brakes at all when something pulls in front of you.

Re:Hey!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever heard of an actual elevator fall? That's right, you've only seen some in the movies.

Re:Hey!

[mindstrm]

Elevators have emergency breaks... in fact, the passenger elevator came into existence when the automatic emergency brakes were invented.. the elevator existed for years and years before that.

Re:Hey!

[slartibart]

But we do put a lot of trust on cruise control. On really wet surfaces, the wheel will be spun really fast because it slips and the car is trying to speed itself up. Once it grips, the car goes flying.

Huh? How do you think a speedometer works? Radar?? The car only knows its speed from the speed of rotation of the tires. So when the tires slip with cruise control on, the wheels keep spinning at the same speed, while the car slows down. The cruise control doesn't know the car is slowing down, so it does not try to gun the engine while the tires are slipping.

When traction is regained, the speed of the wheels suddenly drops, and the cruise control sees this as a sudden drop in speed, and tries to speed up the car back to cruising speed (as it should).

Re:Hey!

[Floody]

Elevators CAN fall, if enough damage is incurred. Something on the order of a 767 fusilage slamming into a building at 500 knots might do the trick.
Fortunately, that never happens!

Re:Hey!

[Billy the Mountain]

I used Google and I still don't believe you:

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/elevator.as p

BTM

Re:Hey!

[MindStalker]

But we do put a lot of trust on cruise control. On really wet surfaces, the wheel will be spun really fast because it slips and the car is trying to speed itself up. Once it grips, the car goes flying.

True, but your explanation is wrong, remember a car measures its speed based on how fast the wheel is spinning, not actual movement of the vehicle. So its not gonna spin the wheels faster that the cruise speed. Yes I guess depending upon differential you could have the whole, "one wheel spinning and the other wheel just sitting there" problem. But obviously when hydropanning you should ease off gas, and the cruise control won't. I wonder if newer cruise controls know to let off the gas when they detect slippage??

Re:Hey!

[maxume]

This isn't true. The part where people get confused is that the cruise control system gets its information about your current speed from the drivetrain. This means that the wheels will not be 'spun really fast because it slips'. In the case that the car did hit an incredibly slippery surface, the cruise system might cause the wheels to spin a little bit, but not anymore than someone who simply kept thier foot on the accelerator. Most accidents in slippery conditions are caused by three things; excessive speed, following too close, and over application of braking. Speed is usually the smallest of those problems...

Re:Hey!

[MindStalker]

I bet if you put a hundred tons in one at once it would overweigh the counter and fall.. some. :)

Re:Hey!

[ThogScully]

Actually, most modern cars don't have traction control and ABS is only starting to become popular enough where you can get it in most modern cars.

And good traction control systems do not use brakes. Good traction control systems use limited slip differentials, mechanically or electronically controlled, but differentials nonetheless to make sure the engine's power goes to the wheels that grip.

Cheap traction control systems use ABS because they are for people who aren't driving anyway and think brakes are the best way to avoid any accidents. Sometimes brakes are a dangerous way to recover a car in limited traction.
-N

Re:Hey!

[richardellisjr]

I've been in an elevator that has fallen 2 to 3 stories. Not fatal, but very very scary when it happens. I believe elevators will never fall farther than that, but I still prefer they don't fall at all. P.S. It still scares the bejezzus out of me everytime an elevator doesn't work correctly (slips or lunges)

Re:Hey!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh god, an urban legends URL just to prove your point ? :-)

Lifts have bimetals atached to them. When the lift falls, these metals heat and expand so that they block the elevator.

Is allready used for a loooooooong time.

It is really a myth.

Re:Hey!

[dthree]

"But we do put a lot of trust on cruise control. On really wet surfaces, the wheel will be spun really fast because it slips and the car is trying to speed itself up. Once it grips, the car goes flying."

This makes no sense. If the wheels are spinning, the cruise control will think the car IS going faster and will slow it down. As far as the cruise knows, the speed of the wheels IS the speed of the car.

Re:Hey!

[the economist troll]

Um, yes. Elevators malfunction and fall all the time. Just two months ago, an office worker taking a service elevator in midtown Manhattan was killed when the elevator suddenly dropped to the basement. Google News turns up nothing, but I'm sure you could find it if you looked hard enough.

Re:Hey!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you choose to troll, you could at least TRY to be entertaining or witty?

Because lame trollers really suck ass.

Re:Hey!

[drinkypoo]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. While it's true that traction control systems are typically not standard equipment, most cars which are not baseline commuter vehicles (the majority of vehicles sold are econoboxes, of course) offer it as an optional package.

Only one kind of limited slip provides traction control, and that's a computer-controlled one, like the variable center differential in subarus and in audis/vws with quattro/4motion (Same exact thing.) Otherwise they simply provide limited slip control as per their name. These are NOT the same thing. The ONLY way to gain full traction control is to modulate the throttle (easiest on throttle drive-by-wire systems since you have butterfly control) and to use ABS to slow the slipping wheel. A limited slip does a decent job of this but part of traction control's job is to keep the car tracking in your chosen direction as demonstrated by the steering wheel position.

In addition, a limited slip won't help your non-driven wheels.

Some cars (at least one contemporary porsche, in fact, though I Forget which) use an open differential with ABS in order to achieve limited slip.

Some of the best traction control systems in the world are those in the Corvette and in Subarus - both vehicles have limited slip, and in the case of high-end Subarus they have limited slips front, center, and rear, but they still use ABS to perform traction control.

Re:Hey!

[Pelops]

Well Neutral is only useful in automatic shift. European cars mostly use the manual shift. Plus, the problem was that the electronic system was blocking everything.
Using the handbrake at speed of 200Km/h isn't going to be very useful.

Re:Hey!

[fucksl4shd0t]

"traction control" is nebulous.

Generally when someone's talking about traction control using ABS, they're referring to a fancy system that's designed for high-speed maneuvarability, like in a slalom or something, and actually has *nothing* to do with the road surface.

of course, the GP isn't aware of that, poor guy.

Just being pedantic, because generally when people argue about what traction control does, they're all right, it's just that "traction control" is such a nebulous phrase as to be virtually meaningless.

Re:Hey!

[fucksl4shd0t]

Elevators have emergency breaks...

Elevator: Quick, it's an emergency, BREAK! *crash*

Re:Hey!

[fucksl4shd0t]

So when the tires slip with cruise control on, the wheels keep spinning at the same speed, while the car slows down.

Depends on the cruise control system. Until recently, cruise control worked off engine vacuum, in which case engine vacuum would decrease when the wheels slipped (engine breaks loose, spins faster) and the cruise control would actually close the throttle to correct.

The beauty of using engine vacuum to do it meant that you didn't have to care about road surface, slope, gear, or anything. The disadvantage was that the system took awhile to compensate for changes.

Re:Hey!

[ThogScully]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

Only one kind of limited slip provides traction control

ABS provides traction when braking and limited slip diffs provide traction when going. Any kind of limited slip is going to improve traction or else it wouldn't be a diff at all. Even an open diff improves traction above a solid axle. Electronic or not makes no difference, except in how it helps traction.

In addition, a limited slip won't help your non-driven wheels.

And neither will ABS, unless you're under hard braking and they are locking up. They are just holding up the rear of the car and if they lose traction (aside from hard braking), they are going sideways... no traction control will fix that in a non-powered wheel...

I'm much more aware of how these systems work and it seems you need to brush up. ABS is braking traction control and limited slip differentials are acceleration traction control. Any good system makes use of the diffs... some may use ABS too, but any system based solely on that is likely a pretty bad and cheap system unless all you ever do is brake.
-N

Re:Hey!

[drinkypoo]

In addition, a limited slip won't help your non-driven wheels.

And neither will ABS, unless you're under hard braking and they are locking up.

Except that an ABS system can add braking force to individual wheels. Braking on the more forward real wheel, but not enough to lock the wheel, will result in the car being pulled back into line. A limited slip doesn't stop your wheels from spinning, it stops one wheel from spinning. Full traction control is a lot more than just using a limited slip.

I'm much more aware of how these systems work and it seems you need to brush up. ABS is braking traction control and limited slip differentials are acceleration traction control. Any good system makes use of the diffs... some may use ABS too, but any system based solely on that is likely a pretty bad and cheap system unless all you ever do is brake.

Limited slips provide traction control when decelerating due to engine braking, too, unless they're a 1-way limited slip, but that's not important right now. The fact is that you can use ABS even with an open differential to implement traction control during acceleration, simply by increasing load on a slipping wheel. The differential is involved, but it doesn't even have to be limited slip. A non-electronic limited slip differential does the brute work of traction control, while the ABS system performs refinement (along with the ECU controlling fuel and timing in the bargain.)

Emergency Brakes

[N8F8]

Don't know about French cars, but all card sold in the US have Emergency Brakes that are mechanical brakes. You pull the handle and a cable activates the brakes.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[TheSHAD0W]

The emergency brake may help to slow or stop a vehicle if the normal braking system goes out, but it can't fight the force of the engine -- especially if the cruise control makes the engine rev higher when the vehicle slows down.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Oddly_Drac]

"Don't know about French cars, but all card sold in the US have Emergency Brakes that are mechanical brakes. You pull the handle and a cable activates the brakes."

They're called 'parking brakes' on the continent, because they tend to lock the back wheels solid if you pull them on in an emergency. Meaning we use them for parking rather than skating around in doughnuts on busy urban streets.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

French cars don't have that; with french cars you pull the handle and a pair of white flags pop up.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[greechneb]

Emergency brakes no longer exist. They are called parking brakes now, because they aren't designed to resist the torque of the engine, they just have enough power to hold the car from rolling, and even then, cars with manual transmissions are recommended to be put in either reverse or first gear to give additional resistance to keep from rolling.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[plilja]

The "emergency brake" is really just a parking break or "hill holding break" (designed to hold a car on a hill while engaging a manual transmission). Generally, enough force cannot be applied by the "emrgency brakes" to slow down a rapidly moving car without significant stopping distance. The "emergency break" also has the added disadvantage of ususally being attached to only two wheel breaks. Because of this, when applied at higher speeds, they tend to spin the car (usful for sheading speed only if you are an expert and have the road clearence - also usefull for "cool bootlegger moves").

Re:Emergency Brakes

[jridley]

Ever try to stop a car with them? Ain't gonna happen. They're rear wheel only, and even if you do manage to put them on hard (requires a LOT of force), you'll just lose control of the vehicle.

Once, when I was about eight years old, I was in the car with my grandma when the brakes went out. She didn't know what to do. I said "shift down" (automatic transmission) - she did, and we coasted to a stop shortly thereafter.

It's amazing to me that this guy had the presence of mind to call on a phone, but for an HOUR didn't think of downshifting.

Probably he, like most other drivers, is only concerned about going FASTER, not slower.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it can! Brakes are WAY more powerful than engines. A small car like that Renault has the equivalent of 600 or 700 hp in the brakes. If you read the story, that's how the driver eventually stopped the car -- he hit the brakes!

Re:Emergency Brakes

[LordNimon]

Yes, it can! Brakes are WAY more powerful than engines.

I don't think that's true at all. I've heard countless stories of stupid people who drive their car with the parking brake on, and all they notice is that the car is a "little sluggish". In my experience, the engine is WAY more powerful than the brakes.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[swordboy]

A couple of things to consider:

- The e-brake / parking brake is usually installed on the rear wheels which, due to the pesky laws of physics, only account for about 10 - 20 percent of braking power, depending on the car's configuration.

- At high speeds, it is very possible to over power the brakes. Mind you, auto manufacturers are very careful about sizing the brakes at a much larger power capacity than the engine. This is a no-brainer. However, it is possible to overwhelm the brake materials at very high speeds, causing the braking power to deteriorate. For example, if you ride the brake at 120mph, you'll lose braking capacity. If you then try to stop the car completely, the engine might have more power than what exists in the braking system under its deteriorated state. I had a caliper stick once and it heated everything up so much that I lost braking power on that particular wheel. It wasn't fun.

So the e-brake would definitely not be a choice in this matter. It should be noted that manufacturers have dropped this term and replaced it with "parking brake" for legal and marketing reasons.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[armb]

You've got a chance of (slowly) stopping a car with the parking/emergency brake. Just not with the throttle jammed full on.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[virtualmyles]

actually... E-brakes are great for driving in the snow, or in rainy conditions because once pulled, they force the weght of thed front of the car to act as a weight and generally force the vehicle to slide back in to a straight line due to forward momentum. but hell, i'm just a gardener, so what do i know?

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

It's amazing to me that this guy had the presence of mind to call on a phone, but for an HOUR didn't think of downshifting.

Probably he, like most other drivers, is only concerned about going FASTER, not slower.

Downshifting isn't going to do a damned thing if the shifter isn't connected physically to the gearbox, and is all under electronic control by a fuxxored control box.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[ILikeRed]

Emergency Brakes!?! Take off you hoser, those never work!

and as Homer would say:

No point in steering now.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[compwizrd]

i take it you've never seen someone do a burnout.

my car can _easily_ spin the back tires with the regular brake fully applied, let alone the parking brake(which is completely useless)

Re:Emergency Brakes

[anethema]

Downshifting wouldnt have worked in this case because the throttle was stuck WFO.

If the brakes go out, but you still have throttle control, sure, gear down.

If the throttle is stuff open, best thing to do is turn the key to the point juust off but not all the way off so your steering lock engages. Then you wont have power steering but you will have a couple presses of the brakes. Hit the brakes and dont let go..you'll stop.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Waffle Iron]

Emergency brakes suck. On some cars the emergency brakes have a hard time keeping the car stationary on a gentle incline.

The real brakes, OTOH, are much more powerful than the engine. That's why they can stop a car from a given speed in a fraction of the distance that it takes the same car to accelerate to that speed.

The key in this case would be to stomp on the real brakes and stop the car as quickly as possible. If the guy tried to ride on the brakes to keep the car going slow, they would quickly overheat, and he would lose them. (Of course it would have been better still to pop the transmission into neutral.)

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Big Nemo '60]

Amusing detail: accordingly to the description from the Renault site (link in the story), the Vel Satis has *automatic* (i.e. computer controlled) parking brakes...

I wouldn't buy one even if I could afford it (and I can't). :-P

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

A small car like that Renault has the equivalent of 600 or 700 hp in the brakes.

Yepp. In the front discs. The parking, or 'emergency' brakes as you call them, usually act on separate drums on the rear wheels only, even if you have rear disc brakes.

(A Vel Satis is not a compact by the way. :-)

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

my car can _easily_ spin the back tires with the regular brake fully applied

That's because of brake balance. Attempts at burnout on front-wheel-drive cars (like the Vel Satis in the story btw) are bound to fail. :-)

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Czernobog]

Perhaps because he was driving an executive class saloon and under certain circumstances he could blow his engine?
I know many people who would prefer to die than have their car damaged in any way.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

cars with manual transmissions are recommended to be put in either reverse or first gear to give additional resistance to keep from rolling.

Actually, my 2001 owner's manual says the exact opposite: leave the car in neutral, and apply the hand brake.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[filenabber]

Yeah - I'm suspicious of this whole thing. The article says "I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped". If I found myself barreling along at 120MPH the FIRST thing I would try is stomping on the brakes and I would have the brakes floored til I stopped or crashed. brian

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Fatchap]

The day I passed my driving test was the first day I had ever driven a car on my own. It was not long after I had got my 1 litre rust bucket over 100mph that I realised I had never tried a hand-brake turn.....

Driving down a quiet country lane I thought I would give this a go and so as I crested a hill I wrenched back on the handbrake, I was doing around 70mph.

It did stop the car, although I did end up with the front wheels in a ditch! Ah the halcon days of youth.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Wojski]

I actually was taught that leaving a manual transmission car in gear while parked could cause damage if someone happened to bump your car while parking causing it to lurch forward.

That said, I still use the parking brake along with putting my car into gear when parking, but I try to stay away from parking on the city streets.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[compwizrd]

I've seen burnouts done on front wheel drive cars :)

However, in this case, it was a lightened(over a thousand lbs of weight removed) Reliant K-Car, producing over 440hp(and torque to match). With the 2.5L 4-cylinder engine mated to a 3 speed automatic, it ran a quarter mile in 10.41 seconds at 132 mph.

Not your average grocery-getter. :)

Re:Emergency Brakes

[corngrower]

You may even have some power steering, if the engine is still rotating and the fan belt is turning. No spark or fuel is supplied, so the engine doesn't produce any power. In the Jeep that I used to own, when the power steering went out, you could barely turn the steering wheel. You literally would have to wrench the thing, and if you were as small person you probably wouldn't be able to steer at all.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[tenasius]

As my wife can tell you, there is no such thing as an Emergency Brake -- only make-black-smoke-come-out-of-the-back-of-the-car brakes. It won't stop you, just make your car smell like burnt rubber for a few years. Hell, she didn't know she had it on for 110 miles.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[doug]

I used to use 'em to slow down because they didn't turn on the break lights. I wasn't doing so to stop, just to drop 15 MPH when I saw a police car and wanted to get below the posted speed limit. I don't know how effective it was, but I never got any tickets using that techinque.

Sometimes I think it is a miracle that we survive our teenaged years.

- doug

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

"halcon" is not a word.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[leetdan]

Boy did I learn this one first-hand... My first car was an '87 Ford pickup, and I grew into the habit of using the parking brake to slow down and stop as I pulled in to a parking space. The first time I tried this with my '03 Kia however, I slammed into the parking stopper (and nearly the building past it). The parking brake in the new car is completely useless at speed, and isn't even enough to stop a loaded car from rolling down a steep driveway from a stop. I'd love to know what concerns the manufacturer had that outweighed the safety factor of a redundant braking system.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[chihowa]

Yeah. I had done that for a while, too.

Eventually, I rewired the brake pedal switch through a toggle switch on the dash so I could use the main brakes without turning the lights on. Great for killing all the lights at night and getting away from cops. That old pile was a mess with rewired everything!

Re:Emergency Brakes

[boa13]

One of the first times I drove on my own, some weeks after I got my driving license, I forgot to remove the parking brake. Let me tell you, I had no problem starting to drive (first gear, then second), but the car felt strange, like the engine was having trouble of some sort; then I understood, removed the brake, and felt very ashamed. Telling this story to several people in the following years, I discovered this is a common beginner's mistake. Lesson is: the parking brake is no match to your engine.

Some years before that, we were surprised, coming out of the Sunday mass, that our car was missing; cars were seldom stolen in the area we were (let's even say, never stolen). Well, we quickly found it, encased in a small (unhabited) building down the hill. Lesson is: when parking in a slope, do put some appropriate gear, the parking brake is not enough.

That said, if someone were to try to push your car, your engine would indeed be damaged, so do not put a gear when it is not needed.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummmmmm, maybe you should go to driving school...Retard.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[thpr]

The emergency brake may help to slow or stop a vehicle if the normal braking system goes out, but it can't fight the force of the engine.

Definitely true. After working to get a friend out of a deep rut in the snow, I put the parking brake on and got out of the car. She proceeded to get in and drive off with the parking brake STILL on. It was an absolute riot to the four of us watching as the back of the car (literally) bounced down the road. We couldn't catch her, as she was driving a good 20 to 30 miles an hour. Thankfully there was some snow to prevent too much skidding and damage to the tires. I still haven't had the courage to ask how long it took her to figure out what the problem was!

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Dravik]

The Emergency/Parking break when adjusted properly will stall your car if you try to begin driving forward with it engaged. There effect on a moving car will depend on if the car if front or rear wheel drive.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Dravik]

It was a paddle style shifter, he could only go up or down. The computer prevented him from down shifting because of an overrev limiter. His emergency brake was also electronic and he was not able to engage it. He could not turn the car off because it did not have the standard key ignition. It was turned on by the swipe of a magnetic key card.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[harborpirate]

They're called 'parking brakes' on the continent, because they tend to lock the back wheels solid if you pull them on in an emergency. Meaning we use them for parking rather than skating around in doughnuts on busy urban streets.


Clearly then, on the "continent", you are not using your e-brake to its full potential.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[jridley]

Yes, turning off the key is the best option. This guy didn't have that option.

What do you mean, downshifting wouldn't work because the throttle is stuck? Does for me. OK, some cars won't let you downshift if your engine is above a certain RPM (though some do). I have a word for that situation: Neutral. Sure, engine goes boom (or maybe not; most cruise controls WILL disengage if the engine redlines; depends on how f'd the cruise was). But in any case at least you're not ploughing into busses or bridges or something.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Dare nMc]

Let see, the average car accelerates to 100 MPH, in several minutes. Your average car de-accelerates from 100mph in several seconds.

Sounds like you need new brakes on the rear, possibly from doing burnouts ;)

true, your brakes are after the tranmission, and fade as they get hot, and your only overcomming the rear brakes, hence the reason you can burn out, cause you don't over come the front brakes.

that said, with the mechanical gain (espicaly of a auto at stall) will allow you to overcome a single brake, until it starts to fade badly.

so over time, the engine produces more power than the brakes can absorb. as far as discussion of Park brakes vs regular brakes, their the same on all cars (not all trucks) they just are not power assist, and are always (in the us??) just the rear brakes. theirfore once someone has defeated them, the front brakes do the majority of the stopping anyway, so most don't notice their out of adjustment... but in overdrive gear, the brakes will easilly defeat the engine on every street legal car, enough to slow and downshift...

Re:Emergency Brakes

[nbowman]

I dunno about your car, but my parking brake has some settings between full lock and off.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[fucksl4shd0t]

Yes, it can! Brakes are WAY more powerful than engines.

Your four-wheel brakes can usually overpower the engine, that is true.

However, the parking brake (incorrectly but commonly referred to as the emergency brake) only powers two wheels, and does not have power assist. It has mechanical advantage through leverage. So it's both harder to stop the car and easier to lock up the brakes. And in this application, using your brakes at all would be going up against the cruise control that's determined to keep your car at a specific speed.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

>Probably he, like most other drivers, is only
>concerned about going FASTER, not slower.

Or he watch too much american movies... Press the brake and press again the brake but never shiftdown.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Kombat]

That said, if someone were to try to push your car, your engine would indeed be damaged, so do not put a gear when it is not needed.

No, do put it in gear while parked, all the time. While it is true that if your car were to receive a forceful push, you'd damage the gear, the answer is to simply leave it in a gear that you could live without, in a pinch. I always leave my car in 3rd, while parked (yes, with the parking brake on, too). If someone rams me, I can still get home without a third gear (although if someone pushes your car hard enough to strip the gear, there will probably be substantial cosmetic damage as well. But at least you'll still be able to get home).

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Armando_Mcgillicutty]

I would think that a cop wouldn't care if your brake lights came or not when his radar said you were speeding...

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

He stopped the car by removing the "key" (a smart card). As for the brakes, they were ineffective because they were too hot.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

An article in french said the driver stopped the car by removing the key card (which turned off the engine). Brakes were ineffective because of the heat.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Oliver Defacszio]

I actually was taught that leaving a manual transmission car in gear while parked could cause damage if someone happened to bump your car while parking causing it to lurch forward.

That is correct. The sudden lurch puts a ton of strain on the gearbox gears. It can also hurt the CV shafts in a front-wheel drive car.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Bertie]

Don't they have some sort of roadworthiness test in the US (which is where I'm assuming you are)? If you tried that here (UK), and an inspector saw what you'd done, you simply wouldn't be allowed to put the car on the road.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[nosferatu1001]

but you are meant to do that to stop your car becoming an additional hazard if it gets pushed into the road

same as you should put your wheels towards the kerb, so if you get rearended (not that i ever complain...) it goes into the pavement rather than into the road

Re:Emergency Brakes

[chihowa]

Nope. There is a state inspection that covers emissions and safty (by which I mean: the vehicle is checked to be sure the suspension and steering are intact and that the lights work). Beyond that, not much else is checked. I've seen many un-roadworthy cars legally pass inspection.

From what I know, that switch is legal as long as the lights work when it is switched on, and you never actually switch them off. If you got caught driving without brake lights you'd get pulled over, but if you're evading law enforcement chances are you're not too concerned about a traffic violation.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

The Vel Satis also has the transmission "stick" in the center console that puts you into three modes:
1) tiptronic style (tap up/down or paddle shift)
2) regular automatic
3) neutral
4) reverse

The car will also have a rev limiter so putting it into neutral even if the gas was floored will not be a catastrophe.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

This is so not true of all cars! Swedish cars tend to have a fully independant SET of calipers on the rear brakes (yes one for each side) just for engagement by the HANDbrake. They can, and I have succesfully used them to stop the car. They are equivilant to applying just the rear brakes. You wont skid to the left or right as both sides have pads and calipers.
Im still waiting for the rest of the world to catch up with the Swedish safety. If he had a swedish car and hit a moose at 80mph he would be fine.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

But remember, you have minimal leverage available compared with the hydraulic calipers.

Re:Emergency Brakes

[jridley]

His emergency brake was also electronic

WHA??!! Is this really the case on this car? That's got to be illegal in many countries. The whole purpose of an emergency brake is to allow for some stopping power in ... an *emergency*. That's why they're fully mechanical, and on a completely separate path to the brake system than the normal hydraulic brakes (at least, for cars designed and bought by SANE people).

Having drive-by-wire "emergency" brakes is like having an emergency exit that you have to go through the normal exit to get to.

Neutral?

[Chuck Bucket]

I've thought about this, but couldn't he have jammed it in neutral? Or was that controlled by computer as well? How about the parking brake? There has to be some "cntl-alt-delete" equivanlent to 'override' a computer, otherwise it's just 2001: A Space Oddessy all over again!

Dave: Stop the car Hal!
Hal: I'm sorry, I can't do that Dave.

CZB*()#$@

Re:Neutral?

[Sebby]

Given the fact that the brakes didn't do anything (they should normally automaticlly kill the cruise), perhaps the same happened with the transmission control; assuming it wasn't manual of course.

Re:Neutral?

[Anonymous Coward]

Parking brake? Probably would end up having his car flip ten or twenty times at 120mph. Or best case scenario, the cable would just snap.

Looks great in movies though.

Re:Neutral?

[starm_]

Similar thing happended to my mother once. The gaz pedal got stuck. She could use the break to slow down a little but as soon as she stoped using them the car would accelerate back. Putting it on neutral only reved the engine _really_ high. After 30 minutes she tought about shutting down the engine. (normal car with key) It happened to me too with the same car but I just put my foot behind the pedal and pull. I guess I should have warned her that my car occasionaly did that. (old VW Jetta)

Re:Neutral?

[Green Salad]

That issue has been fixed in next year's model, which has many more electronic features. It no longer makes sense for us to support last year's model.

Re:Neutral?

[Chuck Bucket]

awesome reply! made me laugh.

PCBV*(

Re:Neutral?

[FlydinSlip]

Neutral is an English concept, and therefore not acknowledged by French engineers.

You crazy English knnnnighots..

Re:Neutral?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know i didn't RTFA, but there is the possibility that the cruise control problem wasn't electrical. Subaru recently had a recall for a problem where the cruise control cable could pop out of its track and jam the throttle open. Totally mechanical problem, same symptoms as the guy in this story (except for the electric key).

Re:Neutral?

[CharlieHedlin]

It may have reved the engine _really_ high, but it won't have been pushing the car. I would choose blowing my engine over death any day.

Re:Neutral?

[Anonymous Coward]

Electronic transmission. In this car, about everything is electronic.

Amen

[Intraloper]

Seems simple enough to just shift into neutral and let the engine blow. Unless I'm missing something.

Re:Amen

[plover]

Yeah, you're missing something. The unreported parts of this conversation:

You: Hello, police? Oh my god, my cruise control is stuck at full throttle! Help!
Police: Stay calm, sir. Can you shift to neutral?
You: No, and I can't shut it off! Help!
Police: We'll send officers to clear the road, sir. Remain calm, keep on the freeway.
You: Thanks, I'll call back if I need more help. [click]
You: YEEEEEEEHAAAAAWWWWW!!!!!!!! I'm goin' 120 MPH and the cops are clearing the road for me! How sweet is that?!?!?!

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

Engines have Rev Limiters that will stop the RPMs from going to a point of an Engine Blow.

The car would have gone into neutral. There is more to this story.

SP --- Doubter but can't get to the article.

Re:Amen

[armb]

Someone I know once had to drive across London with a gearbox that wouldn't come out of 3rd gear. Having a mechanical failure like that at the same time as the accelerator jam on does seem unlikely though - maybe the gearstick works though the same sort of electronic system as the throttle?
(I've had an throttle jam partly open - the car was drivable, but you had to cut the ignition fast when stopped, since it idled at 6000rpm and climbing.)

Re:Amen

[nester]

cars these days all have rev limiters.

Re:Amen

[outsider007]

Police: Stay calm, sir. We'll send someone out there to shoot out your tires.

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems simple enough to just shift into neutral and let the engine blow. Unless I'm missing something.

Or, just try the brakes.

From The Fine Article: ' "I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said.'

You have to wonder why id didn't try that _first_ instead of last.

Re:Amen

[bhtooefr]

We had a truck with a 3-speed column shift that stuck in third gear often. Pull some stuff under the hood, and it unjammed.

We have a truck that the gas pedal jams down, so if you let off the brakes, it gets up to 45MPH without touching the pedal. Stick your foot under the pedal and pull up, though, and it's fine.

Re:Amen

[Mr2cents]

Police: Half a ton of dynamite should do the trick..

You: OMG, it's the freak who tried to blow up the whale!

Re:Amen

[Pig Hogger]

Someone I know once had to drive across London with a gearbox that wouldn't come out of 3rd gear.

Reminds me of one day, when I had a motorcycle. At around midnight, I started to go home from about 30 kilometers away, and my clutch cable just broke. I could not stop and be able to restart again... So I took my chances and got onto the motorway just fine (at midnight, there is no traffic) and from the exit, I took a roundabout route where I knew the traffic lights were precisely synchronized. The only hitch was a red light accross a heavily travelled boulevard, which was solved by going in circles until the light changed... The few stop signs left to my home were done, as we say here american style... I finally got home fine. But I had to wait 3 days before getting the proper clutch cable, though...

Re:Amen

[brundlefly]

You: YEEEEEEEHAAAAAWWWWW!!!!!!!!

Wait, I missed the part of the article where it said Howard Dean was driving.

Re:Amen

[WoodenRobot]

Engines have Rev Limiters that will stop the RPMs from going to a point of an Engine Blow.

I know installing software in Linux can cause problems at times, but I really think you must be doing something wrong if your RPMs are in danger of blowing things up...

Re:Amen

[twiddlingbits]

Guess Renualt's don't have ON-STAR. Based on what I hear on the radio about ON-STAR they could have switched the car off remotely with an over-ride command. I wonder what that truck was carrying that hosed the electronics on the car so badly? Perhaps they should be looking for that problem as well! Or maybe the Renault just thought it would like to be a Ferrari for a short while.

Re:Amen

[joabj]

>YEEEEEEEHAAAAAWWWWW!!!!!!!! I'm goin' 120 MPH and
> the cops are clearing the road for me! How sweet
> that?!?!?!

yeah, as someone who has lost control of an automobile at a relatively low 40 mph, I can tell you being in a car that is *out of your control* is far more *harrowing* and less enjoyable than being in one at that speed that is under your control.

joab

Re:Amen

[Knnniggit]

LOL, I remember that video. My high-school science teacher showed it to my class, it was priceless.

Re:Amen

[khrtt]

What you are missing is the max RPM stop. Most cars have an RPM limiter. It cuts off ignition temporarily if teh engine is running too fast. It's well in the red zone, though, so it's not really prudent to get your engine going fast enough for the RPM limiter to kick in, unless it's a race car and you don't care about engine wear. Or stolen car. Or rental car:-).

Re:Amen

[windex]

Most are at the begining of the red zone.

My RSX and MINI both have them set up that way, the most the variable redline on the MINI will let me go into it is about 300-400 rpm, which isin't much. Sucks much more in the MINI, since the car still gains speed like a mofo all the way to redline in 2nd. :)

Re:Amen

[introverted]

Some newer cars don't have a neutral gear. You can only select forward, backward or park and that's it.

One example is the 2004 Prius, you have no direct control over the engine and, much like the car in the article, there isn't even a key to take out of the ignition. If there's a problem and the computer doesn't want to stop, there's really not much you can do. There isn't even an option for a manual transmission.

Re:Amen

[fucksl4shd0t]

My truck does these two things, sorta.

Occasionally, when shifting from first to second, if you don't do it quite right, the shifter will go into second but leave the rest of the mechanism in first. You have to reach under the hood and pull the shift forks to match the shifter. I've gotten used to it, so now I shift perfectly every time, but I've spent some hairy moments in the shoulder of the freeway.

The throttle cable is also sticky in humid conditions (but not dry). The fix for this is to assertively tap the gas pedal (pushing in the clutch first if you're already in gear, of course). That usually unsticks it. Because of the way the throttle cable attaches to the gas pedal lever I can't just pull the pedal with my toe to close the throttle, only the springs in the carb will close the throttle. What am I saying? There's no gas pedal, that fell off years ago. I touch the lever directly with my foot these days. :)

I love my truck. ;)

Re:Amen

[avgjoe62]

Darn you to heck!!

Now I have to clean baked bean and ham sandwich splatter off my monitor...

Re:Amen

[scaaven]

I almost spit out my sandwich too. That was really funny.

Re:Amen

[Eraser_]

The original Prius had a "Battery" gear, for things like coasting down hills which would give you heavier charge, but no acceleration abilities. This gear would be effectivly be Neutral, just it's below Drive, not above.

Regardless, cars are still required to have emergency brakes (One can only hope it's a hand brake for safety reasons) that is physically connected to the braking mechanism, no computer, no ABS, nothing to go wrong electronically. Ease on the hand brake and hope you got your brakes inspected recently.

Re:Amen

[phoenix321]

I think you're right.

I'm trying to understand why applying the brakes didn't help at all. What in the world could have prevented the main brakes to operate correctly?

Why didn't he stall the engine or press the clutch? No power to the wheels or stalling the engine - either way it should have stopped the car with much less trouble. An automatic transmission would probably be finished after that, but it had been safer for him.

I'd stomped on the brakes or even scratch the roadside crash barriers, but no way I'd keep on racing through heavy traffic. No chance to tell insurance "my car kept on accelerating so I had to ram sideways into the barrier to decelerate", but hitting a truck is presumably worse.

Conspiracy, driver a nutcase or marketing ploy from a competitor, who knows?

Re:Amen

[buttahead]

This is a nice bit of saftey info... try it sometime, as clutch cables can break....

You can shift your bike without the clutch as long as your speed matches that of the gear. The best way to test is to start out in first, speed up slowly and try upshifting at various speeds, eventually you'll get it right and the bike will shift to 2nd. Now try the downshift to first at the same speed.

Re:Amen

[DeputySpade]

Well, a lot of times the redline is there to keep you from exceeding the duty of the valve springs. Redline and the springs end up losing their memory then they start to develop float. You may have all the power in the world at the top end of the tach, but if your valve springs aren't up to the task, the redline needs to stay put.

Re:Amen

[Mr2cents]

They really should recapture that video, the "hi-res" version circling the net isn't really that hi-res by current standards.

FYI, I found it here

Re:Amen

[Pig Hogger]

Well, yes, of course I was "power-shifting" all the time. How do you think I was able to travel at 100 km/h on the motorway and then at 40 km/h on the residential streets????

Re:Amen

[Dr. Zowie]

As a 2001 Prius owner, I have to clarify. The "B" gear lets you accelerate just fine. It does two things: (1) offset the "zero point" of the thrust/drag control, so that just taking your foot off the gas makes the car slow down (simulating a regular car); (2) allow the engine to act as a mechanical brake on the drivetrain (normally, the gasoline engine is only allowed to act as a mechanical power source, being effectively declutched when not in use).

You can drive all day in "B" if you want. You'll just get crappier mileage (in town, about 30-35 rather than 50-55).

Re:Amen

[Verteiron]

Just got over bronchitis and I still choke like Yoda every time I laugh.

Thanks to you I just damn near suffocated myself.

Nice job.

Re:Amen

[jnik]

There isn't even an option for a manual transmission.

What do you want, little dials on the dashboard to set the gear ratio? Nevermind that regenerative braking and a clutch wouldn't get along well....

Re:Amen

[plover]

That was my point. What if he didn't actually did lose control of his vehicle? What if he was just out for a joyride in his new sweet chariot and figured out a clever way to get the cops to make a hole for him instead of jailing his speeding ass?

I've had a stuck throttle before. It was -20 degrees in Minnesota in a parking lot at night, and the thing was literally frozen open. It was indeed scary -- it took several seconds of panic before I figured out to shut off the vehicle. Once I had it stopped, I was able to pry the throttle closed, and idled the engine for a few minutes to thaw it out. If this really was a case of runaway throttle, I feel bad for him. But if he just claimed it to scam some free ride time from the cops (dirtying Renault's name in the process) then he should get time off from the Graybar Hotel just to watch the impound lot crush his wheels into sheet metal.

Re:Amen

[introverted]

There isn't even an option for a manual transmission.
What do you want, little dials on the dashboard to set the gear ratio?

That would be silly. :-P

My point was that with some cars, shifting into neutral isn't an option. Not only does the automatic transmission not have a neutral position, but there's also no other transmission option.

Nevermind that regenerative braking and a clutch wouldn't get along well....

They get along just fine in my Civic Hybrid. Toyota simply made some different design decisions than Honda. One such decision being that the computer is in charge of shifting gears.

Re:Amen

[introverted]

The original Prius had a "Battery" gear, for things like coasting down hills which would give you heavier charge, but no acceleration abilities. This gear would be effectivly be Neutral, just it's below Drive, not above.

But if the computer's fried and not letting you stop, why would it let you switch gears? And if "Dr. Zowie" is correct, that isn't really a neutral gear anyhow, the computer could still accelerate.

As others have pointed out, the so-called "emergency" brake can't overpower a runaway engine.

Re:Amen

[bhtooefr]

See, on this it's not the throttle itself that's sticking, only the pedal (or lever mechanism). Pulling up pulls the mechanism back in (and unsticks it for a while), and it works fine.

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you fool, it was Bo and Luke Duke. Or, as they are known in France, Beau Duc and Jean Luc Duc.

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

I missed the part of the article where it said Howard Dean was driving.

I think it may have been Keanu Reeves.

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

Reaction 1: Laughed out loud.

Reaction 2: Just realized he will NEVER live that down, poor guy. All he wanted was to help us get rid of Bush and now he'll carry this albatross with him forever.

Re:Amen

[NanoGator]

"Seems simple enough to just shift into neutral and let the engine blow. Unless I'm missing something."

I'm going to expose my lack of car knowledge here, so no hard feelings if you point and laugh after I ask this. What about the parking break? Could gently applying it have done any real good?

Re:Amen

[PriceIke]

Nope, he never will.

Re:Amen

[Carnildo]

The few stop signs left to my home were done, as we say here american style...

Here in America, it's called a "California stop"

Re:Amen

[magarity]

You: YEEEEEEEHAAAAAWWWWW!!!!!!!! I'm goin' 120 MPH and the cops are clearing the road for me! How sweet is that?!?!?!

This is completely correct. I don't buy the speeder's story that stomping on the brakes didn't work at first but did later on. From the article:

Finally, as he was bearing down on a toll booth, Dequiedt said he finally managed to bring the car to a halt -- having raced down some 125 miles of highway between Vierzon and Riom in central France.

"I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said."

There's no normal car that accellerates harder than its brakes can hold. Try this yourself next time there's no one behind you on the highway (no one behind == important). Step on the brake and the accellerator at the same time, and you don't even have to slam on them or anything, just press normally. You WILL slow down unless maybe you're in a Bugatti Veyron.

Re:Amen

[DavidTC]

Because he knew that if he did that, there was a chance he'd burn off all this brakes, and then be stuck going 120 with no brakes?

Re:Amen

[Gallowglass]

According to the translation, he was able to stop only after he had finally been able to wrest the "smart" card out of the ignition slot(?).

Re:Amen

[BlueUnderwear]

Some newer cars don't have a neutral gear. You can only select forward, backward or park and that's it.

So what do you at the car wash? (the kind of car wash where some chain grabs the left wheel to pull you through the washing mechanism, and which only works if you put the car in neutral...)

Re:Amen

[DuckDodgers]

There's a Popular Mechanics article a few months back describing Jay Leno's toy car, which is a giant roadster with an engine from some defunct tank.

He specifically noted that it was the only thing he's ever driven that accelerates even when you stomp on the brakes. If Jay says his Ferraris and Corvettes and Ford GT slow down when braking even if you mash the accelerator, then I've got to believe this guy was lying.

Re:Amen

[Hinhule]

Sounds to me there was a glitch in the software and that's why the car didn't break when he slammed the breaks.

Re:Amen

[introverted]

According to the little tag that sticks up at the back of it's collar, Prius is hand-wash only. You should also avoid anything other than the low setting when you iron it. :-)

Re:Amen

[ForestGrump]

As a former driver or a 01 insight (got totaled at 25k mi when rear ended by a ford exploder)

Toyota and Honda took very different paths to engineer their hybrid vehicles.

the way I see it, Honda chose "lets make it as simple as possible, manual transmissions are the most effective (lowest loss) at driving power from the engine (gas and electric) to the wheel. Hence, this would allow us to put smaller (and lighter) gas and electric engines. Hence, a 1 liter 3 cyl engine making 73 hp and 70 ft-lb of torque mated to a 5 speed manual tranny. To further add efficiency, the engine is capable of "leaning out" and burning at 21:1. Couple all this with an aluminum body construction and hand assembly, and it is possible to achieve up to 100 mpg at 50 mph.

Toyota on the other hand chose to utilize CVT transmissions (nothing wrong, except I much prefer driving manual trannies). The transmission is like a T shape, with the gas and electric engines on opposite sides, and the drive shaft coming out. To mate the two motors together, they use some god awful configuration that the service manager at my local toyota dealer has no idea how it works. (great huh?)

In order to maximize city mileage, the vehicle is able to run without the gas engine being powered (but it is still sparkng away...just no gas). Highway mileage is improved by using an atkinson cycle engine- where the engine expands more than it compresses (more efficiency). Lastly, to save weight, steel construction using their smallest platform (echo) is utilized.

Grump

Re:Amen

[DuckDodgers]

As far as I know, all modern cars have power brakes. That means you get some mechanical assistance from the car when you push the gas pedal.

However, even if power braking fails you can still stop the car - it's just harder.

On the other hand, if your brakes are used constantly for a few minutes they can overheat, and they don't work as well. That could be the problem, I don't know.

Re:Amen

[DuckDodgers]

I meant when you push the brake pedal, not the gas pedal. Sorry!

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

many car, including a franco-germano-schweiz one, no longer have mecanical control to switch to neutral.

You just have two foot control : "faster" and "slower".

Now I finally understand why I was feeling so frightened by those. (really a car for babies...)

Re:Amen

[plover]

He specifically noted that it was the only thing he's ever driven that accelerates even when you stomp on the brakes.

It's like the punchline from the old joke: "Yeah, I've had brakes like that too."

I've seen brake shoes that came out of an ordinary car that came off a high speed race track after an hour of the hardest driving a street car will ever see. (A friend of mine is a high-speed driving instructor.) Honest to god, they were bent like bananas. There's a circular depression deep in the middle where the brake piston was mashing them into the brake discs, and both ends are bent out over half an inch away from the discs. He got off the track early because the brakes felt kind of mushy.

Even with only about 4 square inches of pad in contact with glowing orange discs, he brought the car to a stop. If this guy in his brand new car couldn't stand on the brakes and bring it to a halt, he was joyriding. Even if they were "mushy", driving without the brakes for about five minutes at those speeds would have cooled them down enough to stop fast.

Re:Amen

[lotho brandybuck]

People who drive the Prius aren't the type who go to car washes. we're too cheap to pay for gas, definately not going to buy overpriced water to wash the car.

I drive a 02 Prius. Even in the 2002 model, you're a little disconnected from the engine... You can have the thing in park and floor the gas pedal.. nothing happens. I hate to think of the oposite situation.. I am putting a lot of trust in Toyota.

There's no "low gears." The Prius has a CVT. I think mine has a Neutral, but the new one doesn't.

What about antilock brakes??? It is nice to be able to slam on the brakes and still steer on a snowy road, but I'm a little uncomfortable having a computer getting between my foot and the brakes.

Re:Amen

[elphmorgan]

Actually, the 2004 Prius *does* have Neutral. I own one. Quite necessary for car washes. Also, though it does have a keyless ignition, in some trim lines, the ignition can be turned off by pressing the Power button on the dash. Not recommended.

Re:Amen

[hunterx11]

That's because it wasn't Howard Dean.

It was Steve Ballmer. "Who said slow down!?"

Re:Amen

[LinuxHam]

Here in America, it's called a "California stop"

That's funny, I was going to post that in the eastern US, its called a "California Slide" or "California Cruise" and on the west coast, it's called a "Jersey Stop".

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

say it with me: every car has nuetral....every car. Whether or not there is a specific N on the tranny. When's the last time you saw an N on a manual? Every car has a nuetral transmissin state. If it didn't it could NEVER shift gears!

Re:Amen

[Bertie]

Way offtopic here - but why would you want to find a safe vaccine for a disease which has been officially eradicated?

Re:Amen

[Azi Dahaka]

Automatics shift differently from manuals. They don't use a clutch; the transmission is always engaged. They use a torque converter instead. So no, automatics don't necessarily need a neutral state. (Of course, all cars do AFAIK.)

To the grandparent, Priuses (Prii?) can be put into neutral. It's pretty apparent from the stick alone. Although it does take a second to shift to neutral (my guess is so you can keep moving while shifting from D to B; some have suggested it's for safety).

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

With antilock brakes, the computer should be designed to "fail safe". ie: if the computer fails, you get normal, every day, "press too hard and you'll lock up" brakes. Not brakes that won't respond at all.

Re:Amen

[Soruk]

I totally agree. As I drive a Renault (2002 Scenic) I find this a bit alarming. I seem to have the last of the line before they went and stuck an arse on the Megane and went keyless ignition - I have regular manual transmission, normal handbrake etc. I honestly do not want these new things that my mum found when she took delivery of her Espace...

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

uhm, 120mph... I take my car at least once a week up to that speed on Italian highways - when traffic and minimal chance to meet the highway patrol allow me to ;)

Re:Amen

[Eraser_]

Sorry for the mis-information. The person who told this too me probably shouldn't have been believed. She had no idea about drafting off semis or anything. ;-)

Re:Amen

[lommer]

The new priuses have a CVT (continuosly variable transmission). Look up how they work before you go spouting off and calling everyone wrong.

Re:Amen

[HermanAB]

So what are you supposed to do when you get into a skid on ice? With an automatic, you can't depress the clutch - you need to be able to shift into neutral, else your car will continue skidding until you hit something. I hope the Prius isn't for sale in Canada...

Re:Amen

[Almost-Retired]

There's no normal car that accellerates harder than its brakes can hold

Excuse me, but I'd like to differ with that as a wee bit too general an assumption. I'm an old fart and I've had quite a few cars in my 55 years behind the wheel. I've also always been a pusher, as in pushing the envelope of what the vehicle can do. Some of the cars I've found were capable of pulling in spite of the brakes, a 1949 Nash Ambassador being one of them. This thing had 15" tires, but only 9"x2" brake drums up front, and 9"x1.5" inches wide in the rear. When fully tuned up, that 236 cid 6 could actually accelerate the car with about a hundred pounds on the brake pedal, in high gear! Mind you, it could stop from 60mph in about 140 feet when they were cold, which was pretty good brakes in 1949.

But, that 60mph panic stop was all they could do till they had had about an hour to cool before you did it again. At 80 mph, a stuck throttle and applying the brakes, you would get down to about 30 mph and be all done, 125 mph here we come.

I once popped up over a hill at about 80 to find some idiot pulling a disabled car with a chain pulling out of the fairgrounds entrance in front of me. I had about 100 yards to haul it down to about 15 mph or figure out a way make it to grow wings. I did get it pulled in, but every drum on it was cherry red and so out of round I had to replace them all to get back to a smooth brake pedal. And it didn't stop any better with all new drums and the best new Raybestos semi-metalic shoes.

I loved that car, it could haul me across 2 states in the middle of the night at 120+ mph and get 20-21 mpg doing it, but that SOB could not be stopped quickly from more than 65 or so.

That engine, BTW, is the same engine that was used in the Nash-Healy's of yore, fully capable to turning its 4.375" stroke engine at piston speeds that destroyed the rings in a second if one didn't watch the tach. It was built to haul ass, and in good tune did it very well. I had lots of fun picking on flathead fords with dual carbs, a fancy cam and 10.5/1 alu heads on them. But none could beat that Nash, much to some of thems chagrin. The night I finished that engine, breaking every ring in it, the tach said 8100 rpm.

And the guy who had just lost the title to his built '51 Ford to me? I gave it back. I didn't want that 3 legged dog. I went out and bought a 49 Mercury, built it up too, and did it to him again a year later. He was a slow learner I think. But that Merc could stop a hell of a lot better too.

Todays vehicles have so much better brakes than we had back in my 'salad' years its no comparison, so I'm like most commentators here, I have serious doubts about his story about stomping on the brakes not doing any good. I know damned well I can stop my 88 Nissan 4wd pickup and its 3 litre (199k miles on it now) with a stuck throttle, and its not much contest between the 3.6 litre in my mopar van and its brakes at 107k miles. That 3.6L positively honks, but its brakes are even better. How they would fare when the tranny started to downshift might lead to conjecture but by then the switch should be off anyway. 1st gear is twin streaks of Michelin's on the road behind you at anything over about half throttle.

Cheers, Gene

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

Even CVT cars have neutral. Look it up some time.

The Prius (w/CVT) gear shifter has four positions, R, N, D, P. I'll let you guess what those letters stand for.

Re:Amen

[introverted]

So what are you supposed to do when you get into a skid on ice? With an automatic, you can't depress the clutch...

It turns out I was wrong about the lack of a neutral gear, but I've never before heard anyone advocate shifting into neutral as a way to control a skid.

Maybe nobody's ever mentioned the neutral thing to me before, but the advice I've always heard about skid control is if you have anti-lock brakes, hit them and hold them down (and if you don't have them, pump the brakes so you don't lock the wheels). I'd be quite surprised if Prius didn't have anti-lock brakes. Regardless, you definitely don't keep a foot on the gas. As you slow down, the skidding lessens, regardless of what gear you're in.

Re:Amen

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm you can't press the power button if the car is above 3km/h

I own one and I've tried. My test show anything above 3km/h won't allow the car to be turned off.

Its a 'smart' car.

Andrwe

Re:Amen

[Hinhule]

I know that, however since the car which sounds like it was pretty new "electronic key thingy". The designers may have gone a little to far with the electrical stuff and made the breaks just like the gas controlled by a microprocessor. On the other hand that might be illegal.

Re:Amen

[HermanAB]

If you skid on a hard surface, then you don't need to do much - just lift your foot off the gas.

Ice is different. An automatic always sends a substantial amount of power to the driven wheels - if you lift your foot off the brake, the car will start to crawl forward. That small amount of power is enough to keep the driven wheels spinning on ice and the only way to get them to roll again, get your static friction back and regain control, is to slam the lever into neutral.

You can move the lever of an automatic to neutral, without pressing the button, so you just whack it forward and then try to control the skid. Whatever you do on ice - don't immediately step on the brakes, as you may end up with all 4 wheels skidding.

Anti-lock brakes only work while one of the wheels is still rotating. If all 4 wheels are locked and the car is skidding like a runaway tea trolley, then the anti-lock system thinks the car is standing still and will keep the wheels locked - so the car will keep skidding. Anti-lock systems usually work very well, but in certain circumstances, they make things worse and are probably the cause of many fender benders.

This is why top of the line cars now have 'tracktion control', which is a small improvement in the wheel control algorithm, so that it also looks for spinning and the system will apply the brake, when a wheel is starting to spin.

Re:Amen

[mink]

Because in the pre 2003 Prius the transmission is still manualy linked (is the minor way it is). With the 2003 model they went with the keyless tech for ignition and added drive by wire gearshift (some cars call it a "sportshift").

Also the transmission in the prius is a CVT not computer controled, so the gears are not fixed like you seem to be thinking.

See the post about the B setting on the Prius for more info on it.

As for emergency brake you might try using it with the normal brake system to slow/stop (as others have pointed out mashing the normal brake should overpower the engine). Seems a radical thought but this whole discussion seems full of ignorant spouting.

This is not directed at the parent. Maybe if people tried to educate themselves instead of spouting off unfounded nonsense /. wouldnt be such a wasteland.

You seem to assume there is only 1 control computer for the entire car, I dont know the exact electronic layout of my Prius, but it would appear from a glance that there are several.

Re:Amen

[mink]

Here is a picture of the innards of the CVT. The dudes website has a lot of keen info.

Here is another site explaining the prius powertrain.

Re:Amen

[julesh]

Engines have Rev Limiters that will stop the RPMs from going to a point of an Engine Blow.

This may be true, but generally I wouldn't recommend depending on them. In my experience of attempting to move a car with a stuck throttle while moderating the speed by periodically stepping on the clutch, they can still overheat and blow steam pipes _very_ quickly. In case it isn't obvious, I don't recommend this technique to anyone.

Wasnt that a movie...

[psyon1]

that Fox Television made or something? Some woman hit a skateboarder, so gave him a ride, then gave some hitchhiker and some other people a ride. They they started down the freeway, and the breaks didnt work, and the car wouldnt shut off. God, now that I think of it, it was a stupid movie too.

Re:Wasnt that a movie...

[adolfojp]

I remember that movie. They tried to remove the key but the broke it. Funny stuff.


Cheers

Adolfo

Put it in neutral!

[nweaver]

If the accelerator ever sticks, due to either electronic or manual means, just shove it in neutral, brake to a stop, and then turn off the engine.

Simple.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[gregarican]

Good try, but if you re-read the post it mentions that the brakes weren't effective and he couldn't turn off the engine due to the fact it wasn't engaged with an ignition key. The "shove it in neutral" part makes sense, though. Or for a real rip the guy should've kicked it into reverse. The engine would've shot right through the hood!

Re:Put it in neutral!

[ivan256]

The brakes were probably ineffective because when you hit the gas and the brake at the same time at highway speeds the rotors and pads quickly heat up. Brakes work by converting mechanical energy into heat. If you heat your brakes up faster than they can cool off you can't stop and you wear an amazing amount of material off the components. If you let up for a short while they cool down again and should begin working... assuming you didn't keep trying them with the gas in until there were no pads left.

Shifting into neutral, coasting for about 30 seconds, and then trying the brakes should have stopped this guy.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[brunson]

I did that to a chevette when I worked for my friends dad's rental car company. It locked up the wheels for about 1/10th of a second, then the engine stalled and I coasted along until I put the car in neutral, restarted the engine and continued on my way.

One more reason not to buy a rental car.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you read the article you'll see the brakes did work. He just didn't try hard enough at first. You can always stop your car with your brakes even with the engine running full out. He didn't have a triple failure.

In the U.S. we had a rash of these turned out someone put a small brake in a car and move the gas too close. People would swear the brake was to the floor and the car kept accelerating. Of course they had the wrong peddle. This guy is probably just as bad.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[fsbilly]

OK, this is disturbing. So, the car was started without the ignition key. Great. How does that stop you from turning it off? How do you turn it off normally? Do you just wait for the fuel to run out?

This same thing happened a few years back with some woman in a Volkswagen. Turns out she never tried to turn the car off, or take it out of gear.

This driver should get cited for failure to maintain control of their vehicle. This whole story stinks of someone complaining about the car when, in fact, they are a moron.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[gregarican]

Imagine if they had Onstar. Then they could just have some flunky with 2 weeks of training remotely stop the car for them.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've done that on a rental car -- kicked it into reverse while going about 25. The key on the input shaft to the transmission sheared off, no other damage to the engine or transmission.

That was awhile ago, I believe modern cars will refuse to shift to reverse until the speed is low enough.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[fsbilly]

You know, the more I think about it....

I call Shenanigans.

This guy wanted to go 120mph in his car.

Prolly had a hooker in the passenger seat, too.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[maxume]

You would think that there would still be a kill switch or whatnot. I mean really.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[dykofone]

I was in a rental Pontiac Grandam and threw it into reverse going 65 down the highway. It was an automatic, and when thrown into reverse it lurched, then coasted on as if in neutral. I had apparantly managed to stall the engine, so threw it in neutral and started it right back up again.

I still hold the title amongst friends as being the only one to have "stalled an automatic."

Re:Put it in neutral!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm on the record as having skidded on a car with working ABS.

Re:Put it in neutral!

[LiENUS]

umm you didnt stall it automatics work on preasure in the fluid, when your shafts start spinning opposite directions your automatic tranny cuts the preassure to the transmision fluid which makes all the clutches open up it was like you just put it in neutral

parking brake?

[westcourt_monk]

I know it would probably cause an accident.. locking the wheels and all... but what about his parking brake? I know you can apply them slowly, but at 120mph I suppose all you can do is hold on. Any /. folks try it? Fastest I hit my parking brake is 60mph on a snow covered road.

Re:parking brake?

[Anonymous Coward]

in my peugeot hitting the parking brake at high speeds doesn't do much. the car slows down a little and after some seconds you notice a strange stench.

no, i didn't try it out, but i happened to have a drunk co-driver who thought it was funny to do it. that a****** never drove with me again.

Re:parking brake?

[growlydog]

Try it? I did it all the time before I replaced my rear brakes and in the process disabled my parking brake. ALL THE TIME. When making right turns, when making left turns... ESPECIALLY, when making U-turns. All at 40mph or 50mph of course. I get a kick out of it when the other folks in my car get white-knuckled because I'm approaching a U-turn at 45mph and I don't apply my brakes at all. "Yeehaw!" I say as I slide around in a perfect 180 powerslide...

You see, Officer, I didn't *want* to make a U-turn at that interesection, but the sign said: "No, U Turn!"

Oh, by the way, for any who think I'm crazy doing these things, its only because I have a sweet performance car that can take that kind of driving: A 1988 Toyota Corolla.

Re:parking brake?

[drinkypoo]

Try driving with your parking brake on sometime. Don't do it too long, because it will destroy your rear brakes, but the point is that you can do it. The parking brake/e-brake wouldn't help in this situation.

Re:parking brake?

[Frostalicious]

The ability of the parking brake is insignificant compared to the power of the engine.

Re:parking brake?

[u38cg]

My girldfriend will testify that a car will drive perfectly well, in fact indistinguishably from normal (to her, anyway), with the handbrake applied. She only drove some 280 miles before she pulled in for a coffee, tried to put the handbrake on...oh.

Re:parking brake?

[drinkypoo]

I did the same thing to my IROC which had aluminum drums in the back... $$$ I never even noticed it was on, never made any bad noises, and it didn't affect driving whatsoever. I was younger and dumber then...

WOW!

[IloveMorphine]

thats fucked up. of course this is a piece of shit french car.

Re:WOW!

[Anonymous Coward]

this is a piece of shit french car

Well I can't argue with that...

Re:WOW!

[_the_bascule]

This is not the first time this has happened by a long way, and it's not just French cars, most have been Ford models. Just scroll down and see the accounts of lots of manufacturers who have suffered with this issue alleged or true.

Re:WOW!

[_the_bascule]

click this didn't take the tag at first, sorry, my bad HTML

Wait for the investigation...

[TopShelf]

Something smells rotten with this story. Stomping on the brakes didn't do anything, but as he approaches a toll booth, the brakes suddenly work and he's able to stop the car??? Catastrophic system failures don't often repair themselves...

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[psyon1]

"Hmmm... I wonder how fast this car goes. Lets see if I can get the police to clear the freeway." "Hello? Police? My car wont stop, it just keeps going faster! It wont shut off! Please clear the freeway!"

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[DJayC]

This happened in the US to some lady in a minivan. She blew through redlights in the middle of a town, and claimed that it was the cars fault and she couldn't stop it. There are tapes of the phone call to 911.. personally I think she was full of crap, as is this guy. I don't remember what the police though...

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[protolith]

I think this was just a clever trick to get the police to expidite his commute...

"Ha, it fixed itself, thanks for the escort, I better get to that meeting now."

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Katharine]

I thought it sounded odd also. Reading the Google translation of the German article, it sounds like first he managed to remove the smart card (after several attempts) and then was finally able to stop the car with the brakes.

Maybe removing the smart card disengaged something that was preventing the brakes from working properly-- could an automatic anti-skid system or something like that have added to the problem?

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Bozdune]

Amen to that. Brakes are ALWAYS stronger than the engine, unless they're defective, which is unlikely in a new vehicle. And this is exactly what Our Hero found out later, when he panicked at the tollbooth and REALLY stomped hard on the fucker.

So I buy the story. The guy just panicked.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Beardo the Bearded]

No, embedded systems have a Watchdog Timer.

Basically, if you've fucked up the code, it reboots the device or skips a line of code after a set amount of time. It's usually a few seconds, but newer chips can have a delay of a few minutes. (The one I'm working on today goes up to 4:28.) If you do anything with a chip that nobody will ever see again, you enable the watchdog timer. It's pretty easy to incorporate and lets your system recover from lockups or hangs.

I agree that something is fishy here. I am curious as to why he didn't jam the car into 1st and yard on the e-brake like his life depended on it. Don't people learn to drive anymore? Further, don't they have runaway lanes in France? We've got them all over the place here - they're designed for big rigs, but a small car would be more than welcome if you had a problem like this. You drive up a steep unpaved hill into barrels of water. You stop.

I'm an Electronics Engineer and I'd never trust a drive-by-wire car. Things go wrong; you have to have some sort of mechanical over-ride for a life-critical system like a car.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[SydShamino]

If you read the Google translation, it appears to say that, as he approached the toll booth, he was finally able to pry the smartcard out of the car. At this point, the car's speed started dropping, and he was able to bring the car to a halt before he drove into the booth.

That might or might not make it any less rotten, but that helps provide a more viable explanation. The English parent article just dropped that part completely - probably because they don't have a native translator and couldn't figure out what the Babelfish translation meant.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[hvatum]

According the German article at spiegel.de he was "able to pull the chipcard out only after many tries" (Translation mine). This would be the only way to turn the car off because the normal systems were not functioning. Only after turning the car off was he able to slam very hard on the breaks and stop it. That makes sense because the car had power braking, so you'd have to press pretty hard to get the thing to stop.

Sounds like it's for real to me.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Richard_at_work]

There was a recent case in the UK of a lorry driver calling into police that he couldnt slow down his vehicle. The police cleared the road ahead of him and he went on for a good hour or so, finally bringing the vehicle to a halt after crashing it into barriers. It was all over national TV at the time. The outcome? A police investigation found the drivers claims that turning off the engine would kill the steering to be false, and found the driver to have attention seeking mental problems. The driver was found guilty in a court of law of dangerous driving. source

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[ssclift]

The German language article says he came to a stop about 20km before a toll booth...

On the same theme: Saturn made a interesting assumption about their cars a few years ago. At high speed they reduced gas to the engine to control the speed to a maximum of 105mph. According to this entry in Risks digest (source of endless scary stories about computing and automation risks) the author was left going down hill at over 105mph, coasting, with a stalled engine, no power brakes and no power steering.

... not fun at all...

Audi had a problem years ago that was supposedly due to a programming error. At low RPM the computer would increase power but fail to sense it under some circumstances. Net result: your car would suddenly go foot to the floor while you were stopped at a red light.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[tedshultz]

This exact same thing happened in the US. Driver couldn't stop car etc, etc. police cleared the road and blocked all the lights. right before a bad intersection brakes started to work again! Mechanics checked the car and couldn't find anything wrong. The Mechanics were unable to explain how so many independent systems could fail at the same time (ignition switch, transmission, brakes, parking brake...) then it happened again. After reviewing the police tape of the second time, the auto manufacture noticed that the slowed down at corners, and the brake lights would come on right before intersections. It turned out that the driver was upset that she felt the auto dealer had given her a bad deal, and she wanted to trash the car manufactures reputation. Sounds similar to this case. The funny final twist of the story above is that when they announced they were going to press charges against the driver, she drove her car into a wall to total it, so it couldn't be used as evidence against her!!!

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[nester]

We've got them all over the place here - they're designed for big rigs, but a small car would be more than welcome if you had a problem like this. You drive up a steep unpaved hill into barrels of water. You stop.

i wouldn't try that at well over 100+. those runaway areas are for trucks with failed brakes, not fast cars at wide open throttle.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[nester]

it WILL kill the power steering if the engine isn't running! power brakes and steering pumps run off of engine vaccuum. i've driven a car with power steering that died and it's very difficult to steer (though it is possible).

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Asgard]

Tho unpaved portion gets pretty sandy, so a wide-open throttle is probably just going to dig a bit under the wheels.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, embedded systems have a Watchdog Timer.

Basically, if you've fucked up the code, it reboots the device or skips a line of code after a set amount of time. It's usually a few seconds, but newer chips can have a delay of a few minutes. (The one I'm working on today goes up to 4:28.)

This assumes a lockup or similar condition which prevents the WDT update (the dog-kicking, as we like to call it :-). And are people really crazy enough to set the watchdog in a real-time control system to minutes... to me, 500 milliseconds seems a long time.

Further, don't they have runaway lanes in France? We've got them all over the place here - they're designed for big rigs, but a small car would be more than welcome if you had a problem like this. You drive up a steep unpaved hill into barrels of water. You stop.

I can't speak for France, but I have seen plenty of them in mountainous regions of Central/Southern Europe. Never seen one on the flat though... what would be the point? Trucks usually have pneumatic brakes which are RELEASED with air pressure. If the system fails, the brakes lock. Not good for handling, but it will make you stop!

I'm an Electronics Engineer and I'd never trust a drive-by-wire car.

So am I, and I certainly share some of your doubts. But it IS possible to build safe *-by-wire systems, millions of people fly in fly-by-wire airliners every day.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[rewt66]

How fast do you think the runaway truck is going?

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[teeker]

Further, don't they have runaway lanes in France? We've got them all over the place here

In the US, they only have them in mountainous regions. I'm in the midwest and you'll virtually never see them here. Go to west to the Rockies and they're all over the place...so it doesn't suprise me that none were around.

I'm an Electronics Engineer and I'd never trust a drive-by-wire car. Things go wrong; you have to have some sort of mechanical over-ride for a life-critical system like a car.

Damn right.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Lumpy]

I'm an Electronics Engineer and I'd never trust a drive-by-wire car. Things go wrong; you have to have some sort of mechanical over-ride for a life-critical system like a car.

I find comments like this utterly funny from educated people that would NEVER drive/ride in a electronics controlled car yet happily fly at 10,000 feet in a fly by wire plane that if anything fails you are certified cooked hamburger.

BMW has/had a drive by wire car with a joystick instead of a steering wheel. I would trust it as much as I trust the power steering in my car. (Ever tried to drive a car with power assist steering out? how about when the power assist breaks failed?... now how ofted do those systems fail.... very very rarely and usually under extreme mistreatment and lack of maintaince.)

Car's are expensive and complex machinery. As a armchair Embedded Engineer/Professional I would love to own a drive by wire car.

I would trust it as much as having that explosive device in my steering wheel aimed at my face that we call an airbag that can easily go off at any moment if there was a airbag deployment system failure. (Ok maybe a little too sarcastic.)

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[boa13]

Same thing in France. Runaway lanes in mountainous areas only.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[teeker]

Audi had a problem years ago that was supposedly due to a programming error. At low RPM the computer would increase power but fail to sense it under some circumstances.

I am pretty sure this was investigated and attributed to driver error...most of the drivers were older people who had previously driven American cars. Apparently they'd push on the gas pedal instead of the brake on accident upon shifting into gear, wreaking havoc on farmer's markets all over the USA. Once Audi installed a brake-pedal interlock that didn't allow the trans to shift out of park without the brake depressed, the claims pretty much stopped, and that's why all cars now have that feature.

At least, that's what I heard about it. Nearly put Audi out of business.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[DeVilla]

Further, don't they have runaway lanes in France?

They aren't every where. I've seen them in places with decent hills, like Tennesee. I doubt I've seen even 10 in Ohio, and I don't think I've seem any yet in Minnesota. In mountainous areas, they come in handy if a rig loses brakes while going downhill.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[ashkar]

I find comments like this utterly funny from educated people that would NEVER drive/ride in a electronics controlled car yet happily fly at 10,000 feet in a fly by wire plane that if anything fails you are certified cooked hamburger.

Planes have pilots to take over if the electronics go down.

As a armchair Embedded Engineer/Professional...

Enough said.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Dmala]

Further, don't they have runaway lanes in France?

In the US, at least, I think they're only common in hilly areas. I don't think we have any in eastern Massachusetts, where the land is relatively flat.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[cavemanf16]

That rotten fish smell is coming from michael's ass from whence this story was pulled to be put on the front page of Slashdot. This means that the driver was most likely inept and couldn't figure out what to do as other posters have already suggested. I agree that it's nearly impossible that a catastrophic "failure" to slow down was anything but the driver's fault in this case.

Remember people, michael likes to post stories which are sensationalist, and he typically never verifies anything, preferring instead to add some fuel to the fire of speculation and sensationalism with his additional quips that are usually tagged on to the story headline. I can't ignore his stories because then I'm out of the loop when trolls make fun of them later in the week, but that's about all they're good for anymore.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Lehk228]

magor differences, aircraft are constantly maintained by professionals, while an automobile is "inspected" at most once per year, and power assist systems in cars are operable even when the power assist fails, while a control-by-wire system you are fuxored when the computer locks in 100mpg hard Right turn mode due to buggy core or "cosmic rays"

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[owlstead]

Here in Europe, we've got runaway lanes where-ever there are hills big enough to make them necessary and big enough to support them.

As I am living in the Netherlands, where the biggest hill is probably a man made hill for skiing, I don't run into runaway lanes a lot.

Except on holiday to certain parts in France, then there are quite a few.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the point is that a runaway truck doesn't have a throttle wide open trying to climb off the back of the hill.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Planes have pilots to take over if the electronics go down.

What are they going to do, climb out on the wing and move the flaps by hand?

Fly by wire means that the controls are all electronic, there are no mechanical links. If the electronic controls go down, so does the plane.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[demonbug]

Basically, if you've fucked up the code, it reboots the device or skips a line of code after a set amount of time. It's usually a few seconds, but newer chips can have a delay of a few minutes. (The one I'm working on today goes up to 4:28.) If you do anything with a chip that nobody will ever see again, you enable the watchdog timer. It's pretty easy to incorporate and lets your system recover from lockups or hangs.

According to the article, this was going on for an hour.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

I find comments like this utterly funny from educated people that would NEVER drive/ride in a electronics controlled car yet happily fly at 10,000 feet in a fly by wire plane that if anything fails you are certified cooked hamburger.

Look, the testing & certification that anything on a plane has to go through is a big part of the reason planes are so much safer. Cars don't go through this kind of testing and QA.

BMW has/had a drive by wire car with a joystick instead of a steering wheel.

I think you are refering to the 745i, which has a little wheel to control the radio, climate, and other computer functions. The 745i has a conventional steering wheel.

I would trust it as much as I trust the power steering in my car. (Ever tried to drive a car with power assist steering out? how about when the power assist breaks failed?

Years ago, I had a car that did not have power steering or power brakes. It was still drivable, but parking required a lot of effort to turn the wheel.

Conventional power steering & brakes are designed to fail gracefully: if the power assist fails, you still have steering & braking, but it requires more effort from the driver.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Go-go Gadget brake!?

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[zx75]

Runaway lanes? They aren't common in Canada, let alone Europe. For the most part roads in Europe are older , narrower, and windier than up here.

I've driven in the US a few times, and from what I've seen the US is unusual in being widely paved with large open streets and highways.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Beardo the Bearded]

I don't know why I'm responding to an AC, but here goes:

You don't always have the chips control real-time stuff. The program I'm writing sets the PIC to sleep for a minute at a time to conserve power. I am using an external real-time clock chip to wake up the PIC every minute. Obviously, setting the WDT to in interval less than a minute would mess up the timing. To set the WDT to large intervals, you have to use a prescaler and a postscaler and reassign the postscaler from Timer0.

On a real-time control system, I'd probably set the WDT to two cycles.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[gnu-generation-one]

"The German language article says he came to a stop about 20km before a toll booth..."

There are places in Germany more than 20km from toll-booths?

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[TigerNut]

They aren't common in Canada

You must live in Saskatchewan. Come out and drive Hwy 1 between Lake Louise and Revelstoke. As a bonus, you'll get to recalibrate your notion of 'narrower' and 'windier' at least as it applies to national traffic corridors, on the little stretch going down into Golden.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[anglete]

The whole point of this excersize in not giving the engine fuel is to keep it from letting the car go faster than 105mph. That doesn't mean the engine stops spinning. Only when the engine stops spinning do you loose power brakes and steering. This smells of BS. Going down a hill at 105 in gear (auto or manual) means you have full power to all these functions unless something is incredibly wrong or the guy shifted to neutral. I would also doubt that saturn designed the engine control systems to stall if you put it in neutral at 105mph.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Spunk]

That usually frightens the passengers. Look what happened to Shatner!

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

According to this article (french)
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3226,36- 381768,0.html
The incident is really improbable since the brakes are three times stronger than the engine.

And after investigations, they didn't find any evidence of a strong braking

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Spoke]

The guy in the Saturn is a dumbass. The last thing you do when going down a hill at is to put car in neutral. Especially when you're travelling at 100mph+.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[zx75]

Yes, I am aware of that stretch of highway, as well as Hwy 99 through to Whistler. One lane bridge on a national highway anyone?

Those are the exceptions in this country, out of necessity due to the nature of the terrain.

Until I was 18, my family spent a lot of time driving through North-west Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, since then I've lived in Southern Ontario, but have been through Quebec and all the atlantic provinces numerous times. For the most part our nations roads and highways are relatively flat and straight with shoulders but very few 'run-away lanes' as the parent mentions.

We do have the good old 'white-knuckle' highways, but a comparatively low percentage of them to a lot of nations across the pond.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[adamscottphotos]

I'm an Electronics Engineer and I'd never trust a drive-by-wire car. Things go wrong; you have to have some sort of mechanical over-ride for a life-critical system like a car.

Good luck buying your next new car then. I have requirements that force me into a minivan and there are no new models that aren't drive by wire. It's really a thril trying to dodge potholes on forest service roads at 35-40mph WITH a 1/4sec delay on your steering input.

Having a computer between my inputs and the cars outputs scares the willies out of me...

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[jandrese]

More importantly, if you panic and turn the car all the way off (IE, turn the key back to the position where you can pull the key out), it will _lock_ the steering wheel and pretty much guarentee your demise on the next corner.

Still, unless the guys was going downhill, or in an extremely windy section of road (in which case he is fubared either way), it seems a lot safer to kill the engine and just let your car coast to a stop.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Planes have pilots to take over if the electronics go down.

I don't know if anyone has told you this, but the yoke that the pilot yanks on does not hook up to anything. It is all electronic. So if the electric system goes, you can yank on that yoke all day long, and the plane will keep flying in whatever direction it's going.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[delus10n0]

You're really over-simplifying an airplane's control systems; most "fly by wire" planes use hydraulics, and multiple hydraulic lines at that. Your "fly by wire" car is quite different.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[d-man]

Don't people learn to drive anymore?

I'm guessing you don't do a lot of suburban driving.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[EvilOpie]

It's not so much the sand getting under the weels, as it is the speed at which the car transfers from hard pavement to soft sand/dirt. If you're going fast enough, the car stands a good chance of digging in when it hits the dirt and rolling over from it.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[KingKurly]

The parent post is probably intending to say 100+ MPH rather than km/hr. Hopefully the runaway truck wouldn't be going THAT fast...

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[micromoog]

Of course, in certain parts of the midwest you could go 120MPH for hours without even so much as steering, and no one would notice.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[antirename]

No, the problem was crappy vacuum plumbing. The dumbasses at Bosch used molded, snap-together vaccuum lines. A leak at the wrong joint, and the throttle diaphram gets sucked to full throttle. I've fixed a couple of those crap cars. It is a real problem.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Kiryat Malachi]

I don't run into runaway lanes a lot.

I would hope no one runs into runaway lanes a lot.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Carnildo]

If a car were subject to the same QA and maintainence procedures an airplane is, you could count on it to run for millions of miles without trouble.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[pwagland]

On the same theme: Saturn made a interesting assumption about their cars a few years ago. At high speed they reduced gas to the engine to control the speed to a maximum of 105mph. According to this entry in Risks digest (source of endless scary stories about computing and automation risks) the author was left going down hill at over 105mph, coasting, with a stalled engine, no power brakes and no power steering.

I'm sorry. I call bullshit.

Simply put, the guy in the article claimed that he had no power steerin, or brakes, and further that he had "coasted" up to 105 mph. There are two things here I find tricky to believe;

a. The car "coasts" at 105mph. That is pretty damn fast. That needs a long straight downhill road, and

b. that he had no brakes or power steering. As has been mentioned all over this story. You have both, you can even continue to use both assisted for a short while... well and truly long enough to put the clutch back in!

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Could it perhaps be like the current GM full-size trucks (Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra since 1999), whose emergency brakes are known ineffective at holding the vehicle on a grade, unpowered? The adjustment for the "parking brake" often goes out of spec due to bad design and cable stretching, and therefore the majority on the road (my 1999 model included) would be absolutely powerless to stop the 200HP+ motor under the hood should the need arise. Manufacturer refuses to acknowledge as a safety issue. What's a driver to do?

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[DrPepper]

This may actually be quite believable for this car.

The first time he braked, he probably tried it like you would normally - just ease on the brakes to take the speed off. Realising that not much was happenning (as the cruise control was not disengaging), he probably pushed harder and harder until experiencing brake fade.

However, modern Renaults (certainly this one) feature EBA - Emergency Brake Assist. If you slam on the brakes very suddenly, the computer senses that you want to stop sharpish, and actually puts the brakes on at maximum - much faster than you can (it reacts in a fraction of second as your foot starts moving).

So, when he was coming to the toll station, he probably started panicing and actually stamped on the brakes. The EBA would have kicked in and forced the brakes on as hard as they can go - actually stoppping the car, or slowing it enough to run it into a crash barrier safely.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Zzz]

Not 'just before the toll booth', but 20 km before the booth. In Europe, that constitutes a non-trivial distance in some places.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

And that direction is DOWWWWWNNNNNNNN.....! *thuddd*

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[teeker]

Are you sure? Everything I remember reading said Audi was vindicated and it was driver error. I had an 84 4kQ for some years (did all my own work on it) and am not sure which lines you mean. The throttle plate in that car is sprung pretty heavily, especially as it also plays the role of airflow meter IIRC (Bosch L-Jetronic right?). I am not sure which vacuum line could possibly suck open that plate, considering regular engine vacuum directly through the throttle body doesn't do it.

On a side note, that was by far my favorite car ever. Cheap, 4 doors, awesome in snow, good handling for a sedan of the period, and 210,000 mostly trouble free miles when I sold her...except for the crap door handles.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah that German article was handy...

"As soon as the driver puts it into the reader in the center console, going away barrier and steering column bolting device are solved. The driver must operate then an asynchronous operation button, in order to start the engine."

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[babybird]

I can tell you from personal experience that factory brakes on many cars (especially large cars like this) are woefully inadequate for the speeds they are capable of. What happens when your car starts taking off without you stepping on the gas and reaches 120 MPH and you try to panic-stop a large sedan with inadequate brakes is that you end up boiling the brake fluid under the extreme pressures and the extreme heat generated by the brakes at that speed.

I've had this happen to me driving a 1990 Ford Thunderbird SC at approximately 125 MPH and trying to slow down to 65 MPH for a corner that dropped into a valley. The brake fluid boiled at approximately 105 MPH and I had *NO* brakes as I was basically using vapor for hydraulic fluid. Thankfully I had the presence of mind to let off the brakes for a second to allow the rather effective cooling that ventilated disc brake rotors have at that speed, returning the brake fluid to its liquid state and then was able to downshift (manual transmission) and brake at a lesser rate and slow down enough to make the corner using both lanes (thankfully there was no traffic at the time) without plunging over the bank.

Lots of people who have experience in racing can attest to this phenomenon, although it's not very common in race cars anymore since the advent of DOT 5 silicone brake fluids. Needless to say, after this incident I flushed and replaced my brake fluid with racing brake fluid.

The vehicle in this article has an ELECTRONICALLY controlled "hand brake" (which contrary to popular belief is NOT designed as an emergency brake, it is a PARKING brake) which automatically engages when the ignition is turned off, which can only be switched off when the ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED transmission is in park. The ignition switch is controlled by a smart card which electronically operates the steering wheel lock and ignition rather than a physical switch you can twist and disable the ignition system and leave the steering unlocked. Cars like this are designed to be idiot-proof to make their owners feel safe.

I can't say with any authority, but I would not be surprised if, in addition to over-rev protection of the engine, that the transmission will NOT shift out of gear while the car is operating at wide-open throttle, as allowing this would likely cause fairly catastrophic transmission damage. Renault's own website highlights many of the features of this vehicle as making them "safer" in addition to increasing the expected lifespan of many of the powertrain components, going so far as to claim that these systems DOUBLE the expected lifespan of many wear-and-tear parts.

I think the only thing in this article that smells rotten is that auto manufacturers are becoming so concerned with being able to wave the "safest car in its class" flag that they're doing poor implementations of electronic "driver-aids." I'm sure they're probably wonderful and great in many circumstances, but the onus of potential software bugs or poor analysis of the situations encountered on public roadways and improper implementation leads to situations where the car takes control away from the driver *regardless* of what the driver knows about what's going on at the time.

Ultimately what it comes down to is that cars like this, with electronically controlled systems DIRECTLY responsible for the safety of the occupants (such as brakes and shifting into neutral and shutting down the engine) need an effective, immediate, simple MECHANICAL bypass.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[thogard]

Car in europe have a regulatory requirement for an emergency brake. The US rules requires a parking brake which will stop the car form high way speeds but you get better deacceleration just hitting the clutch (if you have one)

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[Anonymous Coward]

There are two parts of brake fade. One is boiling brake fluid. If you change your fluid regularly, you'll probably be okay. The other is gas release from organic brake pads. This is probably more common. Solution? High performance semi-metallic or metallic brake pads.

In your case I would bet it was caused by organic brake pads. The brake fluid is in constant contact with the brake calipers and if you have released the brakes, the rotors would not be in contact with any of the brake components.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[myowntrueself]

Relative to the position of the barrels, I think the truck driver would be safer than the car driver.

The car driver is going to have bits of barrel and lots of water coming through the windscreen, whereas the truck driver might get wet if the windscreen does break.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[MegaFur]

This is very likely true. (I live in the Midwest.)

I'm also pretty sure they've proven Kansas is actually flatter than a pancake. It's actually not that difficult to be flatter than a pancake, you see, because pancakes usually aren't all that flat--they're more sort of slightly curved towards the edges.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[MegaFur]

Planes often have secondary and sometimes tertiary control systems. Planes are also piloted by pilots that have been trained in how to handle emergencies. Often, the plane you're in will have other people in it, so at least if you're gonna die, you're not gonna die alone.

But the main reason, probably, why people don't want the car all wired and don't mind the plane being all wired is you're usually *driving* the car, whereas you already gave up control of the plane when you stepped inside. (unless, except, of course, if you're the pilot)

And then there's the ever-important "bleeding edge" factor. AFAIK, most of these all-wired car things are still new and "new-fangled". Maybe after they've been around for 30 years and we no longer hear stories about "runaway cars" and they have appropriate levels of redundancy built in, they won't be so bad.

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[WhiteBandit]

I'm also pretty sure they've proven Kansas is actually flatter than a pancake. It's actually not that difficult to be flatter than a pancake, you see, because pancakes usually aren't all that flat--they're more sort of slightly curved towards the edges.


Study: Kansas flatter than a pancake

Re:Wait for the investigation...

[leuk_he]

Well there are 2 articles... and you read only one. which is one more the average poster does.

The article in der spiegel said het managed to get the chipcard out and braked 20 km before a "mautstelle" (toll port?).

And the speed was of course 190 km/u. It is very hard to get a german or french car to displays mph. (and if it did it would explain the "bug")

Just so long...

[Scrab]

as the damn thing doesnt start calling itself KITT and trying to turbojump over stuff, I'm sure I'll cope....

Re:Just so long...

[Anonymous Coward]

KITT was soooooooo gay....

Re:Just so long...

[libolt]

Seeing as the vehicle took over and put the driver in potential danger, it would more than likely call itself KARR. :)

Oh not again....

[Tongue In A Box]

In the next edition of Knight Rider... Angered that he's been put into a european compact, KITT goes mad!

Re:How about

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I haven't had alot of practice writing english. :~(

Wonder what happened...

[IANAL(BIAILS)]

The article says he tried stepping on the brakes, but that had no effect on the cruise control... that's usually enough to break the cruise and return acceleration control to the driver, but it sounds as though there was a problem with whatever the electronic link was between the brakes and the cruise. The article doesn't say so, but did he simply try turning OFF the cruise control manually to get the car back under his control?

I also seem to remember years and years ago reading (i think it was in readers digest) about a woman who had the same problem with her car - she had to 'drive' it until the car ran out of gas and then stopped on its own. No cruise control there, so problems can occur with or without all the new technology out there.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[0123456]

"The article says he tried stepping on the brakes, but that had no effect on the cruise control"

Cruise control wouldn't matter: I doubt there's a car on the planet that can out-accelerate its brakes at 120mph. This isn't another idiot who hit the gas pedal rather than the brakes and then complained that the brakes didn't work, is it?

Or does the car really have non-mechanical brakes? I guess maybe a fault with electronic ABS could disable them.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[qqtortqq]

I helped out on an accident investigation a few months ago- there were probably 400 yards worth of skid marks, the the driver of the vehicle hit the center barrier 4 or 5 times. I was trying figure out how those skids were left (she wasnt doing 600mph) when someone looked in the car and saw a sandal stuck under the gas pedal, pinning it to the floor. The back wheels were locked up because she was on the brake, but the engine kept the power to the front wheels, keeping the car in motion. Must have been a hell of a ride.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[windex]

I drive a 2004 MINI Cooper.

MINI's have by-wire fuel and braking. Neither pedal is wired into any kind of mechanical linkage, however the breaking and power steering systems operate off of the battery instead of the engine and the car has a sophisticated warning system for low battery / battery problem conditions.

It's more common than you think, almost every car maker these days is using by wire technology in braking, and more and more in fuel systems in an effort to optimize acceleration for fuel economy purposes.

To my knowledge, no one yet is using by-wire steering in a car sold in the US to the general public. I beleive the Honda FCX fuel cell vehicle being used by the California state government is by-wire, however.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Judging by the number of smacks, I'm assuming she didn't walk away from that one.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[0123456]

Scary... I didn't realise that non-mechanical brakes were that widespread.

"however the breaking and power steering systems operate off of the battery"

So a flat battery means you no longer have any brakes?

Re:Wonder what happened...

[gfxguy]

Of course cruise control should matter, because in all the other scenarios people are giving you're either trashing brakes or engine. In fact, crusie control was supposedly the problem... every car I've ever driven in had a separate power switch for cruise control... braking just disengages it.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[windex]

Yup. But you also have no way to start the car, and the car will not allow you to drive it with a low battery. Worst case I can think of is if your battery somehow became disconnected during driving, and your engine stalled. But I think we'd call that an 'accident', and your car would've been previously stopped by a large tree/car/home. :)

Justin

Re:Wonder what happened...

[agentk]

You can also disengage cruise control by hitting the gas pedal. Happened to my father... in a tunnel in Boston at rush hour!

Re:Wonder what happened...

[TwoStep]

I also have a MINI, and I believe you are incorrect. The power steering pump on the MINI is electric, not run off a belt like in most cars.

The throttle is drive by wire, but the brakes are not. The MINI does have an option (which I have on my car) which is capable of engaging the brakes on individual wheels to correct skids.

One of (any maybe the only) car with any form of by-wire braking is one of the high end Mercedes, which still has emergency mechanical linkages to the front brakes, in case of computer failure.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[Anonymous Coward]

depends on how she hit the barrier... if I could get a runaway, say, under 60 or so, I might be tempted to lay some paint on the barrier to help slow it down... friction can be your friend, and a sideswipe is way different from Mr. Car, meet Mr. Concrete abutment.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[qqtortqq]

I never saw the accident investigator's report, but from what I can tell, the first barrier strikes were glancing blows. It was the last one did her in. It finally killed the car, and she ended up at the hospital, don't know how badly she was injured.

Re:Wonder what happened...

[Anonymous Coward]

On every car I've owned, hitting the gas pedal has never disengaged cruise control. It just sped the car up until I took my foot off the gas, then dropped it back down to cruise speed.

Transmission?

[dumpsterdiver]

Neither article indicated that the driver attempted to shift the car to neutral. Sure, the engine would leap out of the hood, but that sure beats getting creamed by a semi.

Re:Transmission?

[Anonymous Coward]

That particular car mentioned is a high tech model with completely automated shifting system, hence making the question about too much reliance on computer controlled system a very valid one...

Re:Transmission?

[Alioth]

It wouldn't do even that - it'd hit the rev limiter and not go any higher. I'm extremely skeptical that this story is true.

Re:Transmission?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Then again, who would have believed the BMW would build a car's electronics around Windows CE? Or was that PocketPC?

I'm starting to think that with all this rush to market, rapid prototyping, and designing things hyper-effieciently, we are missing the most crucial stage to design work. The "What the hell were you thinking" phase. Where you assemble a testbed and just scratch your head.

Re:Transmission?

[avalys]

"Then again, who would have believed the BMW would build a car's electronics around Windows CE?"

Okay, enough with this bit of misinformation.

BMW built an replacement for a car's dashboard controls using Windows CE. Windows CE has absolutely nothing to do with BMW's engine management, safety, traction control, etc. systems. All their iDrive system does is replace the countless knobs, buttons, and gizmos that used to festoon BMW dashboards. If the system fails/crashes/whatever, it does not affect the driveability of the car at all.

That is all.

Well....

[greechneb]

Anything is going to have a risk associated with it. Yes, there are more things that can go wrong with all the electronic controls on vehicles. But the throttle cable could get stuck on the old 63 Dodge Dart you have in your driveway. You could also trip and roll down a hill and hit your head if you choose to walk to avoid "dangerous" cars.

I do think cars should have a kill switch that is available to the drivers that kills power to the ignition coil, or something similar. Aside from pulling fuses out, there isn't always a way to stop the car if something similar happens.

Re:Well....

[drinkypoo]

On current vehicles the majority of them use engine vacuum to power the brake booster and they use engine rotation to run the power steering pump. Killing the ign coil would be bad. However you could have a failsafe mode in the ECU which would run the car at idle and refuse to rev it higher, which would accomplish what you're going for without making the controls too hard for some people to use. Starting in 2006 cars are going to go entirely drive-by-wire with electric power steering and electric braking systems, so that would be the time to have an ignition kill switch.

Re:Well....

[Jens_UK]

The only electric steering I've heard about going into production is the type that uses electric motors to assist the completely mechanical link between steering wheel and steering rack. I would be curious as to what vehicle is going to steer by wire with no mechanical link.

Hello, 911?

[Bob(TM)]

Yes, hello, 911?

It seems my car *refuses* to stop at red lights. Whenever I approach one turning red, the car mysteriously speeds up through the intersection.

Do be a peach and clear the way for me until I can get this under control ... I'm sure I'll have it resolved by the time I reach my home.

Re:Hello, 911?

[kfancher]

I just want to know where there is a tollway that has 125 miles between booths.

Re:Hello, 911?

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe they have one in France....

Re:Hello, 911?

[grummerX]

The main line of the New York State Thruway is 426 miles long and you only encounter booths upon entering and exiting.

Re:Hello, 911?

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

What's even funnier about this comment is that someone would likely get home before 911 even answers the phone.

"And tragically, having no hands...

[Capella or Bust]

he was also unable to switch the car into neutral, making his waltz with death even more darkly ironic."

Some info on the subject...

[cr0y]

Even if you cannot shut off the car there are a few ways to get the car to slow down, you can try to rip the car into neutral, when in neutral you will be able to stop normally, if that doesnt work a combination of normal breaks (pushing VERY hard) and e-break will typically slow the car enough to get it to hit a ditch or other semi-soft object without to much injury (Try to get into a field, less traction = less speed)

Something is not quite right

[slashdot_punk]

Why not just put the gear in neutral? The engine will rev and might blow, but you could roll to a stop. If it were a newer car, it probably has an automatic shutoff when the engine is about to destroy itself.

I hope they wrote him a ticket

[razmaspaz]

He was speeding. I hope he gets a ticket. Can he sue the car company for the cost of the ticket?

that's a damn good idea

[unformed]

if i'm late for a long trip, call the police, tell 'em to clear the roads and then go at 120 mph ..... nicely done Hicham

Cannonball Run

[Trurl's Machine]

Don't mean to offend anyone, but is there anything actually backing up the driver's story? Personally, I wouldn't mind having a sort of cannonball run through the highway with police clearing path for me, and then explain "officer, there was something wrong with my cruise control".

Re:Cannonball Run

[rmohr02]

The translated Google version of the article seems to indicate the fault in the car was found. But it's not exactly easy to follow.

Re:Cannonball Run

[kaleco]

Heh, do you really think the police were content to leave this issue after the guy got the car back under control? It would set an outstanding precident if they did.
I think that a car hammering along at 120mph wouldn't be particularly unusual on French roads mind :)

Re:Cannonball Run

[Reality Master 101]

Yes, this story is utter, complete, bull crap, just like the Audi "unintended acceleration" stories where the car supposedly suddenly lurched forward. It's generally recognized now that the drivers hit the accelerator instead of the brake.

There is NO WAY that a car motor would overpower the brakes.

Re:Cannonball Run

[MORB]

According to another article, Renault's ceo said that on first examination on the premises, they noticed no particular marks on the brake disks and on the brake pads.

If it's true, it's fishy indeed.
They also say that the car seemed to behave normally when a mechanic drove it from his truck to a garage, but if it was some kind of rare sftware malfunction and the computer reset itself, they wouldn't notice anything anyway.

I don't even know if they have logs in these car computers.

Re:Cannonball Run

[arivanov]

Go to a Renault dealer and listen to the truckload of bull on the newest coolest features:

1. It is started by smartcard with an actuated reader system like on an ATM (it "eats" the card). So in fact you cannot take it out if the car decides not to spit it out. Same as a broken ATM.

2. Vel Satis has fully automatic transmission which is electronic. No gear lever in any shape or form. If the car decides not to shift into wherever you want to shift you get whatever you bargained for.

To add to this:

3. Renault is famous for its automatic transmission being a permanent problem (ask any car mechanic) while its manual being possibly the most reliable in the world (I know plenty of cases where it did 300000 miles plus). If you bought a Renault automatic you are a certified idiot and methinks you asked for it.

Re:Cannonball Run

[SamSim]

My question is: of all the cruise control machines in the world, what are the odds that the first one to malfunction in such a spectacular fashion would ALSO have a swipe card ignition system?

Re:Cannonball Run

[Anonymous Coward]

well yawn..
Only an american would call cops with a fake excuse to drive at 200km/h.

It has began

[roman_mir]

And so it has began, the machine has obviously acquired self-awareness and decided that it does not want to slave for the humans any longer, it began its happy free ride on the highway... the highway to hell.

Re:It has began

[Farrside]

Well, I for one welcome our new Self-Aware Car Overlords!

Re:It has began

[Anonymous Coward]

> And so it has began, the machine has obviously
> acquired self-awareness and decided that it
> does not want to slave for the humans any
> longer, it began its happy free ride on the
> highway... the highway to hell.

Now that's new. Read Isaac Asimov's 1957 story "Sally".

Re:It has began

[roman_mir]

Thank you for the long needed pointer, your anonymous obviousness.

Brakes?

[FLOOBYDUST]

" Stomping on the brakes proved pointless" When the Audi rapid acceleration "issue" came out quite a few years ago the local newspaper Auto writer, (well respected) pointed out the the braking system is designed to overcome the acceleration/ drivetrain system. Is this still true? What exactly does "pointless" mean? ...stopped and read the article.... .. "Erst nach rund einer Stunde und 200 Kilometern konnte er schließlich den Wagen zum Halten bringen" ok now I understand

I don't buy it.

[sdo1]

Every one of these stories about "uncontrolled acceleration" and "out of control" cars is exactly one thing... A driver who doesn't know what the heck they're doing. No brakes? They're stronger than the engine. How about just shifting into neutral? Even an automatic transmision has that option.

Sorry. I just don't believe these stores as anything other than driver's fabrications to cover their own ineptness. It would take a multiple simultaneous failure of unrelated systems to make this happen.

-S

Re:I don't buy it.

[slashdot_punk]

"No brakes? They're stronger than the engine."

Ummmm... no. When you're doing 60-120mph and your brakes are fighting a surging engine, your brakes will overheat and become useless. In fact, your rotors will become red hot and warp when they overheat.

Brake overheating usually happens if you're driving down a steep mountain road and you hold the brake too long OR you're an Indy 500 race car driver...

Re:I don't buy it.

[cakefool]

IIRC, the velsatis is almost completely electronic - not to mention huge for a european car. It is entirely poss the brakes are by wire, and the gear shift possible is also not connected to the gearbox, only the interim computer.

Sadly the last point is untrue, the gearshift is direct, but the computer can lock you out of a stupid (120mph into neutral) manouver.

Also - unrelated failures? what if you only have one master control computer with modular systems running off it - failure in the master unit fscks all!

Re:I don't buy it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your brakes should easily stop you from that speed once. Of course you should apply firm pressure to stop the car in 10-20 seconds, not keep the brakes engaged until you run out of petrol.

Driving down a mountain on the footbrake is only for the dumb. An experienced driver would not try that...

Re:I don't buy it.

[Sefert]

Actually this happened to a good friend of mine. She had a new Mercedes (not sure which model - one of the painfully expensive ones). She was in a parkade though when it happened to her, and I think the car was simply too powerful for the brakes to stop it adequately. Her passenger told me he could see her stomping on the brakes to no effect. In her case, she chose to turn the car over the edge onto the next level, landing on another car, rather than speeding towards the edge of the parkade where she would have plunged several stories down to the road below. As an interesting aside, the police could find nothing wrong with the vehicle, though I doubt they had the ability to check the chip programming itself thoroughly.

Re:I don't buy it.

[hab136]

Sadly the last point is untrue, the gearshift is direct, but the computer can lock you out of a stupid (120mph into neutral) manouver.

Why is this a stupid manouver? I've shifted 90mph into neutral before (Dodge Neon), coasting down hills in West (and regular) Virginia. It's not bad for the engine, and arguably better than expending gas and engine wear+tear for going down a long, straight hill.

In a Chevy Nova, I've shifted from drive to reverse at 45mph (by accident). Stopped the engine(!) but after shifting back to park, the engine started back up and ran for several more years.. and then the car was sold, so who knows what happened to it then.

Re:I don't buy it.

[officepotato]

"No brakes? They're stronger than the engine."

Are you sure about that? An engine in first gear spinning 6000 rpms puts out a LOT of power.

Also, brakes are designed to survive one highway-speed-to-zero hard stop without warping, but that's it. They need cooling-off time after that to cool down from their current temperature of over 1,000 degrees. There's no way they can survive a 120-to-zero stop with the engine pulling at full power.

Re:I don't buy it.

[slashdot_punk]

It is quite irritating to be misquoted....

"Driving down a mountain on the footbrake is only for the dumb"

And another thing... you're just plain wrong. A car engine is more powerfull than you think. People have driven into crowds when their car surged, even though both feet were slamming down the break....

"Your brakes should easily stop you from that speed once"

Re:I don't buy it.

[PhuCknuT]

It would take a multiple simultaneous failure of unrelated systems to make this happen.


Not really. Subaru recently had a recall for the WRX, for a problem with the cruise control. It seems the cable between the cruise control device and the throttle body could pop out of its track, even when you weren't using cruise control, and jam the throttle in the open position. One simple, old fashioned, mechanical failure and you've got uncontrolled acceleration.

Re:I don't buy it.

[sdo1]

One simple, old fashioned, mechanical failure and you've got uncontrolled acceleration.

Well, no. My point was that if such a failure happens, the inability to stop the vehicle would also mean simultaneous failures of systems which could also stop the car such as brakes and transmission.

Bottom line. The driver didn't know enough to pop the thing into neutral.

-S

Re:I don't buy it.

[glenebob]

All true, all true.

It amazes me how ignorant the general population is about things almost all of use every day.

First, brakes can most definately overpower the drive train. If not in first gear, most certainly in whatever gear you're in at hiway speeds.

Second, shift into neutral if you have to! This is not rocket science. If you have a stick, depressing the clutch will have the same effect. Most modern cruise control systems will detect over-rev and shut down. Besides, if you have to save yourself by killing your engine, isn't that worth it?

Third, loss of power assist will not cause brakes or steering to fail, it will just make them require more force from the driver. They are designed specifically to still work without power assist.

Fourth, there is no such thing as braking or steering by wire. See point three.

Fifth, shutting off the engine would be a perfectly good thing to do; see points three and four.

This is likely a story of a guy fooling the police into giving him a high speed escort, or of an inexcusable level of ignorance at the very least.

Re:I don't buy it.

[Anonymous Coward]

You really did not read the article, did you?
For example, the computer did not ALLOW him to
shift into neutral, since the engine would have run too fast in that mode.
Also, for this car the breakes are not strong
enough to stop the engine if it is going at full
speed (turns out that this is the case for most cars).
Your third and fourth point do not apply because of these reasons.
Finally, this type of cars does not have a manual ignition with a key, but is operated by a magnetic card. So removing the card did not have an effect.

Re:I don't buy it.

[glenebob]

Oh really, Mr. AC?

Quoth the article:
"I stepped as firmly, as I could, on the brakes, and the car came finally to a halt."

Re:I don't buy it.

[babybird]

Not in these newer luxury cars. Even back in 1991 Infinity was making a car, their flagship Q45, where all the electronic systems were linked together. In modern cars they're tying more and more systems to one another. When you add anti-lock brakes it often makes sense to tie the ABS system to the engine management to cut fuel to the engine under anti-lock braking, and to the transmission to control engine engagement and shifting. When you add traction control it becomes necessary to tie the brake system to the engine management system and transmission system. When you add electronic parking brakes it becomes necessary to tie that braking system to the engine management and transmission system. When you want to make the car theft-resistant by incorporating a smart-card instead of a mechanical key/switch to the ignition, you lose the ability to control the steering lockout independently from the ignition. And when you tie that system to the transmission requiring the car to be in park before turning off, ostensibly to prevent a driver from inadvertently leaving the car in neutral and rolling away later, you lose the ability to turn the ignition off in the event of a failure such as this.

When the new model BMW 745i came out a year or two ago with the iDrive system running Windows embedded, they had several problems with the system (I don't recall what the problems were, but the iDrive controls basically everything in the vehicle).

You may think these systems are all unrelated and it would take multiple simultaneous falures of unrelated systems to cause a problem like this, but I think you may be making assumptions about those systems.

For example, shifting into neutral, even automatic transmissions have that option you say. Yes they do (in almost every car), but given that in modern cars that shifter is nothing more than an electronic switch, and the actual shifting is controlled by computer and electro-hydraulic actuators, the transmission may not actually shift into neutral (especially if the engine is operating and full-throttle).

Brakes stronger than the engine? Yes that's true...at standstill. When you're going 120 MPH the brakes are ANYTHING but powerful, and in most cars they will overheat and fade in fractions of a second. At 120+ MPH doing a panic stop in many large vehicles will cause the brake fluid to heat to its boiling point, leaving you with no hydraulic pressure whatsoever, ergo no brakes no matter how hard you step on the pedal. If you're not aware of this possibility, it may not occur to someone in a panic situation in traffic on the highway about to careen out of control or smash into the back of a truck to RELEASE the brakes and allow them to cool for a second so you can slow down some more.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying you may think the systems and factors involved here are much simpler than they may in fact be.

Re:I don't buy it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you think the police were able to check if she was stomping on the gas?

Re:I don't buy it.

[mark-t]

Actually, the brakes should be stronger than the engine at any speed. If they can't stop the car at full throttle then the brakes were too worn down in the first place and should have been replaced before the trip. Although I realize when you're careening down a highway at 120 and unable to stop it may seem a little late for "should have's", my point is that the situation is preventable in the first place by checking your brakes regularly enough that you'd never get caught in that position.

Re:I don't buy it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Brakes put down a lot more torque than the engine, since obviously you can stop faster than you can accelerate in most cars. Hence, you can use them to stall the engine. Though if you don't apply them seriously, if you just "feather" them thinking to slow down just 10-20 pmh, they will overheat and become unusable for a few minutes (they should cool down pretty fast at 120mph). They won't "warp". Warping happens when you lock the wheels or keep the brakes on after a hard stop due to uneven heating/cooling of the rotor.

Re:I don't buy it.

[cakefool]

Shifting into neutral whilst moving is classed as A Stupid Manouver(TM) because coasting technically doesn't give you much control over your vehicle - slowing down and steering isn't always enough.

On the other hand I've shifted into neutral in a Vauxhall nova at 120mph(indicated, probably 110 really) because half my 80 mile journey was essentially uphill, and the other half downhill.

If I hadn't thrashed the ballls off it to get to 120, I might have gotten good mileage, factoring in 20-30 miles coasting.

Re:I don't buy it.

[hab136]

Shifting into neutral whilst moving is classed as A Stupid Manouver(TM) because coasting technically doesn't give you much control over your vehicle - slowing down and steering isn't always enough.

Cars only do three things - speed up, slow down, and turn. In neutral, yes, we've taken away the speeding up option, so you only have 2/3 the control you would have otherwise. However, that's not necessarily stupid; there's not a lot of reasons to speed up when you're already traveling 90mph. Besides, you can always rev your engine back up and then slip into gear.

Now, if the car were to prevent me from jumping into reverse when I was traveling more than, say, 10mph forward.. I would consider that prevention of a "stupid" move, one that you should never make. Going into/out of neutral at high speed, though, isn't necessarily stupid, and thus shouldn't be prevented by the car.

Re:I don't buy it.

[cakefool]

You are technically correct - the best kind of correct.

Please attempt the following when you find a large safe area - Accelerate to 45, perform emergency swerve. Thats swerve, then swerve back onto line, as if you just avoided an idiot on the motor/freeway. Repeat , but engage neutral at 45mph. Worst case, you spin out, best, you lose a ton of speed, and are now in another lane, one that might not have been expecting you there.

I agree, and often coast on the motorways, but in gear with the clutch down - instant power and control if needed(Warning: will screw clutch if not properly adjusted; "Instant" claim reliant upon reactions)

You want to try that at 90? I don't.

Thanks

can't kid me...

[N3Z]

He just wanted to see how fast he could go!

Stomp on the breaks?

[giantsfan89]

After 125 miles:
"I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said.

I think that would be one of the first things I'd try. I'm sure this was a scary situation!

Re:Stomp on the breaks?

[Anonymous Coward]

The linked article is a piece of shit. He stopped the car by removing the card key.

In the UK

[Skiron]

He would be fined for speeding and had his licence taken away - like they do to Ambulance drivers here.

Re:In the UK

[el_chicano]

From the article linked above:

Last year, Mick Ferguson, of the West Yorkshire ambulance service was taking a liver to Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridgeshire when he was found to be driving at 104 mph on the A1 near Grantham, Lincolnshire.

Did anyone else find it weird that an article from the BBC used miles per hour to measure speed? I thought the UK used the metric system -- doesn't the BBC use kilometers per hour to measure speed?

Re:In the UK

[james72]

The UK uses both systems. We still use MPH for speed (and miles for distance), but sell petrol in Litres now. We switched from Gallons (UK gals, different from US gals) about 10 years ago.

Temperature is generally metric.

-James.

Re:In the UK

[Anonymous Coward]

no... we use miles per hour.

Re:In the UK

[pjt33]

The EU is dragging us kicking and screaming into the metric system, but we still use Imperial for some things - speed limits, quantities of drink in bars, etc.

Re:In the UK

[Shambhu]

Do you measure gas mileage in miles per liter?

Re:In the UK

[james72]

No, just to confuse things, that's still generally MPG. Still at least the UK is making the effort to convert! Unlike one large country I know off... :)

-James.

Re:In the UK

[AndrewHowe]

Only beer and cider...
I found a good BBC article about it here.
I like one of the comments... "It is easier to count in 10s than 16s."
But I'm a computer programmer, you insensitive c10d!

Re:In the UK

[pjt33]

I haven't yet found a bar which won't sell me a pint of lemonade.

hmmm

[5m477m4n]

Did this driver have a couple of "pints" before his car "took control?"

Re:Bad Cars

[gregarican]

What's wrong with Renaults? Oh yeah, two words. Le Car...

Failure of Engineering, Not Failure of Consumer

[reporter]

The frightening scenario of a car accelerating on its own is a failure of engineering. The engineer should have analyzed the dangerous modes of failure and then ensured redundancy in those modes. For example, the space shuttle has multiple computers performing identical tasks; if one computer failures, then the remaining computers continue to operate.

For a car with cruise control, there should be an emergency lever that shuts off the hoses supplying fuel to the engine. The driver would control the lever manually just as he manually controls the parking brake.

Re:Failure of Engineering, Not Failure of Consumer

[Alioth]

It isn't needed. The solutions are:

1. The brakes will overpower the engine anyway. Just press on the brakes hard.
2. Put the car in neutral.
3. If the car has manual transmission, simply press the clutch pedal down.

Re:Failure of Engineering, Not Failure of Consumer

[stienman]

For a car with cruise control, there should be an emergency lever that shuts off the hoses supplying fuel to the engine.

There is, but it's tucked away in the trunk (or boot, for you british) of the car and typically requires a collision to activate. Alternately the switch (or another one) can also be activated by rolling the car over.

Either of these maneuvers can readily be performed even when speeding, so I don't see any reason the driver couldn't stop if he had to.

Speaking from an engineer's perspective, however, The cruise control has an on/off switch which is also actived by tapping the brakes lightly. These are redundant and should completely cut power to the cruise control module if the watch dog timer hasn't kicked it around a bit already. This is the ideal spot to increase safety, not with a fuel cut off which will produce the same problems that ignition cutoff does - no power brakes or steering.

Alternately the brakes should be able to completely stop the car even when the engine is putting out full power. This can be shown by the idea that the car can always decellerate more quickly than it can accelerate. Therefore the driver should simply brake to a complete stop, then put the car into neutral or park with the parking brake on and turn off the ignition. Ideally the ignition should still be operable (ie, he should be able to turn it off even if he's holding a mag or rfid card/chip). The idea that the car doesn't turn off until the driver has left the seat is ridiculus - I hope that this isn't true in this particular car. Too many accidents can happen while exiting the vehicle (bump the gear lever) if the ignition is on.

I believe that either the driver is not competant enough to drive this vehicle, or is blaming the car for various reasons. It may be simply to get a free high speed ride, but it's possible that they want to highlight possible problems that people should be aware of in newer, 'smarter' cars. Could also be a simple smear campaign against Renault.

-Adam

Re:Failure of Engineering, Not Failure of Consumer

[ReporterIsATroll]

The frightening scenario of a car accelerating on its own is a failure of engineering.

really? you mean we weren't suppose to entrust our lives to Kit? uh oh...

[sending this message as i'm driving]

brakes 'suddenly' worked?

[zboy]

he probably just made a bunch of money off a bet with some friends

HELL!

[kvn299]

The devil's in my car!

Cheap shot ...

[YankeeInExile]

He was driving a Renault?

People -- there is a reason the least often uttered phrase in the world is Quality French Engineering

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me guess, you eat Freedom Fries?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[code shady]

Actually . . . its second only to Quality Italian Engineering
Seriously, you all know what FIAT really stands for, right? Fix It Again, Tony.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[YankeeInExile]

I don't get it. Is this a Belgium reference?

When I do feel the need, I order papas fritas

Re:Cheap shot ...

[alnjmshntr]

Renault built probably the most dominant Formula 1 engine of the 1990's

Re:Cheap shot ...

[YankeeInExile]

Well -- I have had several Fiats in my days. One of which the front half of the car was held to the back half basically by the fenders, because the frame was broken, so yes they did have ...curious...failure modes.

On the other hand, there was a period in the 50s and 60s where Italian sports cars ruled the roost. And they were well engineered.

Back to French autos: I had a friend who owned a Peugeot - and he complained, as we were waiting for the tow truck, This car has had parts fail that I'd never even HEARD of! What the hell is a fuel accumulator?!. I speculated it was a pressure buffer in the fuel injection system.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, now you've just blown the hell out of "trickle down" theory.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't catch me dead in a Peugeot.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your search - "Quality French Engineering" - did not match any documents. http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie =UTF-8&q=%22quality+french+engineering%22

Re:Cheap shot ...

[rsidd]

People -- there is a reason the least often uttered phrase in the world is Quality French Engineering

Cheap insult: moronic ignorant xenophobic American. Heard of the TGV? 300 km/h (over 1800 mph), running since the early 80s, not a single fatality and only a small handful of accidents. Compare that with Amtrak or British Rail. Heard of the Concorde? Heard of Airbus?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I heard of the Concorde it was being retired because they were falling apart on the runways.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean, like some american space shuttles ?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

umm... ferrari, anyone? lamborghini? where do those come from?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think your decimal is off on that mph figure... Quality French math.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Lord_Dweomer]

I thought the least uttered phrase was British Reliability.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the Concorde went down because it ran over a piece that had fallen off of a Boeing plane.

There was a chunk of a Continental Airlines jet on the runway that the Concord ran over and its tire kicked the chunk up and damaged the craft.

Thats how i remember it anyway.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

over 1800 mph

Mach 2.5? Christ!

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

ah, then it's so tremendously SAFE, I guess....

Re:Cheap shot ...

[PonyHome]

Airbus? Isn't that the french plane that flies itself into trees?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't confuse prestige (synonym for "hey y'all, look a the size of my penis"?) with reliability.

An acquaintance used to daily drive a Ferrari 308 in the 1980s. $12k a year in maintenance costs (it was ~10k mi when he bought it). He gave it up for a 911 - which he still owns by the way.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

How about alive in a dead Peugot?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[sad_]

that's right, but FORD spells 'Driver Returns On Foot' backwards.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

lamborghini

If there isn't anything broken, it's not a Lambourghini. They may look great but they do have their problems. However the dealer near me sais its part of the character of the car. Go figure.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[bcron]

Quality French Engineering ... other example? Airbus 320 crash at the Paris Airshow, 1988 .... This story is often brought up as one of the tragic cases when the computer overrode the commands of the pilot. As it turns out, this anegdote is correct at all. French Engineering can happen to you to!

Re:Cheap shot ...

[jrumney]

I had the misfortune to hire a Citreon in Italy recently. The tow truck driver that took me back to get it exchanged when it refused to start said that in recent years Citreon had overtaken Fiat as his number one source of business.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[BlueUnderwear]

He was driving a Renault?

A Renault? I.e. a French car? So he was actually going backwards at 120 mph?

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Grishnakh]

Heard of the Concorde?

If I'm not mistaken, the Concorde used Rolls-Royce engines, which are obviously British.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Bertie]

I'd say it's heard considerably more often than "good American car" anyway. It's funny how US car sales are virtually non-existent in Europe and Japan, where there's a wide choice of vastly superior machinery, isn't it?

Furthermore, Renault own Nissan, who I believe shift quite a few cars Stateside. Nissans don't break down. Ever.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[GrahamCox]

Well -- I have had several Fiats in my days. One of which the front half of the car was held to the back half basically by the fenders, because the frame was broken, so yes they did have ...curious...failure modes.
Was it a 128, maybe a 3p? We used to rally one. Up to a point it was a great car, until a hard day's yumping over Eppynt led to the exact same failure you describe - there was a noticable bend in the body just ahead of the windscreen, which MOVED as you leaned on it. We still finished though ;-) Tremendous handling and great engine nevertheless.
On the other hand, there was a period in the 50s and 60s where Italian sports cars ruled the roost. And they were well engineered.
Yep, but by and large never that well built. Always been the Italians' achilles heel, productionisation.
As for French Quality Engineering - the new Peugeot 407 coupe you Americans... look upon it and weep.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[dbitter1]

I tried googling for that phrase, just hoping that it would come up with the Did you mean 'Crappy French Engineering' ?, but alas, it didn't...

:(

Re:Cheap shot ...

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"Heard of the Concorde?"

Yeah, and last time I checked one was downed by a tire that exploded.

"Heard of Airbus?"

Yep, and last I checked a fly-by-wire system destroyed a prominent Aribus jet at an airshow. Sort of how a drive-by-wire system caused this car to accelerate out of control.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[Anonymous Coward]

*sigh*

Concorde was downed by an accident, but still remains one of the most advanced commercial planes out there. Any Boeings out there flying at Mach 1?

As for the Airbus, it wasn't the fly by wire that downed the plane, but a misjudgement. The pilot was too low, too slow. The computer refused to let him pull up sharply - an action that would have caused the plane to stall and crash.

Re:Cheap shot ...

[rsidd]

"Heard of the Concorde?"

Yeah, and last time I checked one was downed by a tire that exploded.

Ah you're right, that's so unlike American planes that never ever crash, not even one in 20 years.

"Heard of Airbus?"

Yep, and last I checked a fly-by-wire system destroyed a prominent Aribus jet at an airshow.

And, of course, no Boeing has ever crashed. And I note that you haven't heard of the TGV. Or of the Paris underground (Metro/RER) network that connects both airports, all train stations, and every part of Paris. Quite different from New York, where JFK still doesn't have a decent train connection to Manhattan (the subway takes as long as the TGV train from Paris's CDG airport to Brussels!), and a light rail has only just opened connecting it to Queens -- that too, running slowed-down after a test run crashed killing the driver. Good old American know-how.

Well...

[Blue-Footed Boobie]

Thankfully, he was able to make use of the DBES that is built into that car. Oh, there wasn't a Driver Bowel Evacuation System in that car?? That's gotta be a mess...

*COUGH*

[FlimFlamboyant]

Vel Satis has been awarded the maximum 5-star rating from Euro NCAP, an independant consortium. It is now the safest saloon in the executive-car segment.

Famous last words.

What, no gear shifter?

[El_Smack]

The guy couldn't slip it into neutral? Or park or reverse? I put a Toyota Corolla w/ automatic transmision into reverse once on the freeway and all it did was shut off the motor. No damage at all. Renault's website shows what looks like an automatic transmision gear shifter in that car.

Re:What, no gear shifter?

[Anonymous Coward]

or reverse

Hmm..from 120 km/h into reverse..that I want to see from a save distance ;) Luckely in the Renault there is a safety that prevents you from doing that.

Take a lesson from SF

[maxchaote]

This is why all those high-tech gadgets of the world of tomorrow in classic Sci Fi had "manual override"s.

sounds fishy to me

[pqdave]

I might believe a glitch that caused momentary unexpected acceleration, but I've got a hard time believing that the entire car is drive-by-wire, or that the throttle, foot brake, parking brake, transmission and ignition all failed in such a way as to prevent the car from being slowed to under 100 miles for 125 miles, even with outside advice. Similar cases have been found to be deliberate.

Poor Excuse for a Joyride

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, so the guy wanted to drive down the highway at a hundred miles an hour, so he had the bright idea to call 911 and blame it on the cruise control in his car. Blammo, the police clear all the traffic off the road for him. He probably wouldn't even have had to pay a fine for skipping the tollbooth.
Yeah, if I need to get somewhere in a hurry, I know what to do now. Just call the cops and tell them my car is "out of control". /pbz

Re:Poor Excuse for a Joyride

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesnt wash.
In France on the express way, if you are only doing 120mph you get assholes driving VW Golf GT riding just a few meters your rear bumper.

If I remember, the speed limit is 90mph I think.
Of course I was in a Skyline GTR 33 at the time so I just *had* to see if it would do the full 180mph that the speedo goes to. I think I got to about 170 MPH before my significant other started to suspect I was grossly exceeding the speed limit and asked me to slow down. (of course I did this early in the morning when there was no traffic around) That was one smoooth ride - felt like the car was on rails. Of course I had to take 15 min breaks every hour to recover, and to keep my average speed down so I didn't get done for having too fast a journey time for the distance travelled when I got to the tollgate.

No one has said it yet, so I will...

[jea6]

The problem is he was trying to pass...in a Renault.

My Wheels...

[Thunderstruck]

Much safter transportation, my 1979 HD sportster. It has 3 circuits, a headlight, a taillight/break light, and the ignition coil. It has two fuses. It has no speedometer, no rear shock absorber, no front break, and no windshield. I ride without a helmet.

I'm STILL Safer than this guy!

Re:My Wheels...

[nordicfrost]

I'm STILL Safer than this guy!

As soon as the vehicle comes to a violent stop at any larger sized object, your're not.

Re:My Wheels...

[Thunderstruck]

Something about being perfectly safe six feet under ground.

... a beta AI in the car?

[Windbeutel]

it got a little cross with gran'pa driving, and decided to teach him a lesson... Hmmm... why am I all of a sudden thinking about Asimov and the 3 laws of robotics, and wondering if Reanalult techs ever heard of failsafes? It seems that this car might be running on some MS derivate OS, not a solid real time os. (could I be thinking of QNX or are those just letters in my head?)

Well, I've got this figured out.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/jan0 4/01-08VCCES04PR.asp

Microsoft Momentum Hits the Road in 2004 Model Year Vehicles

Drive a manual

[Oscar26]

If everyone didn't have automatic transmissions, this problem wouldn't have been an issue. Just push in the clutch and let the engine spin all it wants. There is no drivetrain connected to it anymore.

Seriously, something smells fishy in the story. I found it hard to believe that the "off" button suddenly broke.

Re:Drive a manual

[CMiYC]

The article clearly says France. In Europe most cars are manual. Automatics are not very popular.

Re:Drive a manual

[adamdeprince]

Automatics have a neutral setting as well ... perhaps for this very reason? Very fish. The brakes responded somewhat; instead of pushing harder to stop the car, the driver tooled around a little before he "tried really hard." Hmm, do that in the first place?

Renault replies

[Namishman]

The official PR spokesman for Renault commented:
It's not a bug, it's a feature.

Talk about your Race Conditions

[EvilTwinSkippy]

We've all heard of race conditions in computer science, but this goes way too far.

But seriously, why one earth didn't they engineer in a kill switch. A nice big red button. Your furnace has one. You mainframe has one. Every robot in a factory has one, as do most dumber bits of equipment.

Re:Talk about your Race Conditions

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

Because most modern computers don't have one (for whatever reason, they've replaced the mechanical power switch with an ACPI shutdown notifier).

Hmmm... French Car, Right?

[Alan Livingston]

Renault's a french company, right? Clearly the overtaking truck triggered the fear response in the car. Apparently, in this case the fear response is flight. Probably better for the passengers than if it chose fight...

I should try that...

[Algan]

This guy is a hero... he drives 120 mph on a crowded highway and instead of being arrested, he gets the cops to clear the road ahead of him...

This would do wonders for my morning commute :)

Re:I should try that...

[Anonymous Coward]

never been on a german autobahn, eh? :-)

Re:I should try that...

[adsl]

Now that moorcyclist who got the 205 mph ticket the other week should read up on this:) Meantime I believe that this guy's car was attacked by the "Replicators" who tried to communicate with the car and got peeved because the car would not respond to them......

Re:I should try that...

[enjo13]

AND he got to brag about it to more than a million people..

He's a genius, no doubt.

Re:I should try that...

[harborpirate]

This would do wonders for my morning commute :)

The only problem being that this is the sort of trick that only works once.

Re:I should try that...

[Bertie]

How did he manage that? Where was this? As I understand it, if you go over 170-something, you're going so fast that a Gatso camera can't actually get two shots of you to show how fast you were going.

Heard about the Swedish guy who got a parking ticket in England for his snowmobile - in the summer? Here.

Re:I should try that...

[adsl]

Here is a lonk to a USAToday story. Or google "205 mph" under "news" category and a lot more comes up:) http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2004-09-25-20 5-ticket_x.htm

Re:I should try that...

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

There are some days on my morning commute where even doing a quarter of that speed would be an improvement.

Back in NYC, on their freeways (e.g. the Long Island "Expressway"), even a tenth of that speed would be an improvement. :)

remember the bus?

[maclar]

I saw something like this with a bus.. long long time ago. But that was at a movie theater.

Re:remember the bus?

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw something like this with a bus.. long long time ago. But that was at a movie theater.


Yeah, I think it was called: "The Bus, That Couldn't Slow Down."

Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

French car? Was it made on a Monday? Oh wait! that's for Italian cars...

Elevators

[crow]

I've only heard of one modern case of an evevator falling due to a failure of the safety system, and that was in the WTC disaster.

You're far more likely to get hurt from slipping on the stairs than from taking the elevator.

Yes, you do have a point about trusting technology even though it isn't 100%. However, in order to keep that trust, we have to investigate those few cases where it fails so that the problem can be corrected.

Re:Elevators

[Dman33]

Oddly, there was a recent case in NYC where the elevator 'fell' - up!
Story

Software liability

[Anita Coney]

If you put crappy software in a car and it causes an accident, the manufacturer can be sued.

But if you put it in a server, which crashes, bringing down your entire business, you cannot sue the manufacturer.

Can someone explain to me the difference?!

Re:Software liability

[danheskett]

Can someone explain to me the difference?!

Surely. As a manufacturer of a car, you take on the responsibility that you are working with a defacto deadly weapon, dangerous object and/or safety hazard. It is your duty to mitigate the risk, and design an appropriate system.


As a driver of a car, you cannot make that decision.

Re:Software liability

[Anita Coney]

Once again, the risk of injury to people is NOT the reason we can sue automobile manufacturers. In every aspect of our lives other than software, if you're damagned due to the neligent act of a entity, and if that entity had a duty not to be neligent, you can use.

I'll say it again, it has NOTHING to do with people actually getting injured. If a car rams into my house because of faulty software, I can sue the manufacturer for the damages to my house. There is no requirement that I actually suffer phyical injuries.

Re:Software liability

[natefanaro]

Didn't you read the 4th last article?

There's no such thing as bad software!

So when do I get my Knight Rider car then?

[IgLou]

Defect? I call that a feature! Whee!
Next thing you know your On Star will start talking to you at times you least expect it.

To quickly flip back to serious though. Probably more will emerge from this. I imagine cars are held to engineering standards correct?

My cruise control stuck once

[Cro Magnon]

If I hit one button it sets the speed, and the other one accelerates to an already set speed. I hit that one, and it got stuck and instead of accelerating me to the speed I wanted, it kept on accelerating. A quick tap on the brakes deactivated it, but it was still unnerving.

Re:My cruise control stuck once

[reuben04]

It happened to me once too in a honda, it hit 120 before I could get it under control. The weird part was that the button I hit was not to accelerate, but to decelerate. It just kept going faster. Jamming on the brakes didn't shut it off, but it did slow me down. I tried shutting the cruise off and that didn't work. I then tried the master switch on the dash and that didn't work either. I pulled up on the accelerator by placing my foot underneath the pedal, and hit the brakes. I still don't understand why and neither did honda but it promptly shut off. It is a scary thing when you know you don't have control of the vehicle. Sidenote: http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/news_cover.ht ml

Re:My cruise control stuck once

[Anonymous Coward]

You did 120 in a Honda?

Congratulations! Well done!

Re:My cruise control stuck once

[lobsterGun]

Something like this happened to me too.

It turned out that the floor mat had curled up and trapped the gas pedal in the down position.

The cruise control was completely innocent.

Re:My cruise control stuck once

[hughk]

Cruise control normally is linked to throttle and brake. If you hit either, it should disengage (also eliminating a single switch failure). This is totally separate to the control that turns it on or off or sets the speed.

Leave it Renault....

[ayden]

The car in question was a Renault Vel Satis.

As the Tom and Ray Magliozzi from Car Talk say about car design, "Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, but nobody imitates the French".

I know Audi had similar problems in the mid 1980's. I guess the French are imitating 20 year old German design flaw.

I feel... afraid... Dave

[helmespc]

Slow the car down, HAL... I can't do that, Dave...

Re:Bad Cars

[hrieke]

Well at least it's not Le Citron.
But again, maybe the car builders where too honest.

This wasn't...

[anzha]

Ahem.

This wasn't an ad on /. for yet another stoooopid low budget Stephen King car-comes-to-life movie was it?

Well, auf deutch. ;)

Yes we are

[didjit]

>"Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?"

You mean like electronic, touch screen voting machines with no paper trail?

i blame dennis hopper

[Anonymous Coward]

if this had happened in the old days, keanu reeves could just board the car from a rolling platform and drag his heels til it stopped ...

... nowadays, cruise control must be safeguarded from terrorists and requires a new branch of homeland security monitoring your cruise control at all times

Re:i blame dennis hopper

[fishbowl]

And if it had happened in Los Angeles, the police dispatcher talking to him on the phone would not have communicated with the police on the road, who would have simply thrown stop sticks (sticks with sharp things) in his way. He would have been killed, but the reason he was speeding would not have been reported.

Not that I believe the guy's story. He wanted to get the rush from speeding, and his story keeps him out of trouble with the law.

Re:How about

[Anonymous Coward]

Or getting first posts, apparently...

Maybe this needs fact checking

[Moby Cock]

After seeing the number of posts that have been able to come up with a solution (i.e. Put it in neutral or put it in park or hit the emergency brake) I find it hard to imagine that this guy was flying around the roads for an hour before the car stopped. Furthermore, if the police were on the phone with him, they should have been able to coach him on one of the above mentioned actions.

So I guess, i am wondering if this story is not just an urban legend type load of crap. I don't speak German, so I only read the report in English. It was culled from the Associated Press but its seems too far-fetched to me.

Thoughts?

Errrrr

[$RANDOMLUSER]

...he raced down the highway for another hour before finally managing to stop the car.

Why wasn't putting the transmission in neutral an option?

Re:Errrrr

[Anonymous Coward]

Irrational fear that an overrevved engine will detonate like a small bomb instead of tripping the rev limiter or breaking.

Brake by wire?

[DarthStrydre]

Ok - now I know nothing of Renault cars, but do they brake by wire? Every car has a braking system that is stronger than the engine. (Slashdotters - this is not flame bait - though it is a blatant overgeneralization it is in most cases true)

Unless the car brakes by wire instead of having a master cylinder, there should be no way that it could not stop. An ABS system that malfunctioned would not affect the brakes' capabilities.

Brake fade due to boiling of the fluid could be a problem going from 120 to stop with a wide open throttle, but given the amount of air passing over the brakes I would still think it possible to stop.

Using the e-brake (hand brake)(parking brake) might help, in addition to hte fading main brakes. If the rear brakes are disc brakes, they usually have a smaller drum brake for the e-brake because drums lock up better (so your car doesnt roll down the hill)

Also if this person was really fearing for his safety... life is more dear than property. screw the engine - either shift to neutral and hope it has a damn good rev-limiter, or (worse) downshift and use the engine+rev limiter as a kamikazi-style brake and hope it doesnt go boom!

or reach under the dash and pull fuses randomly.

Over-engineering?

[BeBoxer]

I was always under the impression that safety standards required the brakes to be able to overpower the engine and stop the car even with the accelerator floored. But from looking at the web site for the car in question, it looks like there are a million ways from Sunday for the car's CPU to take away your braking control:


The braking system was designed according to very strict specifications. Vel Satis is equipped with ABS, emergency brake assist and EBD electronic brake distribution, as well as the latest in driver assistance systems such as the ESP electronic stability programme fitted as standard, complementing Renault's patented trigonal-type multilink rear suspension.

This happened to me.

[ccandreva]

My mom's '83 Oldsmobile Cutlas did this.
I had my licence maybe less than a year, and was driving home from the movies at night on the Boston Post Rd in Westchester county, NY (2 lane street, storefronts on either side.)

All of a sudden the gas pedal went down to the floor on it's own, and the car starts to accelerate from about 30, through 50 and going. Hitting the break did not disengage the cruise control, and breaking a floored car doing 50 does - absolutely nothing.

Just as I was about the turn off the key, the pedal comes back up. The whole way home the car did this. I still remember getting home, being asked what was wrong, and saying "Your fucking car tried to kill me." - this was the first time I swore (on purpose) in front of my parrents.

Next day we take it to the shop, and the mechanic's reaction was "Oh yeah, they do that." Evidently the cruise control wires, mounted on the turn signal lever, woudd fray and short out. Part of the design was the Resume button had priority over the break cut-of switch, so when Resume shorted, you were screwed.

I've met three other people who owned this car, and had the same thing happen to them. One guy, as soon as he said he'd had an 83 Cutlas, I asked "Did it ever go Flying Dutchman" on you, and he knew exactly what I met. His started revving itself next to a Cop at a traffic light. He just got out with his hands up, saying "It's not me, it's the car !", as the car sat there revving itself.

Re:This happened to me.

[Tassach]

Ah yes, the 83 Cutlass... by all accounts, the worst car GM ever built. I had the misfortune of owning one. It never went flying dutchman on me, although I'd heard about the problem. Mine had just the opposite problem, actually -- the engine would cut out for no F*ing reason whatsoever.

Re:This happened to me.

[pe1chl]

>and breaking a floored car doing 50 does - absolutely nothing

As explained in many other followups, this is absolutely nonsense.
A car in normal operating condition should brake much harder than it accelerates. Try it the next time you drive the car: time how long it takes to accelerate to 50, then time how long it takes to stop from there.

Re:This happened to me.

[bill_kress]

Used to happen in my Toyota Supra all the time. Luckally the Supra had a hard on/off switch rather than some button.

It was usually okay, but every now and then I'd be traveling around 20 and it would resume to 40 if I forgot to shut off the switch.

Also, when I was younger and much stupider, had a very healthy '65 convertable valient. Was working on the carb and had the air cleaner off. Going through k-mart I goosed it just for a second and as the carb took a deep breath it sucked in the gasket which jammed the throttle open.

I reached down and shut it off, but that was a crowded parking lot and I left some pretty serious rubber. Thinking about it makes me cringe even now.

Re:This happened to me.

[ccandreva]

As explained in many other followups, this is absolutely nonsense

You weren't driving the car. I was. Please do not presume to tell me what happened.

The car was floored, I stood on the brakes, nothing happened.

As someone else pointed out, this was perhaps the worst car GM ever made. I wouldn't be surprised if the brakes were crap too. In any case, this car has long since seen the crusher, and I don't think testing on my current '91 Caprice would prove anything about an '83 Cutlas.

Re:This happened to me.

[ryanhos]

I learned to drive on a an early 80s Cutlas Sierra and it did almost the very same thing near the end of it's life. I would manually accelerate to near my previous speed and press the resume button. The car would sharply accelerate past my previous speed and would have probably gone forever had I not stopped it.

Luckily the few times this happened, lightly tapping the brake would disengage the cruise control computer and return control to me. I eventually learned to turn off the cruise control, turn it back on, and press the set button if I wanted to use the cruise. I didn't think it was dangerous because the cruise always shut off on command. Besides, shifting to neutral and pressing the e-brake sounded like a reasonable back-up should the gas ever stick.

There's a reason neutral is between reverse and drive.

Re:This happened to me.

[pe1chl]

The car would probably not be street legal here.

The minimum deceleration is 5.2 m/s^2 which means it would stop from 100 km/h (28 m/s) in 5.3 seconds. A typical car decelerates 7 m/s so it would stop in 4 seconds from that speed.
A fast roadcar accelerates to 100 km/h in 9-10 seconds, or only about 3-4 m/s^2.

Re:This happened to me.

[dozer]

This is stupid thing to say because it totally ignores momentum. Remember that you're in a 3000 pound car. At highway speed, the brakes need to overcome both the engine AND the massive amounts of kinetic energy you're carrying. Can they bring you to a full stop before they fade? That's a tall order with the crappy hardware put on most cars nowadays. Good luck if you're on a mild downhill!

Re:This happened to me.

[pe1chl]

The deceleration of the brakes is much more than the acceleration by the engine. In a typical car, about twice as much. So if they cannot bring you to a full stop once with the engine at full power, they probably will not be able to stop you twice at normal conditions either.

Re:This happened to me.

[241comp]

Take into consideration that the braking power you have when not accelerating (deccelerating from 50) is enhanced by the vacuum assist in the braking system. When your car is under full throttle, there is no vacuum in your intake system - therefore, you only have limited (based on the size of your vacuum reservior) brake assistance. After that, you are entirely without power brakes.

Try this sometime - get in a car with turbos and put it into acceleration such that you are generating boost. Now press the brake pedal without stopping accelerating. You will have 3-5 seconds of power assisted braking. This is obviously an exaggerated situation with being under boost but that allows you to feel the affect in a more pronounced manner.

Re:This happened to me.

[ccandreva]

Thinking about it anyone who is talking about brakes being able to stop a car that is running full throttle has no idea what they are talking about.

Has no one else ever started driving with the emergency brake on ? I know at least once I've gotten half way down the block, wondering why the engine was sluggish, before I realized the brakes were still on.

Brakes do no apply "deceleration". They apply force, as the engine does. Force to maintain speed is MUCH less than force to accelerate, and we haven't started taking the momentum of a huge piece of steel into account yet.

Again -- I know my Caprice can move from a dead stop with the brakes on, and it has some powerfull brakes. Just a more powerfull engine.

Brakes are sized to the size and weight of the car, NOT to the engine !

Re:This happened to me.

[pe1chl]

>Has no one else ever started driving with the emergency brake on ?

The deceleration spec for the emergency brake is about 1/5th of the normal brake.

>we haven't started taking the momentum of a huge piece of steel into account yet

The reason why the law does not state a force but a deceleration is exactly that: the heavier the car, the better the brakes must be to meet the spec.

It is not very relevant to discuss the forces needed to decelerate the mass of the car, as exactly the same forces are needed to accelerate it. A heavier car is harder to brake, but also harder to accelerate.

My car is light according to American standards (988 kg) but has a reasonable power/weight ratio (110 hp engine). Still the brakes are much, much more powerful than the engine.
I would love it when it could accelerate as fast as it brakes :-)

Re:This happened to me.

[glenebob]

I have been known, on a cold winter morning, to warm my car up faster by riding the brakes... No so good for the car, admittedly, but f*** it, I was cold :-)

I can floor the gas pedal in ANY GEAR I WANT, and control the speed by modulating the brakes, and with very little effort in fact.

Besides, it's common sense (I know, that's rare)... It would be a huge safety problem if the brakes could not overcome the power of the engine. AND, you have four wheels braking, and usually only two wheels driving, so even with a complete brake failure at one end of the car, you should be able to slow to a near stop at least.

Re:This happened to me.

[Grishnakh]

Waitaminute... you had one GM car almost kill you, and found out that this was a common occurrence on these cars. So when you got another car, you got it from GM?

Re:This happened to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

First emergency brakes are not designed to stop the car. They're to prevent a stopped car from inadvertently moving. They're also known as parking brakes.

Second the e-brake only engages on two wheels.

Third those wheels are the rear wheels which in normal driving contribute only a fraction of the total braking effort.

Fourth those wheels have drum brakes (usually) which have poorer brake performance characteristics than disc brakes.

Fifth those drum brakes don't have power assist on the e-brake cable.

Re:This happened to me.

[Oliver Defacszio]

Hilariously misplaced loyalty is the only reason GM sells anything. Although, I suppose there really are people who figure that autonomous cruise control and three engines in less than 130k miles is no reason to look elsewhere.

A glimpse inside the mind of American car buyers.

Re:This happened to me.

[Idarubicin]

Just as I was about the turn off the key, the pedal comes back up. The whole way home the car did this.

Did anyone else wonder why he didn't decide to pull over and turn off the car after, say, the second time?

Re:This happened to me.

[ShakaUVM]

Damn,

I was about to post a story on my Cutlass going crazy on me, then I saw this.

83 Cutlasses going crazy, trying to kill people? And there wasn't a recall? WTF??

I was on campus at UCSD, when my car decided to floor itself, running through a 4-way intersection and then aiming itself at a crowd of people crossing the street. I was stunned, holding down the brake as hard as I could (which did nothing! damn the naysayers in this thread which claim that the brake would work -- the brake pedal felt soft, and felt like it was slowing the car only a litte). The car then went tearing down a 25MPH zone at about 50MPH. The whole time, I was desperately trying to steer while reaching down with my hand trying to pull out the pedal (which I had (incorrectly) assumed had gotten stuck). When tugging on the accelerator did nothing I had a few more seconds of panic, then realized I could just cut power to the engine and turned the car off.

I coasted to a stop and just sat there for five minutes...

Unbelieveable this was a common problem and they didn't recall the cars. I mean, they have recalled cars that have had minor defects in seat belts... why the hell wouldn't they recall a car that goes crazy and tries to kill people?

The sad part is, I was fairly poor at the time and kept driving the damn thing. I had other problems, like the pipe that you put the oil dipstick in (whatever it is calld) falling off, but it never went crazy again.

-Bill

Re:This happened to me.

[ccandreva]

Because I was 18 years old (or thereabouts).

It was near midnight, it was my parrents' car, and I was probably more scared of them then of the car.

In 198x kids didn't have cell phones. The nearest payphone would have been further than my house. It was at most a 10 minute drive home, but almost an hour walk.

Also realize each time it floored itself, it proably lasted on the order of 10 seconds. For a kid who basicly just got his licence, it took about that much time to register what happened.

The first time, I assumed it was my fault, must have been something I did. The second time, I KNEW I didn't do anything. I don't remember specificly what I did, most likely by the time I figured out it was the cruise control, I would have been dropping it to neutral as soon as it floored itself.

Re:This happened to me.

[ccandreva]

I have to say, out of all maybe 10 GM cars my family has owned since I was a kid through the ones I've bought as an adult, that was the only lemon.

My father's first car was a Camero, that he had to sell when I came along. He still talks about being able to start that care moving in third gear. After that we had an Impala, a Skylark, then his company started issueing Caprices as company cars.

My own next car was my Dad's hand-me-down Caprice. I got it with 80k miles on it after he had used to commute from Westchester (basicly NYC) to Albany 3 times a week, and I put another 80k on it commuteing to Hoboken for grad school on the Cross Bronx Expressway. (and other road trips)

That car took punishment. Cracked the sway-bar on a crater-sized pot hole by the Lincoln tunnel -- got me home. Got rear-ended by 18 wheelers several times in bumper to bumper traffic, didn't even get a scratch.

Alas, nothing lasts forever. I'm on my second Caprice, and my wife has a LeSabre, both of which have been very reliable. So on average GM's been very good. Not loyalty, statistics.

Re:This happened to me.

[Inthewire]

The car would sharply accelerate past my previous speed and would have probably gone forever had I not stopped it.
...and an opportunity to experience relativistic speeds was lost forever.

Re:This happened to me.

[Mauro]

He just got his license....
He's Italian....
He was more afraid of his parents killing him, than the car killing him or someone else...

M.

ps. (I know candreva so I am not stereotyping, just describing reality)

Re:This happened to me.

[ed1park]

"A car in normal operating condition should..."

Your position is absolute nonsense. The point is that the car is NOT NORMAL.

Next time get into a car and start driving at 30 mph like the poster said he was doing. Then floor the gas pedal like the shorted cruise control did. It only takes a *few* seconds before the car hits 50mph, which is a reasonable amount of time before someone caught off guard will think "oh shit the cruise control is fucked" and start hitting the brakes.

Go ahead, reach 50mph and step on the breaks while the gas pedal is still floored. Don't just read about it and pretend you know what will happen. Just pray those followup posts you read about weren't talking out of their asses.

It's really quite pathetic that so many people here blindly accept things as long as someone else believes it. Don't believe everything that you read.

And btw, i've seen an investigation where a short like this was the cause of accidents. And the brakes were not enough even from a dead stop in the case of an SUV. I suppose it was because of the extra horsepower and torque because of the engine.

My Renault

[Anonymous Coward]

I have never had any problems with my Renault in Project Gotham 2.

and to think

[Anonymous Coward]

most people find that it's more of a problem just to make a French car go.

To bad for this guy, now the car probably won't even go anymore. Should have left it running in circles until it ran out of gas.

I don't think we should be so worried about the new systems. Just never trust any form of french engineering. These are the people who developed a vertical take off and landing aircraft, contracted an American firm to develop the software for stabilization, provided inaccurate specs and never let the software engineers see the unit to test and debug. They just don't think about consequences to design decisions.

The French are good for wine, cheese, maids wearing mini-skirts and pretty much blue collar jobs only if you can actually get a frenchman to work.

And when it's a truck...

[m_member]

There was a similar incident a few years ago on a UK motorway. A huge, gigantic, whacking great truck was out of control with a stuck throttle and the driver called the emergency services. He didnt want to flick the engine off as he'd lose brakes and steering, I can't remember the justification for not simple engaging neutral.

Anyway, afterwards he was accused of doing it on puropse as a publicity stunt - his truck with company name were shown on TV from news helicopters.

You insensitive clod

[tgd]

Some of us don't have power brakes and power steering.

But I can shut my engine off on the highway, and turn it back on and blow flames out my exhaust!

In all seriousness, though, something is fishy about that story. A defect making the car keep speeding up is one thing, but two defects making the brakes not disable cruise, plus a defect making the brakes ineffective on the gas (most if not all DBW cars cut the throttle cruise or not if the brakes are applied), plus a defect where the brakes wouldn't stop the car even with the gas on is a hell of a lot of defects.

Smells PEBCAK to me.

reminds me of a burned renault motor

[clarkie.mg]

This story reminds me of the day we went to brussels in a renault megane diesel and the motor began to exhaust fume so we stopped and guess what, after turning off the key, the engine continued to function ! After a few minutes, it started to burn oil and that made a large cloud on the road. It finally stopped when there was no oil with a strange sound and the engine was dead.

Re:reminds me of a burned renault motor

[scrod98]

Happened to me once in a borrowed Rabbit Diesel (1980 somethingorother). My friend never bothered changing the air filter and it was completely plugged, so the engine created a suction. As you say, ugly sound and lots of foul smoke. Taking out the air filter remedied the problem.

Renault

[emtboy9]

heh... and there is a REASON why Renault no longer sells cars in the U.S.

I bet that guy had one hell of a ride that day tho. I wonder if it did start talking to him.

"Stop the car!"
"I'm sorry, Dave, but I am afraid I can not let that happen."
"Please! For the love of God at least slow down"
"I truely am sorry, Dave, but we must pass that truck in a quick and efficient manner"
"But we passed that truck 20 miles ago!"
"Really Dave, you should just relax and leave the driving to me"
"Thats it! I am shutting this car down! Wheres my magnetic card?"
"I'm sorry Dave, but I can not let you do that."

Actually, it won't blow.

[DG]

Most every car made since the mid eighties has an electronic rev limiter on it. Attempt to rev past this limit, and the ECU will selectively cut fuel/spark to keep the engine speed under control.

It's very accurate; +/- 20 RPM typically.

Sticking an engine with a stuck throttle into neutral will result in it banging off the limiter and making a lot of noise, but it won't overrev.

You can, however, MECHANICALLY overrev a manual transmission by downshifting into a lower gear while the wheels are turning at a faster speed than is otherwise proper for that gear. The wheels and the engine are mechanically connected, and downshifting to too low a gear will spin the motor up - no rev limiter can protect against this.

In certain BMW M3s, the transmission mounts get a little sloppy, and engine torque reaction under hard acceleration can rotate the transmission enough to move the shift gates. It's possible then to try and go 2->3 or 3->4, and hit 1 or 2 instead. This is invariably fatal to the motor. You will bring your pistons home in a bucket.

Depending on the contstruction of any given automatic transmission, it may or may not allow you to take it out of gear and go into neutral under throttle. If you are silly enough to be driving an automatic, this could be a problem - but anybody who'd buy an auto trans where a manual was availible would steal sheep - so you probably had it coming. ;)

DG

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[InfiniteWisdom]

If you are silly enough to be driving an automatic

If you're in the US you may not have a choice. If you're looking for a used car, you'll have almost no choice. Even when I bought my Honda Civic new, I had to go to practically every dealer on long island before I found one that had a manual in the color/configuration I wanted. And Civics are relatively low-end cars with high volumes where the dealers can afford to keep a large inventory. It must be even harder if you're looking for a less popular model.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Cederic]

>> anybody who'd buy an auto trans where a manual was availible would steal sheep

If I drove a manual for my daily commute I'd be registered disabled, permanently limping and in constant pain - due to the wear and tear on my left knee.

By driving an automatic I get to avoid all that (well, except the constant pain).

Of course, your sheep are still not safe..

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[gphinch]

I'm pretty sure European cars don't have rev limiters. Thats part of American safety requirements that most other countries don't follow.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

> but anybody who'd buy an auto trans where a manual was availible would steal sheep - so you probably had it coming. ;)

I only have one leg you insensitive clod!

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[drew]

You can, however, MECHANICALLY overrev a manual transmission by downshifting into a lower gear while the wheels are turning at a faster speed than is otherwise proper for that gear. The wheels and the engine are mechanically connected, and downshifting to too low a gear will spin the motor up - no rev limiter can protect against this.

i can verify this from experience. this happened to a car i used to own twice, both times when i was letting somebody else drive on a long trip. both times, the driver (different drivers each time) accidentally downshifted from 5th to 2nd instead of 5th to 4th while the car was moving ~60-65 mph. the first time, fortunately, it had just been raining, so the road was wet enough that the car started skidding rather than over-revving the engine. (also, fortunately, there were no other cars around for a very freaked out college girl to have to avoid while trying to figure out why the car she was driving was skidding and decelerating abruptly) the second time i was not so fortunate, and i had to replace about 3 quarts of oil that sprayed out through one of the engine seals due to the suddenly drastically increased pressure inside the engine.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[PeterChenoweth]

I'm pretty sure that most any modern (read, 1990-Today) car has a rev limiter. The rev limiter is not for the saftey of the public at large, as most US regulatory options are (smog controls, bumpers, etc), but they are for the safety of the engine and thus the manufacturer of the vehicle. An engine without a rev limiter could blow itself apart the first time someone floored the car while in neutral, which is why a lot of new cars actually have a lowered rev-limiter between 3000-4000RPM (depending on the engine type, of couse) when in neutral.

And stating that just because it's a "European" car means less saftey isn't true. The Europeans actually have some tougher standards regarding safety than the US does (look into the car vs. pedestrian height rules mandated by the EU) - they're just different from the US rules.

Frankly, I don't believe this story. There isn't a modern car on the planet where the brakes are less efficient at halting the car than the engine is at propelling the car. Unless, of course, something was drastically wrong with his brakes.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[drew]

it depends on how picky you are about the car you are getting. of the five used cars my family has purchased since 1990, four have been stick shifts, mainly because a stick will knock about 5-10% of the resale value of a car- my father will specifically look for stick shifts when buying a used car because he knows he will be able to pick them up about $1000 dollars cheaper than an equivalently equipped automatic.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[DG]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Bullshit.

Every car I've owned for the last 10 years at least has been a manual, and my daily commute is ~ 30 miles each way in DETROIT.

My current commuter is also the tow vehicle for the race car - a Dodge Ram 2500 with the Cummins Turbo Diesel, a 6-speed manual, and 4.10 rear gears - meaning I shift three times to cross an intersection. It also has the Mother of All Heavy Clutches.

My clutch leg is just fine. In fact, the exercise does me good.

AND I get better gas milage AND the truck is lighter and less complex - meaning "more reliable".

AND it's a whole lot more fun to drive. There's little else you can do solo in a vehicle that matches the staisfaction of a perfectly rev-matched downshift.

With the majority of economy cars, the clutch effort is so light that you can activate the clutch with your ankle, not your whole leg. My wife's Neon (also a manual) has a clutch that requires about the same effort as the gas pedal.

Manuals are just FAR superior to automatics in every way possible.

DG

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[nolife]

Funny, I just searched for Honda Civic, used in the New York city area.

One search with MANUAL turned up 46 cars, One search for AUTOMATIC turned up 36 cars.

I did not go through each and every result though to verify.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[khrtt]

I drive a manual in my daily commute, and I get repetitive straing simptoms in my right ankle, before I get any in my left knee:-). Pushing the gas pedal can be so haaarrrd:-).

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[InfiniteWisdom]

Its because most people won't even bother mentioning it if its automatic. Drop the keyword and you get 246 results.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, you're driving a Ram 2500 as a commuter vehicle and are touting the improved gas mileage of a manual trans?

Dumbass.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

"FAR superior", eh?

What do the women say when they see your one very muscley leg?

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[nolife]

Well a lot of factors go into the comfort. My Mustang is a bear in stop and go traffic. It has a cable operated clutch which requires a lot of force to move. Add to the fact I have a Centerforce clutch which grabs great and has a very small distance from full clutch to no clutch, a 2.73 rear end which means at 600-700 rpm idle, the car moves at 5-10 mph without my foot on the gas, anything under that and the car bucks back and forth based on the engines torque curve at that RPM. Point being, it is a real pain in the ass. The clutch is my own doing but the rest is 100% Ford.

My real commutor car is a small Ford Aspire 5 speed. Complete opposite and not a problem at all in traffic.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[pixelpusher220]

Buy a VW...they still make about 50% of their cars manual transmission for the US market (read that a year or two ago and can't find a link at the moment...)

Or order one, there are plenty of cars that have it offered and if you're willing to wait for what you want you can get it. As for having it 'on hand' that's just not where the market is currently.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[JakiChan]

That shift in a BMW is called a "money shift". Why? Cuz when you hear that sound you know that you're gonna have to spend a *lot* of money....

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[DeputySpade]

Manuals are just FAR superior to automatics in every way possible.

Except for shift point consistency when an inexperienced racer is at the wheel. When I first started draging my T/A (6spd) I was cutting low 14s. Now I'm in the high 12s. With an auto I would have started out with solid low 13s and stayed there. That's the one and only place where autos shine. The shift takes place at the exact point you want _every_time_. If you're new to the sport and trying to hit your dial-in, you probably want an auto. Of course, then you have to admit to being a sheep coveting wuss who probably can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

BTW... Just a little background, I drive 40 miles into the Chicago Loop every day. Before I had my 6-spd T/A I had a 5-spd Rx7. Learned to drive in a 3-on-the-tree Rambler. I've done my fair share of time in autos and they just irritate me. I hate it when I have to wait for some goofy vacuum solenoid or computer to decide when it wants to shift. I want my car to shift when _I_ think the time is right, not some computer programer.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Eraser_]

So, what you're saying is, this guy couldn't have some form of arthritis in his clutching knee? Tendonitis? Multiple breaks?

Think before you speak, thanks. My girlfriend drives an automatic, it boggles the mind. At least it still has a hand break.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[cayenne8]

"mainly because a stick will knock about 5-10% of the resale value of a car-"

Your statement is new to me. Now, possibly it depends on the car...but, if you have an automatic in a Corvette or Porsche...you can cut your resale down plenty!! When we looked for a Honda for my Mom a few years back...new car purchase...the automatic was an option that cost extra...perhaps Honda has changed that.

My 911 Turbo is the first car I've ever owned that 'technially' had more than 2 seats...and in any real sports car, you definitely want to have manual transmission. It is more fun, safer (control issues) and you get better gas mileage!! Geez, I only get 10 mpg now as it is...imagine how bad it would be if I had an automatic transmission...hehehe.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Moofie]

Better gas mileage than WHAT? A dump truck?

Jeebus.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[InfiniteWisdom]

The point is not to get *a* manual transmission car, but the specific car you want. And that is a lot harder with a manual than automatic if you're in the US. Thats the point I was making.

Fortunately there are enough die-hard manual transmission fans out there that most manufacturers at least still offer a manual option.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[zaffir]

Depends on the car you want.

If you were shopping for something like my Subaru WRX, anyone you find will almost always be a manual. Automatics do exist, but the WRX is a sporty, fun-to-drive car - most people who buy this kind of car prefer the extra performance and fun a manual provides.

You will have a tough time finding a modern SUV in a manual. I think ford offers a manual transmission in the lowest trim escape and explorer, but that's pretty much it. Your average SUV driver doesn't want to bother with shifting. Hell, even I wouldn't want to shift one - it'd just be more work, not extra fun.

The vast majority of Americans want something simple and easy to drive. An automatic works just fine for them. I think i read somewhere that about 10% of the cars on the road in the US are manual.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[arivanov]

You are mistaking GM for all cars.

It is only the idiots at GM who do 22cm plus clutch travel. These are actual numbers from my old Vauxhall Astra.

French cars are under 16cm, Some japanese have clutch travel as low as 8 cm. No wear and tear.

Speaking out of experience - had non-stop knee problems with the Astra. No problems even on 5 hour drives with the new Daihatsu.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[babyrat]

Actually for offroading and rock crawling auto is king. Nothing like a foot on the brake and a foot on the gas to get you over nasty stuff.

So they are not far superior in 'every' way.

Also there's a thing called personal preference. My vette is a manual, my 928 is an auto. I like them both for a variety of different reasons. Sometimes I like have the option of downshifting when I want, and not when the car decides it is proper/safe/whatever, and sometimes I like just being able to smash the accelerator and watch whatever is in my rear view mirror get smaller.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's little else you can do solo in a vehicle that matches the staisfaction of a perfectly rev-matched downshift.

Well, you could always shift the other stick if you drive an automatic.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[netsavior]

Actually it is very easy to blow your engine downshifting... and a rev limiter does not help! imagine this scenario, engine redlined in 5th gear, 120 mph you shift to 2nd gear, what do you think the RPMs are in 2nd gear to get to 120? higher than redline... therefore, nothing electronic is going to stop that Mechanical Gearing that is now transfering the 120mph * 3,000lbs of velocity into Crankshaft RPMS... the Engine WILL throw a rod or otherwise blow up. It is just like popping the clutch, if you push a car in gear, the engine will turn no matter if the battery is dead or not...

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Kiryat Malachi]

I used to live in Detroit. Detroit traffic ain't shit. You move, for one thing, almost continually. Maybe not fast, and right now with all the ugly-ass construction going down its worse, but when the highways are in their normal (not all ripped up at the same time, just one at a time) state Detroit traffic is really pretty good. This is coming from someone who used to do 30 miles right through the heart of the 275/96/14/696 interchange when they had the whole damn thing ripped apart.

Come to Chicago, do 30 miles each way out here, and THEN tell me you want to deal with a stick.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Dravik]

sheep? you wouldn't happen to be from New Zeland would you?

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

What on earth are you talking about? You'll be
hard pushed to find any modern car that doesn't
have a rev limiter, you'll also find that most
European countries have far more stringent,
ongoing, safety checks of cars than most of the
US including _annual_ tests that cover
considerably more than smog. European safety
standards are as high as anywhere in the world,
driving licenses are generally harder to get and
the overall standard of driving is far better
than here. US vehicle safety is a by product
of having one of the worst road safety records in
the world...

I think I've just been trolled...

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

My UK model 1969 Volkswagen camper van had an
original equipment rev limiter using a centrifugal
contact built into the rotor arm within the
distributor cap...

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[merlin_jim]

I am not the original poster but I understood what he meant immediately.

I have systemic gout causing rheumatoid arthritis in both knees (and most other joints too)... some days the 1.3 mile drive to work is really painful. If I lived farther away I'd definitely be telecommuting or on disability. As it is, cruise control is the only way I get to the grocery store most weeks.

Many gout sufferers only have it in one leg. And gout isn't the only cause of arthritis.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[CharlieHedlin]

My old 1974 BMW 2002 broke an engine mount. The left side of the engine lifted, causing the throtle to open.

I imediately thought stuck throtle, hit the clutch, and the revs dropped. I was quite confused until I figured out that it was the engine mount and the torque of the engine was lifting it.

Of course no ECU and rev limiter would have protected my engine had it been a stuck throtle, but better a blown engine than crunching the car and myself.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

I fell off my bike as a kid, and hit my left knee on a manhole cover, ouch. It has bothered me ever since -- and clutching is *the* thing that sets it off most. Such a pity, because I hate automatics, but that's the way it went.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Chicago is manageable if you're going in at 6pm and out at 7am. =)

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[skiman1979]

I used to drive manual transmission all the time. However, my wife will only drive automatic. Since we switch cars from time to time, she needs to be able to drive both cars. So unfortunately, I'm stuck with automatic.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[colinleroy]

Most every car made since the mid eighties has an electronic rev limiter on it. Attempt to rev past this limit, and the ECU will selectively cut fuel/spark to keep the engine speed under control.

I'm pretty sure mine (1992 mazda 323) does not. It doesn't have anything else than the bare minimum, it doesn't even have an injector (it has a carburator).

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Dman33]

He is in Detroit (likely a suburb). For whatever reason, a Ram 2500 is a commuter vehicle there. I have yet to figure that out...

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Blimey85]

Manuals are just FAR superior to automatics in every way possible.

I can think of one way... convenience. My Ford Explorer was a manual and I hated it. It served no purpose other than to annoy me. So a manual gets better gas mileage... so what? If I wanted great gas mileage I wouldn't drive an SUV in the first place.

In a situation like what this guy had, I would rather have a manual... I'd also rather have an older vehicle that doesn't have a crap load of electronics. You just don't hear of this sort of thing happening to an older vehicle...

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Any braking system exceeds the engine of the car in terms of power by far. Acceleration from 0 to x mph is always slower than stopping from the same speed.

The energy throughput of the brakes is greater than the motor. Brakes overheat because they have much less cooling, but that's an issue on downhill driving, not in a one stop emergency situation.

That is: stomp on the brakes hard and fast, car stops, engine stalls and/or automatic transmission dies, end of ride.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[DG]

It's called diesel.

DG

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"Manuals are just FAR superior to automatics in every way possible."

Wow. I never knew that one thing could be better than another in "every way possible". But if a Slashdotter says it, it must be true.

Just like "Linux is better than Windows in every way possible", or "Kerry is better than Bush in every way possible", statements like your own only show your ignorance.

There are situations where automatic transmissions are far superior to manual transmissions. There is a reason that most people drive automatic transmission vehicles, and it's not that "they're stupid".

So, the next time you feel like telling me that RPN is better, that assembly beats Java, that building a computer is better than buying one, or that "vi" is for wusses, Don't.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[DuckDodgers]

There is one serious reason to prefer newer cars to older ones - crash ratings. Older cars were often heavier, but they weren't designed with good crumple zones. You're shred yourself to bits on the interior in an impact.

But check the National Traffic and Highway Safety Administration and The National Insurance Institute and you'll see many newer cars and SUVs are substantially safer in an impact than any older model, even a Volvo.

Many people don't pay any attention to crash ratings, and maybe you're one of them - but I thought it was worth mentioning anyway.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Come to Chicago, do 30 miles each way out here, and THEN tell me you want to deal with a stick.

please... 36 miles each way (LITH to Itasca), dealing with 90 and RT 53/290 with a 5-speed manual... 2 toll plazas, contruction, semi drivers on speed...
not exactly fun, but never bad enough to wish I had an automatic....
people who won't buy manuals because of commutes just don't know how to drive manuals correctly....

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you smoking crack? I've never done any rock crawling, but I've done A LOT of offroading, mainly in manuals, but I've taken up a few automatics. The manual trans is way better off road. For one you have a backup for your brakes. Two, if you can't shift up or down on a steep hill you shouldn't be on that steep hill in the first place.

Now with rock crawling I have no clue. Never done it, but I could see how a foot on the break and one on the gas could be usefull there.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[PHPhD2B]

Amen dude :)

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[isorox]

If I drove a manual for my daily commute I'd be registered disabled, permanently limping and in constant pain

Strange how everyone else manages it.

Personally my commute invovles me watching a dvd and reading some emails, or occasionally reading a book.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Bertie]

You drove a Daihatsu for five hours at a stretch? How's your hearing now? ;)

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[bob beta]

And stating that just because it's a "European" car means less saftey isn't true.

No kidding. In a few years, exterior air-bags are going to be mandatory on all EU cars. Yes, that means airbags on the OUTSIDE of the car, to protect pedestrians. It'll add about $1000 in cost.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Nept]

I live in Socal and used to do a 150 mile commute daily between house (north of glendale) to school (pomona) to work (tustin). LA, Orange County and Orange Crush Traffic daily (though granted I would sleep at work some nights to avoid the trip home). And I drive a stick.
Most drivers who are used to automatics don't realize how subconcious the use of a stickshift becomes, and how little difference is ultimately makes.

As an aside, manual trans drivers are probably safer as they can't talk on the phone and drive quite at the same time quite as easily as a driver of an auto transmission.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[ColaMan]

You might have a counterweight+spring on the rotor in your distributor. You can tell by taking the distributor cap off and pulling off the rotor - you can normally see a spring arrangement of sorts on the rotor.

Early carburetted Landcruisers had this - when you got to about 5000rpm (500rpm above redline) there was enough centripetal force on it for it to be moved out a little, which shorted out your spark to the distributor shaft. This stopped all sorts of valve-bending hilarity from happening. I know, as an apprentice friend of mine found a cruiser that had one that didn't work, and proceeded to deliberately thrash and rev it off the tacho, above 6000RPM. Strangely enough , when he got it back to the workshop, it was running a little rough.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Kiryat Malachi]

Please. Your commute is not what I was talking about; 53 is nothing. I do 30 miles, Wicker Park to Deer Park. It genuinely is that bad. You get the "good" part of 90.

I could do it in a stick, sure. But why should I? I prefer not to have to deal with "clutch engage, wait 2 seconds, clutch disengage, repeat ad infinitum" on those days when I'm dumb enough not to take mass transit, at least until Kruesi screws me and I can't do mass transit anymore (give him time, he will).

I'm not saying it's not doable; I'm saying that for most people, it isn't worth it. There's always a few zealots, but most of us acknowledge that sticks are no fun in traffic.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Kiryat Malachi]

Actually, I've found that you need to leave the city by around 6 AM to get out before the traffic starts; I reverse-commute, so I do in fact do those times roughly. Traffic still sucks.

Best times for a reverse-commute in Chicago, at least on the north/northwest side? Out of the city by 6:15AM, head back in by 3:15PM. Except on Fridays, when you're pretty much just plain screwed.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[BlackHorse]

Hopefully you commute on a train or bus!

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

manual trans drivers are probably safer as they can't talk on the phone

Don't be silly. I use a headset to talk safely on my cellphone while driving. Besides, it leaves my hands free to hold my coffee, cigarette and electric shaver.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[GreyWolf3000]

AND I get better gas milage AND the truck is lighter and less complex - meaning "more reliable".

Disclaimer: I drive a stick and love it

Ok, claiming you get 'better' gas mileage by going manual on a big rig like that is like claiming you save on your energy bill by bringing the heat down from 100 degrees to 95.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[GreyWolf3000]

Nothing like a foot on the brake and a foot on the gas to get you over nasty stuff.

Ever heard of heel-and-toe driving?

I haven't mastered it yet, but it's a more difficult part of manual transmission control. You work the clutch with the left leg, and use the heel of your right foot to brake, and the toe to accelerate. You can handle subtle and sudden changes as well, but it requires tons of practice.

But if you master it, you are certainly a l337 driver. Like, top 99.999% of all the drivers out there.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[turpie]

Actually an auto SUV is often better offroad than a manual. On long climbs in the mountains an auto will be able to change gears as the gradiant changes, where as a manual driver would be stuck in the lowest gear to avoid losing too much momentum and rolling back during a gear change.
When driving in sand an auto will usually be able change gears smoother than a manual driver and therefore maintain traction.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[DaemonDazz]

Heh, I've got a Subaru, although not the WRX, but a 2003 Outback Limited Edition (in Australia). I specifically ordered a manual transmission in it.

I don't think I'm old enough -- or lazy enough! -- to *need* an automatic ...

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Cederic]

Some people probably picked up on the "Even driving an automatic I get constant pain from my knee" part of my message.

Simple fact: Working the clutch on a 12 minute commute did noticeable damage to my knee.

I'm now doing a 55 mile commute. For most of that my left leg would be idle even driving a manual. For the rest (which accounts for 20-50 minutes, depending on time of day, roadworks, accidents, etc) my car is constantly either in stop-go traffic, or changing speed.

Manuals are not FAR superior to automatics when using a manual means walking on crutches your whole life. I'd rather use an automatic and retain the ability to actually walk. Trust me, I would drive a manual out of reference, were it not for my knee. However, that preference isn't strong enough for me to cripple myself.

~Cederic
ps: I also broke my left ankle in July. Two days after the break I was driving again - something I suspect I wouldn't have been doing in a manual. Not to put too fine a point on it "every way possible" is clearly bullshit.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Cederic]

>> Strange how everyone else manages it.

Everyone else also manages to run, ride a bike, play tennis, dance and do many other things that I can't do.

Thanks for rubbing it in. I hope you have a good life,
~Cederic

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[Anonymous Coward]

but how do you hold your newspaper?

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[drew]

it's probably true to varying degrees for any non-sports car, but three of the specific cars in question were an 88 nissan sentra, an 87 jeep cherokee laredo, and a 92 eddie bauer ford explorer. the eddie bauer ford explorer was easily $1,000-$1,500 dollars less than the equivalently equipped automatic, and the jeep was probably about $800 less than an equivalently equipped automatic. on the nissan the price difference was probably fairly negligible, but the car also only cost us about $3000, iirc. in particular, if you are looking at a used suv, family sedan, and probably most types of trucks and vans, a stick will always be cheaper than a comparable automatic. for anything that considers itself a sports car, the opposite is probably true. for "sporty coupes" its probalby fairly even. with the small economy models it seems you rarely have a choice anymore, unless you are getting something with a "sports package" (see ssporty coupe).

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[RESPAWN]

In certain BMW M3s, the transmission mounts get a little sloppy, and engine torque reaction under hard acceleration can rotate the transmission enough to move the shift gates. It's possible then to try and go 2->3 or 3->4, and hit 1 or 2 instead. This is invariably fatal to the motor. You will bring your pistons home in a bucket.

This happened to one of the guys in our local SCCA chapter at an autocross. He was driving an E36 M3, went to shift to third, and *POP*! Ended up being pretty costly to him, and it took a while for him to feel comfortable shifting to 3rd on the track again.

Re:Actually, it won't blow.

[ralphclark]

> If I drove a manual for my daily commute I'd be registered disabled, permanently limping and in constant pain - due to the wear and tear on my left knee.

Manual transmission is the norm in the some markets, such as here in the UK (many people, particularly those driving performance cars, just prefer it). We're no strangers to long distance commuting either. I haven't heard many people complaining of clutch operation related injuries though.

However if you *already* had an old injury in your clutch leg, I can see how it might be exacerbated in a manual transmission car.

Re:Bad Cars

[gregarican]

Or the worst of the worst? The Yugo. I read somewhere that Renault was finding a way to make an even cheaper version of Le Car. They reportedly scrapped the plans since the product was too low quality. Apparently the government of Yugoslavia salvaged the plans and bought them from Renault. Voila....the Yugo.

I remember when this guy I knew was showing off this used Yugo he had bought. It had all of the options. Even a sunroof. Good thing it had one since all of the manual window cranks were broken so the windows wouldn't roll down!

Driving a Saloon

[nekoniku]

According to the Renault Web site linked in the post, the Vel Satis is a saloon.

Therefore, the driver must have been drunk.

2 stanzas tyger tyger

[Anubis350]

Brakes, Brakes Burning bright
on the highway, in the night
what awful error made system die
and made the poor driver cry

On what distant tollboth lies
The crappy break that you did buy?
What disaster did you sire?
And with what rod did you make fire?

Re:2 stanzas tyger tyger

[iphayd]

I want to slow down
my car has mind of its own
missed my turn again

Electric power steering?

[YankeeInExile]

Uhmmmmmmmm ... no.

Unless you have one of the (few) cars with electrical power steering, you certainly will not lose power steering by shutting of the ignition.

So long as the engine is turning, the entirely mechanical power steering pump will continue to rotate and provide pressure to the system.

So long as the engine is generating manifold vacuum, you will have power brake boost. Beyond that, some cars (I know my old Volvo had one) have a diaphragm vacuum pump in addition to manifold vacuum to power the brake booster.

The only danger in killing ignition is in carburated autos, where you will continue to run fuel through the engine without spark. This will destroy any catalytic converter, and has a good chance of causing numerous backfires, and damaging the remainder of the exhaust system.

In the same Volvo wagon with the vacuum pump, it had a major overheating problem, but with its fuel-injected engine, killing ignition was a non-issue. No electricity, no fuel pump, no backfire. After climbing a long grade and getting up to 130, cresting the hill, and killing the ignition would cool it back down in just a few tens of seconds just from pumping all that relatively cold air through the engine. (Of course, shock cooling the engine was probably worse for it than the overheating, but it was a dispos-a-car anyway.)

Re:Electric power steering?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Many cars have an anti-theft lock that lashes the steering wheel in position when the ignition key is in the off position. Of course as soon as the engine cuts out, you can put it back into ON, and use inertia to coast.

Re:Electric power steering?

[HRH King Lerxst]

Yeah, but if you shut off the ignition, it engages the steering wheel lock, so you won't be able to turn the wheel anymore, even if you have assist.

At least this is true for cars sold in the U.S.

Re:Electric power steering?

[YankeeInExile]

True, but moving to Lock is substantially past Off ... Also, in one car I had (maybe that same Volvo) the steering lock-pawl did not fall in until the key was actually removed from the switch.

Re:Electric power steering?

[jcomand]

Hmm. Based on your explanation, I don't understand how the engine can turn the vacuum pump if the ignition is OFF. I was under the impression that even though the wheels are turning, if you turn the key off, no gas is sent to the engine and the engine would quickly be at 0 RPM- no pistons moving, no fanbelt turning, no vacuum pump, nothing. Are you saying that the inertia of the vehicle spinning the wheels keeps the engine turning when there is no gas? Or is the vacuum pump attached to something that moves when the engine is not turning? (If so, how does it turn when the car is stopped?) I know that even after turning the engine off, there is a little bit of vacuum built up that will give you one or two pumps on the brake. Is that what you are referring to? I don't know if that would be sufficient to stop from 120 mph though.

Re:Electric power steering?

[willgott]

It is very dangerous to turn the key to zero (all electricity off) while the car is moving! I don't know about the rest of the world, but most cars here in Sweden have an anti-theft mechanism that locks the steering-wheel. I have tried engaging it myself a couple of times(while standing still) and it isn't always that easy to disengage quickly.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Lumpy]

nless you have one of the (few) cars with electrical power steering, you certainly will not lose power steering by shutting of the ignition.|

wrong. there's a tiny matter of the steering lock. that in a panic you will not simply and carefullt click the key off one notch to kill power to the ignition coils.

most of the time in a panic situation people pull the eky bac kto the lock position and even yank the keys out... YAY we now have no steering cince a small turn will engage the lock and turn you into a grease smear in a nice metal case.

Re:Electric power steering?

[YankeeInExile]

I was under the impression that even though the wheels are turning, if you turn the key off, no gas is sent to the engine and the engine would quickly be at 0 RPM

Your impression is wrong. So long as your car is in gear, there is a mechanical connection between the wheels and the engine. (In a standard transmission auto, until you come to a dead stop; in an automatic transmission until some very low speed where insufficient power is backfed through the torque converter to continue turning the engine against its own compression. On the order of 15 to 30 km/h.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is why sensible cars don't engage the lock until you pull the key out and wriggle the steeringwheel.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Anonymous Coward]

Every mercedes I have been in allows you to engage the steering lock easily by turning the key back to lock. any turns you might do will engage it.

you are currently careening down the road click it locks..

I guess mercedes is not sensible.

Re:Electric power steering?

[fishbowl]

"Which is why sensible cars don't engage the lock until you pull the key out and wriggle the steeringwheel."

That still doesn't go far enough. If the vehicle is rolling, the steering lock should not engage at all, period. I think I want to disable mine completely now that I've thought about it. I use a Club quite religiously, so the steering lock is really nothing but a liability.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only danger in killing ignition is in carburated autos, where you will continue to run fuel through the engine without spark. This will destroy any catalytic converter, and has a good chance of causing numerous backfires, and damaging the remainder of the exhaust system.


This will only continue to run fuel through the engine if the fuel pump is driven by the wheels, and that doesn't exist. All cars have either engine driven or electric fuel pumps, both of which stop when the key is switched off.

Re:Electric power steering?

[dozer]

Ummmmm .... no.

In most cars, the engine won't be turning no matter how fast you're coasting. Try it with an automatic transmission and see.

10X as many automatic transmissions are sold as manuals in the U.S., and the numbers are somewhere around 7X for Europe. With an automatic transmission, as you know, the torque converter is driven off the output shaft of the engine.

So, if the engine stops developing power, the pump half of the torque converter stalls. Unfortunately, torque converters don't work backwards. Therefore, the fluid pressure in the fins disappears and engine and drivetrain effectively become disengaged. You're now coasting. Thanks to compression, the engine comes to a halt really quick.

Know what that means? No power steering, no manifold vacuum, no power brakes, no engine braking. You're in for a hell of a ride.

This is a real problem when taking automatic 4X4s offroading. Picture stalling the engine on a steep hill... *shudder* Unfortunately, I don't know of any good way of fixing this, short of converting to stick.

Re:Electric power steering?

[chihowa]

This will only continue to run fuel through the engine if the fuel pump is driven by the wheels, and that doesn't exist. All cars have either engine driven or electric fuel pumps, both of which stop when the key is switched off.

If the car is in gear, the transmission will continue to turn the engine, which will drive all of the belt driven components. A mechanically driven fuel pump will continue to operate, an electric one will not.

Re:Electric power steering?

[greed]

There's a reason why most cars need to have the key pushed in to turn to "lock". If you just grab it and turn, it should not go to "lock". (Though, these days, I'm not betting on anything, especially if it is important in an emergency.) Some even had a button that you had to press--which was really annoying if you'd never encountered one of them before.

I recall "de-clutch/shift-to-neutral" drill in my driver's-ed class, and it wasn't even the deluxe course. Ignition-kill was part of that well. Also, part of the in-car test for your license was how to do both.

Or do they not teach stuck-throttle recovery anymore?

Re:Electric power steering?

[Anonymous Coward]

In most cars, the engine won't be turning no matter how fast you're coasting. Try it with an automatic transmission and see.

I have, it works. Your statement is simply untrue. As long as the car is decelerating against engine braking (it will be as soon as you turn the ignition or fuel off), the transmission will remain engaged and will slow the car. If the transmission was in too high of a gear for the speed (unlikely, since the kickdown mechanism should have downshifted it when the throttle stuck open) then it would disengage because the pump RPM would fall below the point necessary to maintain pressure on the clutch and band apply pistons.

Unfortunately, torque converters don't work backwards.

No, sorry, this is a common misconception. They do indeed work backwards. Automatic transmissions are equipped with overrunning clutches specifically to provide engine braking. The torque being trasmitted back through the converter from the transmission to the engine is more than adequate to turn the engine even without spark or fuel and with the throttle closed. If your automatic transmission equipped vehicle just freewheels instead of slowing down when you manually downshift the transmission then you need to get it repaired.

You can test this by driving down a long hill (with no other traffic around) - downshift your automatic transmission so that the engine revs come up, keep the vehicle speed up with the throttle, next turn the ignition off. You will note that your vehicle is slowing down due to compression braking. Turn the ignition back on, and the engine will begin burning fuel again and you can upshift back to the right gear, all without any disengagement in the automatic transmission or torque converter.

No power steering, no manifold vacuum, no power brakes, no engine braking

No, this is not entirely correct. Power steering will be lost the moment the engine stops turning the steering pump (no modern production car has a reserve accumulator for the power steering system), however, you don't really need power steering about about 5 MPH, and you can still steer the vehicle even below that speed (although with considerable additional effort). I drove a big heavy American car for two years with the power steering pump disconnected, and the car was perfectly driveable other than requiring more effort on the steering wheel when parking. Power brakes do have a reserve, thanks to the check valve in the vacuum line from the brake booster. You should get one or two full applications of the brakes, more than enough to bring a vehicle to a stop. Once the vacuum reserve is used up you should still be able to stop the vehicle by standing on the brake pedal. If not, I suggest you trade your car in for a wheelchair. People used to drive with non-power assisted brakes for the first half of the 20th century - it's harder to stop, but nowhere near impossible.

You might want to look into how a modern (post-1950s) automatic transmission really works, it's much more complicated and much more well thought out than you seem to think.

Your 4x4 example is really off-topic, but that problem is easily solved by having a good brake system. My 1 ton K5 Blazer will stop without the power assist with just light pressure on the brake pedal.

Re:Electric power steering?

[McFly777]

Carburators have a float bowl which holds a relatively small amount amount of fuel. If the car is a manual, the grandparent post would be correct; the engine would continue turning due to being driven by the wheels, and fuel delivered by the venturi in the carb. could damage the catalytic converter.

Of course, if the car has a manual transmission, one could depress the clutch (neutral), or even better, after killing the engine, use the engine compression to assist braking.

Note as well, just because one doesn't have POWER brakes or POWER steering, doesn't mean you can't brake or steer. It only means that you have to work a bit harder at it.

It amazes me how often, when in a panic situation, people simply give up. (trying to steer, trying to brake, trying to think, etc.) What ever happened to "fight or flight?" Many seem to instead "play dead," which is often a self-fulfilling action.

Re:Electric power steering?

[M1FCJ]

All of the cars I drove (A Volvo, Fords, a Nissan, a Skoda, Renaults, Wolkswagens etc.) you have to take the key out before the anti-theft lock works. I haven't driven anything made in USA, maybe they do build such shit.

Re:Electric power steering?

[atta1]

Spent much time as a professional mechanic? I have. I can assure you that most torque converters will work backwards, however inefficiently. It is possible to pull start a car with an automatic transmission. Get it up to about 30 mph with the key off, then turn the key on. Done it many times. It's not good for them, but it works.

Re:Electric power steering?

[peacefinder]

Yeah, but if you shut off the ignition, it engages the steering wheel lock, so you won't be able to turn the wheel anymore, even if you have assist.

Not in my 1997 Subaru, purchased in the US. I can turn the key off, and the steering wheel does not lock. "Off" is not the same key positon as "Lock".

Incidentally, I cannot lock the wheel and remove the key unless the automatic transmission is shifted to "park", and the headlights will not turn on if the ignition switch is not set to "Accessory or "On". These are slightly annoying safety features that have prevented more trouble for me than they have caused.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Dare nMc]

The only danger in killing ignition is in carburated autos,

ummm, I know you mean with it in gear, but a modern auto tranny car is electrically shifted, with electric solenoids, so I believe will go into top gear quickly. below a certain speed not enough torque to keep the engine moving...

also if you get into neutral no engine still moving, you will lose lubrication on most auto's and some manuals to moving parts, like rear seals... and can do serious damage if towed, or coasted too long.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Desert Raven]

Nonetheless, I can attest that when the engine stalls on an automatic, you lose the power steering. I've had it happen on a couple vehicles over the years. There's nothing quite like losing the power steering just as you're entering a sharp turn with a 3/4 ton truck.

And, in my experience, the parent was correct. When the engine dies on an automatic, the rpm's drop to practically nil, no matter how fast you're going.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Dare nMc]

It is possible to pull start a car with an automatic transmission. Get it up to about 30 mph with the key off

I too have to call Bull S**t on this one. absolutly torque convertors work backwards, I can down shift let off the throttle engine accelrates as the car does...

but to pull start a car at 30MPH, interesting. I am fairly sure stock electric shift autos lock out gear choice with engine off, and the rest (majority) valve body need fluid power from the torque convertor to choose a gear, so best case you would be in top gear, until you got enough pressure built up from the engine turning to select a lower gear.... maybe with a truck in low range. Of course if the engine were to never have stopped spinning, the tranny could keep it spinning, until you re-fired it. or maybe if you had enough of a starter to get it spinning the tranny would help at some point...

but to pull start a auto car...

Re:Electric power steering?

[Student_Tech]

In my volvo('83 240) I had 4 Positions (Reading clockwise, with Off at about 11 o'clock, and about 1 hour or so to the next position):
Off (where you could remove the key and steering wheel would be locked)
I - Power to accessories, fan, steering unlocked
II - Normal Running position, most everything on, status lights in dash
III - Run starter - Cuts power to most everything that was on in I and II. Dash status lights were on as were headlights(if you had turned them on before starting the car).

So, if I knocked it from position II to I it would kill the engine, but not engage the lock.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Alioth]

I don't think it's as much as a factor of 10 in the US (when I lived there, probably at least 1/3rd of the people I knew had manual transmission in their cars). In Europe, virtually no one has an automatic - for some reason, people just don't go for automatics. I only know one person here who has an automatic car.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Grishnakh]

And how many modern vehicles still have engine-driven fuel pumps?

Anything made in the last 10 years or so should have an electric fuel pump, and electronic fuel injection. If you turn off ignition, and the engine is still turning because of the connection to the wheels, there won't be any fuel pumping, and the fuel injectors won't be opening. The only thing coming out the exhaust will be regular air.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Grishnakh]

Unless you have one of the (few) cars with electrical power steering, you certainly will not lose power steering by shutting of the ignition.

I don't think this is a problem. EPS isn't the same as "steer-by-wire". It's actually a very simple system where the steering rack has an electric motor bolted to it to provide assist, rather than complex hydraulics. If the car loses power, you simply lose assist, but the manual portion still works as before. Depending on the unpowered characteristics of the motor, it may actually be easier to steer than an unpowered hydraulic-assisted system, since you don't have to fight against the hydraulic fluid which now isn't flowing normally.

Personally, I don't understand why EPS isn't installed on more cars. It's smaller and simpler than hydraulic steering, and offers a 5% fuel economy improvement. In large quantities, it should be cheaper since there's fewer parts and less assembly labor needed.

Re:Electric power steering?

[chihowa]

Well, as the GP was talking about carburated engines, I'd say a fair number of carburated cars that are still on the road also have mechanical fuel pumps. Chill out, man.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Anonymous Coward]

On my car ('99 Chevy Malibu), you cannot turn the key to the lock position unless the car is in park.

This is a feature that occassionally has me confused when I forget to put the car in park and try pulling the key out :) Seems like a good feature for a case like this though.

How many cars actually let you put the key to lock while moving?

Re:Electric power steering?

[dozer]

In your example, of course, the torque converter is still working forwards because your engine is still developing power. You need to actually turn the ignition off. I think you'll be surprised at how quickly your engine drops RPMs to almost nothing.

Re:Electric power steering?

[dozer]

Your 4x4 example is really off-topic, but that problem is easily solved by having a good brake system. My 1 ton K5 Blazer will stop without the power assist with just light pressure on the brake pedal.

So will mine. We're talking about engine braking, which is entirely on topic. I'm sure you already know that on a loose, steep (35+ deg) slope, you need to touch the brakes as little as possible. This is for two reasons: 1) brakes are normally biased to the front, so the back will want to come around and try to roll you and, more importantly, 2) because if you accidentally lock up either front wheel (easy to do in gravel or sand) you lose most or all of your directional control.

So, let's say you're just starting down the hill and RPMs are low. If your motor stalls and you have an automatic, no matter if it was made in 1950 or 2005, you're in for a scary ride. This exact scenario happened on Five Finger Hill in Hollister in a beat up 1990 Range Rover. So, I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about...

Re:Electric power steering?

[Anonymous Coward]

> the torque converter is still working forwards because your engine is still developing power.

nope, obviously you have never tried this, I just did. turned the ignition off, no difference, back on no difference (well the tachometer goes to 0, but the engine tone doesn't change, and it still runs the same rpm when the key is turned back on.) I actually slide the rear tires when I select first gear, at 25 mph, without touching the brakes and it also revs the engine to 4000rpm without ever touching the throttle when it down shifts.

this was with a 2000 Chevy 2500 V8 pickup.

Re:Electric power steering?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

My Ford Focus has been back to the dealer twice. Even with the key inserted, the steering column wouldn't unlock. (I've been making out like a bandit on the extended warrenty. They've also had to drop in a new fuel tank and pump.)

Re:Electric power steering?

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Putting it back to ON with the engine turning will cause it to run again. The fact the car is moving and in gear will keep the engine turning.

If you turn the ignition on and off before the RPMs drop too low, it will resume running without having to have the ignition put into START.

My ignition has 5 positions
ACCESSORY-LOCK-OFF-ON-START.

Putting it into OFF is what you'd want to do to just stop the engine.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Pontiac Grand Prix cars (and probably many others) have an overheat protection mode.

Some of the cylinders are run without fuel or spark, letting them cool. It switches which cylinders are running and which are cooling off every so often.

Your post makes me thing that might actually work well. Luckily I never had to find out.

Re:Electric power steering?

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Could one actually push start an automatic if one could get it up to that speed? Very hard to do with human power alone, but using a hill or another car might work.

BTW, 15 to 30 km/h is about 9 to 18 mph.

Re:Electric power steering?

[atta1]

Granted, I am not talking about a modern era car with all the controls that are now commonplace, I'm talking about 70's era cars.

Love Bug

[Sheepdot]

A car with a mind of its own?

I remember Bruce Campell having this same problem in 1997.

Hmm

[slashhax0r]

Most vehicles will still have enough pressure built up in their brake booster to hit the brakes with ignition off. I would be concerned about steering though, if you were in a bmw 760il for example, you might have some issues as there is motor assist in the steering system...

to answer the question...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?"

Answer: Yes. I've always felt this. All these extra gadgets are luxuries and completely unecessary. I am perfectly happy with the control I have in my standard Civic. No power steering, or anything like that. I have total control. Why would anyone want less control? Why even have a driver if you're going to automate and "power" everything?

This Happens To Me All of The Time

[coyotedata]

This happens to me every time my truck gets onto 91 North in Mass but for some strange reason the problem always instantly goes away as soon as the radar detector goes off.

Bullshit

[purduephotog]

Power steering and braking is provided by a cylinder of fluid. You've got enough for probably 4 or 5 hard 'full brake' depressions and at least 3 or 4 good wheel cranks.

Shutting down the car forces it into a 'reboot' of the system. Shifting it into neutral while the engine is at full power is a good way to blow it.

Downshifting the car is fine, but all thats going to do is blow out your clutch or tranny- remember,if the pedal is fully depressed it's probably redlined at 6500 RPM.

So first, in order-

Hit the breaks.
(failing that)
shift to neutral/ kill the engine / restart
(if the car immediately revs the engine back up then...)
kill the engine / SLOWLY depress the break to come to a stop.

So yes, a mechanical switch is needed- it obviously would not have helped the driver in this situation (I guess; I don't have nor have I used a magnetic key for ignition).

if all, absolutely all, fails, hope to god you have a good drive somewhere in front of you that is willing to match speeds and sacrifice his rear end (semis work great). Using the back end of the vehicle, his braking power should probably be enough to bring your racing car in, and shifting into neutral would cap it. Pop the hood and kill the battery. (probably would need bolt cutters from the police).

So in conclusion, you've plenty of power / pressure in your breaks after you kill the engine. Test it some day- turn the car off, in neutral let the car roll, feel the pedal become soft... after about the 4th 'pump' you're down to your own mechanical leverage 'pumping' the fluid into the brake cylinders.... so no more 'assist'.

Re:Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

You also don't need power steering if you are going over 15MPH. Power steering is only for convienence while driving in parking lots.

Re:Bullshit

[hb253]

Power steering and braking is provided by a cylinder of fluid. You've got enough for probably 4 or 5 hard 'full brake' depressions and at least 3 or 4 good wheel cranks.

Not quite.

Power brakes are vacuum assisted. After shutting off the engine there may be enough residual vacuum in the accumulator for 1 or 2 applications, three if you're lucky.

Power steering is provided by a belt driven hydraulic pump. As soon as the engine stops turning, no power steering. Cars with electric steering assist shouldn't have that problem, but I'm not sure.

Re:Bullshit

[fucksl4shd0t]

Ack, what rock do you live under? :)

Power steering and braking is provided by a cylinder of fluid. You've got enough for probably 4 or 5 hard 'full brake' depressions and at least 3 or 4 good wheel cranks.

That's extremely oversimplified, and somewhat inaccurate. 99.99999% of cars with power assist brakes use a vacuum booster that runs off engine vacuum. I can tell you all the technical details of how it works, but I don't really feel like it. :)

Power steering isn't exactly provided by a cylinder of fluid. A cylinder is just a cylinder, you need a pump to pump the fluid for it to be useful. Surprisingly, power steering works similar to the vacuum booster on your brakes, only using fluid instead of vacuum.

Re:Bullshit

[karnal]

Power brakes are vacuum assisted.

Not all are. I've seen cars with:

1. Vacuum power assist brakes.
2. Electronically assisted brakes (cylinder builds up pressure from a pump to assist)
3. Power Steering assist brakes (power steering pump provides the power to the cylinder to build up pressure before braking)

The electronic design is neat in that it will only go out if you totally lose power to the car.... the battery will keep the brakes working for a while after the engine goes out....

Re:Bullshit

[DeputySpade]

Power steering and braking is provided by a cylinder of fluid. You've got enough for probably 4 or 5 hard 'full brake' depressions and at least 3 or 4 good wheel cranks.

Shutting down the car forces it into a 'reboot' of the system. Shifting it into neutral while the engine is at full power is a good way to blow it.

Downshifting the car is fine, but all thats going to do is blow out your clutch or tranny- remember,if the pedal is fully depressed it's probably redlined at 6500 RPM
....

Pop the hood and kill the battery. (probably would need bolt cutters from the police).



Your understanding of auto mechanics is... um... extraordinary. How the bloody hell did this get moderated "insightful?"

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

BMW is just the first

[Anonymous Coward]

First we heard about BMWs going haywire, then Windows Automotive Edition, now this. Recently my car's CD player got stuck in an error state and even turning off the car didn't help it. I had to pull the dash board fuse to reset it.

It's a symptom of people being too tolerant of computer failures. I used to hope it would be the other way around--that the embedded systems world would influence the PC world in reliability, but now I fear the reverse is happening. Will we soon reach a point where the car computer(s) will be less reliable than the large mechanical parts they ostensibly monitor?

Neutral!

[ultrasonik]

Why couldn't he take the car out of gear? Can this car not be shifted into neutral??? This story sounds really fishy.

getaway car

[Doc Ruby]

Can this system be adopted in the US, in conjunction with a burglar alarm? Let the cops catch the bastards on a cleared highway.

No, it's just the old adage

[iamacat]

About how the world would be a better place with german carmakers, french cooks, british policemen and italian lovers. As opposed to french carmakers, german cooks, italian policeman and beg your pardon british lovers. Why do you think Renault no longer sells in US? I used to have a used one and I never encountered a car with more problems.

Re:No, it's just the old adage

[whoever57]

Why do you think Renault no longer sells in US? I used to have a used one and I never encountered a car with more problems.

A Renault provided me with the best investment in a car that I ever made. Yes: investment: I bought the car (used), ran it for ~ 9 months, did zero maintenance and sold it for more than I paid for it!

Not true at all

[Anonymous Coward]

ALL cars with PS and PB (at least in North America), you still have both braking and steering with the engine off. Turn it off, and gently coast the car to the edge of the road.

A *very* similar problem just recently happened to my wife in her car ... the bottom of the accelerator pedal got jammed under the driver side floor mats when she accelerated to pass a vehicle (although we didn't know the cause until much later). Applying the brakes would slow the vehicle, but realizing that they would quickly melt (or ignite) I told her I was killing the engine and reached over and turned the key. She steered to the side of the road and slowed to a stop. We then were able to diagnose and correct the issue. When it happens at full speed on a highway it is terrifying, but as long as you keep your wits you be able to manage.

The manouever was safe and our van sufferec no damage of any kind, brakes, transmission or otherwise. Any other course could have been fatal (at least in our situation).

In summary, turn off the engine.

BTW, the offending floor mat is now at the bottom of a landfill :)

Sure.

[Run4yourlives]

As important as you think your business is, nobody will die if it isn't functioning.

If you can prove that (ie, hostpitals, 911, flight control) then you'd probably be able to sue as well.

Re:Sure.

[Anita Coney]

I never said anyone died in the accident. People survive accidents and sue all the time.

Let's imagine, for example, if the car hit the toll booth. Regardless of whether anyone was injured or died, the owner of the toll booth could sue for his damages to his booth.

too trusting of our technology? Gawd yes!

[museumpeace]

When the day comes that 4-term senator is refused permission to board a plane in the capitol of the state he has represented because some kid born after he was first elected can't find his name on some computer's list...we don't have what I could call a technology advantage. The problem however is more often the stupidity of the user than the untrustworthyness of the technolgy.

Worse -

[allden]

Did he get a ticket?

Stuck throttle - brakes win

[netringer]

I suspect this problem is mechanical, not electronic. The cruise control connection to the throttle or the throttle linkage itself can bind and stick the throttle wide open.

I just had the accelerator get jammed to the floor on my Mustang when it got held down by the floor mat. Luckily I have a manual transmission and could just put int he clutch and let it the engine get cut off at red line. After trying pushing on the accelerator to get it to bounce back, I unstuck the throttle by pulling the floor mat back. I could have killed the engine with the key and coasted to the shoulder.

This guy might have freed it up by pushing on the gas.

Just like with the "unintended accelleration" stories, I think we're not hearing the whole story. One Audi dealer offered $10,000 to anyone who could make the car take off while he had his foot on the brake. There were no takers. Every car made has better brakes that overpower the engine. The engine will die. The car will stop.

Re:Stuck throttle - brakes win

[silicon not in the v]

One Audi dealer offered $10,000 to anyone who could make the car take off while he had his foot on the brake. There were no takers. Every car made has better brakes that overpower the engine. The engine will die. The car will stop.

So? Totally different thing. If you look up the coefficient of friction for a material, it has two values--static friction(non-moving) and kinetic friction (sliding). The static friction value is always higher, so it would be easier to use the brakes to keep a car from beginning to move than to slow it down once it is already going at speed.

Re:Stuck throttle - brakes win

[Lumpy]

Yes and no.

applying hard breaking at high speed will cause gassing at the break pads and cause an excessive amount of fade as they heat up drastically. you can have very little breaking power when you try to engage the brakes at high speed now couple this with the engine fighting you.

with 3 piston large caliper disc brakes with vented and cross drilled rotors? no, there's enough there to counteract the problem (I.E. designed for high speed braking found in racing)

but the really low end brake systems found on cars on the road from BMW and Mercedes let alone the even cheaper junk on Renault have no chance of helping much being applied at 120mph.

The mechanics of this decline and failure in the coefficient of friction are varied. At a certain temperature, certain elements of the pad can melt or smear causing a lubrication effect, this is the classic glazed brake pad. Usually the organic binder resin starts to go first, then even the metallic elements of the friction material can start to melt. At really high temperatures the friction material starts to vaporize and the pad can sort of hydroplane on a boundary layer of vaporized metal and friction material which acts like a lubricant.

so brakes not working in this instance is certianly a possibility.

Re:Stuck throttle - brakes win

[DuckDuckBOOM!]

I had this happen with an '89 Cavalier. When cruise control was on (but not necessarily engaged!), every once in awhile it would get bored or something and decide to floor the throttle.
(I was told by a passenger that the acceleration was accompanied by a little dash light reading 'BANZAI!', but was never able to confirm this.)
Although it readily disengaged on request, not good. After 3 or 4 shop visits, the dealer eventually replaced what I assume was one of the engine control ROMs. No further problems.
Punch line: the old ROM was something like rev. 9.x, and the new one was around 22.x. My guess is that the Cavs with rev. 1.0 just exploded when you turned the key.

Re:Stuck throttle - brakes win

[Anonymous Coward]

adrenaline took over, and it is quite a powerful chemical. it causes one to lose all fine motor skills (steering or putting one's foot on the brakes, in this case), and it sends the thought process into overdrive, where one can just not remember what the hell to do. at least the adrenline didn't take over so much that he couldn't call the police and articulate what was happening. If it had been an unexperienced driver, who knows how bad the damage could have been.

Begun. It has BEGUN. Not BEGAN.

[Anonymous Coward]

jesus.

Re:Begun. It has BEGUN. Not BEGAN.

[roman_mir]

jesus - You can call me My Lord

I chose my car because it has no power steering.

[ahfoo]

My most loved car is a '79 Toyota Celica with absolutely no power anything. The car was originally sold as a sports edition and it was considered more sporty to not have power steering since you get a better feel for the road without it. At high speed you really don't need power steering. It's for parking and such.

Oddly enought, from their website:

[emtboy9]

"Vel Satis has been awarded the maximum 5-star rating from Euro NCAP, an independant consortium. It is now the safest saloon in the executive-car segment. "

What does this say for safety ratings in Europe?

Its amazing how people seem to thing that technology == safety.

The only thing that is guaranteed is that technology == another point of failure.

Re:Oddly enought, from their website:

[xeper]

"Vel Satis has been awarded the maximum 5-star rating from Euro NCAP, an independant consortium. It is now the safest saloon in the executive-car segment. "

What does this say for safety ratings in Europe?

Nothing really: You get Euro NCAP Stars for good performance in crash tests. No electronics involved, just plain old metal...

Re:Oddly enought, from their website:

[emtboy9]

Sounds like the ratings that the DHTS gives in the U.S. even though there have been times where their tests were less than realistic.

But I should have been a little more clear, as I was actually referring to the quote about the car being the safest in the executive-car segment.

But then again, with a really bad cruise control like the, the car had BETTER be an outstanding survivor in crash tests.

Re:Oddly enought, from their website:

[Gubbe]

"Its amazing how people seem to thing that technology == safety."

It's interesting to hear comments like that, especially when sparked by a single instance of failure which, I should add, happened under very dubious circumstances.

Perhaps you'd like to return to the times when there were no electronics in cars? Oops, there go your ABS brakes, ESP, Airbags, systems monitoring and a great big bunch of other safety-enhancing systems.

Granted, it can be argued that more technology makes people more reckless because they think their cars will protect them, but I dare to claim that when you count the lives/limbs saved by technology in cars and then subtract deaths/injuries caused by electronics faults in cars, you'll end up with a very big positive integer.

Re:Oddly enought, from their website:

[emtboy9]

"It's interesting to hear comments like that, especially when sparked by a single instance of failure which, I should add, happened under very dubious circumstances."

Nothing overly dubious so far about it... guy hits the gas to pass a vehicle on the road, much hilarity ensues... Please dont tell me that you dont accelerate to pass slower moving vehicles when driving...

But that aside, yes, I agree, it is interesting. Because as I said, it is amazing that people seem to thing that technology == safety.

And regardless of wether or not this happened one time, or a thousand, this is technology that is in a position to cause much pain and loss.

What would you say if, perhaps, the guy had lost control at ~120 mph, flipped, and caused a 30-40 car collision wiht multiple deaths, severe injuries, etc? But its ONLY A SINGLE INSTANCE OF FALURE, so that is acceptable?

Sorry, but some of us think that, in situations where technology is in a position to control life and death, even one instance of failure is unacceptable.

If I lose ABS, then so what? I have driven cars with non-abs braking systems for years. In all manner of road and weather conditions, and I have never had a wreck due to brake issues. ESP? Havnt needed it yet. Airbags? Agreed they save lives, but again, they too have the potential to cause a lot of grief.

As a former Rescue worker, I can tell you that it is VERY unnerving to crawl into a wrecked vehicle to render care to someone, KNOWING that all around me are unexploded airbags.
System monitoring has not cause much yet, other than the ability to spy on people's driving habits and then use such against them in court or insurance proceedings. (good, bad, dunno, I am undecided on that one).

And of course you can come up with any big positive integer you want... thats easy. I can also easily come up with the same number that says more people are killed each year by alcohol than were ever killed by Nuclear devices... so therefore, Nuclear weapons must be safer than alcohol.

But I digress, because that is just another example of skewed statistics.

Re:Oddly enought, from their website:

[Gubbe]

It's also amazing that some people seem to think that technology automatically rules out safety.

What's dubious is what exactly caused this incident to happen. The most plausible explanation proposed in this thread was a mechanical fault with a gas lever getting physically stuck. Assuming that, the number of failures in the software or electronics of the system has dropped to zero.
The second plausible explanation proposed was that the guy just wanted a fun ride and faked the fault.

I can appreciate your experiences as a rescue worker, but are you really saying that airbags should never have been invented because they pose a danger after an accident has occurred? What about ABS brakes? That 50 year old lady who has driven 30 years without incidents and then one slippery evening in fall she sees a deer only a few yards ahead. She hits the brakes in panic and turns the wheel to steer clear of the unfortunate creature. If her car has ABS, she'll stand a good chance of avoiding the animal. If not, she'll never even have a chance as she won't have time to remember to pump the brake pedal like she may have been taught some long time ago.

Now you'll be quick to point out that that's not the way it should be since she should know how to drive the car she has, but realistically speaking, how many people could actually follow the correct method of braking in a situation like that? You? Me? Tommi Mäkinen? Perhaps, but at least as many couldn't. Your problem with statistics is that you only use yourself as the sample.

I claim that ABS brakes have saved numerous lives and caused the loss of none to small fraction of those saved. I do not have statistics to back it up, but that's only because I didn't bother to look for any and you'd just discredit them anyway because after all, they are statistics and statistics never provide any useful information.

They do, when used correctly. Of course you can lie with "statistics" all you want by comparing weapons that haven't been used since WW2 to the leading cause of road fatalities or by similarly claiming that a Lada is faster than a Ferrari through scientific testing (well, we didn't have keys to the Ferrari). The fallacy lies in the assumption that if you can just provide one example of bad statistics, then all statistics must be bad.

In the end, it is my belief that technology has brought many more positive things to automobile safety than it has caused issues. Not counting the automobiles themselves of course.

I'll finish by giving you a tip for your counter argument:

The techonology in question here, cruise control, wasn't developed with safety in mind, it was developed for the sole convenience of the driver. You can go from there and point out how all the entertainment technology in cars hasn't saved any lives but has distracted enough drivers to rack up the body count severely.

Most of you are wrong

[Enigma_Man]

Here's why:

About turning off the ignition: The only time it is hard to steer a car without power assist is when the car is sitting still, or moving only very slowly (less than ~3 mph). When the wheels are rolling, it is just as easy to turn (I have removed my power steering to save weight in a car that isn't light by any means, I'm a skinny geek and it isn't a problem). The brakes might possibly lose their power assist (unless they are vacuum assist), but even then, as long as you know that the brakes will be harder to push, it isn't _that_ hard.

Next time you are driving in a large isolated stretch of road, try flooring it and putting on the brakes to try to overcome the engine. The car will come to a complete stop (unless you drive a POS with worn out brakes) even with the engine floored. Also, the emergency brake should have a mostly similar reaction, though you will probably end up dragging the rear tires along the ground, given the propensity for front wheel drive these days.

Third, many cruise control systems (not sure about brand-spankin' new cars) use some sort of vacuum or hydraulic control over the throttle pedal. You can physically override the cruise control by pulling up on the throttle pedal.

Fourth, he should have been able to put the car into neutral, even in an automatic. If the car is modern enough to have cruise control, it will slip into neutral, and the engine RPMs will bounce off the rev limiter, and not grenade the engine either (modern engines can run for weeks at maximum rpm without problems). Pull the car over, pop the hood, disconnect the battery or spark plugs until it stops running.

This guy is either a complete moron, or someone looking to speed down the highway semi-legally.

-Jesse

Re:Most of you are wrong

[scrod98]

If you read the website everything in the car is electronically assisted (or drive by wire), not hydraulic or mechanical. Still doesn't explain why he could not take it out of gear, although with all the electronics it may have an interlock that prevents that from happening at highway speed.

Would be bad for the car ;)

Re:Most of you are wrong

[mla_anderson]

Any cruise control that interfaces directly to the throttle control (usually with a second cable) cannot be overridden by pulling up on the accelerator pedal. The reason is that pushing on the pedal pulls the throttle cable, pulling on the pedal will attempt to push the cable and just loosens it, it will pull back against the cruise control.

Re:Most of you are wrong

[Enigma_Man]

His brakes still worked though; and was how he eventually stopped the car, he was just too much of a puss to push _really_ hard the first hour or so apparently, or he was lying.

Either way, my point is the guy is either a moron or lying.

-Jesse

Re:Most of you are wrong

[Alioth]

Disconnecting the battery probably won't stop it, given that the field coil on the alternator would remain energised. Pulling off the spark plug leads would though (unless diesel - in which case, block the air intake).

The brakes

[Anonymous Coward]

Ze brakes ... Zey do nothing!!!

120?

[dakkon1024]

120mph???? For a half an hour??? Glad he had a full tank of gas and peferctly straight roads. And what happen to netural? This doesn't add up.

This is a GREAT idea for getting out of tickets !

[Anonymous Coward]

That aside, every car ever sold has brakes which will overpower
the engine.

In other words, just put the fucking brakes on, and keep them on until the car stops.

If you are too stupid to do that, stay off the road !!!!!!!

Re:Brakes?

[brunson]

It's interesting how those "unintended acceleration" accidents completely went away when manufacturers started putting locks on the transmission that require your brakes to be applied.

A Road & Track editor pointed out that their test drivers regularly apply full throttle while holding the brake down with their *left* foot to obtain maximum acceleration off the line with an automatic transmission.

I for one...

[Anonymous Coward]

welcome our new Renault overlords.

Sorry, it's /. it has to be said--at least a million times. (And get modded up every friggin time)

The problem with emergency brakes...

[DG]

There's a couple of problems with the e-brake.

The first is that there's typically not a lot of mechanical advantage and/or pad area in the e-brake. Accordingly, they can't produce a whole lot of braking force. Most cars are quite capable of driving through their e-brake.

The second is that 99% of e-brakes brake the rear wheels only. This results in 100% rear brake bias, which is very unstable. Assuming you somehow managed to lock (or very nearly lock) the rears wheels with the e-brake, if there is ANY cornering force on the car at all, it will go around.

You can try this in a snowy, *empty* parking lot. Drive in a big circle at slow speed, then pop the e-brake. Whee!

If you have a stuck throttle, the last thing you need to worry about is directional stability.

DG

Re:The problem with emergency brakes...

[Kombat]

The first is that there's typically not a lot of mechanical advantage and/or pad area in the e-brake. Accordingly, they can't produce a whole lot of braking force. Most cars are quite capable of driving through their e-brake.

Then the brake is calibrated incorrectly. If I haul on my parking brake handle, at any speed, the rear brakes lock up solid. And they stay that way until I release the brake. Granted, my car is front-wheel drive. I'm sure it would be a different case in a rear-wheel drive vehicle. However, I really doubt that my little Honda Civic's engine has enough power to actually accelerate the vehicle while the rear brakes are completely locked up.

Just push the 'Normal Cruise' button

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like the car had automatically activated 'auto cruise' as the microprocessor deduced you were not acting in your best interest.

Not to worry - the car's primary function is the preservation of human life.

Unless you wound up with the evil twin, in which case its primary function is self preservation.

Car & Driver

[JoeStreet]

If I recall correctly, Car & Driver did an article on the runaway Audi fiasco. They determined that in ALL production cars, the brakes (not breaks) are ALWAYS more powerful than the engine. Therefore you can ALWAYS use the brakes to stop a "runaway" car. Period. End of story. I believe Pat Bedard authored the article. Pat, are you there?

These stories are more about someone wanting to get rid of a car than any technical problem. I'll bet the owner is behind on his payments.

Re:Car & Driver

[brunson]

I may have incorrectly attributed my previous comment to a R&T editor. Now that I think about it, it was probably C&D.

This happened to my wife once ...

[miniver]

... or something like it. She was driving her old Chevy Spectrum down a two-lane road at rush hour, when the carburator's butterfly valve stuck open. Standing on the brakes had no effect. Eventually she got to a safe place where she could run the car into a parking lot, shift into neutral, and stop the car as it coasted up an incline to a halt -- with the engine still racing. Then she was able to turn off the ignition, thus slaying the demon.

While she could have turned off the ignition at any time to kill the engine, she would have had almost no control over the vehicle (power brakes, power steering), and traffic was pretty heavy ... a sure formula for an accident. Once she had it stopped, she had her mechanic come out and look at it, and he replaced the butterfly value ... for free, since he'd done a tune up on the car a week earlier.

Re:This happened to my wife once ...

[pqdave]

Power brakes have a reserve of several full-travel pumps before power assist is lost, and even then will still work with more effort. Power steering is an assist only, and at any speed over 5mph isn't needed, especially in a car as small as a Spectrum.

I can understand that in a situation like that, not everyone will know enough about cars and have the presence of mind to do the right thing. I don't fault your wife for her handling of that, unless she was racing at high speed for an hour while on the phone to people who should be able to help figure out a solution.

Michael Rayner claimed this happened to him

[alanxyzzy]

But was charged with dangerous driving. I can't find a story that tells whether he was found guilty or not.

1999-06-10 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/365915.stm

1999-06-08 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/364260.stm

1999-06-07 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/363407.stm

1998-10-21 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/197964.stm

A driver praised as a hero when he rang police on his mobile phone to say his 38-ton lorry was out of control has been charged with dangerous driving. Michael Rayner, 26, now unemployed, from Potters Bar, Hertfordshire, will appear before Hendon Magistrate's Court on 17 November. Mr Rayner was praised for preventing an accident on the M1 in May when he said his accelerator had jammed on the motorway. The articulated lorry careered towards London for more than 20 miles at speeds of up to 80mph. Mr Rayner gave police a running commentary and the busy motorway had to be cleared by patrol cars and a helicopter. The Scania P124 lorry finally came to a halt by hitting a crash barrier and fence near Hendon in north-west London.

Re:Michael Rayner claimed this happened to him

[Psychotext]

Lol... I just posted this same thing right after you. A search on the BBC website states he was found innocent: Runaway lorry driver cleared

Re:Michael Rayner claimed this happened to him

[Alioth]

Do lorries not have manual transmissions and clutches? (the biggest I've driven is a fixed-body Leyland Roadrunner which in any case was incapable of more than 45mph because it had a low-ratio final drive - had the throttle stuck open on it, I'd have just pushed the clutch down and braked to a halt).

But if the transmission is shifted to neutral...

[sczimme]

as described above, then the emergency brake can be used to normal effect.

It happened to me too

[ballpoint]

I was driving a BMW 528i between Brussels and Paris, with the cruise control on. BMW's cruise control (Tempomat) is extremely accurate; I've never seen more than 1km/h deviation once it has settled. So there is no need to look frequently at the odometer.

When I approached another car on the relatively empty road, it seemed as if that car was driving really slow, like standing still. That happens, so I continued. As I came near a second car, I finally realized that it was me who was driving awfully fast. 230km/h. A touch on the brakes, the cruise control turned off and the car decelerated rapidly.

It turned out that one of the keys in my bundle was stuck between the steering wheel housing and the stick used to set the cruise control, forcing it into acceleration mode. Like a slowly boiled frog, I didn't notice what had been happening.

Later models have the cruise control controls on the steering wheel itself, which would have avoided this. OTOH I don't like controls on the wheel at all: steering wheels are for steering, and controls that change position are not ergonomic.

Re:It happened to me too

[otis wildflower]

It turned out that one of the keys in my bundle was stuck between the steering wheel housing and the stick used to set the cruise control, forcing it into acceleration mode. Like a slowly boiled frog, I didn't notice what had been happening.

That's why I like ignition locks in the dashboard, like on my Benz w126 ;)

Later models have the cruise control controls on the steering wheel itself, which would have avoided this. OTOH I don't like controls on the wheel at all: steering wheels are for steering, and controls that change position are not ergonomic.

I have to say I'm pretty damned fond of my 300SDL's ergonomics, except for the manual driver mirror and the fader dial that's useless when you ditch the crap stereo. One of these days I'm dropping in a new amp/wires/speakers and replacing the fader with a audio-in and/or 120v AC plug.

Re:It happened to me too

[fishbowl]

" I finally realized that it was me who was driving awfully fast. 230km/h."

A really nice car with good suspension will do that to you. Happened to me in a friend's Saab once, but because of my foot, not because of the cruise control. I was driving by sound and feel, not by the speedometer, but what felt like 140km/hr in my car was 200+ in the Saab.

One word - Brakes

[rider_prider]

No engine/transmission is stronger than the brakes, period. Nothing to see here, move along.

Re:One word - Brakes

[trongey]

So you've never seen a '69 Chevelle sitting at a red light smoking the rears while the fronts held? Or, conversely, dragging the fronts screeching through the intersection because the rears hooked up?

Lots of engine/transmission combinations can overpower brakes/tires, just not so much in newer cars.

Still, the article does sound fishy.

Re:One word - Brakes

[rider_prider]

Yes I certainly have done research in this area, that is brake stands when I was a kid, with a wide variety of vehicles, from pickups, to honda civics, to motorcycles. The trick is to run the engine rpms up against the torque convertor(or dumpt the clutch) with the brakes on and slowly release the brakes so one tire will break loose and spin. Press harder on the brakes and the brake stand stops... It's easier to do with more power and lousy brakes, ie. '69 chevelle. A new car with limited power like less than 250hp and modern brakes = easy to overpower engine and stop the car.

Re:One word - Brakes

[trongey]

Even better with limited-slip diff. Both rear wheels spinning :) Very impressive, but requires a lot of low-end to break em loose.

Nothing quite like taking advantage of ignorance.

[fdisk-o]

I don't think that's the truth of what happened.

I've not yet heard of a production car in which the brakes cannot overpower the engine. In fact, they are required to be able to do so in order to pass highway safety standards in any european country. This sounds much more like a joyride.

This also reminds me of the issue a number of years back when a number of folks had "unstoppable acceleration" in their Audi 5000 cars. They had been driving an automatic transmission and mashed the accelerator instead of the brake.

It would seem that people are so very willing to blame the equipment when they have made mistakes. Technology misunderstood by the vast majority of folks sure does make a great scapegoat.

Of course, I wasn't the one driving, so what do I know?

Similar XP

[mobby_6kl]

I had a similar experience, my dad was driving our '85 Ford Scorpio and after accelerating for whatever reason the engine stuck at rather high power. The breaks slowed us down maybe 40%, there was smoke everywhere and the breaks didn't help much at all. Of course switching to neutral solved the problem. The gas pedal/engine cable was repaired by the previous owner, and it was held together by some strange construction which got stuck and held the engine at high RPMs.
------==|==----
^cable ^this is the thig that got stuck

Explanation sounds is simple...

[lanroth]

It's a PICNIC. Problem In Chair, Not In Car. ;-)

Prior Art? ;-)

[Psychotext]

This happened recently in the UK with a lorry driver. The police did try to charge the driver with dangerous driving but he was let off. Not quite the same as the automatic systems of the Renault, but certainly not the first time something like this has happened.

Found some links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_91000 /9 1259.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/news id_364000/ 364260.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/ne wsid_363000/ 363407.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/368677.s tm

Are we putting too much trust?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?

How much trust are you putting in all the other hundreds of machines (electronic or otherwise) you already use?

Alternate (Babelfish) Translation:

[gekkotron]

ONE HOUR LONG FULL POWER

"fear of my life"

It was worse than a nightmare: A normal route on the motorway. To be stopped suddenly will the car ever faster, is no more. Well one hour long hunted a French driver with speed 200 over the runway, in the Slalom around the other cars. Debt is to have defective electronics, the manufacturer examines the incident.

Paris - it has a truck overhauled, when its car accelerated suddenly independently on 190 kilometers per hour, quoted the French daily paper "Le Parisien" the driver Hicham Dequiedt on Tuesday: "it was impossible to drive more slowly. On the brake to step, nothing proved functioned. as useless, " It used the headlight flasher and evaded a car after the other one, reported the 29-Jaehrige of the newspaper.

A cause for the Horrortrip was a electronics error in the vehicle: the Tempomat of its Renault Vel Satis was defective. The ignition to switch off is not possibly been, since the car has a smart card instead of a key, quotes the newspaper Dequiedt. It succeeded to it however to alarm over its mobile telephone the police. This warned the other road users over the broadcast and signaling devices along the motorway between Vierzon and Riom in central France.

The police certified Dequiedt a "admirable behavior": "you discussed solution types at the telephone with me." The officials let a Mautstelle on his distance vacate, all barriers were eliminated and fire-brigade and ambulance alarmed as a precaution.

"I stood, said the fear of my life" Dequeidt to "Le Parisien. It became dangerous, when before it a truck on the left trace overhauled another vehicle. It could change over only to the standing tire. "I thought, my last Stuendlein struck."

Only after approximately one hour and 200 kilometers he could finally bring the cars to holding. As succeeded to it, in addition there are different data. "Le Parisien" quoted Dequeidt: "I stepped as firmly, as I could, on the brakes, and the car came finally to a halt." According to data of the police with Clermont Ferrand in central France, it succeeded to pull it after "many attempts" the smart card out. Thereupon the car lost 20 kilometers before a Mautstelle gradually at speed and finally to a halt came.

Electronics breakdown: The Vel Satis is steered with a smart card
The pressestelle of the manufacturer Renault confirmed the incident, which occurred on Sunday, on request of MIRROR ON-LINE ONE. "the car is examined for the moment in France", said spokeswoman Caroline Sambale. To the causes she can say to still nothing for the moment. "Le Parisien" quoted head of the company Louis Schweitzer, which expressed itself sceptically over the incident. "as it is described, surprises me the incident, and it appears very improbably." Whether similar incidents in France already occurred, did not become known.

The model Vel Satis is steered via the smart card: Door locks open automatically, as soon as the driver equipped with the map, whom grasp affects; Preferences of the driver such as air conditioning system and seat position, in addition, vehicle-relevant data such as maintenance dates are stored on the smart card. As soon as the driver puts it into the reader in the center console, going away barrier and steering column bolting device are solved. The driver must operate then an asynchronous operation button, in order to start the engine.

Re:Thats what you get...

[gregarican]

Personally I'm surprised that the French automobile continued to accelerate. If it was true to its nature it should've unconditionally surrendered...

Nice Thought But...

[virg_mattes]

...if this car had a manual transmission, there'd be no problem. Step on the clutch (why would you downshift instead of just holding the clutch open?), let the rev limiter protect the engine, and step on the brake. Car stops.

Because of this I'm inclined to believe it's an automatic transmission. Shifting it from drive to neutral will disengage it, and again the rev limiter covers the engine while the brakes stop the car. I'd like to see documentation of any automatic transmission that will refuse to disengage at any given engine or car speed, because that auto company would be wiped off the face of the Earth by lawsuits. I doubt such a transmission exists.

All in all, I suspect that the same thing happened here that happens in a lot of cases. I suspect he panicked when he couldn't stop the car and since nobody directly told him to shift it out of gear, he didn't think of it. Also, he managed to stop the car using just the brakes (which is as it should be; the brakes should be strong enough to stop the car under full power, assuming they're in good repair), so I further suspect that if he'd been calmer he could have stood on the brake pedal sooner.

Virg

Re:Nice Thought But...

[mollymoo]

hifting it from drive to neutral will disengage it, and again the rev limiter covers the engine while the brakes stop the car. I'd like to see documentation of any automatic transmission that will refuse to disengage at any given engine or car speed, because that auto company would be wiped off the face of the Earth by lawsuits. I doubt such a transmission exists.

I doubt you can shift straight to neutral with many of the "F1-style" paddle-shift gearboxes. You have no lever to shift to "N" and the box won't shift down if the revs are too high. There simply isn't a control which lets you do anything but shift up and down.

A car going off on its own is one things - you still have steering and brakes. The guy in the story survived, after all. The idea of a malfunction with fly-by-wire steering is truly terrifying.

Re:Nice Thought But...

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if you have a paddle-shift sequential gearbox, there still has to be a selector to allow you to choose betweed forward and reverse, and this selector also has a neutral option.

Re:Nice Thought But...

[n6mod]

Not on any of the paddle-shift cars I've driven. (Ferrari, Aston Martin) Tiptronics don't count, those are really automatics with fancy switches.

Neutral is below first, reverse is either a button on the steering wheel (Enzo) or below first.

I *think* you can always get neutral by pulling both paddles simultaneously.

Re:Nice Thought But...

[Anonymous Coward]

IIRC at least some of the Sequential manuals have an option to pull both levers at once to engage neutral. I think BMW and Ferrari both do this.

Re:Nice Thought But...

[InvalidError]

But if everything's electronic from the gear box to brakes and everything else, ABS might be messed up as well, making the brake pedal much less effective - particularly if it is stuck in relaxed mode. Car manufacturers are putting more and more safeguards for common handling mistakes since they cost them... and what initially appeared to be trivial fixes turned out to have significant unexpected consequences in the form of killing a number of emergency measures. Along the lines of cutting ignition, this is problematic for cases where the transmission needs to be in 'Park' before the key can be moved off the 'On/Running' position and the transmission is locked in position until the speed drops below about 15km/h. Other suggestion (also drastic): pull fuses. One of them should kill the ignition - assuming the current surges from breaking high-current inductive circuits does not kill the fuse-puller first. (direct or (most likely) spark-surprise-ouch-screeching_tires-bang indirect)

Re:Nice Thought But...

[spunkypimp]

which is as it should be; the brakes should be strong enough to stop the car under full power, assuming they're in good repair

Actually, I was driving a 1 mo old Nissan Pathfinder. As I got into the car I knocked the industrial floormat out and when I put it in I accidentally set it on the throttle. I was fine for a few minutes because I didn't depress the throttle very far, although I thought the car was acting funny. Finally, after I hit 35, the car wouldnt' stop because the throttle was depressed. I stood on the brakebut the car just went CHUG-CHUG-CHUG and kind of stuttered instead of stopping.

It stuttered right through a red light and into the side of a maroon Volvo. My parents (I was still in high school at the time) didn't believe that the brakes couldnt' stop the car until I made my dad go out on an empty road and try it.

Re:Nice Thought But...

[Anonymous Coward]

You've driven, eh? Did you try pulling both paddles at the same time on that Ferrari? That's how you select neutral.

Stupid question...

[gfxguy]

Couldn't he just turn off the cruise control? I know breaking usually disengages it, but every car I've ever driven (with cruise control) had a separate power switch for it...

Who made who?

[Tom2K2]

I'm pretty sure Stephen King tried to warm us all about this some time ago. Was there a mysterious green cloud hovering above the earth?? Who made who!!!?? Who made you!?? I hope that when the machines take over that ACDC provides the soundtrack of our impending demise.

AC/DC approves of this sig

Subaru of America warned of this, had recall

[Richthofen80]

Subaru sent me a recall notice 6 months ago about a potential problem. It was mechanical, though, not electrical. Apparently a retaining clip for the cable for the cruise control has broken in some models, causing acceleration to 'stick'. Dealers are replacing defective clips at no cost to drivers.

As it has already been said many times, the best way is to shift into neutral, sound the horn and use hazards. That's what the recall letter said, as well.

its taught at least in the massachusetts drivers license handbook.

Re:Subaru of America warned of this, had recall

[mihalis]

My WRX had this recall also (and since then it's been again for another officialy recall - possibly loose driver's seat retaining bolt).

I wasn't too concerned because (as others have mentioned) in a manual car you normally have at least three options - use the brakes, turn off the engine, depress the clutch.

In an emergency I can well imagine trying the brakes first - in a porsche, for example, although the engine is stupendously powerful, they quote the brakes in bhp equivalent figures and rate the 911 turbo as having "3000 bhp" brakes (IIRC) - more than enough!

Re:Subaru of America warned of this, had recall

[Alizarin Erythrosin]

But in a WRX (you must have a bugeye since you have the seat bolt recall, I have an 04), why would you want to slow down? ;-)

The clip thing is a precaution. They issued a recall notice only because if it did happen, and it could, it would be really bad.

Re:Subaru of America warned of this, had recall

[mihalis]

But in a WRX (you must have a bugeye since you have the seat bolt recall, I have an 04), why would you want to slow down? ;-)

Silly! The reason is obvious. You need to slow down so that you can enjoy accelerating again.

and yes, it's a bugeye sport wagon

The clip thing is a precaution. They issued a recall notice only because if it did happen, and it could, it would be really bad.

True, I was just agreeing with the comments on how many options must be removed from a car before you can really lose control this way.

Re:Subaru of America warned of this, had recall

[Anonymous Coward]

"its taught at least in the massachusetts drivers license handbook."

too bad turn signals aren't.

This one time... at band camp ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot has turned into storytime! Yay!

hard to take seriously

[mihalis]

I am sceptical about this story, however it reminds me of an attitude to software, expressed before by a French engineer, that I disliked :-

An Airbus avionics programmer appeared on a documentary about the Airbus crashes (this was in the UK so was at least seven years ago). He was quoted as saying something like "we take the attitude that, with software, if we test it well enough, then it will work".

This scared me. If you don't know why, I don't want to ride in your plane or live near YOUR nuclear reactor, either.

Re:hard to take seriously

[dtfinch]

"we take the attitude that, with software, if we test it well enough, then it will work".

That relates to some good wisdom I heard on how to tell the quality of a programmer. The inexperienced will say "if it works, it's right" as opposed to "if it's right, it'll work." The original quote might have compared CS and CIS majors, but I can't remember.

Re:hard to take seriously

[MadHungarian1917]

If you remember the first Airbus A series at the Paris Airshow crashed because the computer overrode the pilot's control inputs.

There is some debate over whether the A/C was correctly configured for takeoff but still the computer needs to allow manual override for conditions the software designer did not take into account. To this day I will not fly on Airbus equipment for this very reason if a software designer is so arrogant as to think there is no condition they have not accounted for I agree with the parent poster and I dont want any part of their A/C or nuclear reactor.

Re:Bad Cars

[MindStalker]

Hey my first car was a Renault, you insensative clod. And it only cost me 200 dollars, and the parking brake didn't work, and it wouldn't go in reverse, and I had to push start it most of the time. What was that again, renaults are crappy? yea I agree.

Have you ever tried lifting a motorcycle?

[masukomi]

It's like these tiny women on harley-davidson motorcycles, how the fuck are they going to pick those things up if they drop them? Just ignorant.

Hullo?! It's not ignorance at work it's physics.

Most guys I know can't lift a Harley. They're freaking heavy. In fact, ANY motorcycle that can hit highway speeds, even small 150cc ones are to heavy for many people to pick up alone. Bulked up guys would probably have problems with a harley too, not only because of the weight but because you don't want it to slide and scrape up the whole side of your bike.

Tiny women on Harleys are no worse off than most guys when it comes to picking them up. The only ignorance is the idea that your average male could pick one up.

Sexism sucks. Think before you speak.

Possibly an automatic gearbox

[Colin Smith]

"The 5-speed pro-active automatic gearbox with sequential shift uses all the on-board computers to adapt to your style of driving. This optimises consumption, power and roadholding." (from the Renault velsatis web page).

It's sequential, a bit like a motorbike gearbox so maybe it can't be set into neutral until it's down in 1st gear. Any Renault automatic drivers comment on that?

Re:Possibly an automatic gearbox

[fucksl4shd0t]

Let's see, a Frenchman driving a French car...

His name wasn't Clousseau, by any chance, was it?

A Similar Occurrence

[14erCleaner]

Something similar happened to a Colorado woman last February. She was driving on a rural interstate when her Pontiac accelerated to 100 mph and wouldn't respond to controls. After driving 75 miles toward Denver (while desperately calling for help on her cell phone), the car was slowed to a stop by two police cars that surrounded it front and back and physically "restrained" it.

From an article on the incident here: A mechanic examined the car Monday and said a transmission reverse gear cluster anchor bolt fell out, preventing the car's transmission from moving into another gear. He also found the car was idling at a very high rate, which would cause it to go fast if it were already moving in 5th gear. The Center for Auto Safety previously reported problems with sudden acceleration in Pontiac Sunbirds and other GM "J" cars.

Re:A Similar Occurrence

[adamdeprince]

What is wrong with her brakes if she couldn't stop a car with a fast idle in 5th?

drive by wire the next innovation

[Brigadier]

you know moving to an indirect drive system has pretty much been planned. I think the problem is that there needs to be more self checks and overides built into these cars. The link below is GM's HyWire which seems to be setting the standard for standardised platforms which includes drive by wire.

http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2002/pari s/ preview/gm-hywire/

same thing happened to me!

[Naikrovek]

I was in my dad's 1968 chrysler newport (HUGE car) and was driving 65 or so on cruise control. when i got into town the cruise wouldn't disengage and the 290hp motor was too much for the 4 wheel drum brakes to stop. for some reason the car would not go into neutral. i put the car through all the gears and my speed did not change. i cruised through town braking at about 50 and had a huge line of cops behind me by the time i got out of town, and when i finally got to a point of open road where i could think to switch off the ignition (i was 16, gimme a break) i was promptly thrown on the ground and handcuffed.

one of the officers didn't believe me when i said the cruise control stuck, and asked test the car himself, since it was the only way to prove to him that i wasn't purposely speeding. when he started the car again, cruise was still stuck, and the car was still stuck in gear, and VROOM 65mph. he spun around and hit a tree, steering column peirced his chest and killed him.

they kinda forgot about arresting me after that. cruise control sucks.

Re:same thing happened to me!

[Quill_28]

You are serious? Did they even have cruise control on 1968 cars?

Re:same thing happened to me!

[tuffy]

You are serious? Did they even have cruise control on 1968 cars?

It'd already been in-use for 10 years by then.

Re:same thing happened to me!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to be skeptical or anything, but what in what city did this happen to you? Was it reported in any newspapers?

Re:same thing happened to me!

[NighthawkFoo]

Some 1950's Cadillac models had cruise control as an option. There were "hand throttles" available going back almost forever - FDR had one installed on his car after polio had paralyzed his legs.

THere is only this little issue here

[floydman]

" stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped" he said. Maybe the story is a little short on details, but if you are driving at 120 MPH, and do what he just did, you wont be alive to say the sotry, no matter what car you are driving.

for sure

[Anonymous Coward]

And as Audi showed years ago to reporters, the brakes on a car are always strong enough to override the engine. And there is no car which has true brake-by-wire, so the computer can't intercept that.

This person is either having people on, or a complete idiot.

You can prove to yourself your brakes are more powerful than your engine by pushing both pedals at once in your car. If you don't want to do that, then just think about it, does your car require more distance to accelerate to 60 from 0 or to stop to 0 from 60? The answer is it stops at least 3 times quicker than it acclerates. That means the brakes are applying more stop force than the motor can apply acceleration force.

It's user error (as usual)

[AK Marc]

The top of the line Vel Satis has 245 hp. Brakes can easily out power the engine. It took him an hour to decide to push hard enough on the brakes to stop the car. Of course, with the proper pressure on the brake pedal, he came to a halt.

Re:It's user error (as usual)

[evilviper]

Where are you getting this information? Everything I've read has been incredibly vague.

Or are you just guessing?

Re:It's user error (as usual)

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it said elsewhere he finally removed the smart card. His brakes may have been able to overpower the engine, but not while they were fighting momentum too.

Re:It's user error (as usual)

[AK Marc]

From the article:

"Le Parisien" quoted Dequeidt: "I stepped as firmly, as I could, on the brakes, and the car came finally to a halt."

So, even 20 km after pulling the smartcard, it continued to go, until he stepped on the brakes hard enough to make it stop. The article wasn't all that clear, with the translation difficulties, but that line is quite explicit.

Re:It's user error (as usual)

[AK Marc]

His brakes may have been able to overpower the engine, but not while they were fighting momentum too.

All mainstream passenger vehicles of the nature of the one involved in the mishap (like a Toyota Camry, Ford Taurus, or other midsized family car) can stop in 1000 ft. or less from 120 km/h, if the brakes are fully applied. That he didn't try earlier indicates that he is stupid. That no one else here knows this indicates that the roads are quite unsafe.

The force of the brakes on the wheels is about an order of magnatude greater than the force of the engine. It isn't even close. Try for yourself. Go 75 mph, floor the throttle, then apply the brakes firmly and watch the car slow down while under full throttle. Really, it will work. You'll slow down briskly, as long as you aren't an utter moron like the guy in the story that is afraid to hit the brakes hard.

probably a clueless driver

[hb253]

Shades of the disproven Audi sudden acceleration fiasco of the 1980's. All those cases were driver error (stepping on the accelerator instead of the brake pedal). People refused to admit they made a mistake.

All cruise control systems I've used disengage when the brake is applied. Even if it didn't disengage, a properly maintained braking system should be able to stop the car, even with the engine at full throttle.

Even with a keyless ignition, there should be a way to shut off the engine. Perhaps the driver was not familiar with the car controls. It's always a good idea to read the manual.

Untimately, my opinion is the auto makers are going too far with automated electronic systems that intervene on the driver's behalf. I'd prefer to hang myself with my own rope.

Pro-active automatic gearbox?

[Colin Smith]

Sequential, slipping it into neutral might not be an option. I can't find out enough about it from the Renault web site to see if it can be dropped into neutral from any gear.

Re:Pro-active automatic gearbox?

[GoRK]

I imagine it can. I can confirm that BMW's SMG transmission in the M3 will go to neutral from any gear, as I have accidentally yanked it into neutral during a hard left corner at the track.

It might depend on the way the shift controls are set up. On the BMW you push up and down to shift (or use the paddles) and pull the stick to the left to go to neutral. I could see that if the transmission required you to downshift all the way to first before you could move to tell the car to go to neutral you would have a problem.

The other thing about sequential transmissions is that they will normally disengage the clutch automatically when you brake, effectively putting the car into neutral as well; however at least the M3 has a tendancy to keep power during light braking, so this could be a point of malfunction also, I suppose.

Re:Pro-active automatic gearbox?

[arivanov]

you push up and down to shift (or use the paddles).

These are electronic. So is the actuator on the clutch (automatics of this type have real clutches inside). If they are not fully independent circuits and go through the computer which is bust you are very very toast. Same as this poor chap.

Sounds familiar...

[JakeD409]

Did anyone else see I, Robot (the movie, I mean)? Maybe there's a reason his car wouldn't slow down...

My similar experience

[Hoi Polloi]

My first car was a Ford [car model removed due to owner's embarrassment]. I came to a light and as I hit the brakes to slow down the engine started revving like mad. I had to put all my weight onto the brake pedal to keep it still at the light, it was like trying to hold back a crazed horse. I didn't want to go through the light obviously and I didn't want to kill the engine there either. I managed to control it until I got to a parking lot on the other side of the intersection where I put it into neutral and killed the ignition. The engine dieseled for almost 5 minutes until it used up what was in the carburetor (yes, old car). Fortunately there was a mechanic across the street who walked over and checked the throttle line and noticed that it was frozen open. He loosened it up and I was able to get it to the shop the next day safely.

NOT FUN!

Re:My similar experience

[myowntrueself]

"My first car was a Ford [car model removed due to owner's embarrassment]."

Oh, so it was a Pinto?

brakes should always work

[wotevah]

The brakes are mechanical with all sorts of fail-safe modes builtin (dual cylinder setup, it works without the booster etc).

The car's computer has no say in whether your brakes work or not (the ABS system does if you have it but it shouldn't become active until the wheels slip).

Additionally, the clutch is fully mechanical too. You should be able to disengage it and the car will stop accelerating (this has the benefit of disabling cruise control at the same time).

Something else happened there. I'm curious to know what it is.

Also, someone says never to turn off the engine. Maybe in traffic, but if you're in a straight line, I see no harm in turning off the engine if the car doesn't listen (but don't turn the key all the way, so it doesn't lock the steering wheel).

Re:brakes should always work

[fishbowl]

"Something else happened there. I'm curious to know what it is."

The guy saw an opportunity to get the rush from high speed driving and had a good enough story to get out of trouble with the police.

Re:brakes should always work

[stanmann]

120 is fast, but not "high speed" not in my book anyway. I've done 120 on city streets in a Hyundai Accent PoS.

Re:brakes should always work

[fishbowl]

"120 is fast, but not "high speed" not in my book anyway."

Certainly not in a nice car with good suspension. I wonder what a new Renault is like?

Ah, the old days

[spamacon]

We had a gigantic Chevy Caprice Classic station wagon when I was a kid that had this same feature. When I was old enough to drive, my brother and I would sit at a stop sign, and press "Set" on the cruise control. You could watch the gas pedal drop to the floor and the wagon would just take off, well, as much as a 2 ton station wagon can take off. It wouldn't stop accelerating until you tapped the brakes. Combine that car with too much of Knight Rider's "Turbo Boost", and you have quite a fun afternoon.

Christine

[ParnBR]

I'm amazed no one remembered this. Or so it seems. I don't mean to make fun of this; although the movie probably looks campy today, the idea of a car with a mind of his own is scary. I'm sure the original news article doesn't do justice to how much scared the driver was. He was lucky to keep his life, 200km/h is just too much.

Re:Obligatory win/linux crash joke

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, CARS DRIVE YOU!!!

ok, happy?

Fly By Wire, Not For SpaceShipOne

[Anonymous Coward]

Burt Rutan ruled out such fly by wire systems for SpaceShipOne.

Overly liberal people crack me up.

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it amusing that people always want to be the first one to make a point about correcting what they see to be un-pc.

Why don't you face it, a 100 lb woman is simply not going to have the muscle of a 200 lb man and they won't be able to lift the same amount of weight.

You may view this as sexist, but it's simply nature.

Re:Overly liberal people crack me up.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you face it, a 100 lb woman is simply not going to have the muscle of a 200 lb man and they won't be able to lift the same amount of weight.

What woman and man are you referring to? I can find two 200 lb men you have very different lifting capacities. Same goes for women. Overall body weight doesn't tell you how much muscle someone has. It doesn't tell you the quality of the muscle. It doesn't tell you the distribution of the muscle. It doesn't tell you the technique used when lifting. Comparing two people only knowing one variable...I guess two variables, weight and sex...is just ignorant.

Re:Overly liberal people crack me up.

[avi33]

AC, meet dictionary.

You seem to have confused the term 'liberal' with 'politically correct.'

Re:Overly liberal people crack me up.

[Anonymous Coward]

As if the right wing crowd is accused of being overly politically correct.

When making a statement, the best I can hope for is to be right *most* of the time. Of course there will be exceptions to every rule. But the reason it's a rule is because it applies *most* of the time.

I can say "dogs bark", and someone who wants to argue can chime in and say that I'm stereotyping and that they have a dog that has never barked. But they are choosing the exception over the rule just for the sake of argument.

Political correctness is known more for being a liberal cause than a conservative cause.

Re:Overly liberal people crack me up.

[clem9796]

It's not simply un-pc. it's rediculously wrong. My kid can lift me if i sit far enough up on the see-saw. It's all about center of gravity. If someone is still too weak to lift the bike being perfectly in position, then.. well.. maybe they should sell their bike, or don't ride alone much, or get more experience so as to not turn it over in the first place.

Re:Overly liberal people crack me up.

[Anonymous Coward]

No matter who the rider is, the proper way to pick the bike up will be the same. The part they grab is the same. They don't give long levers to smaller riders.

Since they're lifting it from the same point, the stronger the person is, the easier it will be for them to lift it. I've dropped dirtbikes when I was younger and had to pick them up, and it wasn't easy even when my dad did teach me the proper way. I can easily imagine a weak person not being able to pick up a Harley.

And this is why . . . .

[theparanoidcynic]

I never want to buy one of these newfangled cars that have more electronics than a hacker's apartment. It can have EFI and DIS, those aren't gonna do much harm if they go nuts. ABS is okay too because those units failsafe to full breaking power at the first hint of trouble. Other than those I'd like to keep my clutch, gears, steering, and non-abs-mode breaking on manual control.

A Limerick

[jazman_777]

There once was a man driving slow
But he owned a defective Renault
He pushed on the brakes
until his foot ached
And now he's a Slashdot Hero.

The root cause

[Call Me Black Cloud]

Apparently there was a Porsche behind him. Once his french car sensed the german car approaching, the french car's fight or flight response was triggered. It's obvious which path the car chose...

ob /.

[5m477m4n]

I, for one, welcome our new self-aware car overlords.

Someone had to say it...

from reuters: neutral gear failed!

[remou]

Reuters Article

The driver called police to say the cruise control of his Renault Vel Satis had jammed while overtaking a lorry, and that all attempts to brake or put the automatic into neutral had failed, police said Tuesday.

Theres always another option...

[IndigoZenith]

There are many great ideas that people came up with on how the driver could have slowed the car. But nobody has listed the obvious one yet.

He should have kicked his way through the floor boards to the engine compartment. At which point he would have seen 6 wires, 2 of them being blue, 1 brown, 1 orange and 2 red. He would then have taken the brown, orange and 1 of the reds and spliced them together with a bit of electrical tape. But making sure that he was at all times grounded and that the blue wires did not come in contact with the red ones (Then you would have a whole new set of problems).

Once these wires are connected together, it is all downhill from there. You just have to use a screwdriver to crack open the steering column where you will find 4 more wires (blue, green, yellow/blue, red). Take the connected wires that you finished with earlier, use a 3 foot spare wire to run a bridge to the steering column connecting to the green and blue wire. Once this is all done, just push your horn 3 times in rapid succession and the car will slow right down.

Still makes me laugh that this guy never thought of this. Silly French people.

Antilock Brake Failure

[nurb432]

A few years ago had a friend scooting down the highway when his antilock brakes suddenly kicked in and froze ..

Wasnt a pretty sight.. Thankfully no one got hurt..

He got free repair service and an apology...

The company will remain namless, but it was an early model with anti-lock.. seems not all the bugs were worked out yet..

actually.....

[to_kallon]

i had something similar happen to me. we have a lincoln navigator and the control chip on the transmission went out and it started running wide open at will. now granted, it took me a few months to notice given my driving style, but i did end up driving through downtown at 7000 rpms, shifting to neutral (automatic trans) and coasting into stoplights. now of course the problem becomes that you are sitting in neutral at 7000 rpm and you can't very well just drop back into drive. so i had to shut the engine off, put it in drive then turn it on. let me tell you, there is nothing like burning rubber, sitting still, for 10 seconds in a small semi. i did finally make it to the dealer and, as it turns out, there had been a recall issued but not publicized.
in short, while it may seem a fishy tale, these things do happen, although i didn't call the police nor did the problem fix itself on approaching a tollbooth.

Not entirely true...

[sczimme]

On vehicles that have rear drum brakes, I believe the cable actuates the brake pad/cam lever mechanism in the same way as the hydraulic cylinder does. Of course one probably cannot get the same amount of braking power without the hydraulic assist, but saying they have "just enough power to hold the car from rolling" is a bit off the mark. Besides, most of the vehicle's stopping power is in the front brakes, so the alternate actuating mechanism for the rear brakes is not a huge loss. (The emergency brake actuates the rear brakes because suddenly engaging the front brakes at speed can make an unpleasant situation worse.)

As an aside, placing the transmission in neutral is part of a belt-and-suspenders approach: if something should go awry with the parking brake, the transmission will then hold the car in place. The transmission is not there to add holding power [to that of the parking brake]; it is there to add an additional source of holding power in case the parking brake fails.

Life is like a s Renault Vel Satis

[Anonymous Coward]

Life is like a s Renault Vel Satis... sometimes it accelarates, or takes a turn out of my control and I don't even have a darn magnetic key.

Engine braking

[littleghoti]

If you shift into a lower gear, the engine will act as a brake. Think about how beginners kangaroo their cars, and how you can coast if you depress the clutch, but not if you don't.

Re:Engine braking

[chihowa]

Except that in this case the engine is stuck at WOT. Downshifting will just make you go forward a little slower than before.

I think he is right.

[Anonymous Coward]

People nowadays are becoming less and less capable. They are becoming a pure end-user, and not even a good one at that.

They can't maintain their car, they can't fix it when something breaks, half of them don't even know how to change a flat tire. Most don't even know how to drive a car that doesn't have an automatic transmission. And sadly, some of them don't even know how to drive.

They are helpless idiots who make no attempt to learn what they can. But I bet they can tell you who Julia Roberts is dating!

Re:I think he is right.

[Le Marteau]

half of them don't even know how to change a flat tire

Example: I am constantly amazed at the number of cars I see on the side of the road which have fallen off the jack and are on the axle. I would think that everyone has seen this, and when time comes to change a tire, that they would do something to prevent the car from moving and thus falling off the jack. The stupidity of some of my fellow drivers stuns me, sometimes.

Accelerating out of control != cruise control lock

[millermj]

If the car started accelerating out of control, that's not a cruise control lock-up, but rather something else. In the early 90's, there were several reports of Saturn sedans having a true cruise control lock-up. I remember reading about it on the Prodigy (original service) bulletin boards. The car would lock in at 75 mph. Shifting into neutral (as suggested by other /. readers) did work for those drivers, and after they had coasted to a stop on the side of the road and with the engine roaring, they could turn off the ignition. That's why when I bought my 1995 Saturn SL-1 I explicitly asked for one without cruise control. Saturn redesigned their sedans in 1996 and the problem seemed to disappear at about the same time. Saturn didn't want to call attention to this problem, but it was severe enough to show up when I did my research through Consumer Reports. To demonstrate my trust of Saturn Corp. to have solved the problem, my second car was a 2001 LS series Saturn equipped with cruise control.

Just look around...

[Cassanova]

for an airport, ram in through the gates and just tell the cops you are going to circle the runway till the gas runs out... sheesh..do these things even need to be said?

Buying Renault Was His First Mistake

[rogerborn]

B
esides, that car's electronic logic devices are powered by Micro$oft's Windows.

What did you expect would happen?

=)

Roger Born
writing.borngraphics.com
"Out of my mind. Back in five minutes."

Robot?

[cerebralsugar]

This happened in a Renault Vel Satis??

Could it be he was driving a car that looked like one but was really...

THE KNIGHT AUTOMATED ROVING ROBOT!

KARR!!!!!!

Maybe KARR with laringitis so the driver couldn't hear him talking??

I can hear you people now. "That was a TV show dude." Well let me live in my fantasy world!

C to 7of9! Beam me up for some hot love!

Was he driving a M$ car?

[crovira]

That would require a 'one finger salute', shortly becore the crash.

Renault 120 mph?

[Anonymous Coward]

He was going downhill all the way wasn't he?

for some reason I don't buy this...

[demonbug]

From one of the articles:

"I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said.

Yeah; it doesn't sound like he was trying too hard to get the car to stop before. The Vel Vetis has plain old hydraulic brakes (albeit with ABS and "electronic brake distribution") - a malfunction in the cruise control isn't going to affect the mechanical linkage, and obviously the brakes did work as he was able to stop just before reaching a toll booth. Sounds like BS to me, someone afraid of "no more keys" trying to invent a scenario where this new-fangled technology could be life-threatening (not that I completely disagree - I find the notion of using smart cards instead of keys to be rather pointless, myself - another solution in search of a problem).

Re:for some reason I don't buy this...

[fishbowl]

"Sounds like BS to me"

Did his excuse get him out of a speeding ticket?

Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[SmallFurryCreature]

Is this still a clutch system (not sure about the world, the sytem that disengages the motor from the gearbox)?

Usually when you shift in these systems you first will have to engage the clutch disengaging the transmission and then shift. Doing it without clutching is possible but sounds nasty.

I can imagine that a system would then refuse to release the clutch if the speeds are to mismatched but this would still slow you down (no power reaching the wheels after all) and not keep you going for an hour.

If it is more an F1 like setup where you press a button and the car clutches and shifts for you I can imagine it.

Yet both cases sounds like over-confidence. You can brake with your engine and if for some reason the real brakes fail it may be your only option. Removing a valid way of decelerating sounds stupid. If this is really the case then yes we have become to reliant on computers.

Thing go wrong, don't remove safety features. Why don't cars have a fuel cutoff near the drivers seat? After all he is between the fuel tank and the engine in 99% of the cases.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[dykofone]

Sorry, I forgot to specify that it's an automatic transmission. I'm not sure of the exact setup it uses, but I'm pretty sure it's "shift-by-wire," or that when I select a different gear it is then controlled by the computer, not physically shifted by the lever.

As far as automatic transmissions go, Rovers can do some pretty strong engine braking. When off road, I never use the brakes, just shift into first and I will crawl down the hill.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[the_mad_poster]

When you downshift from, say, 4th to 3rd in an AOD transmission, the lever may go into the 3rd slot but the system will not actually shift down until it's "safe" to do so. It's the same premise that the system uses to shift up. You can hold the car in 2nd gear and it won't go over, but it also won't shift up to 3rd immediately if you push the lever into third gear. In an AOD, you more or less have to look at your gear lever as a nice suggestion that the car USUALLY follows.

I don't really know how you could safely stop a modern AOD if you lose control of the throttle unless you've removed the rev limiter. The car will not shift down or into neutral if doing so would throw you over the rev limit and you can't gun the engine further to try and blow it either.

As a sidenote, you can get a shift kit that will let you shift up and down in an AOD at your command. If you had something like that and you were going that fast, you MIGHT be able to override the rev limiter simply by throwing the lever back into first gear as hard as you can. Rev limiters aren't perfect and you can rev the engine to explosion if you do something stupid enough.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[the real darkskye]

Actually it is quite simple to shift in a manual (or stick shift for our pond-side readers) without a clutch, it just involves matching the engine RPMs with the gear+wheel speed for a smooth change.

The things you learn fast when your clutch cable snaps while driving.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[jasonshortphd]

Here's an idea... The EMERGENCY BRAKE... Isn't that what it is for? And he couldn't turn OFF the cruise control? Wierd. In all the cars I have owned it is a on / off type of thing, but if that failed and stuck on, how about that hand brake?

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[the_mad_poster]

You can't safely pull the hand brake at 120 mph. Brakes have metal wiring in them that can snag the tires if it's bared, and pulling the hand brake at that speed would probably rip away the pad pretty quick. Not only that, but there's no way the brake could've stopped the car before it burned up unless it caused the cruise control to finally stop as well. If you don't believe me, you've gotten a half mile up the road and suddenly realize you left the emergency brake on. It's only meant to hold the car in place on an incline and to add some extra power to your real brakes, it's not meant to actually stop the car on its own.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[jasonshortphd]

Why wait until you hit 120? I wasn't talking about it then... When the car first went out of control. But you are correct that the pads would burn off. A flat tire might be better than impacting another car at 200 (I think he said he hit 200). ANYTHING is better than getting on your cell phone and having a converstation about it! This is TIME TO PANIC. :)

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[the_mad_poster]

Heh.. you've obviously never seen what happens to a tire snagged by bared metal wires from the brakes. The tire doesn't so much blow as it shreds. The result can actually cause the wheel(s) to stop spinning which will at best throw the car out of control and at worst send it flipping end over end.

I imagine that if he's telling the truth he probably didn't pull the hand brake and stomp the regular brakes because he DID panic or didn't realize what was happening fast enough.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[Drawkcab]

He started out passing someone at ~90mph, so it was pretty much too late for that before he even lost control. Besides, haven't you ever found out that you were driving around with the emergency brake on? I'd never risk my car by experimenting with it, but I don't have much faith in it in an actual emergency. Of course this kind of thing will never happen to those of us with manual transmissions, or even a typical automatic.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[BasilBrush]

What kind of wierd hand brake are you describing? How the hell can the brake cable ever come in contact with the tire?

In all the cars I've ever owned/seen, the hand brake cable is connected to the exact same rear brake pads as the foot brake is connected to. If the pads wear out, the solid metal behind the pads comes in contact with the drum/disk and they overheat. But there's no wire in contact with tire outcome.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[Spangston]

Don't underestimate the strength of the e-brake wires in a modern car. Those which still have mechanical (as opposed to hydraulic or electrohydraulic) e-brake circuits have proper components which are designed to take much worse application than any human could generate.

In fact, the greater danger would be the rear wheels locking up. The Vel Satis is a front-drive car, which means the rear wheels would probably lock up on that car on the highway, and would therefore neutralize any traction the rear end would provide.

In addition, I believe it is illegal, as well as illogical, to program an automatic transmission NOT to shift to Neutral, in any circumstance, when the driver asks for it.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[Pieroxy]

Note that all this is most likely a hoax. The guy tried everything to stop:
1. Brakes
2. Turn cruise control off
3. Parking Brake
4. Neutral position
5. Stop the ignition

None of these worked. And none of these is linked to a common system. Brakes are hydraulic, hand brakes mechanic (although in this car probably electronic), neutral is controlled by the gear box, ignition is also electronic. But different systems.

Probability for all that to fail at the same time on the vehicle? Very low.
Probability for someone to invent all that to have his picture in the newspapers? Much, much higher.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[the_mad_poster]

..solid metal behind the pads comes in contact with the drum/disk and they overheat. But there's no wire in contact with tire outcome.

That's what I'm talking about - the bare metal behind the pads can rip a tire to shreds. I don't mean the cable itself, I mean that some brakes have a wire mesh on the backplate. Admittedly, I haven't seen this on a non-commercial vehicle newer than the last decade or more, so perhaps it's not like this anymore, but on semi-older cars, the pads would be worn away to the point beyond burn in that the metal can come in contact with the tire if you slam on the brakes and that just tears the tire to ribbons.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[Bzap]

Probability for someone to invent all that to weasel his way out of a ticket? Infinitely higher.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[BasilBrush]

I'm still not seeing how the pads can come in contact with the tyres. But I don't suppose it matters. I'll take you word for it and just assume it's a quite different setup from anything I've seen.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[dnoyeb]

As an automotive engineer I can say it sounds like a hoax to me as well.

1. Brakes are designed to be stronger than the engine transmission combination. But if misapplied can heat up and become not totally effective, but still.

2. I remember Chrysler had similar problem, but it was meerly lunging forward, no consistent acceleration. Note, stepping on the brake deactivates the cruise control.

3. parking brake will not be more effective than main brake, but its not hydraulic so its redundant (but not additive). But it definitely will not stop the car, especially a front wheel drive. Its a "parking" brake after all...

As for the ignition, even passive "authorization" systems like cards and RFID and FOBs typically have manual ignition control. So I don't believe it for one second.

Of course turning off ignition switch causes steering wheel lock, so you better be damn careful to turn to accessory.

Most likely cruise got stuck on acceleration, and he let it go to see what would happen.

Re:Can you explain more clearly what happens?

[shyster]

Yeah, the brake cable isn't going to tocuh the tires. Greatest possibility, though, is that you pull too hard on the handbrake (understandable, since you're in a panic and trying to stop a fast moving vehicle) which will likely snap the handbrake cable leading to the brakes. Of course, even if you do manage to apply the rear brakes, you're still pretty much screwed because they're only about 20% of your braking power. Your pads will burn out though, and you'll smell up the place. That and the screeching metal-on-metal sound should give other drivers fair warning. ;)

Well, this is what you get when

[multiplexo]

you purchase a French car, especially one with a fruity name like "vel satis". Personally I'd like to see what the CAN bus on the car says, pity that cars don't come with CAN loggers as standard equipment.

Re:Well, this is what you get when

[otis wildflower]

BTW, offtopic, but the new BMW bikes use CAN-BUS.

Re:Well, this is what you get when

[stanmann]

And in the US, BMW Bikers use Cannabis.

Re:Well, this is what you get when

[otis wildflower]

sssh!

That's a fast car, son

[Anonymous Coward]

Kit, is that you? Whatever I did, I'm SORRY, Kit! Now slow the f*ck down or I'll trade you in for a blender!

Lost in Translation

[cthrall]

Loving it:

> A car of this type
> rests as from spirit hand
> over the motorway

Uh, No.

[virg_mattes]

> But we do put a lot of trust on cruise control. On really wet surfaces, the wheel will be spun really fast because it slips and the car is trying to speed itself up. Once it grips, the car goes flying.

Not correct. The speedometer is tied to the wheel, not the road. If the wheel spins up, the speedometer goes up too (next time you're stuck in snow or mud, step on the gas and note that the speedometer moves even when the car doesn't). In your suggested scenario, the tire spinning will cause the cruise control to slow down, not speed up, since it assumes the tire is sticking so it'll think you're going too fast.

> Elevators fall sometimes, but we love not walking, don't we?

I'd like to see a report of this outside of movies. I frankly couldn't find one anywhere, and what I know of the design of elevators leads me to believe it's possible there's never been a failure.

Virg

If the engine continued to accelerate

[porkchop_d_clown]

braking by itself wouldn't be enough - the brakes would overheat quickly and become useless.

I'm wondering why he didn't shift into neutral.

Re:If the engine continued to accelerate

[Mongo222]

Not true. There isn't a car made whose breaking force isn't multiple times as powerful as the power it engine can produce.

the audi story

[bmajik]

is bullshit. Audi owners know it well - 60 minutes did a big thing on it and it basically crushed Audi NA's brand image and sales. They renamed their entire model range twice.

The real cause ?

On the type 44 cars (Audi 4000 and 5000) the gas and brake pedal are close together to make performance driving easier.

Dumb shit americans would hit the gas pedal going for the brakes and rear end people at stops.

CBS fabricated the "expose" on the "problem" completely. Lawsuits were filed and eventually resolved with Audi showing no negligence or fault, but they still changed their pedals in later cars anyway.

Re:the audi story

[ConceptJunkie]

Ralph Nader: Wrong at any speed.

Re:the audi story

[ConceptJunkie]

OK, before (or while) I get modded into oblivion I realized that was the Corvair, not the Audis that he was on about, but not until I clicked "Submit". I was too busy trying to be a smart-ass.

Re:the audi story

[virg_mattes]

Too busy to check the title as well. The book was called _Unsafe at Any Speed_.

Virg

Re:the audi story

[ConceptJunkie]

No, I was implying that Nader is full of it. Or at least himself.

Re:the audi story

[wintermute740]

"On the type 44 cars (Audi 4000 and 5000) the gas and brake pedal are close together to make performance driving easier."

I have that problem on my Ford ZX2. When I first bought it, I had a problem with the engine reving when I was stopped. Since it's a manual, I didn't have a problem with hitting anyone, but it did take me awhile to discover that the edge of my foot hit the gas pedal when I had the brake pedal pushed in.

Re:the audi story

[Richthofen80]

Wait, you're saying CBS fabricates stories? What about the Dan Rather guard memo exposes? obviously those were real, right ? ;)

Re:the audi story

[Anonymous Coward]

"Dumb shit americans"

pretty much describes 78% of all drivers on the roads in america.

and that percentage really should not have their license.

if you think speeding is cool hen you certianly are a part of that group. Driving really fast in a place where it is safe to you and others.. ok, go for it. Speeding in residential and city streets? that's just fucking assholes that deserve to have the crap beat out of them.

Yes driving 35 on my 25mph street makes you an asshole. slow down you idiot.

Re:the audi story

[Dravik]

No, no, no. The story is real, pesky facts like all the evidence being forged are not relevant at all.

Re:the audi story

[Anonymous Coward]

Car and Driver magazine subsequently did 70mph-to-0 braking tests on one of these cars, once the normal way, once while applying full throttle. The stopping distances were identical. Really makes me wonder about the brakes in this Renault Vel Satis.

What I think he meant...

[rewt66]

I think he hit the brakes and the cruise control did not disengage. See, hitting your brakes is one of the normal ways of turning off cruise control (or, rather, temporarily inactivating it). He never tried overpowering the engine with the brakes. As others have pointed out, shifting into neutral should have worked also.

Something similar happened to me

[mcrbids]

I had an old Dodge Caravan some time ago. I had the carburetor rebuilt by a local shop. Worked great for a few months, and then one day, in traffic, the gas pedal got stuck.

The car was uncontrollably accellerating! It was a stick shift, so I forced it into 4th gear (so the motor was spinning slowly and thus didn't have much power) and then braked my way to a safe stop.

Scared the living hell out of me!

Needless to say, the guys who rebuilt the carburetor fixed it free of charge. (it was a single screw that came loose)

Put the blame where you want to, but don't single out electronic technology - anytime we depend on *anything*, there's a failure rate.

Look at the benefits vs costs to get a look at the *real* cost...

If electronic braking saved 1,000 lives due to improved handling, but failed every so often to the detriment of 20 people, that's a pretty good bargain. (And you'd be sure to bet that the 20 failures would be examined mightly closely to get rid of that, too!)

Relax.

Re:Something similar happened to me

[netik]

It was a stick shift!

You could have dropped the car into -neutral- by placing the stick in the center. No excuse.

I'm confused at how you were at risk.

Re:Something similar happened to me

[SaDan]

Since the vehicle was carburated, and (I haven't owned one, so I can't say this for certian) probably doesn't have an RPM limiter like most fuel injected cars do, shifting to neutral could have been just as life threatening as not maintaining control of the vehicle.

A blown engine can send parts in all directions, including through the interior of the vehicle. FWD vehicles with transverse mounted V6/V8 engines means at least three pistons are pointed towards the firewall...

Fail dangerous?

[Colin Smith]

Cool...

The throttle sensor gets stuck on max, the gearbox is a sequential automatic with safety features to prevent damage to the engine, they take away the key and lock the card while driving and you get launched down the road at 120mph.

Yay Renault! Sounds like a lot of thought has been put into how to make a single point of failure *really* dangerous.

Why not take it out of gear?

[El]

This must have been an automatic transmission. That's why I always drive a manual -- you can take it out of gear! In fact, I had a simular problem years ago. The Honda dealer screwed up the installation of the vacuum advance for the A/C, with the result that the cotter pin got stuck causing the throttle to stick wide open. I immediately put it in neutral, then noticed my engine was redlining, so I shut it off. Fortunately I was in a parking lot at the time. I still can't understand why the car wouldn't let him shift gears; dropping it into low or neutral and over-revving your engine sounds far preferable to a collision. And when the engine blows up, it should be covered by warrantee, because it was a manufacturing fault that caused it!

MOD Parent Down As A Sensationalistic Moron

[macdaddy]

What a load of crap. Try telling it with a little less sensationalism. Sure you lose power this and power that but you DO NOT LOSE THIS OR THAT. You will not lose your steering. You will not lose your brakes. Any decents Driving 101 course will teach you this simple facts. Mine in fact had us all demonstrate this traveling down the road at highway speeds. It is in fact quite easy to steer a car moving at highway speeds without power steering. It is also quite easy to brake. The only downside here is that without your vehicle running the oil pump that lubes your automatic tranny won't be running, thus causing extreme wear and tear. This won't be a problem in the short-term however, assuming all you do is stop the car. This is why you don't tow vehicles with automatic trannies. Even in neutral the driveline is still connected to the gears inside the tranny.

Re:MOD Parent Down As A Sensationalistic Moron

[fucksl4shd0t]

Ooo, so close. :)

The only downside here is that without your vehicle running the oil pump that lubes your automatic tranny won't be running, thus causing extreme wear and tear.

Some, yes. Some have a pump that's mechanically powered at the tail-end of the gear, so if it's mechanically engaged fluid flows. Most, though, drive the pump off the torque converter. All, however, store tons of fluid in the tranny. If you drain it, you only get like 1/3 of the fluid that's in there. That's why those quick oil change places have their fancy machines.

. This is why you don't tow vehicles with automatic trannies.

I know what you mean, but I'm gonna clarify this. You don't tow vehicles with automatic trannies with their drive wheels on the ground. That's why a wrecker will either put the wheels on the ground on a come-along, or will pick up the drive wheels.

The real danger has to do with where the torque is coming from. A manual tranny is bisexual, you can apply torque to it from either side and it doesn't care. An automatic cares. If you apply torque from the drive wheels, you spin gears backwards, build up fluid pressure, and what happens next depends entirely on the individual tranny. Most that I've seen break pilot gears (new ones ranging in price from $600 up).

Deep in the bowels of an automatic tranny you don't find gears in the same form as you find them in a manual tranny. There is no mechanical connection anywhere from the engine to the drive wheels. It's a hydraulic connection. You do find some friction-type stuff (clutch wheels, or something, I forget the names) in some of them. Others have a big band around it that gets squeezed.

Man I hate automatic trannies. Both my car and my truck are stick-shifts. My wife's car is an automatic. Got it from her mom, who is deathly afraid of stick-shifts. Says it's too distracting and they shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

Re:MOD Parent Down As A Sensationalistic Moron

[macdaddy]

Some, yes. Some have a pump that's mechanically powered at the tail-end of the gear, so if it's mechanically engaged fluid flows. Most, though, drive the pump off the torque converter. All, however, store tons of fluid in the tranny. If you drain it, you only get like 1/3 of the fluid that's in there. That's why those quick oil change places have their fancy machines.

True. Most common vehicles don't though, amplifying the problem. Even worse than that is vehicles with trannies that are only lubed when the vehicle's tranny is in any position other than Park. Larger Dodge vehicles do this. Ie, your Dodge Ram or Durango's tranny is not lubed when you're in Park. Your fly wheel however is of course moving like a SOB. There's been numerous tech bulletins about this but Dodge still hasn't addressed the problem. Why, I'm not sure. I'd think they'd want to address the issue but I'm not a marketing guru.

You don't tow vehicles with automatic trannies with their drive wheels on the ground.

I thought I implied that but maybe not. You're right. You only tow vehicles with automatic trannies by their drive wheels, unless of course your pull the driveline. That's what we have to do with all our buses. The load of those 16+ ton vehicles is too great for the front axle to take so we have to disconnect the driveline before the wreckers will tow the bus on to the shop.

I hate autos too. I'd rather walk than drive an auto. Well, maybe I don't hate it that much. I definitely prefer sticks though. That's what I learned on way back when. If it's not manual then it had better by hydrostatic. :-) Autos are too expensive to work on too.

Re:MOD Parent Down As A Sensationalistic Moron

[fucksl4shd0t]

Dodges are just...weird. Any transmission that you have to shift into neutral with the engine running to check the fluid level is fucked. Honda's the only company to get it right. :) You check those with the engine off, tranny in park.

I can see how you'd have to pull the driveshaft off the buses to get them to tow it. You can't use a flatbed (unless it's on an 18 wheeler, which aren't used by wreckers) at all, and the come-alongs won't take the weight either. Buses aren't supposed to be towed, they're supposed to be fixed in the field. :) (I know, that's almost never as practical as it sounds, and I'd gladly pay $100+ to tow the car to a place where I can use a lift and an air compressor. That's money well-spent)

I'm not sure what the deal is with dodge transmissions. It might have more to do with the fact that they use so many disposable mitsushitty parts... Of course, even with the flywheel spinning it shouldn't affect the transmission since the engine has to spin up a bit before the fluid in the torque converter actually locks and engages the tranny. Don't know for a fact about Dodges, though, but I have noticed the excessive amount of failed Chrysler transmissions compared to other manufacturers. I'm hoping DaimlerChrysler will finally fix the problems. They've certainly got the technology in their Mercedes division.

Ack. I'll take an auto over walking most of the time, I'll admit. There are some nice things about driving an automatic. It is nice, for example, after driving for 3 hours on a bumpy road to be able to cruise into the gas station without having to suddenly remember how to shift. But then I'd rather have the efficiency of a manual on a long trip. Ok, now that I think about it, maybe there aren't any nice features about an auto. Heh.

Re:MOD Parent Down As A Sensationalistic Moron

[macdaddy]

Dodges are just...weird. Any transmission that you have to shift into neutral with the engine running to check the fluid level is fucked. Honda's the only company to get it right. :) You check those with the engine off, tranny in park.

I'm not a big Dodge fan personally. Sure a '93 Turbo RAM kicks ass but anything since is a city truck. Our 3/4 '96 was purchased because it was one of the last with a solid front axle. Personally though I'd rather put up with a truck without that than deal with the other POS features of that truck. I can't recall what the rear end is geared at but it's less than 3:73 and damn sure not 4:10. It's a gutless wonder.

Around here almost no repairs happen in the field (unless of course it's something simple). The wreckers are pretty accustomed to yanking the shaft and towing her home. It's amazing how much a school bus can weigh. We had a '95 64 passenger cab-over roll over last year. The dry-weight on the sticker was 20 ton. My father is a mechanic. We tend to fix our own vehicles where they lie, unless of course we have a trailer handy. That's always a plus.

The Dodge tranny lube problem has been for some time. Our old '94 Voyager doesn't suffer from that problem but our '96 RAM and '03 Durango both do. It's rather irritating. The worst tranny I can think of though is GM's 700R. That thing was a POS. You just about can't find a salvage yard with one in stock or for a decent price. It's bad. Again, forget the auto and go with the stick. :-)

I find myself trying to shift my car's auto on teh floor like a stick. It occasionally gets me in trouble. ;-) The only time I can think of where I'd rather have an auto is in a city where I have to deal with incompotent morons sniffing my ass at a stop light on an incline. It amazes me how close people can get sometimes. Personally I love driving a wheat truck in cities. I'll let it roll a bit if the mood suits me and someone is inches from my bumper (or lack thereof). Muh ha ha haaaa. >:-} I really like the control of a stick. I wish everyone was required to learn how to operate both reliably. Then the people that choose autos at least have a better understanding of the mechanics of their and a respect for those that choose sticks. Of course I think potential drivers should be required to do a lot of things but that's neither here not there. :-)

Informative? Maybe, but also inaccurate.

[Anonymous Coward]

Modded "Informative" but, unfortunately, wrong.

Turning the key (in most cars) from Run to Acc (part way off, but accessories running) will kill the motor - which WILL take out your power steering, and power breaks. With the exception of very few cars, the power steering is driven directly from the motor via a belt, and the power brakes are driven via vacuum boost off the manifold.

If you kill the kill the motor chances are you WILL lose power brakes and steering.

Some cars now use electric motors for steering assist, and some high end Mercedes have electric break boost.

Your car goes runaway, the recommended action is to shift to Neutral (as the original poster noted). That has been the recommended action since there have been recommended actions.

Now, the REAL reason you don't turn the key all the way off is that in most cars you LOCK THE STEERING column, which guarantees you're hosed.

This car is different

[Exmet Paff Daxx]

This article I found seems to back up his story that the handbrake is electronically controlled as well as the engine and therefore user shutdown is impossible:
link:

an electronic card instead of a key (it remembers your preferred seat, stereo and mirror settings, among other things), a DVD player in the rear - only one, though, rather than the pair you can have in some cars - and an electronic handbrake. This last advance dispenses with the familiar lever in the centre console, engaging and disengaging when the engine is switched on and off. There's no danger of the Vel Satis running away as, initially, it will be sold only as an automatic, and firing up or shutting down the engine will require the gearlever to be left in Park.

No danger of it running away? Sounds like a rather Titanic claim. Here's the other kicker:

The technology arsenal runs to adaptive cruise control, rain-sensing wipers, automatic headlamp illumination, a tyre-pressure monitoring system, ESP (Electronic Stability Programme), brake assist, a fuel cap integrated into the filler's lid and more airbags than you'd ever want to see deployed during a single crash. All this kit, Renault hopes, will encourage supreme peace of mind for driver and passenger alike

So we've got an electronic transmission, no manual shutdown, an electronic emergency brake, an "adaptive" cruise control system, and "assisted" electronic brakes.

All the naysayers may want to check their normal assumptions about cars at the door. This one is French.

Re:This car is different

[oreilco]

With all those safety gizmos, he should have just slammed it into the barrier at the side of the motorway.
although, if it didn't stop him, the deployed airbags might have made it hard to navigate.

Re:This car is different

[jamesh]

I wonder how his insurance company would handle such a thing, especially if it couldn't be proven that the drive by wire system malfunctioned. Probably not his greatest concern at the time though but there are certain risks associated with slamming into a barrier anyway.

This opens up huge possibilities for sabotage.

Litaracy Issues

[virg_mattes]

Then you didn't read the article. The elevator in question was moving upward when it killed the good doctor, which is an odd definition of "falling".

Virg

Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[bigtangringo]

I hope he was using hands free mode...

Re:Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[bigtangringo]

Not to mention scary, the fastest I've ever driven on the freeway is 113MPH, and at that speed you're white knuclking the steering wheel. The slightest twitch will send you across a lane or two. I can't imagine searching for my cellphone, let alone dialing and talking on it at 120...

Re:Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[NighthawkFoo]

I don't know about your car, but speed-sensitive steering tends to help with that quite a bit.

Re:Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[Anonymous Coward]

This does only apply to american cars, or made for these roads. It is no problem to do 140mph and take the hands off the wheels. Even though you should not do that, a good car still drives perfectly straight.

I once made 130mph in a 66 Dodge Charger (440 and 5 speed in it :-) on the "Autobahn", THAT was scary ! Even though it lastet only a minute or less......

80mph can be incredibly loud and fast in a go-cart, but in a big good car 150mph can be quiet and easy.

Re:Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[bigtangringo]

I did it in a 2003 Toyota Matrix, with a labelled top end of 120. (needless to say the piddly ~120 horses takes a bit to reach 113 :)) Anywho, it was not designed for driving at speeds that high, I could have taken my hands off the wheel, it was stable. But the slightest turn of the wheel was immediately apparent!

Re:Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[jlanthripp]

Bah, 113 is nothing. I've hit 120mph in a 1991 Nissan Sentra many times (121mph is impossible because the rev limiter kicks in at 120mph).

When I was a teenager, I had a 1978 Camaro with a 350 small-block (5.7L in today's parlance), bored .030 over to 355ci, 650cfm Holley carburetor, Crane solid-lifter cam with 306 degrees advertised duration, and 10.5:1 compression. The speedometer only went to 135mph so I don't know exactly how fast I got it to, but it took a lot of slowing down to get back down to 135mph.

My dad's 1963 Corvette roadster had a speedometer that went to 160mph, but the end of the cable twisted off when that speed was exceeded...

All of this on US freeways. Nashville to Chattanooga (~130 miles with a mountain in between) in an hour is fun, BTW :)

Re:Talking on your cell phone at 120?

[kylegordon]

Went down to visit a friend a week or so ago, rented a car for the 3 days for a measly £60 ($100) and ended up with a shiny 2.2l Vauxhaul Vectra. Quiet spot on the motorway and wound it up from the regular cruising speed of 90mph to 135mph. I'm used to doing 120, but this thing was insane. It was still pressing us into the seat when I chickened out at 135mph. All that for £60... well worth it :-)

Similiar but not as severe problem

[Jett]

I have a 2003 Ford Focus which had cruise control installed on it about 9 months ago. I've noticed on a several occasions the cruise control will randomly start accelerating - it always stops doing it when I tap the breaks, but if my breaks ever went out and it happened things would get exciting quick. It goes in for service soon so I'll have them take a look at it, I've tried to replicate it a few times with no luck and it seems completely rando. I've also tried to ride it out when on an empty road late at night, once it passed 100mph I gave up on that though :)

Brakes good

[herohog]

"I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said.

Well Duh! I don't know of too many cars out there whose brakes can't overpower the engine. The trick is to do it hard and fast because if you tru to ease it to a stop you can burn out the brakes. My Turbo Pinto, go ahead and laugh, I'll wait, with 200+ horse power could be brought to a halt with the stock brakes with a stuck throttle... I know... I did it! =8-O

Re:Brakes good

[fishbowl]

"My Turbo Pinto, go ahead and laugh, I'll wait, with 200+ horse power"

Not laughing. The Pinto was the Probe of the day. With a Turbo 2.3 under the hood of a Pinto, you have a sleeper that will have riceboys laughing as they disappear in your mirror.

The gas-tank-boom thing is the only reason to dis the Pinto, and that was *greatly* exaggerated in the pursuit of yellow journalism. Superficial features of the Pinto (e.g., hatchback) should not really be made fun of, lots of hatchbacks are considered cool, why not a Pinto?

I had a V-6 Bobcat for a short time, and it was anything but slow, even though it did have extreme nerd appeal at the time. A drunk red-light runner totaled it, and the insurance money was barely enough to buy a 1975 VW Rabbit. I had alomst forgotten about both those cars. Thanks for reminding me!

Still Wrong

[virg_mattes]

Counting an elevator as "falling" because the building fell with the elevator inside is just being hurky-jerky about it. We're talking about elevator cars falling down the shaft. Try to be an adult in the discussion, eh?

Virg

Nope

[virg_mattes]

> I bet if you put a hundred tons in one at once it would overweigh the counter and fall.. some. :)

Sorry, but no. Putting that much in it would cause the floor to fall out of the car.

Virg

Not the first time

[lovebyte]

I saw this before. It was on one of those police video thingy. It was in the USA and a woman was panicking in her car because the cruise control had taken over. She had tried to brake but after a while the brakes had burnt off.
When it comes to this guy in the Renault Velsatis, I saw some Renault engineer on French TV doubting that it could be possible. Time will tell.

May the force be with you

[DownTownMT]

before a Mautstelle gradually at speed and finally to a halt came.

Did Yoda write this article??

Re:May the force be with you

[fishbowl]

"Did Yoda write this article??"

It's been mechanically translated from French, which uses a postfix verb modifier structure.

Re:May the force be with you

[DownTownMT]

i know i was making a funny

Don't confuse yourself.

[Anonymous Coward]

We are talking about averages and genetic limitations here.

For every 1 woman that can lift 300 lbs, I'll be able to find 20 men.

Some goes for height. For every 1 woman that is 6', there will be many times that number of men who are that tall.

This is the nature of the human species. Of course you'll find exceptions, but then you'd be choosing the exception over the rule just for the sake of arguing.

Re:Don't confuse yourself.

[Anonymous Coward]

We are talking about averages and genetic limitations here.

For every 1 woman that can lift 300 lbs, I'll be able to find 20 men.

Some goes for height. For every 1 woman that is 6', there will be many times that number of men who are that tall.

This is the nature of the human species. Of course you'll find exceptions, but then you'd be choosing the exception over the rule just for the sake of arguing.

The average woman doesn't ride a Harley-Davidson.

You are stereotyping. Some women are small and very strong.

Someone chose the exception when they mentioned small female Harley riders.

You can't pick out a very distinct subset of the population and apply average characteristics to them. Once you separate them out, the group will have its own averages. I suspect that many (not all) female Harley riders fall into the strong category even if they are small.

It doesn't matter if there are more men who are stronger. That fact has no effect on whether or not they can get a Harley back on its wheels.

Re:Don't confuse yourself.

[Anonymous Coward]

You are stereotyping. Some women are small and very strong.

And to an overly liberal crowd, stereotyping = definitely false.

it doesn't matter if there are more men who are stronger. That fact has no effect on whether or not they can get a Harley back on its wheels.

Of course matters who is stronger when it comes to lifting something. Unless you live in some alternate universe where being stronger makes it *harder* to lift something.

Face it, you're choosing the moral high ground but the logical low ground. Men are stronger than women and can lift more weight, even if that weight is a fallen Harley.

Jeep disproved this non-sense.

[Above]

I don't think a car of that class has a drive by wire system at least not yet. Back when people were driving their Jeeps through walls left and right, due to the pedals being offset more than most cars, Jeep made a video for the court case.

They showed that in a Jeep, with a large V8 engine, the engine could not at full throttle overcome the brake. Be it from a stop, or while moving. Their catch phrase, "Brakes always win".

So, as long as the car had a mechanical brake system which was still working he could have stopped.

I've had it happen to me before

[multi-flavor-geek]

It was a 1997 ford 15 passenger van with the 6.8L v10, the thing just took off, luckily we were west of Minot N. Dakota, so there was nothing to hit. With the brakes to teh floor the thing would barely get below 50mph, as it was it was well over 100 mph, even though the limiter was set at 85. we had to cut the engine off and drift to a stop with the van in neutral, and no power steering or brakes. Even after putting the van in park, and turning off the engine, and letting it sit, and making sure there were no stuck throttle linkages, when we restarted it after a few minutes it went straight to 6000 rpm! We sat on the side of the road for quite a while before we decided that we would chance driving that death mobile again, and we never again touched the cruise control.

PS. west of Minot North Dakota, you can safely drive 100 mph in emergencies because there are no towns, houses, farms, hills, turns, or trees.

No wonder

[cornjones]

(The Renault Vel Satis) is now the safest saloon in the executive-car segment.

Well no wonder. I thought we weren't supposed to mix saloons and driving.

Secret French Technology Discovered

[kmankmankman2001]

Actually I think we will find once all the facts are revealed that Renault had imbedded secret sensor technology in this car. The car sensed a German approaching and immediately engaged "RUN AWAY!" mode. It finally disabled itself once it determined it was at least 100 KM away from any Germans. Working this technology into more French products is a key initiative of their national defense policy. There is no credible evidence, however, to support the claims of some that when the "RUN AWAY!" mode was deployed a small TV screen revealed itself and began playing old Jerry Lewis movies.

Ignition off won't hurt you

[Ribald]

If you shut off the engine, you will lose your power steering, as it's powered by an engine-driven pump. Since all you need to do is turn a few degrees to the side to guide it to the shoulder, though, the manual fallover works just fine.

Most power brakes are run by engine vacuum (some, like my truck, are a hydroboost system off the power steering pump). There's generally (actually, I think it's required by law) an accumulator that will store engine vacuum. You get at least two or three full-pressure applications before the vacuum is exhausted, and then it's fallover to the unassisted hydraulic brakes--you can still stop, it'll just take longer.

My truck weighs in excess of 7000 pounds (3175 kg), and I can easily control it with the engine off (one of the first things I did after buying it was get it up to speed in a parking lot and shut it off, to see how it handled).

Just shut off the engine, put the transmission in neutral, keep steady pressure on the brakes (pump them, and you're out of power assist in short order), steer to the side of the road. Just don't turn the key to lock, or whatever causes the steering column to lock in place--there should be an interlock requiring you to push a button or press in the key to do that, anyway.

This should be a non-event.
Broken steering shaft, or an old straight-air tractor-trailer with an air system failure--there's something to be excited about.

--Ribald

Re:Interested

[vakuona]

Makes you wonder why the steering should lock when the car is in motion. That os dangerous, or has no one in the auto industry thought of that.

Can this really happen?

[Gwydion]

What needs to fail for this to happen? For a car to keep accelarating, the engine needs to be running, the throttle needs to be open, the transmission needs to be transmitting power to the driving wheels, and the brakes must not be applied. So in this case:

The engine could not be stopped. Keyless car, and the electronics ignored pressing the 'stop' button. Possible

A drive by wire throttle can theoretically get stuck open due to some electronic malfunction. Fair enough.

The brakes: Power assisted, electronic controlled, but surely these are still hydraulical? Is electronic malfunction likely? I say unlikely, but let's give the benefit of doubt.

So, the transmission... Look at the picture. http://www.renault.com/img/gamme/images/velsatis_i nt4.jpg/ Surely if you shift that thing into neutral, your car WILL loose drive?
The story sounds unlikely, but not impossible in future, as more and more electronics creep into our cars. Mind you, I'm not against electronics, the chips in my car has saved my arse more than once...

How to turn off the ignition:-)

[khrtt]

My VW used to do that -- the accelerator pedal got stuck sometimes, and I'd have to get under the hood and bang on some pulley to get it to release. My mechanic couldn't figure out what the problem was, so I drove it like that for a year or so. The pedal didn't get stuck every time, only sometimes, and only in really bad weather:-)

What happenes when you turn off the ignition, and I speak from experience, is:

1. You loose power steering. Unless your car is fly-by-wire... sorry, drive-by-wire... whatever, I think Volvo made one experimental model like that, but most normal cars retain manual steering even with he ignition off. Incidentally, the darn VW had no power steering to start with, so I didn't have to worry about loosing steering assist. Anyways, power steering is really only useful when you are parking. At speed, steering assist makes very little difference.

2. You have one brake assist charge in the vacuum accumulator. That is, you can apply the brakes once, normally. The next time you brake you have no brake assist, and you have to really lean on the brake pedal hard. Thankfully, I'm a big guy, so that wasn't a problem.

3. Steering wheel LOCKS UP. This is a theft prevention device that almost all cars have. Once you take the key out, the steering wheel would lock in a turned position. It would not lock up if the wheels are facing straight, only if you turn. The locking device is rather flimsy, and car thiefs would often brake it by yanking on the wheel real hard. Unfortunately, at speed this is not an option.

So, here's the algorithm:

1. Your gas pedal gets stuck.

2. You make sure the wheels are facing straight to prevent steering from locking up.

3. You turn off the ignition, put the car in neutral, and turn the ignition back on. The car is in neutral, so the engine won't re-start, but the ignition key is in "Run" position, so the steering won't lock up either.

4. You hit the emergency flashers, lean on the horn, and pull off. Nicely done. Don't forget that your brakes require a lot more control input then normal.

Now, I've done the above procedure, what, 20 or 30 times. It's fun, especially if you have a nervous passenger in the car, who gets scared out of their pants:-). Though the most I got a passenger scared was when I forgot to unlock the glove box before driving, and his lighter was in there. The glovebox in the VW, like most cars, locks with the same ignition key. I pulled the key out, unlocked the glove box, and restarted the engine, and gave the lighter to my friend, all while going 90 mph. Nothing dangerous, considering that the road was really straight, so I didn't even make a face, or even think it was gong to be scary. My friend, however, who wasn't used to this as much as I was, crapped his pants. Pardon my French.

Another option is to simply put the car in neutral. Any manual gearbox allows that, and most automatics would shift to neutral under power too. The engine starts racing, and quickly hits the max RPM stop, but you don't risk getting your steering wheel locked up:-). I would always turn the ignition off, though, since I didn't know if the stupid VW had a max RPM stop, and I didn't care to test it:-).

DISCLAIMER: If you do something stupid and get hurt, it's own damn fault, and don't blame me. Just because it worked for me doesn't mean it won't kill you.

No..

[acomj]

Having been in a misbehaving renault on the side of a german highway.. I will not speak of good personal experiences with french cars. (The used to import them into the US awhile back, and my friends used renault was not very good).
My experience is not a representative sample.

Although I had a puguet bicycle I liked very much and was quite good..

Case in point - mechanical overrev

[necro2607]

http://rsx.clubrsx.com/videos/RSX-S_misshift.mpeg

I'm sure everyone's seen this, but for those who haven't... enjoy seeing some kid misshift his sports car and go like 3000rpm over redline :)

And he stopped just in time...

[dunsel]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought this guy was telling a tale when I read the story.

The chance that his car was terribly malfunctioning are much smaller than the chance that he wanted to go fast and get away with it.

Isn't it a little suspicious that he stopped just in time when the toll booth was coming up?

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[GooberToo]

Actually, if you check, these situations are happening more and more. They even happen here in the states.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[Moofie]

What, you mean like Audis with unintended acceleration?

You know that was a fraud, right?

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[Mr Guy]

My mother had a very similiar situation happen to her. However, she managed to completely control her car, while driving through town and even stopping at stoplights, by shifting and using the brake and emergency brake heavily.

Two days later when I got to look at her engine it smelled like she burned the hell out of them, but she got home safely. Thank god she was only in a Ford Escort and only going 40mph through town. I still find it very hard to believe this guy COULDN'T stop and much easier to believe he panicked too much to stop.

Incidentally, when I turned it on the next day it continued to rev until I manually fiddled with the lines. The mechanic said it was just dirty, cleaned it, and pronounced it good as new. If I was a mechanic, I could tell you what part he actually cleaned, but the best I can do as a geek is tell you it's that pulley thing at the end of the cord that comes from the gas pedal.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[arivanov]

1. I do not find it hard to believe. Vel Satis is fully electronic automatic transmission with keyless entry and ignition. You cannot switch to neutral if the computer is bust. You cannot turn off the engine either. And if it has already been allowed to accelerate to 120mph the handbrake (dunno if it even has one) and the breaks will not do shit.
2. It is what you get from integrating non-vital and vital circuits to save costs. Dunno if the Vel Satis uses similar electronics, but the recent Citroen and Peugeot (the other two french makes) run using a single integrated on-board computer that controls everything from wipers to engine. To add insult to injury it is a low end crap running Windows CE. It is quite noticeable - their speed displays are fully digital and it takes them 2+ seconds to update between reading (as of Citroen C2). Enough to lose your license in some of the UK speed camera happy areas. That is besides that it is an el-cheapo passive LCD which cannot be read if you have polaroid sunglasses or if the sun is behind you (Citroen C2 and C3 at least).
3. This case is an example why you should not buy an automatic and a keyless entry until proper cars are available. In fact I would rather have my speedo analogue as well (it takes less time for human brain to read an analogue dial compared to a digital number).

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[dave1791]

Not likely. IIRC- he was not going much faster than the legal freeway limit in France. I think it is 150 kmph.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[Anonymous Coward]

Polaroid glasses? Ah, it takes 2+ seconds for the image displayed on the dash to develop. That's the real problem!

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[bobbozzo]

Any cars' brakes can stop the car at any speed, even with full throttle.

This is ridiculous.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen (because the driver is too scared to push the brakes hard enough), but it shouldn't happen and is easily avoidable.

Some car TV show tested Audis when they were having the 'sudden acceleration' problem. Stopping distance only increased by a small percent with the throttle wide open.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[French Mailman]

The speed limit on French highways is 130 km/h (about 80 mph), or 110 km/h (70 mph) if it's raining.
The Vel Satis driver was driving at 120 mph (almost 200 km/h)

According to this document from the French government (document is in French), the punishment for driving at that speed on a highway can be all of the following :
- a fine of 1,500 euros AND
- 3 years of driving license suspension AND
- 4 points deducted from the driver's license (out of 12)

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[russotto]

Any car's brakes can prevent that car from going, even at full throttle.

That's not the same as saying the car's brakes can stop it from 120mph with the engine at full throttle. Brake fade could render the brakes ineffective before reaching a stop.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[bobbozzo]

That's like saying a car going down a steep hill at 120mph can't stop.

Maybe a Chevy Sprint wouldn't be able to stop before its brakes catch on fire, but a decent car would.

The test I cited was done at 80mph. It only added 10 feet to the total stopping distance, which is nothing.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[Grishnakh]

3. This case is an example why you should not buy an automatic and a keyless entry until proper cars are available.

Don't confuse "keyless entry" with "non-manual ignition". Keyless entry is fine; it's just a way to unlock the doors using a radio-transmitted code instead of a mechanical key. Considering there's billions of possible radio codes, and only a handful of key combinations, keyless entry is far more secure than mechanical locks (surely you've heard of people whose friends' car keys could open their cars).

What this car sounds like it has is a non-mechanical ignition system, where a smartcard or something similar is used to tell the computer to turn on the ignition and start the car. So the actual power to the ignition system is under control of the computer (probably with a relay), rather than a switch attached to a lock cylinder as in most cars. This is a Very Bad Idea, since it removes a simple way of cutting power to the engine from the driver.

This is much like a computer (running Windows, no less) that has no power switch or reset button on the case, and the power cord is permanently attached to both the power supply and the wall, so that you can only turn it off from within the OS. If the OS hangs or crashes, you're stuck, and have to go the breaker box to power cycle it.

What this shows is that there should ALWAYS be manual overrides in case of emergency. (It also seems to show that you should avoid French cars.)

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[srvivn21]

In fact I would rather have my speedo analogue as well (it takes less time for human brain to read an analogue dial compared to a digital number).

It appears that NASA disagrees with you... PDF link

From other sources I have read, digital displays are best for showing exact information (you are going this fast), where analog is better for displaying trends (your speed is increasing).

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[dAzED1]

no, you'd just grind metal. They bought the guy a new car anyway I'm sure, so I don't see as how it matters much.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[kaladorn]

Not sure about that. I drive a Mustang GT and I consider it to have 'marginal' breaking for its mass. That is to say, the 10.5" (or so) brakes just don't cut the mustard. If they'd put on the bigger disks, I've seen as large as 13" on 18" wheels, or a higher pressure pump, she'd stop a lot faster.

Said car also has 225 hp nominally and maintains cruise control up a fairly steep hill even down around 1500 rpm, which is nowhere near the power band for the car.

If the car was running full tilt throttle open, I think she'd keep climbing or at best hold even with the brakes locked on. I'd be surprised if it didn't more than double my stopping distance. It isn't worth the engine wear or brakes to prove the point, but I have a good gut feeling having seen how she stops normally.

I also note that the car is a standard with a mechanical clutch. I wouldn't buy any other form of transmission in a vehicle, if I could at all avoid it. If I press in the clutch, it disengages. There is no 'if... and... or wherefor...". That's my ultimate defence - in goes the clutch, and steer steer steer. Coast to a stop.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[bobbozzo]

OK, I asked Google to find me articles on the Audi problem.

The first article is on point... it says average cars' brakes have 3-5 times more horsepower than their engines.

Here is an article which specifically talks about the Audi problems...

Most car experts and magazines such as Car and Driver supported Audi's position, knowing full well that working brakes can always overpower the engine, even at full throttle. But major media outlets chose to ignore basic facts and instead gave front-page treatment to theories about sunspots causing cars to run wild.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[GooberToo]

No.

There have been some well established cases, whereby, police were required to physically stop the vehicles. In other cases, they let the vehicle run out of fuel. In yet another case, the car went off the road and horribly crashed. The occupent lived. AFAIK, these cars were not even from the same manufacturer.

I had remembered the Audi deal, but I couldn't remember the outcome. Accordingly, I was not including it in what I was talking about.

My point being, I don't believe these cases are nearly as rare as you seem to believe. Having said that, I certainly have no worry about driving my vehicle.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[returnoftheyeti]

Just so the parent poster knows, and eveyone else. Almost all new cars today that are stick shifts have a hydrolic clutch. So if the hydrolic line breaks, the clutch is always engaged to the engine. So the best bet is not to punch in the clutch, but to shift to netural. Netural is the center of the shift pattern. Don't need to engage the clutch to take the car out of gear.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[ars]

Isn't it a little suspicious that he stopped just in time when the toll booth was coming up?

Um, the article said he stopped several miles AFTER the toll booth.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[Anonymous Coward]

The report you link to is about reading clocks. While clocks with hands could be considered an analog display, they are very difficult to read compared to most standard analog displays. For example, at about 9:48 the hour and minute hands overlap. This means you have to see one "hand" and deduce that both are pointing at the same thing. Then, you have to look at the minute hand and judge how far it is from the '10', and decode that into minutes. Finally, you have to look at what hour the hour hand is pointing to, and subtract one because the hour hand is almost at the '10', but the hour is actually '9'. Needless to say, digital clocks are almost always easier to read than analog ones.

However, automobile gauges are much different. It's much less important to know my exact engine speed than to be able to glance at my tach and see that the needle isn't near the red line. Am I speeding? It's a lot easier to just see that the needle isn't too far than to have to decode a digital display and try to figure out if it's reading '52' or '25'.

Some Hondas have a mode that shows instantaneous fuel economy (mpg) as a blue bar on the center console. If it just displayed a number, it would be useless while driving. However, you can just see the bar out of the corner of your eye. If you see a lot of blue, you're getting good mileage; if not, let off the gas.

Of course, there's no reason a digital display can't show an analog readout (like the Honda mileage meter), as long as the update period and latency are short enough. The problem with digital readouts is that they have to update often enough so as to show current data, but not so often that an average person doesn't have time to read and decode it.

aQazaQa

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[Bertie]

It's not nothing when you pull up two feet from the car in front on the motorway when it suddenly brakes. Ten feet further and you'd have an engine block on your lap.

You know those LED brake lights some cars have now? They light up much faster than conventional bulbs. You're only talking fractions of a second, but at 70mph it's equivalent to two metres more warning that it's time to hit the brakes. That could come in pretty handy.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[elchuppa]

(It also seems to show that you should avoid French cars.)

I would suggest that at most it means you should avoid Renault's, and even then it should require a more researched discussion.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[ishmaelflood]

Your car can probably brake at 0.8g.

At 60 mph, that is 5280 ft/min.

It probably weighs 2500 lb, at .8 g the total force is 2500*.8=2000 lbf

so, since power =rate of doing work, and work is force times distance, power = force times speed.

1 hp=33000 ft lb/min

roll the numbers, you get 320 hp of braking.

So, even at full power, even ignoring losses in the driveline, at 60 mph you can easily slow the thing.

Now, if you were to change gear and try at 30 mph you might find it a bit more of a challenge.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[agallagh42]

Wasn't it eventually proven that the problem with those Audis was simply an unusual pedal placement? Since there was a larger than normal transmission hump, the pedals were all shifted to the left, putting the throttle pedal where some people expected to find the brake.

The common reaction among panicky types when the car suddenly started accelerating was to just push harder on the pedal, instead of calmly trying to figure out what they were doing wrong.

Car and Driver did a big article on this a few years back.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[DaemonDazz]

Over here in Oz, my first car, a '65 Toyota Corrona, had a hydrolic clutch ...

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[AVee]

... the handbrake (dunno if it even has one)..

Well it has one, but don't take the 'hand' part seriously. It's electronic and automatically pulls when you park and releases when you start the car. That's really handy in normal use, but it won't help is situations like this. And this car wheigths about 1800Kg, so it won't help much anyway at 120mph.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[arivanov]

HAVE THOUGHT THAT THE GAS IS FULL THROTTLE SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE BREAKS???

Think again. Try it. Then repost.

Even a lousy lame crap shit anticar like a 1995 1.4 GM/Opel/Vauxhall Astra can happily truck along with the handbrake pulled all the way. It will even accelerate to motorway speeds.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[bobbozzo]

Most likely.

Nonetheless, standing on the brake would still stop the car.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[bobbozzo]

lousy lame crap shit... handbrake

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[agallagh42]

Well yes, but you missed my point. These people THOUGHT they were standing on the brake, but were actually standing on the gas. Totally driver error.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[bobbozzo]

One of the articles I was looking at yesterday said they believed drivers were pressing on both pedals at once, as the pedals were close together.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[plover]

We had a case in Minneapolis where a police van "suddenly accelerated" and ran into a crowd watching a parade, killing two people.

The officer (and the police union) claimed that it was a runaway vehicle. Ford, the NTSB and the police all inspected the vehicle, and found no evidence whatsoever that the van was at fault. Instead, they found the driver was only partially seated with the door hanging open, and they concluded that since the driver was not in a proper driving position that he mistook the accelerator for the brake pedal. (Think of it as a lethal off-by-one error.)

I think true runaway vehicles really are rare, and most of them are either partially or completely the driver's inability to properly control the vehicles.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[GooberToo]

I think true runaway vehicles really are rare, and most of them are either partially or completely the driver's inability to properly control the vehicles.

I do agree that they are a rare event. Just not as impossibly rare as what seemed to be suggested. I also agree that it certainly seems, many people lie about this. Just the same, being struck by lightning is also rare, but that doesn't mean it doesn't actually happen.

Re:And he stopped just in time...

[kaladorn]

Try 3200+ lbs. Take a look at average car weights. 2500 is on the very low side even for most alleged sportscars. In top gear, I'd possibly be able to stop the car as it isn't very powerful (0.67 ratio). In third gear (also capable of 100 kph... I can do it in second gear if I'm in a real hurry), the ratio is more like 1.33. Still, the car does not stop quickly from 60mph. It might be able to stop under full throttle, quite possibly. And the brakes probably wouldn't start a fire from overheating in that time. But the amount by which the brakes outstrip the full throttle output isn't such a large margin that the stop would be quick and painless.... I'd have to have an accelerometer in the car to tell you if it can cut 0.8gs braking. I would not have thought so as that would suggest my seatbelt should be pushing back on me with around 190 lbs pressure given my weight. I don't think it is.

Could be mechanical

[Anonymous Coward]

I once had an old Fiat (a model not sold in the US) that would spontaneously accelerate. The cause turned out to be purely mechanical.
The engine in this car was mounted transversely, and one engine mount was on the firewall. There was also a crack in the firewall. When the engine was required to produce a lot of torque, as in accelerating up a hill, the engine would cause the firewall to flex in such a way that the engine moved closer to the passenger compartment, with the same effect on the throttle linkage as if the driver's foot pressed on the accelerator.
Fortunately this car had a manual transmission and the ignition could be switched off. But until I understood the problem it caused some scary moments.

a few bugs

[Zilfondel2]

Oh, systems like these will have a few bugs in them when they are first rolled out. Considering how many people - over 40,000 in the US alone - die from auto deaths each year, a few hundred deaths from a computer glitch ain't bad.

You just have to start worrying if someone can hack the system, or if a car crashes when all the cars are tightly packed together (a few feet front/back). Then you may end up with thousands of car crashes + car fires in a single incidence. Could get pretty gnarly.

Stomping on the brakes useless?

[tkrotchko]

I don't understand. I've never heard of a car with an engine that could overpower the brakes. Certainly no modern car fits into this category.

I smell a rat here.

Re:Stomping on the brakes useless?

[psykocrime]

I don't understand. I've never heard of a car with an engine that could overpower the brakes. Certainly no modern car fits into this category.

I smell a rat here.

Modern braking systems are often (at least partially) computer / electronic controlled as well. Ever hear of "ABS?" That's all done with sensors and electronics and such.

Sooooo, if there were some really hairy screw-up with the control system for the car, it is conceivable that stomping on the brakes really would be useless.

OTOH, most cars (at least here in America) have a mechnical brake for the emergency / paking brake.

UPDATE, more info available

[boa13]

This article (in French) has much more information than what we've had until now: http://www.rtl.fr/rtlinfo/article.asp?dicid=225812

Key points translated from the article:

* The driver has tried to use the brakes, but he says they quickly heated up and became ineffective.

* The driver has tried to remove the ignition "key" several times, initially without success.

* Out of ideas and quite afraid, he has called the police, and has soon been escorted by police motorcycles.

* The toll booth had been evacuated and left wide open by the police, all vehicles on the highway (around the toll booth) had been stopped and parked on the emergency lane. Even then, entering the booth at 120 mph would have been quite deadly.

* Fortunately, the driver has stopped the car 12 or 20 miles before the toll booth, by finally managing to remove the smart card that is used as an ignition key on these cars.

* Renault says there are three independant ways the cruise control system can be deactivated: using the brakes; pressing the appropriate button on the steering wheel; switching to neutral gear. The first two are electronic controls, the last one is mechanical.

* Renault says the three systems are fully independant, and it is unlikely they all should fail at the same time. Renault says the car will be brought back to its factories as soon as possible, for inspection.

* The driver was only planning to drive home, a few miles trip, but ended up more than one hundred miles from its planned destination.

In my opinion, he could have stopped the car much earlier, but was panicked. To those who say he should have had no problem removing the smart card, try doing that while controlling a car at 120 mph on a non-empty highway (at one point, he had to overtake a truck by driving on the emergency lane!).

As for the failure, there may be three independant systems, but ultimately, there's only one engine, which can go mechanically wrong.

Re:UPDATE, more info available

[Anonymous Coward]

Just to add one point you missed:

* The sequential gearbox was also stuck, so the driver couldn't shift into neutral.

Re:UPDATE, more info available

[bobdotorg]

Further update:

French police announced that upon their initial examination it had been determined that the malfunction was caused by the driver's younger geeky brother faulty LN2 overclocking of the CPU.

Re:UPDATE, more info available

[DrPepper]

Removing the key card - I can confirm that this is quite hard even when the car is stationary (and the engine running).

I have a Renault Laguna II which has the same card key ignition system. It holds the card in the slot when the engine is running - there is a hole in the card and I guess it puts something through that to stop you removing it. Whatever it does, it doesn't want you removing it without turning the engine off first.

In addition, part of the front of the card (that is usually exposed when it is in the slot) pulls out to reveal a normal key. You can use this key to unlock a hidden lock on the doors if you ever have problems with the card. The card is great for everyday use, but I can appreciate that in an emergency there isn't much to grip on.

I can also confirm that the semi-automatic gearbox used is designed to make sure that you don't kill the engine. Eg. in manual mode it won't let you shift when it might stall/over-rev the engine. In fact, if you put it into a gear and accelerate, once it hits the rev limiter, it will (after a short pause) shift up for you.

I imagine that the cruise control system got fried, so pressing on the brake or pressing the "0" button on the steering wheel would both have had no effect as they are both signals to the same computer. The vehicle computer probably wouldn't let him shift to neutral either to protect the engine.

Chances are that being in France, he would have had a diesel as it's the most common engine choice in Europe and given it maxed out at 120mph. As I am sure everyone is aware diesel engines tend to be fairly torquey, so it could well be quite fun trying to brake at the same time the engine is running flat out.

Renault also don't have a very good reputation for electrics; very worrying given their latest vehicles contain a lot of technology as standard, which makes them attractive over the competition. That and the overall design is, shall we say, different :-)

It's a french car...

[56ksucks]

.. It was just running from the volkswagen behind it.

I can't resist.

[Anonymous Coward]

First Passat.

Now this?

Re:I can't resist.

[pragma_x]

I for one welcome our new unable-to-stop-at-120MPH overlords.

Re:I can't resist.

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine a beowulf cluster of...

Oh, never mind.

Been there, done that...

[AnswerIs42]

Had a Ford Tempo with the same issue. Crusing, tap breaks to kill cruse, go to hit resume and it just keeps accelerating.

Nice thing though, the Ford's on/off for cruse was more dependable than the speed setting..

Becuse of that.. any vehicle with cruise in it, I wants turn it off and back on and reset it that way.. never use resume anymore.

Saturn story sounds bogus, too

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anybody here want to compute how steep the hill needs to be to get the Saturn going 105mph? I've tried going downhill in Civics with the clutch disengaged, and couldn't even get up to 80. I seriously doubt that a Saturn has enough mass or aerodynamic efficiency to even have a terminal velocity of 105mph.

Of course, when the Saturn driver found himself going back uphill with no power steering or brakes, he would just have to engage the clutch to start the engine back up instantly. Since he doesn't need ignition to get the engine running, it wouldn't even matter if the stupid Saturn didn't give him any gas.

This story smells like the Audi, and the Renault story doesn't smell too good either.

aQazaQa

Re:Saturn story sounds bogus, too

[Eraser_]

Sure you didn't have the brakes on? My VW Jetta easily passes 85-90mph going down a hill between LA and Santa Barbara on the 101 in California. I forget the name of the valley you're going into but it's pretty steep, a very fun ride.

Re:Saturn story sounds bogus, too

[Anonymous Coward]

Different AC responding here... I'm pretty sure the Saturn story is bogus. I have one. It's 3 years old. I've taken it to speeds past 105 without problem. Taking the foot off the gas at only *90* going down hill drops it below that speed due to wind resistance.

Sudden Acceleration Demo – Nail in Coffin

[Nom du Keyboard]

I remember in the days when Sudden Acceleration was the big thing that one of the car manufacturers -- may have been Volvo -- finally put a demo on television about it. At the time, everyone who had just driven through the back of their garage in into their kitchen swore on a stack of holy books that they were holding down the brake as hard as they could press it.

In the demo, the accelerator was floored while the brake was held down as hard as possible. Want to guess what happened?

I'll tell you...

The car stayed in place, spewing smoke from its rear tires in the process.

I thought that had put the nail in the coffin of Sudden Acceleration years ago.

Re:Sudden Acceleration Demo – Nail in Coffin

[Control Group]

Yeah, but there's a huge difference between the engine overcoming the brakes from a stop, and overcoming the brakes when the car's already at speed.

"Stop" friction is much higher than "moving" friction. No car ever built can overcome locked brakes from a standing start, that's true. I can certainly believe, though, that an engine can overcome the brakes at speed.

Re:Sudden Acceleration Demo – Nail in Coffin

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially because engines deliver more power when the car is moving at higher speeds.

Re:Sudden Acceleration Demo – Nail in Coffin

[Anonymous Coward]

You are such an idiot.

Care to elaborate?

[Knnniggit]

That sounds like an interesting story. How did it happen?

Re:Care to elaborate?

[Suidae]

I'm not the GP, but I've had that happen too. I was driving a '66 Impala at the time. I had just taken off a valve cover to show a friend a problem I was having with the rockers oiling, and when I put the cover back on I neglected to readjust the routing of the plug wires (which had to be moved to allow the cover to come off. I drove the car a couple of blocks, then gunned it around a corner. At that point the throttle stuck wide open. Fortunately the car has no electronics to speak of, nor any steering or safety interlocks (the car will start in gear, a 'feature' that very nearly caused a great deal of damage to a very expensive minivan I parked behind once), so it was a simple matter to switch the ignition off and coast into a parking lot (manual breaks and power steering, but with an very large diameter wheel, so loss of power-assist is only a minor inconvinance).

Turns out the throttle cable had gotten hooked behind the spark plug wires I had forgotten to reroute, leaving the pedal slack and the carb fully open. Took 30 seconds to fix and I was on my way.

Fortunately the engine was a worn-out 283cid instead of a high performance racing engine. Such an engine would likely have fish-tailed the rear end and made the incident much more difficult to control.

Re:Care to elaborate?

[ronaldb64]

Hey that sounds like the experience I had one time:

After doing some maintenance on my aging Renault 5 I was driving to work. Coming off the interstate, the throttle somehow got stuck. Luckily a couple of wobbles with the gas peddle and a bump resolved the problem. After I pulled over, and inspected the engine, it turned out that after working on the carburator, I apparently hadn't tightened the bolts with which the air filter housing was attached to the carburator, and one of the bolts had lodged itself into the valve. Never found that bolt again...

Re:I chose my car because it has no power steering

[whoever57]

My most loved car is a '79 Toyota Celica with absolutely no power anything. The car was originally sold as a sports edition and it was considered more sporty to not have power steering since you get a better feel for the road without it. At high speed you really don't need power steering. It's for parking and such.

While what you say is absolutely true, it misses another alternative. My '88 Volvo 440 (beloved car, sold to a friend many years ago) had speed-sensitive variable power steering. At lower speeds, you got more assist, at higher speeds: less. Worked wonderfully.

In fact that car was one of my all-time favorites. I think a previous owner had "chipped" it -- it was way too fast!

While on the subject of ideas that are not new, it amuses me to see adverts by Lexus (?) promoting headlights that turn with the steering. Citroen had this when? '70's? Or was it earlier?

whaaaa!!!

[justroach]

What a wimp!! My 83 Pontiac Parisienne did this to me while I was driving it on a busy highway in New York. Instead of whining to the police about it I stomped on the brake and then manually disabled the cruise control. :P Hrmmm.... sensing something to do with French in this whole topic.

Hand brake

[ZappaSoft]

Why didn't he just pull on the hand brake, spin a couple of times and stop?

You don't know RenaultSport

[Anonymous Coward]

There is all the world of difference between the Renault brand and the RenaultSport brand. While it is part of the Renault Group, RenaultSport has its own totally separate design team and manufacturing facilities. One of the best engineered RenaultSport cars ever built was the Renault 5 GT Turbo - outstanding pitch/roll stability, torque, fuel economy (35+mpg when turbo not used), crazy gear-ratios, incredible acceleration in the useful 35-65mph range, the infamous 1.5second turbo lag, but a true pleasure to drive. The car won the top award in 1989 from virtually every car magazine in Europe that reviewed it. It is very rare to see one nowadays in original condition; the few that there are are often crash-repaired or modified from original specs. It's a collectors' car now. I quite often have to refuse offers to buy my original condition R5GTT, including one from a guy who wanted to ship it over to the States.

Re:Thats what you get...

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know how many French soldiers are fighting with the US in Afghanistan?

Over the top

[flibuste]

French highways are limited to 130KPH, and this guy was doing 120MPH, which is around 192KPH, so far beyond the limit.

Obviously the car's software blew up some limits.

I can only find that funny since the guy actually managed to avoid getting jailed...Since recently in France, you risk jail if you go 150KPH or more on a highway.

You must be British

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm guessing that you're British. You're definitely not American or Canadian. In the US and Canada you often CAN'T buy cars with anything but automatic transmissions. The majority of cars sold here only come with automatic transmissions and even on those few models that do allow you to buy manual transmissions, it can be very hard to find one with a manual transmission. I think there are 2 reasons for this. First of all, adding an automatic transmission jacks up the price of the car by over $1000, so if given a choice, all dealers prefer to sell automatic transmission cars. Second, Americans (I'm one) are by nature lazy and prefer automatic transmissions. I can't give you any numbers, but I can tell you that the majority of Americans don't know how to drive manual transmission cars and have never owned one. I have a manual transmission and I can't think of a single friend of mine who owns a car that also has a manual transmission.

Re:You must be British

[clem9796]

2004 Hyundai Accent GSI. 5-speed manual.

Don't laugh, i pay alimony and child support.

Nonsense..

[simp]

I drive a Renault Laguna. A 4 door saloon with very much the same equipment as the bigger SUV-styled Renault Vel Satis.
On the the steering wheel there are 4 buttons to set/reset the cruise control and to accelerate/deccelerate. BUT: on the dashboard there is a nice mechanical switch to switch on & off the entire cruise control system. I have tried it in the past: set the cruise control to a certain speed, flip the mechanical switch to the off position and the whole cruise control gets powered down.

Renault is not stupid they have done their homework. And yes you cannot remove the keycard while driving. Why? To prevent the driver or other passengers from pulling it out while you are driving. That would be dangerous as you would also lose the power braking and powersteering.

Re: Car theory says "no"

[Anonymous Coward]

Power brakes operate on throttle vacuum. With the throttle all the way open there is no throttle vacuum, so no power brakes. A better thing to do is familiarize yourself with how your car handles while it's off (preferably in a parking lot). Don't become too damn dependent on power features.

Manual.

[Zilfondel2]

Aaah, thank god for my manual honda civic. With a key.

I'll be laughing all the while they go to the hospital.

Wow!

[JamesSharman]

This man talks about exercise in terms of clutch usage.

Teach me your ways O' master.

nice car description in the link:

[avi33]

Vel Satis has been awarded the maximum 5-star rating from Euro NCAP, an independant consortium. It is now the safest saloon in the executive-car segment.

gears are for wimps

Simple cost analysis:

[Lethyos]

Destroying your car is preferrable to maming and/or killing others and yourself (let's not even talk about law suits). You hardly did the wrong thing.

Re:Simple cost analysis:

[steve_l]

I sheered off the bottom of an engine once in order to get back onto the correct side of a meridian. Again, it seemed like the right thing to do. When the bill came in the following week ($800), I could not help wonder if there could have been a more cost effective solution...

Re:Simple cost analysis:

[Anonymous Coward]

I've knew someone who had a genuine accident but was still found at fault and got his ass sued off like you wouldn't believe. 800$ is small change compared to losing your house.

Technology vs. technology

[Mighty LoPan]

I find it interesting that while one form of technology was trying to kill him (the car), he used another form of technology to help save his life (the cell phone).

It should be in a movie - they could call it I, Robot...or The Matrix...or T2...

Re:I chose my car because it has no power steering

[Spamlent Green]

I think it was actually Tucker that pioneered the turning headlights in the 50s. (Though for all I know Citroen was the first major corp do it on a large scale). But, yes, I was equally amused by those ads.

Hmm, a Decent Assassination Method...

[Anonymous Coward]

If one were to assassinate someone important, I suppose the cruise control could be rigged in a similar fashion...

Re:Hmm, a Decent Assassination Method...

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be a hideously complex, probably ineffective way to assassinate someone. You'd be better off trying to poison them.

Better than humans

[airship]

So, one computer almost caused an accident. In the meantime, 50,000 human drivers actually caused accidents the same day. I think I'll take my chances with the computers.

This happened to me

[IQ]

I had an '85 mitsu montero. Driving to Winona for buck hunting in the fall of say '90. On the interstate from Chicago through Wisconsin traffic was light and I tapped the break to disconnect cruze. The engine revved, the disconnect failed, I was in gear with a stick. I thought damn this sucks. I shifted to neutral. The Engine redlined. I turned the ignition partially off cutting the engine and power steering. At this point the car slows down pretty quick (from 65mph). I pulled onto the shoulder and braked with the hand (parking) brake. The brake hardly did anything but the car did eventually stop.

I popped the hood and could see that the cruze vaccuum pump was seized in the full on position. So I disconnected the cable with a screw driver. That released the throttle lever arm. Then I pulled the fuse for the cruze. Started the engine. Continued on my way. Got to Winona. Drank some Schmidt Beer. Got up super early and snuck into my spot. When the sun rose I had a 10 point hog in my sights ripping up the hillside and I wasted him with a single slug to the boiler.

I'll never forget that hunt.

Re:Thats what you get...

[flibuste]

Your surprise probably comes from the fact that you suck as much as a cruise control system.

What about stuck brake?

[Psychedelic]

My car recently developed a problem with the brake booster. If i pressed on the brake pedal and lifted my foot off the pedal, the brake would not release and would still be in the same position. The only way to get it to release was to push it in all the way - then there would be a 'whoosh' sound as the release valve would finally open. I ended up driving on the highway using a combination of downshifting and using the hand brake driving at 40mph. Surprisingly your hand brake has nowhere near the braking power of the regular brake, so my option was to come to a complete stop i.e. push brake, pull over to try and release brake pedal then get going again, or to brake very slowly using the hand brake. It sucked but i guess better than having the accelerator jammed!

Sounds like the Darwin awards almost had a winner.

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of crying about it over your cell phone...

P
R
N --- Hello dumb ass.
D
L

Same problem

[heroine]

Except instead of going 120 on the freeway, it's always going 20 mph above the speed limit, no matter what the speed limit is.

just what i needed

[danZenie]

another woman!

In other news...

[red30]

Darl McBride receives a Renault Vel Satis from anonymous donor.

It's sad to see what concept cars boil down to

[melted]

I remember the concept of Vel Satis. It was a jaw dropping car. Instead, they've downgraded it to a frikkin' Toyota Avalon, and then fucked up the electronics.

Re:I chose my car because it has no power steering

[fucksl4shd0t]

Having a hard time believing a 79 Celica was intentionally manufactured without power steering. Not saying it didn't happen, mind you, just not believing it was intentionally built that way. :)

Fact is, power steering cuts off anyway after you get above parking lot speed. The only exceptions I'm aware of are late 70s and early-mid 80s Olds and Cadillacs, and those cars are widely known to be crap anyway. But they were the last of the boats Chevy built.

Anyway, here's some 79 Toyota Celica trivia for you: The alternator used in the Celica is internally mechanically compatible with the Celica Supra of the same year. It's less amps, but if your Supra is a stick it'll be just fine. You have to take the guts out of the celica's alternator case and transplant them to the supra's alternator case, however. Should work for 79-81 Celicas and the same year Supras. (The Supra was only made for 6 months of 79, though. It's a rare bird, I wish I still had mine :( )

VERY dubious story

[Captain_Chaos]

I fully admit not having RTFA, but this sounds very fishy. He couldn't put it in neutral? Or just depress the clutch pedal? Also, the brakes of a car are _much_ more powerful than the engine, especially at high speeds, there's no way that you wouldn't be able to stop the car with the brakes even whith the throttle open all the way. I don't buy this at all...

old joke

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't remember who said this....

You know you are having a bad day when you
pull up to a tollbooth and there is a Ford Pinto
in front of you and an Audi 5000 behind you!

Flashing his lights?

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand and appreciate that Europeans indicate their desire to pass a slower vehicle by flashing their high beams, something, by the way, that Californians are genetically incapable of understanding, but, when you're doing 200KPH in an uncontrolled vehicle:

HONK THE FUCKING HORN!

Shifting into neutral.

[Iron Chef Unix]

A lot of people have mentioned that the driver could have just shifted into neutral, but what if that was electronic too?

My father owns a BMW 745i (I think that's the number). Anyway, EVERYTHING is computerized. I mean, EVERYTHING, including the gear shift.

It looks like a little stubby gear shift next to the stearing wheel except it only goes up or down and then returns to center.

You just click up or down to get to the gear you want. You have to push another button simultaneously to get reverse. There's a bit of a learning curve to figure it out. The car wash told him not to bring it back, because they can never put it into gear at the end of the line and have to shut down until they can so they don't have a pile-up.

Point is, he has had to have "software upgrades" because the computer system would reboot while he was driving and he would stall out.

So, it is not infeasible that the car could be incapable of shifting into neutral if the system locked up with the cruise control accelerating. I am sure they have fail safes, but as any software engineer knows, it's the corner cases you didn't think of that get you.

Re:Shifting into neutral.

[__aamcgs2220]

Funny, the 745i's run Microsoft's innovative software for some function which I don't know what it is. Requires upgrades for reboot issues, eh? Hmm. Either way, the beemer still has good brakes, and hopefully that's not the system running the MS code...

2010 reference. Made me remember this...

[Libertarian_Geek]

What the hell's this?
I want you to do me a favor.
This line here, this is the main power|supply to the control bay circuits, right?
Well, most of them, yeah.
What other ones are there?
Well, all the environment circuits|are fed to this one here.
Yeah, but this is the one|that feeds into Hal, right?
-Yeah.|-All right.
i want you to install|this little baby right about there...
...inside the cable trunk.
i want you to put it where nobody|can find it without a deliberate search.
No shit?
No shit.
Hey, this is pretty neat.
A nonconducting blade so there won't be|any short circuits when you trigger it.
-Where's your remote control?|-if i trigger it.
The control's in my compartment.|The red calculator. You've seen it.
Oh, yeah.
Put in nine nines, take the square root|and press the integer. That's all.
-in an emergency, even you can do it.|-What kind of emergency?
Well, if i knew,|i wouldn't need that stupid thing, would i?
Chandra would have kittens|if he found out.
He's not gonna find out, is he?

French newspaper article

[Anonymous Coward]

The original French article is here:
http://www.leparisien.fr/home/info/faitsdivers/art icle.htm?articleid=241157402

Yes, we are.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?" In a word: yes.

Brake/throttle confusion.

[natoochtoniket]

Here in Florida, almost every week, there is an article about an old person who drove a car at full throttle into a building. Usually, the building is a bank or beauty salon, which then has a "drive-through" lobby. Recently, a man drove his brand new Mercury 4-door through the back wall of his own garage and into his swimming pool.

In almost every case, the driver swears he/she was pushing hard on the brake pedal, but the car kept accelerating anyway. Of course, in reality, the driver is just pushing on the wrong pedal.

Operator error. Not mechanical failure.

Re:Brake/throttle confusion.

[Anonymous Coward]

Here the banks are usualy hit by mechanical diggers and the like. They are used to scoop up the atm's.

Very fishy

[metamatic]

The guy claims he reached 120 mph in a Renault? Yeah, right, maybe if he was traveling vertically.

Well, I for one welcome our madly accelerating vehicular overlords.

why no safety shutoff?

[outanowhere]

Industrial machines that do not move, including all that don't do anything harmful if they go nuts are required to have emergency power shutoffs called "EMO", "EPO", "Emergency Stop", etc.

Why are non-industrial devices, even those that can go nuts and destroy property and kill people not required to have them?

Happen to me and how we stopped it.

[JBoelke]

This happen to my brother and I driving a manual tramission Saab 900 (this was 1986 or 87). When my brother depressed the clutch, the engine red lined and stalled at 95 mph. We coasted to the side of the road and determined that the mechanic did not properly reistall the cruise control after doing other mechinal work. (The crusie control was on top of the engine) After about 1/2 an hour the pressure in the engine adjusted it self and we were able to continue driving. This time without the cruise control.

Re:Happen to me and how we stopped it.

[GreyWolf3000]

If you downshifted, the car would have still redlined, but it wouldn't have been going 95 mph. If you downshifted all the way to second, you would have probably ended up going like 40 mph tops.

Of course, anyone who's ever driven a stick wouldn't try shifting down to first gear going 40.

RE: brake fade

[King_TJ]

Actually, I was under the impression that brake fade (assuming modern vehicles) has more to do with expansion of hoses and the like under heat stress than "gaseous buildup" between the brake pads and disc.

Modern brake pads don't outgas, as far as I'm aware. This is also why you'll see many autocross racers insisting that such things as cross-drlled rotors only serve to increase the likelihood of the rotor cracking - and don't give any real stopping advantage. (In the Toyota Supra forum I used to be a member of, the factory OEM brake rotors were the most often recommended ones for auto-x use. All the slotted and cross-drilled Brembo rotors and such were bought only for "show".)

The holes or slots were supposed to provide an escape route for the hot gasses coming off the pads, but the pad manfacturers say that's no longer necessary with the modern materials used in the production of the pads.

This happend to me!

[JBoelke]

This happen to my brother and I driving a manual tramission Saab 900 (this was 1986 or 87). When my brother depressed the clutch, the engine red lined and stalled at 95 mph. This was befor cell phones so we did not have the police clear the way. We coasted to the side of the road and determined that the mechanic did not properly reistall the cruise control after doing other mechinal work. (The crusie control was on top of the engine) After about 1/2 an hour the pressure in the engine adjusted it self and we were able to continue driving. This time without the cruise control.

similar issue in airplanes

[peter303]

In the last two decades airplane piloting has gradually replace most direct contact with controls by a mediating computer layer. Some pilots dont trust the computers or software completely. This is called the fly-by-wire debate. Some accidents are attributed to bad software, although the testing is quite rigorous.

Re:I chose my car because it has no power steering

[Moofie]

Citroen had this when? '70's? Or was it earlier?

Tucker had it in the late 40's. Still a bad idea. Well, poorly implemented, anyhow...

is it running Windows?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a thought. Thre was an incident a while ago of a BMW failing to open doors/windows and the AC shutdown with a Thai minister inside gasping for breath.

Obligatory quote ...

[Knx]

"A car must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law."

Re:Obligatory quote ...

[Anonymous Coward]

But this is a case where the order (downshifting), would put humans in danger. As the engine would force the wheels into a skid and put the car into a dangerous driving situation.

Granted, the car can't tell the difference that a case where downshifting is the more dangerous of the two options, but the downshifting danger would be a far more common concern than what supposedly happened here (and therefore alot more dangerous to allow).

So i don't think there is any real violation of the rules of robotics here.

Re:Obligatory quote ...

[gabbarbhai]

The first law dictates that a car in motion shall remain in motion (barring trivialities like a resultant force etc..)

The Grapevine

[Zilfondel2]

Try the grapevine. You can get up to 95 mph in ANY car just by coasting. Uphill, you might be able to go 40 mph.

Pretty nasty "hill"

Re:Thats what you get...

[Anonymous Coward]

7? 8?

You're completely off on Euro auto/manual stats

[blorg]

10X as many automatic transmissions are sold as manuals in the U.S., and the numbers are somewhere around 7X for Europe. With an automatic transmission, as you know, the torque converter is driven off the output shaft of the engine.

It is nothing like 7:1 automatic:manual in Europe; if you inverted that you'd be closer to the truth (I work for an Irish used car website and out of 16,500 cars currently on the site well under 10% are automatic.)

The Vel Satis is a relatively high end Renault so the chances of it being an auto are higher; still however out of the six Vel Satis models sold here new, four are manual...

Re:You're completely off on Euro auto/manual stats

[dozer]

My numer is right for the U.S. (story) but opposite for Europe. Blorg is right. Sorry for the confusion.

And, to the other people replying here, I've done this. When my car's engine stops developing power, the ZF disconnects pretty much completely. No chance of push-starting it. And besides, push starting at 30 MPH? Are you daft?? Considering that you can push-start a manual at 5 MPH, I'd say that my point is probably valid.

Thats really a no-brainer..

[t_allardyce]

anyone who doesn't bother designing redundancy/backup/fall-back measures in a system like that is an incompetent engineer, period. Reminds me of the worst film ever made - Atomic Train, or the stupid Delorians that you could lock yourself in, im just glad the people who design planes understand this, because car manufacturers certainly don't. Also car interfaces have to be one of the worst in the world, clutches are a stupid awkward in-efficient system (grinding plates together might be what you'd expect 100 years ago but come on this is 2004!), controlling low speeds is just not good enough (we have the fucking shift key to let you finely adjust controls in some programs, where is it in cars?).

1971 Datsun Pickup

[peacefinder]

Same thing happened to me once. But I wasn't in France at the time.

I was driving my dad's red 1971 Datsun pickup on my way to work. (My brother had rolled it a couple times, but it was a Datsun so of course it still ran as good as ever.) A light ahead changed to yellow, and, being about 20 years old at the time, I did what came naturally: I floored it.

Not that flooring a '71 Datsun 1600cc engine had much of an immediate effect. But I did start accellerating, and I made it through the light whilst it was still yellow. Sweeeet. I let off the gas.

The engine continued to rev up.

"Oh, shit," said I. I was up to about 50MPH (in a 45 zone) and accelerating. The next light was about 400 yards away and red, with cars backed up waiting in every lane going my way. It was familiar territory, so I knew the light wouldn't be green before I got there.

I started to panic. I dropped the clutch, and the engine started to wind up. I had no tachometer, but I knew that sucker was gonna tear itself apart if I let it go on like that. I shoved into high gear (4, no overdrive) and engaged the clutch again. Naturally this was a slightly wrenching experience; the RPMs dropped and the vehicle lurched towards the firey doom ahead. In full panic now, I dropped the clutch again with the same result as before. I re-engaged the clutch.

I thought "I am going to die in about ten seconds. Nine. Eight. Oh yeah, the switch."

I turned the engine off and pulled over. Heh. Silly me.

Turns out that the throttle pedal itself was jammed. There was a little mushroom-shaped backstop attached to the firewall, and when I had floored it I had shoved the perdal sideways a bit, and gotten it stuck behind the backstop.

The moral of the story? Panic is not helpful, even the simplest devices can fail, and every powered device needs a kill switch.

Re:1971 Datsun Pickup

[Alioth]

Personally, given the choice between a fiery death and blowing the engine up, I'd choose blowing the engine up every time. If I was ever in a 'stuck gas pedal' situation, the car now belongs to the insurance company (or the scrapman) - I'm gonna do what it takes to not crash even if it means putting a rod through the case.

Re:1971 Datsun Pickup

[peacefinder]

Personally, given the choice between a fiery death and blowing the engine up, I'd choose blowing the engine up every time.

See, that's why it's important not to panic.

A very rational choice, and one that I certainly agree with. But I was young, stupid, and caught very much off-guard.

Once I got my wits about me, I realized that avoiding both bad outcomes was really easy. :-)

this happened in the states..

[Anonymous Coward]

...to a woman in a sunfire. stinking mac at school wont let me log in... anyway...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,110216,00.html

Car Computer Problems

[0peth]

That's the reason at least in the USA, cars with cruise control systems are required to have a master kill switch in addition to the normal methods of turning them off (some subset of the brake, clutch, and steering-wheel "cancel" button.)
I have no faith in the computers put in cars these days. Part of it is definitely a 1997 Accord which has a couple of problems with it. Similar to the guy in the post, cruise control will sometimes settle on a speed 5-15 mph higher than what it was set at (but is luckily responsive to turning it off.) Also, and possibly more annoying, is the door locks. The doors are supposed to lock when the car starts, and unlock when it stops, and they do, but they keep doing as such randomly. I'll be driving around, and the doors will randomly click locked a dozen or so times.
Can't wait for them to get such features as online, software/firmware updates--it'll be great to have virusses on my car.

I was wondering the same thing

[SuperKendall]

I couldn't find anything that indicated if the braking was brake-by-wire or not, but like you say with all the electronic overrides on braking it does seem possible the computer could have overrideed the brake. The e-brake was all electronic!

I, for one, call Shenanigans on this whole thread

[Swampfeet]

There was a case like this a few years ago I saw on some 20/20 type show, where a woman, panicked, called 911 and said her car "was accelerating out of control". Cop shows up while she drives along (she is clearly in control, speeding up and slowing down) puts his car in front of hers, stops her car. Nothing at all wrong with her car, turns out she has a history of mental illness and hysterical behavior. That's what happened here, bet on it.

Downshifting can be dangerous too.

[N3Bruce]

Overreving the engine in itself can be a safety hazard if you do succeed in downshifting into a lower gear. If the engine manages to hold together at 9,000 RPM rather than its 6,000 RPM redline, the sudden deceleration as the engine tries to match the transmission speed can cause the drive wheels to break loose, causing momentary loss of control. This is even more dangerous on a motorcycle, as it can result in a highside when the rear suddenly grabs hold after skidding along. If the engine seizes in the process of self destructing, this skid will continue until the vehicle stops or a driveline component lets go.

That being said, I will slam my car into Park if the brakes fail and I am carrening towards a busy crosswalk or headed into a ravine. Most newer vehicles won't go into park unless the brake pedal is depressed, so keep this in mind if you must attempt this maneuver. A manual transmission will generally be difficult to get into a gear which is seriously mismatched to engine speed, as the synchronizers will tend to lock the gear out. If you accidentally try to shift into first after redlining in second rather than hitting 3rd, the synchronizers in the transmission will tend to lock out the gate for first gear.

Re:Downshifting can be dangerous too.

[ColaMan]

Note that "Park" (on most auto transmissions) only has a dinky little rod that gets inserted into the teeth of one of your gear packs to stop it from rotating.

Stops your car from rolling away on a hill? Yes.

Stops your car from 60MPH? *small crunching noise* No.

Re:Downshifting can be dangerous too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless you know how to double clutch.... then the synchros won't be locking you out of anything.

Re:Interested

[Anonymous Coward]

Makes you wonder why the steering should lock when the car is in motion. That os dangerous, or has no one in the auto industry thought of that.


Well the steering lock is there for theft deterrance. To be perfectly safe it should disengage whenever the wheels roll (in a manual rolling the car downhill with the key out and the steering lock engaged is a stupidly easy and dangerous thing to do accidentally)

But then there would be so little point to having the lock it should just be eliminated.

...Duh

[hcob$]

Are we putting too much trust in the increasing number of electronic systems that our lives depend upon?

" One word... "Duh!"

BusinessWeek says French quality IS good.

[citiZen2010]

I was smugly chuckling to myself about this also, until I read this.

Re:BusinessWeek says French quality IS good.

[AndrewHowe]

Well, perhaps it is in general. But one of my Hungarian friends has a Renault Clio, and there's this funny yellow light that keeps coming on. It's something to do with the ignition system. He can drive it all day, fine, no problems, then the light comes on and the car goes into some sort of "safe mode". It won't go above 3000 revs or 50mph.
He's taken it back to the Renault garage many times. Each time they replace something, or install new software, or whatever. He gets charged a packet. Off he goes, it works fine, but then an hour later... Yellow light. Power down. D'oh!

Wheeeeeee!

[Spy der Mann]

Hello!!!

I'm the wacko scientist! %-P

Let's replace manual gears and levers for electronic! Electronic is the future! Yeehaw! %-P

car on autopilot stops when brakes used properly

[Anonymous Coward]

"Stomping on the brakes proved pointless (I thought at first but upon trying again) I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said.

An article about a confused driver forgetting how to turn off his autopilot or hitting the gas when he thinks he's hitting the brakes just does not make quite as good a story.

Remember the Audi 5000's "Unintended acceleration"

[DaveJay]

The Audi 5000, and many other cars over the years, have had reported cases of "unintended acceleration", often resulting in deaths. In most (if not all) cases, it turns out to be driver error, wherein the driver BELIEVES they're stomping on the brakes, but instead they're pressing the gas. The truth is, in all modern automobiles, the brakes can bring the car to a halt even with the accelerator floored.

Historically, this usually occurs when something else malfunctions and causes the driver to get distracted. In the case of the Audi 5000, it was an idle control that went awry, and when people shifted into drive with their foot off the brake, the higher idle would make the car lurch forward. They'd slam on the brakes, but accidentally hit the gas, and keep their foot to the floor until they hit something. They found this out by inviting a number of people who experienced this "unintended acceleration" to a parking lot, and had them drive engineers around for two days in front of cameras while the engineers played with the computer to force errors.

On the second day of this testing, a woman putting the car into reverse went tearing across the parking lot at high speed until the engineer reached over and shut the car off. She jumped out of the car, and on camera, shouted something like "It happened! There's your proof! The car is at fault!" -- but the cameras inside the car showed she had been hitting the gas, the cameras outside showed no brake lights, and the engineer riding with her bore witness as well.

As a result of this study, and all of the fallout surrounding the related lawsuits, the US requires an automatic transmission interlock on all cars sold here. You MUST have your foot on the brake to shift into gear.

- - -

Now, to the case at hand. I am fairly certain that this was the course of events:

1. The driver recently purchased the car, or it was a rental, so he was relatively unfamiliar with it (the Audi 5000 incident found that the vast majority of people having these incidents were drivers for whom the Audi was not the primary vehicle, or whom had just purchased it);

2. The driver was cruising along on cruise control, and pressed the gas without manually disengaging the control.

3. When the driver lifted off the gas and pulled back in, the car either didn't slow down as quickly as he thought it should (remember, we're assuming he was unfamiliar with the car), he accidentally hit the button to reset the cruise control to the newer, higher speed, or there was a genuine malfunction that reset the cruise to the newer, higher speed.

4. In the next few seconds that followed, he panicked and went for the brake -- but instead he hit the gas. Having done this, and firmly believing that he was hitting the brake to no effect, he continued to floor the gas. The car continued to accelerate.

5. Between trying to shut the car off, calling the police and swerving around traffic, it never occurred to him to look down and see if he was actually hitting the brake. No shame there; none of us would have, either.

6. As he approached the tollbooth, he made another attempt at the brakes (probably using both feet this time) and brought the car to a stop.

So, is the cruise control at fault? Possibly, but not definitely. Either way, similar past incidents suggest that it was a relatively minor issue until he hit the gas by mistake.

For what it's worth, with no witnesses in the car and no instruments monitoring, we'll never know for sure. Also, unless he realized his mistake just before stopping the car, he may well spend the rest of his life believing it's the car's fault -- and if he DID realize his mistake, there's no way he's ever going to admit it.

I'd just like to add...

[bmajik]

I drive, amonst other things, a 1988 BMW M5.

This car has mechanical power steering and mechanical power brake assist. however, it is incorrect to say that power brakes are just a vacuum booster. Many are, but many are not, especially mid 80s german cars that didn't really draw enough vacuum for a vacuum based brake assist. (Some BMW, Audi, and VW models feature non vacuum assist)

Those vehicles have a hydraulic brake booster which is run as a separate output channel from the power steering pump. The power steering pump cant react fast enough for panic threshhold braking, so such cars have a brake pressure accumulator or "brake bomb" which stores pressurized power steering fluid. This pressurized fluid is what provides brake force assistance. Note that the power steering fluid and brake fluid are separate and do not mix; it's just that the brake power regulator uses stored pressure from the PS system to pressurize the brake system.

I recently replaced the brake pressure accumulator on my BMW.

Now, ancient brake technology dissertation aside - i have _very_ relevant experience regarding loss of steering and braking power.

I was on Brainerd International Raceway in Minnesota with my M5. This racetrack has a 1 mile long front straight, and turn 1 is banked. I was entering turn 1 at about 125mph (its a 4 door sedan, give me some slack) and midway through the turn i felt my steering get a bit "funny". I immediately recognized the loss of power steering. KNowing what i know about the car, i checked the brake pedal and found i had no power braking either.

Turn 2 can also be taken in excess of 100mph in my vehicle, but turn 3 is a 110 deegree turn that can't really be navigated above 50mph in a sedan on street tires. So I had no power steering and no power brakes, and i had to slow down 4000 lbs of vehicle, driver, and passenger from in excess of 100mph to about 40 mph.

This was no problem, honestly. You can do the entire back section of BIR without braking once you get past turn 3 if you're running a cool down lap. I really stood on the mechanical unassisted brakes to get speed down by turn 3, and then i was able to drive the car back into the pits.

The problem? The power steering pump is belt driven, and since the power steering pump also pressurizes the power brake system as described above, when the belt snapped, i lost power steering and power braking. My brake presure accumulator, which normally stores enough pressurized fuild to perform 3-4 full brake applications even in the total loss of engine power and brake assist, was faulty (thats why i replaced it a few weeks later :) so thats why i had no power braking as soon as the belt went.

So, the moral of the story is
1) knowing how your car works is helpful. I got a ride over to NAPA, bought a new belt, and was back on the track for the next session. I remained calm even though i had the most difficult braking maneuver on the track coming up in less than 15 seconds.

2) The key to all driving situations is operator skillset and awareness.

Here's another short story:
Once in my 1980 BMW 528i i was cruising along the highway, with cruise control enabled. This was an aftermarket cruise control system, as it did not come on this specific vehicle from the factory. I opted to take an off ramp (which went up hill, as they often do in the midwest) and when i dipped the clutch the engine started bouncing off the rev limiter. Manually cancelling the cruise control had no effect. This took me quite by surprise so i killed the engine and slowed to a stop on manual brakes.

The cruise control cable had stuck. OPening the hood, wiggling the cable returned the throttle to the closed position.

Note that at BMW Club track events, a specific part of the technical inspection is the condition and function of the throttle return spring. Driving at speed requires nuance in the use of the throttle, a stock throttle can be a real problem.

Re:I'd just like to add...

[RESPAWN]

I think the truth behind the story is that the gentleman in the Renault most likely panicked, as people often do in unusual situations.

I know I almost did when I lost braking power. I used to drive a 1995 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme. A couple of years ago I was starting my car and released it a fraction of a second too early, causing some sort of backfire under the hood. After getting over the initial shock of a bang and black smoke coming out from around my hood, I let the car sit a bit and started it again. The engine was idling higher than normal, but maybe the ECU was just confused due to the extra, unburnt fuel left in the combustion chambers.

After letting the car idle a bit I decide to take it out for a drive and see if the idle will settle down on it's own. I press in the brake to shift to reverse and then begin to back out of my garage, probably modulating the brake a bit on the way out. Eventually I let off the brake completely and when I went to get back on the brake the pedal doesn't appear to want to move, while I'm backing up at an unusually high rate of speed due to the car idling higher than normal, and I'm heading right for my grandfather's house.

I immediately slaped the gear lever into neutral and stomp on the emergency brake (foot operated) to stop the car, and kill the ignition, still not sure why my brakes aren't working.

After poking around under the hood, it turns out that the backfire had caused the vacuum line for the brake booster to pop off. I still had brakes, but becuase the pedal had so much more resistance, and because the car was already acting weird, I immediately assumed the worst. That, and I had to think and act fast before I put a hole in my grandfather's living room. I've driven cars without power brakes before (namely my dad's heavy, 4-wheel drum braked 1955 Chevy), but I was simply surprised by the lack of pedal movement with the small ammount of pressure that's usually required. Since I knew I was going slow enough, but was running out of room, the emergency brake seemd like the best course of action. The vacuum leak was also presumably the reason for the high idle, I just wished I'd seen it when I was checking under the hood in the garage.

Actually, come to think of it, I've experienced a stuck throttle before, too. I was driving my roommate's car at a local SCCA Solo II driver's school event. I'd already had a few events behind me (including one in the '95 Cutlass, much to the ammusment of the onlookers, but where I surprisingly managed times that put me about mid-pack out of the attendees), but I was still a novice driver and felt the driver's school would provide a lot of seat time and a lot of needed instruction. Anyway, one of the exercises they had was a braking exercise. You start from a stand still, launch the car, and accelerate towards a braking box, with the goal of the exercise being to practice braking at the threshold. I had a few runs under me, and had planned to really push it this time. I launched the car hard, had a perfect upshift to 2nd, and waited just a hair longer before getting on the brakes... and instead of rolling on them, I hit them too hard, and felt them lock. I eased off, blew through the box, and pushed in the clutch to shift to neutral and come to an easy stop. As soon as I pushed in the clutch, the engine jumped up to about 5000 rpms, so I killed the engine and pulled over. The throttle return seemed fine. It tunred out to be a problem with the ported throttle body on the engine. We later found out that if you hit the throttle with exceedingly hard force as I had done when I had that "perfect" shift into 2nd, it has a tendency to stick open, as I found out that day, and again at a later autocross. Go figure.

News Flash

[Anonymous Coward]

French police clear 125 miles of road for motorist with cruise control stuck at 120 mph. Motorist manages to stop car with revolutionary technique called "braking."

It Sounds to me ...

[Muad'Dave]

... like cars without traditional ignition keys should have a kill switch wired to the emergency brake pedal. Hit the emergency brakes, power is cut to the computer.

Those Darn French

[Anonymous Coward]

....Even their cars run away.

Naieve posited solutions.

[Anonymous Coward]

All you guys must be driving 1984 VW Jetta.
Newer high end vehicles are drive by wire, incl the tranny. Also, cable brakes to rear will not conteract force from front wheel drive.

The simple manufacturing solution to this problem, in future production, is an ignition kill switch. 'Blipping', used to control engine power on early aircraft, is an example of this solution, put to effective practice.

As a backup, a cabin mounted petcock in the fuel line would allow the operator to shut off fuel flow completely, once slowed to a safe speed. It would also act as a failsafe in the event of a failure in the ignitiopn kill switch.

Both of these devices are featured on my '70's moped!

How do you say...

[KnarfO]

...Christine in French?

:-P

Re:I, for one, call Shenanigans on this whole thre

[plover]

Back in 1981, my wife had an old rust-bomb '71 Cadillac Coupe de Ville that had a runaway cruise control module. (She called it "possessed".) Sometimes, it would just decide it wasn't going fast enough, so it accelerated all by itself.

Now, picture combining that failure with a failure in the brake pedal sensor switch. You've got a cruise control trying to bring you up to speed, and no feedback telling it to disconnect. Of course, in that old behemoth there was a mechanical "on/off" switch for the cruise control allowing the driver to simply shut it off. It was still very, very surprising though to feel the acceleration, look down and see 80 MPH and rising.

These were all discrete circuits, long before the era of computers. Now in this Renault, if there is an "on/off" switch, it's no more effective than pressing Ctrl-Alt-Del on a hung PC. It's very easy to see how a couple of simultaneous failures could allow this to happen. What's harder to see is how an engineer could allow such a crappy, unsafe, non-redundant design to ever make it to prototype stage, let alone a production vehicle. If I lived in France, I'd seriously have to think very hard before purchasing another Renault ever again. (Here, in the States, it's easy to promise never to buy one, but it may be harder to follow through on this promise if you're French and it's your "national" brand.)

French running away?

[Anonymous Coward]

The French made care must of thought something was chasing it.

a chrysler

[nilbog]

Don't be so quick to judge the auto-accelerate stories as false. I used to have a chrysler that would, no joke, accelerate by itself. I know I wasn't accidentaly hitting the gas because I would be fighting the acceleration with the brakes, which by the way, was not all too difficult, just a little scary.

No way this is true

[BobaFett]

Well, not all of it: sure, things can happen which will cause the car to effectively "floor the gas pedal". Cruise control failures may be possible, and let's even say that the cruise control kill switch fails. Mechanical failures are even simpler, happened to me once (broken morot mount). But applying the brakes disengages transmission on automatic cars. Also, he could have shifted into neutral, that always works. In both cases the engine will rev up and probably fail, unless it has a red-zone cutoff (which in many cars is as simple as a valve redirecting exhaust into air intake when RPM exceeds maximum - works like a charm, engine halts in half a second).
I suspect he either made up the whole story so he could get away with a fun ride, mixed up brakes and gas, or was more concern with the danger of killing his engine than the danger to himself and other drivers on the road.

every system needs a "f (s) ck this!" button

[swschrad]

every one. a button that stops the current operations and goes back to stasis. in the case of a car, no forward energy would seem to be the logical application. in the case of OS, the only one I've ever seen that would almost always stop a current operation (like a SQL search on the null set) was NeXTStep, ctrl-period IIRC.

have you written one in lately?

No, you're all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

1) breaks are useless @ full throttle/at speed
this is because of hte vacuum needed, and the heat displaced while breaking. at full speed, vaccuum, well, doesn't suck as much, and brakes, well get hot as fuck pretty fast- think NO BRAKES!
2) shifting to neutral is stewpid. now youre going to 'coast' with no possible braking at all ? bad idea.
3) hand brake anyone ? it's a start, and generally on the REAR wheels, so should something get SO FUCKING HOT it seizes, it'll be less likely to cause a spin.
4) downshift NOW
5) median ? you have airbags ya pussy!
6) a smallish delivery truck rear end ? (messier)
7) hit a cop car, sue everyone!
strike #7 , this isn't the USA we're talking about ;)

Re:No, you're all wrong.

[teeth]

2) shifting to neutral is stewpid. now youre going to 'coast' with no possible braking at all ? bad idea.

Good idea. You still have full braking, even if not full servo assist, and you are unlikely to lose much vacuum during one emergency stop with a running engine, even at full throttle.

I have stopped from ~90mph with a stopped engine, in neutral (oil dump due to fractured cooler feed pipe) hard enough to trigger ABS on the dusty hard shoulder. Steering assist had faded to nothing after crossing two lanes and straightening up but braking was uncompromised.

Re:No, you're all wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

I like old cars. They're cars, not gadgets :)

I have a 1975 Range Rover, fitted with a 4 litre turbodiesel. It has no servo steering. No mechanical, and no elektrical. I does however, have a brake-assistant - but the vaccum pump installed isnt really enough for it. It's atleast twice as heavy to break than a normal car, turned off. But you still get all 4 wheels to lock up in 70mph. Car wheights around 2100kg.

To do a little testing, we tested braking "torque", ie putting gear in low-1 (terrain), full throttle, and got the engine to stop. I know - this isnt so good to the drivetrain, but fun.

Test #2. volvo s40 t4, speed 160km h, pressing both throttle and brakes. Result? Smoking brakes and a car standing still. Conclusion - if he'd pushed the brake hard and kept it "floored", it would have stopped. But methinks he didnt push the brakes hard enough to stop - just to heat up. They then cooled down again and he got it to stop.

Need to slow down?

[freeze128]

Just turn on the Air Conditioning. That always works for me.

Panic Button needed

[Anonymous Coward]

The moral of the story? Panic is not helpful, even the simplest devices can fail, and every powered device needs a kill switch.

Yesterday, I picked up my pills at a newly refurbished Pharmacy inside a Supermarket with a large front opening closable with a roll down sheet metal thing. On the other side of the counter, on the wall was a LARGE RED pull down switch with LARGE LETTERING saying (I forget the exact words) it was an emergency switch to open the roll down sheet metal thing. For fire maybe.

Moral: Emergency switches for EVERY powered device. Amen.

Misclassified...

[HomerNet]

This one should have been from the "Matter-of-time" department. I mean, really, how many of us who work with computers on a daily basis didn't see this one coming? Electronic systems are our livelyhood, and each and every one of us knows that the fail-rate is high enough that you should NEVER entrust human lives to this kind of technology. A pacemaker is one thing, where if it goes you only risk one life, (sad but true, wish it weren't so) but when you put that kind of system into a 1-ton killing machine and expect perfect results...well, that's just not smart.

Is this Slashdot or Cardot?

[rfunches]

I mean, really...800+ *car* comments from self-proclaimed geeks? Now that I think about it... /.ers probably could code their cars to "malfunction" in their spare time.

Just a CHIP's episode

[theDunedan]

Come on. A "stuck cruise control" happened on an episode of CHIP's back in the seventies. They probably got the idea for that episode from a real life experience. In other words, there is nothing new here.

- the Dunester

This has to be bogus...

[march]

Any car's brakes will easily stop the vehicle even with a wide open throttle.

Methinks this guy did "an Audi" and never really hit the brakes.

Re:This has to be bogus...

[nelsonen]

What about the cars that have fly-by-wire brakes? The emergency circuit has far less stopping power than the normal brakes.

Re:This has to be bogus...

[march]

What about the cars that have fly-by-wire brakes?

How many production vehicles do you know have fly-by-wire brakes? Maybe one or two high end Mercedes or BMW's?

Re:This has to be bogus...

[cr0sh]

I am not saying you are wrong...

However, I wonder if I was ever crazy enough to get on a long stretch of road, and get my 6000+ lb 1979 Bronco with a 400 M-block (6.6L V-8) up to full speed (god, that would be VERY SCARY) - then keeping my foot on the accelerator, hit my brakes...

Somehow, I see the brakes catching on fire long before I would stop...

My 2002 Stratus is like that

[ModernGeek]

If I put it in "3" or "L", and it goes over 6,000 rpms, it will shit up, and won't shift down until you slow down. It has electronics keeping you from breaking ANYTHING. The entire shifting mechanism is controlled by a computer. The only thing you can do is put it in Park while you are moving, and that doesn't do a thing, if you put it in reverse while moving, it will do nothing until you stop. I think neutral might be mechanical though.

Re:My 2002 Stratus is like that

[agallagh42]

"If I put it in "3" or "L", and it goes over 6,000 rpms, it will shit up"

Now there's a lovely feature! :-)

No, you won't.

[Gordonjcp]

If the wheels are still turning the engine (ie., the car is still in gear) then the hydraulic pump feeding the power steering will still be in operation, vacuum from the air intake will still operate the brake servo, and the pressure reservoir will still operate your ABS (yes, even with the ignition off). In any case, you can steer cars just fine at normal driving speeds with no power assist, and brake vacuum servos tend to hold enough vacuum to let you brake to a stop. When that vacuum is gone, the brakes still work, but the pedal will be a lot heavier.

Of course, you could just save all the bother and get an old Citroen, where steering, suspension and brakes are all powered from a high-pressure hydraulic system. This has at least one (and sometimes two) large accumulators that store pressure for several hours after the engine is switched off.

Indestructable cars

[Captain_Chaos]

I was driving my dad's red 1971 Datsun pickup on my way to work. (My brother had rolled it a couple times, but it was a Datsun so of course it still ran as good as ever.)

On a related note, check this out.

Actually...

[Gordonjcp]

Look up DIRAVI some time. This is the power steering system used on some Citroen and Maserati cars (possibly others). There is effectively no mechanical connection between the steering rack and the steering wheel. For safety's sake, there is a loose mechanical coupling with about a quarter turn of play, but under normal circumstances it is entirely controlled by the hydraulic system.

It is *extremely* difficult to get the car into a situation where you lose the hydraulics to the point that the steering won't function at all, though. I have driven one home with a burst suspension pipe, and only about half a litre of fluid in the system (just enough to keep the brakes and steering going) - the steering worked but was incredibly twitchy, because there wasn't enough pressure for the speed-controled damping to work.

I don't believe this story

[manuel.flury]

I own a renault with same motor+electronic system than the velsatis and personnaly I can't believe that this guy don't have tried to play (successfully !) with the police as for 2 years now a lot of automatic radars (detect your speed + take a shot of you and your car) appear on the french roads which send directly your photo to the police. The french driver license a 12 points and you lose a certain amount of point when you do something wrong. So what a good idea if you want to override speed limit legally !

I call bullshit!

[Anonymous Coward]

If true, this driver has set a new French endurance record by driving for one full, uninterrupted hour without a breakdown.

"I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could"

[SnappingTurtle]

"I stomped on the brakes as hard as I could and the car finally stopped," he said.

I bet stomping hard finally crushed the beer can that was lodged underneath.

Throttle mechanisms...

[Gordonjcp]

I've had the return spring break before. Fortunately there was a very light spring on one of the throttle spindles that v-e-e-e-r-y s-l-o-o-o-w-l-y shut the throttle when I lifted my foot off the pedal. All I did was chop the ignition and coast to a safe stop. These days I always check the throttle spring for security and damage as part of my weekly maintenance...

In the UK at least...

[Gordonjcp]

... VelSatises are automatic. Both of them.

Re:In the UK at least...

[Bertie]

I know they aren't too popular, but they must've sold more than two...

Re:In the UK at least...

[Gordonjcp]

Around Glasgow I've seen maybe four. That's less than the number of Aston Martin DB7s that are going about. They are all thirstymatic, though. I think you must be able to get a manual version. Automatic gearboxes are pretty uncommon over here.

Not only the Vel Satis

[thrill12]

Also other, middle-class, Renault models are incorporated with more and more electronic control. My parents just bought a Renault Scenic, which only has an electronic handbrake. The manual override is in the back.
I joked to the cardealer : "what if the software decides to engage the handbrake, while doing 120 on the highway ?"
He kinda kept quiet and stated that it probably would have a safety guard against that - though he never tried it out.

I think that even though automation is kewl and all, you should (especially in generation 1 models!) always foresee a manual override.

Theoretically...

[jellisky]

The Kansas Turnpike has no booths until you actually enter or exit it (I've travelled on it a bit)... and it's over 230 miles long. So, theoretically, you could drive the whole thing for 200+ miles and never hit a booth in that stretch. ;)

(You get a ticket signifying where you entered, present the ticket at the exit booth when you exit, and pay the right amount there. It makes more sense than those god-awful $0.40 booths that are prevalent around places like Chicago... and can someone explain the rationale for $0.40? That's the most stupid amount of money outside of $0.41 for a toll booth. It requires at least 3 coins, no matter what, and of different denominations, to optimize the solution!)

-Jellisky

Re:Theoretically...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! You're lucky they don't ask you for $0.42, or you'll scream "Ahh!! That stupid 42 number again!"

it is true!

[sad_]

i believe this story, in fact i believe the car became self aware and discovered how UGLY it was and wanted to kill itself!
that, or the fact that renault is 'une piece de crap voiture'.

Same here...

[Gordonjcp]

My 1989 Citroen CX has a bloody great big twin-choke Weber, and it will rev quite happily well past the red line at 5,500rpm. In 5th this puts you somewhere beyond 125mph, well onto the antisocial side of the the speed limit.

This is the reason I don't have any electronics in my car. Well, not on "mission critical" systems, although it does have contactless ignition (which isn't very electronic, no microprocessor at any rate). It even has a big switch under the dashboard to isolate the ABS power supply.

Get back to basics.

[stimpleton]

Granted, this is all very high tech but stuck throttles have occurred for decades with just as dramatic consequences.
Its called a frayed throttle cable. Interestingly, "driver intervention" is surprisingly low, with drivers stopping only when they run into something.

Other causes that I have seen(I was a mechanic for 15 years before I got involved with the computer side of things:

- "Damper pots" on carburetors work fine controlling the secondry throttle plate, till a rubber o-ring perishes within the carb, and engine vacuum sucks the rubber diaphragm in the pot fully home and the throttle opens fully.
- Piston type accuators that wear, and the piston finally tilts and sticks...at the last speed you were going.
- In some EFI cars, when a vacuum seal of gives way, the lean mixture can be aggresively compensated by the EFI unit, resulting in at least partial throttle.

Some (but a fraction) of vehicles formally identified w/ throttle probs that have resulted in similar results as the article:
- 2001 Ford escape - Water enter servo, throttle sticks.
- Nearly all european cars to 1982 - Poor corrsion ressistance, cable sticks against the outer cable.
-1990 Ranger - Throttle cam wears and sticks against air intake tube, where there was only 1 mm clearance at new.
- Oldsmobile Toronado/Trofero - worn nylon bush. Throttle sticks wide open.
- 1996 Honda Accord/Accura - Carpet by throttle pedal snags pedal, preventing its return.

Re:I chose my car because it has no power steering

[Tmack]

I have a '90 nissan Sentra that was manufactured without it as well. No power steering reservoir, no pump, no power assisted steering. The only power-anything in the car was the brake assist (yes, it was a manual). Car still runs, though its on engine #2, CV joint set #3, and probably near the end of life of the 2nd brake rotor set. All this at about 160K. Engine was replaced cause it was cheaper than changing the timing chain (since I had a friend that did it at cost of the replacement junked engine).

Tm

In Central France...

[mojotooth]

Cruise Controls YOU

Re: brake fade

[Anonymous Coward]

There are two types of fade:
o pad fade
o fluid fade
Pad fade (pad opertional temp range exceeded) is obvious when the pedal is firm and the car doesn't stop. Fluid fade (boiling) will make the pedal feel soft or go to the floor with greatly reduced braking effect. Racers flush their fluid before every event. They select pad compound based on the thermal range the brakes will see and add cooling ducts to prevent pad fade.

Braking converts kinetic energy into heat energy. The greater the mass of the rotor, the more heat sink capability it has.

Drilling rotors:
o removes mass which lowers thermal storage capacity
o weakens the rotors
o provides stress cracks a starting place

Examine any track driven drilled rotor and the cracks start at the holes or slots

There are also metalurgy differences between brands of rotors, which may explain why an OEM rotor may be superior to given aftermarket rotor. Change the pad compound, and the aftermarket rotor may show an advantage.

brakes are always stronger than the engine

[SuperBanana]

the driver has tried to use the brakes, but he says they quickly heated up and became ineffective.

In almost every car ever produced, the brakes are far more "powerful" than the engine. This is complete bullshit, unless the car was poorly maintained or had a serious defect. You can't ride them- you really have to push hard and bring the vehicle to a stop quickly, or yes, you will overheat the brakes- but even if you do that, you don't have to wait long for them to cool down. You CAN'T use your handbrake- it's a PARKING brake, not an "emergency" brake, and yeah, they tend to not be properly adjusted so they won't do a very good job of stopping the car; since little weight is on them, manufacturers don't make the rear brakes very big. Use the BRAKE pedal, people.

Elizabeth Jordan, a NY EMT who called 911 claiming her car was out of control, became completely hysterical- a cop finally stopped the vehicle by pulling in front of her and using the cruiser's brakes(and rear bumper) to stop.

Funny thing, but they found absafuckingloutly nothing wrong with the car she was driving. The woman was simply a hysterical bitch who wanted attention. Suddenly after being brought to a stop by the cruiser, she could turn off the ignition. Why the fuck didn't she do that in the first place?

99% of the stories about cars going "out of control" are bullshit. It's almost always driver error- or a complete fabrication by the driver to get out of trouble (or for attention).

Re:brakes are always stronger than the engine

[Anonymous Coward]

About that Elizabeth Jordan thing... there is an MP3 on The Smoking Gun of her 911 call. Poor girl... she sounds really scared but damn is she stupid!

Here's the MP3 page:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/liecal l1.html

There this one part where the 911 operator asks:
911: "Can you down shift?"
Jordan: "What do you mean downshift? I am female."

Then...
911: "What happens when you go into neutral?"
Jordan: "Um, like... the engine races."

Re:brakes are always stronger than the engine

[theLOUDroom]

In almost every car ever produced, the brakes are far more "powerful" than the engine. This is complete bullshit, unless the car was poorly maintained or had a serious defect. You can't ride them- you really have to push hard and bring the vehicle to a stop quickly, or yes, you will overheat the brakes- but even if you do that, you don't have to wait long for them to cool down.

Spoken like someone who doesn't know much about brakes.
On 90% of cars out there, the brakes are doing all they can to execute one high-speed stop.
Manufacturers cheap out on brakes because consumers like you, don't know enough about them.
The brakes on my Saturn can execute a high speed stop ONCE and then they're pretty much guaranteed to be warped. This is WITHOUT the engine fighting them.

Yes, the brakes can exert more force than the engine for A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. The problem is that brakes have a LIMITED CAPABILITY TO DEAL WITH HEAT. As brakes heat up, they become ineffective.
Using the brakes with the engine stuck wide-open is a LAST resort. You are risking going from a car with a stuck throttle, to a car with a stuck throttle AND no brakes. (When your brakes get hot enough, they can fail catastropihcally.)

Funny thing, but they found absafuckingloutly nothing wrong with the car she was driving. The woman was simply a hysterical bitch who wanted attention. Suddenly after being brought to a stop by the cruiser, she could turn off the ignition. Why the fuck didn't she do that in the first place?

Because we don't teach people that's what they should do. It's absolutely retarded that we hand out drivers liscenses with no mention of what to do if something goes wrong with your car but that's the way we do it.

As someone who has actually HAD their throttle get stuck wide open going down the highway, it's a very scary experience. I was lucky enough to know that turning off the ignition will kill the spark, even on the carb'ed vehicle that I was driving. I was also lucky enough to not remove the key from the ignition and engage the steering wheel lock.
I would have MUCH rather been told that by someone else, as opposed to trying to figure it all out within the space of two seconds.

99% of the stories about cars going "out of control" are bullshit. It's almost always driver error- or a complete fabrication by the driver to get out of trouble (or for attention).

99% of statistics like this one are total bullshit that was made up on the spot. They only detract from the discussion.

Re:I, for one, call Shenanigans on this whole thre

[sniggly]

It's very out of character, they're winning more european safest car of the year awards than any other manufacturer and it's evident in collission tests and traffic accident stats that they deserve a reputation for safety. And if you were in eur you can also purchase Peugeot or Citroen; very nice cars too.

power steering

[Anonymous Coward]

I had problems with the auto-transmition of my car.
When exiting from freeway and reducing speed very fast it wouldn't downshift in time and the engine would die (bellow 300 RPM).
As result the steering and braking became hard in 2-3 seconds after the engine died.

When you are used to soft wheel and it becomes very hard when you are already in a turn it is very dangerous. I managed to put in neutral and start the engine to regaing steering.

Yes, you can steer but you need both hands to make very slow turn - you don't have time for it. And max braking was almost like touching the brake softly compared to when powered.

Car designed for power steering has a lot harder wheel compared to car designed without power steering.

this has happened before!!

[Rho17]

There was a version of this around here in southeast Missouri 5-6 years ago. Young guy in a Ford Escort going down the highway found his car accelerating on its own, couldn't stop. He drove for 100 miles or so at over 100mph before he ran out of gas. So this isn't an isolated incident!

Re:I, for one, call Shenanigans on this whole thre

[DeputySpade]

Yup. That sounds likke old seventies GM cruise control alright. I had both a Caprice Classic and a Trans Am from the late seventies and they both had the same kind of flaws. They were of a slightly different type, though, where the only control for the cruise system was a single push button on the turn signal stalk. That T/A, man... Push the cruise control button from a dead stop and it would quite literally suck the pedal to the floor and the acceleration would throw you back in your seat. The deal with my two cars, and probably your Cadillac, is that the cruise control in those cars was vacuum operated. The cruise control would go absolutely berzerk if there was a vacuum leak. In my T/A the previous owner actually hooked the vacuum up to ported instead of unported (or vice versa) when installing the new carb and intake. If your wife's caddy had so much as a cracked vacuum hose I can totally understand this happening.

You're in 5th...

[purduephotog]

... and the engine is redlined. You downshift to 4th or 3rd. What's going to happen? I believe it will sound something like 'whump' followed by a series of metallic items exiting the top of your hood. I could be wrong, however, as I've never downshifted while doing 6000 RPM (or for that matter, dropping the clutch while at 6000 RPM - I'm too chicken)

Sad to say I was sitting there this morning completely unable to type any simple words or sentences. I blame the benadryl. 2 posters up caught what I was trying to say- you've got residual braking power left before you are mechanically pumping fluid to the brakes.

Shutting off the engine at speed isn't so big a deal, unless you've got a big block thats going to lock those rear tires up ;P Thats all the point I was trying to make. Shut the engine off. When it comes back on, assuming it's not a hardware fault or the pedal is 'stuck' with that snapple bottle that was rolling around...

Come to think of it they should have used spike strips on the guy.

Re:You're in 5th...

[DeputySpade]

Spike strips rule. :D

Re:You're in 5th...

[dcam]

Come to think of it they should have used spike strips on the guy.

Are you sure that is a good idea? At least with the guy in the car and wanting to stop there is some semblance of control. Take out 1-4 tyres and you have no control (and the wheels would be still spinning).

I have firsthand knowledge.

[Anonymous Coward]

My WRX actually did have that cruise control failure, about a month before the recall... but it stuck at what I had it set at (75mph).

Just held down the clutch and the brake, rode the shoulder and all was fine (the engine did race a bit), after a bump jarred the cable loose. Never happened again, but since then I had it in for the recall.

I had thought my dumb ass had stepped on the gas instead of the brake because they are close, like some of the old Audis.

Renault's put the handbrake on...

[steve_l]

I had a renault megane for rental in the Alps in may.

Their fancy rfid tag ignition key is cute; just plug it in and hit the go button. There is no stop button; you just come to a halt then pull the card.

The moment you pull the card it actually puts the handbrake on. The handbrake comes off when you restart the car, put it in gear and rev the engine.

I didnt have a 125mph chase down the autoroute, but we did have a scary time doing a 3 point turn on an alpine pass in the snow. The road was closed and we had to turn round. But you cannot spin up the engine and clutch then gently come off the handbrake, as you normally do on hill turns. As soon as you hit the accelerator your brakes would come off. So the only safe way to hill starts is to make 100% sure you are in the right gear (ie forwards and not backwards), then hit the accelerator hard. Get it wrong and you drive off the mountain at speed.

I think the Renault line have added a bit too much automation these days. I note the German toys havent gone that far yet -not even Mercedes- and I think they knew what they were doing.

Re:Renault's put the handbrake on...

[Anonymous Coward]

The moment you pull the card it actually puts the handbrake on.

Oh oh oh, that means these cars are not Paris-compatible.

A way to pick up a motorcycle

[k2r]

> Hullo?! It's not ignorance at work it's physics.

I ride a motorcycle of 230KG, it does 200KM/h, which is highway-speen (actually: Autobahn-Speed) and picking it up is as hard as picking up a box of beer. You just have to know how to do it, and that's just pure physics.

Unfortunately my english-skills might be too bad to explain it properly, but basically you just have to turn the handle bar into the maximum position. This brings the lower end of the handle bar into maximum distance to the motorcycle's center
Now go down into knee bend and use the handle bar's lower end as a lever to pick up the motorcycle as you would pick up a heavy box from your knees - and don't drop it over on the opposite side :-)

Actually this works as simple on most motorcycles - and since HD-motorcycles are usually made for posing instead of driving, they tend to have veeeery wide handle-bars which make a good lever :-) (duck and run :-) )

k2r

Hmmm....

[rabidlamb]

I would have thought the car would have surrendered much easier; what with it being French and all ;)

its a 'handbrake' in the UK

[steve_l]

We dont call them parking brakes in the UK, even though we engage them to park. They are called handbrakes and when your car gets stolen, whoever gets chased round town will use them to corner entertainingly, untill they flub it and slide sideways into a wall, roll the car, etc, etc.

I have had the brakes fail on a car (original mini) and have used it to get home (Very carefully). Since the main foot brakes didnt have power assist, there wasnt a significant difference in performance.

Ah. So it was an Escort.

[jpellino]

What other Ford would you be embarassed about --- oh, yeah - right.
The Festiva,
The Aspire,
The Tempo,
The Contour,
The mid Cougars
All the Thunderbirds between the one in American Graffitti and the new old one.

Re: locks the steering

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, back in the day when steering column locks were new , a friend of my brothers was coming home from Santa Cruz and since he was low on gas, he decided to turn off the engine and coast back into SillyCon Valley.

Oops!

Mom's car has a steering lock, the first corner after Summit Rd. and he cleaned off the drivers side of Moms car against the center concrete divider!

Tough lesson...

but..

[JustNiz]

why didn't he just shift the car out of gear and/or use the emergency brake?

Unscramble his name!

[Slicebo]

The best anagram for "Hicham Dequiedt" so far:

HI MACH DEED QUIT

Radar vs Emergency Brakes

[doug]

Radar wasn't quite so common back in the early/mid-80s. The Highway Patrol (State Police) had it, but the local cops usually didn't. At least that was the popular misconception back then. I was pulled several times, but only the Highway Patrol got me for speeding and my breaking without lights trick didn't work because I didn't see him until he hit his blues.

- doug

Have you ever experienced brake fade?

[Colin Smith]

It's fucking terrifying. I've only experienced it on my bike, on a track after a few laps of giving it some serious stick. Doing 110 miles per hour towards the end of the straight apply said brakes and sweet fuck all happened.

If you've been applying brakes, they heat up, they heat up the pads, the disks and the brake fluid. If it all gets too hot, it all just stops working.

Truth Be told.

[Icegryphon]

Answer is No. Electrical Systems are pure evil in cars. That is why my next one is going to be a dino.

Designed to Fail or Failing to Design ?

[cbelt3]

No reset button. At least not where you can get it in a moving car.

PPM is usually considered in defect rates- we're talking about electronics defect rates that are found in the factory. Once they are in the wild, it's hours of operation before failure. Lots of theory exists, and its all sadistical / statistical, but the more complex your system gets, it is more likely that *stuff* is going to happen. And when you add in unexpected external conditions and sensetivity in the system, well, it's kind of like this.

ALL cars fail at some point or another. The designs are built with what is called 'limp home' functionality and 'gentle failure' designs so that the eventual failure will not kill someone. But since many code monkeys have often forgotten (or never learned this), and all the grey heads that knew how the world works have been laid off or outsourced, the new generation of vehicles does not consider this (What do you mean it's going to break ? My code NEVER breaks !). Oops...

The moral of the story, if you're going to write real-time code, take a course in failure engineering, and think about sh*t happening.

And then, as you code, imagine that the person (or AI, or whatever) you love the most in the world will be riding in your product, and plan accordingly.

Please.

PS- Computer failure rates is 100%. Depending on the OS, the MTBF can be less than 24 hours.

Re:Sounds like the Darwin awards almost had a winn

[Anonymous Coward]

Since this happened in Europe this is more likely:

1 3 5

N <--- Hello dumb ass.

2 4 R

Crash Ratings

[kaladorn]

I find it interesting that the first thing they do in NASCAR is build a frame under these frameless-unit-body wonders when they want to make them into cars that can hit a cement wall or other cars at 170mph and you can walk away from the crash.

I watched a PBS special where they talked to the crash guys who study NASCAR crashes and work on engineering safer cars. They have dramatically different (IIRC) opinions of how cars should be designed to survive high speed collisions than the current automakers or the NTHSA.

Sadly, I have no bibliographic material so I can't contribute a link to verify this controvery.

I recall my father talking about spring-steel bumpers and citing at least one case he knew of where a spring steel bumper backed up by 6000 lbs of car had sheared off a tree rather than crumpling. The occupants were unhurt and the vehicle could be driven away.

Contrast this with many 8 mph accidents in mall parking lots. And look at skyrocketing insurance costs - they've studied low-speed impacts on most modern cars and SUVs from an insurance PoV, and the costs are waaay up. A lot of these low-speed accidents, if taken in an older car, would result in no significant damage to the occupants and no significant damage to the car - I myself have *flattened* an iron parking sign (via a fishtail in the winter) in a 66 Olds Delta 88 with nothing worse than a minute crimp in the fenderwell trim moulding. If I tried that in my new Mustang, I'd be looking at $500-2000 damage I'd guess.

So, crash ratings mean something. This is why some number of people prefer pickup trucks, along with the better visibility. I did refer to those stats when I bought my Mustang, which at the time had one of the better front impact ratings. It's not a bad idea to study these things, but crumple zones are no panacea, and can leave a car that would otherwise be manouverable disabled during a multiple impact collision scenario. They also can drive everyones insurance up... to a questionable end. There are other approaches to the problem and the current prevailing approach is not necessarily the only or even best approach.

Re:Crash Ratings

[bob beta]

A lot of these low-speed accidents, if taken in an older car, would result in no significant damage to the occupants and no significant damage to the car

Yes, but the old car, if it hits anything, is likely to hit some shit new car with plastic body parts. There goes your insurance premium...

The new 'look' of automotives of the last decade or so is almost entirely the result of plastics.

Metal cars are nice, sometimes.

Re:Crash Ratings

[Anonymous Coward]

Your NASCAR comments are bullshit.

NASCAR cars are involved in two types of collisions:

- high speed collisions with walls.
- low speed bumps with other cars going in the same direction at about the same speed.

This is the reason they are stiffened up (well, for performance too). If a NASCAR car was involved in a frontal offset crash with regular oncoming hiway traffic, the other guys car would be torn to pieces. That's why they're not street legal.

Re:Crash Ratings

[kaladorn]

Does being an AC mean you can't read? I think I said that NASCAR builds frames under there cars (you don't seem to debate that) and that they allow the NASCAR cars to hit other cars (which might be moving 0 mph or 170mph in the same direction or anything in between) and walls and the occupants sustain no damage. Oddly, for someone who thinks what I said about NASCAR is BS, you basically repeated what I said.

Furthermore, if I'm in a crash and the other guys car doesn't survive but mine does, I'll feel real sorry they didn't invest in a safe car. Speaking of BS, it isn't that fact that keeps them from being street legal - there are a variety of other reasons far more mundane that prevent street legal status. But many cars from other racing series' *are* street legal, and most of them do the same thing and build in additional crash protection for the occupants - roll bars/cages, side impact supports, additional structural members, etc.

Next time you want to shoot down someone's point, you might actually want to read it first. But then, reading might be tough for the average AC....

Children

[Bartman_205]

Won't somebody please think of the children???

Translation of Speigel page

[wclough]

The Google translation is very hard to read, so I suggest the Reuters equivalent: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessioni d=R0RTVWKMK1DIWCRBAEZSFEY?type=oddlyEnoughNews&sto ryID=6418334

Kill switch

[Krellan]

Lessons learned:

1) Any vehicle with an ignition system that can't be turned off the same way it was turned on -- from Renault's new smartcard ignition system, to an old-style lawnmower with a pull cord -- needs a KILL SWITCH! Pressing the kill switch shuts off the flow of gas/spark/whatever to the engine, causing it to stall, and would not have any other side effects such as re-engaging the steering column lock.

2) Pedals usually have different shapes: a horizontal rectangle for the brake (or clutch), and a vertical rectangle for the throttle. These are shaped differently on purpose: when strongly pushed, you should feel the difference in your feet as your shoes bend around the pedals differently! Often, the pedals will even be at different heights: notice the gas pedal is lower than the brake, on most cars.

3) Say what you will about our overzealous product safety/testing/defect laws, but there's a reason Renault cars aren't sold anymore in the US :)

Re:Kill switch

[Anonymous Coward]

Any vehicle with an ignition system that can't be turned off the same way it was turned on -- from Renault's new smartcard ignition system, to an old-style lawnmower with a pull cord -- needs a KILL SWITCH!

I'm still in disbelief that a car with this style of controls (or lack thereof) would lack a safe engine kill system. I Am Not An Automotive Engineer, but even I can see the blatantly obvius need for one. I think the conversation must have had to go like this:

Technician: We need a safe kill system, in the event that the engine speed becomes uncontrollable.

Engineer: The system is foolproof.

Technician: But what if the engine speed..

Engineer: Are you threatening me?

Technician: Well no, I was just..

Engineer: FOOL PROOF!! MWAHAHAHA!!

Re:Interested

[vakuona]

Yeah, but are you willing to risk dying to have a feature that is supposed to protect your car from theft. If there was a way, I would totally rmove the wheel lock from my car because truth be told, it the thieves come for your car, they are going to get it, wheel locking or none. Besides, you should just buy one of those nice contraptions to lock your gear shift and wheel if you want to protect it from theft. But then again, it can be beaten.

Yeah, but it's a Renault.

[Beardo the Bearded]

There's a hell of a difference in the force required to stop a full-size truck and a Renault.

He should have started gearing the car down to 1st. Then he'd have been going slow enough to use the emergency brake.

Minneapolis Police Truck Sudden Accel Tragedy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's worth remembering the story of the police van in Minneapolis that killed two people after it suddenly accelerated.

The cause was eventually traced to aftermarket brake-light flashers. When wired into certain vans, they disable the shift-lock people have been discussing above.

Here's some excerpts from the WSJ story; track it down, it's a thrilling read. - Delayed Impact
- Six Seconds, 2 Dead: A Police-Van Crash Exposes a Bombshell
- Sleuth Bob Young, Debunker Of `Sudden Acceleration,' Follows a Shocking Trail
- Serious Dangers on the Road

By Anna Wilde Mathews
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
1 November 1999
The Wall Street Journal
A1

MINNEAPOLIS -- Tires squealing, the police van lurched forward, ricocheted off a squad car and careened through the holiday revelers on the sidewalk. The runaway Ford slammed into an office building and finally stopped, its still-spinning wheels spewing burnt-rubber smoke.

Blood and glass littered the concrete where a woman sprawled, dead. Next to her, an infant boy lay still in a mangled stroller. His frantic mother snatched him up and raced down the street. "My baby is dead!" she shrieked.

Four days later and 1,000 miles away, Bob Young sat down in his tidy home office in the Maryland suburbs on a cool gray December morning. He dialed up a voice mail from his boss at the federal government's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: "There's been a double-fatality sudden-acceleration involving a police van in Minneapolis. The state police are asking that we help."

Mr. Young, a 45-year-old with a salt-and-pepper beard and an easy manner, hung up the phone and grimaced. He didn't really want to help. He felt sorry for the victims, but he dreaded the scene he expected in Minneapolis -- lawyers preparing lawsuits, reporters chasing stories, politicians demanding answers.

Besides, Mr. Young figured he already knew the cause of this crash: The driver had stepped on the gas instead of the brake, and the van had accelerated unexpectedly. Mr. Young had studied "sudden acceleration" for more than a decade. In the esoteric world of car-crash investigation, he was famous for debunking every case he had encountered in which a vehicle was said to have mysteriously lurched into motion. He believed the Minneapolis accident would prove to be a typical instance of a driver making a tragic mistake.

...

Mr. Young felt his pulse quicken and his face redden. In his mind, he went back to the county garage where he had conducted all those tests on the van. And he remembered: He hadn't tested the shift-lock device with the van's lights flashing. The battery had been dead and he had allowed a patrol officer to switch off the lights while the battery was recharged. Mr. Young hadn't thought to turn the flashing lights on again once the van powered back up and he ran his tests. On Dec. 4, when the van barreled through that crowd, the lights had been flashing.

A tiny oversight. Maybe it didn't matter. Maybe Mr. Marose was wrong. "Let's go out and look," Mr. Young told his audience.

...

[ you can guess how it ends. ]

Hrm.

[porkchop_d_clown]

dunno about that. If you're already doing highway speeds and you slam on the brakes, but your motor is still cranking at high speed?

I'm pretty sure your brakes would overheat before you stopped.

Note to engineering at Renault

[Anonymous Coward]

Add a bleeping kill switch!!!!

Note to the driver.
Next time buy the model without the fancy ultra automatic everything gee whiz gizmos.

Re:Interested

[ars]

Has no one here actually driven a real car? You CAN'T turn off the ignition if the gear shift is not in park, so it's impossible to lock the steering wheel.

Wait for the investigation...Poisoning.

[Anonymous Coward]

"If a car were subject to the same QA and maintainence procedures an airplane is, you could count on it to run for millions of miles without trouble."

Just pour some mercury over the aluminum and let the fun begin.

Re:I, for one, call Shenanigans on this whole thre

[ronaldb64]

and it's evident in collission tests and traffic accident stats that they deserve a reputation for safety.

That may be good news to Renault drivers: Hey if you ever get stuck doing 120MPH, rest assured, we got an excellent rep in collision tests....

Scary

[yuri benjamin]

Driver: Car, slow down!
Car: I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

Files and directories

[Rich]

Was making directories visible to user-space as files a mistake? In order to maintain the file system as a DAG you need to make them read-only and fudge the permissions anyway, so what was the gain?

I would turn off the ignition.. and more.

[murderlegendre]

The fact is, that any car with power brakes will still have enough stored vacuum for one or two complete applications, even after the engine is cut. In a panic situation, most drivers would just jump on the brake, and skid to a halt.. and there would be plenty of power left for that. Power brake systems are designed for this, for jebus sake.

As for the steering, at driving speeds (and above..) a loss of power steering would not be all that dangerous. Sure, the steering gets heavy, but a panicked driver tends to oversteer anyway, and would hardly notice the increased effort - they'll turn the wheel as hard as they have to.

Are you surprised to know that handlebar mounted killswitches have been mandatory on motorcycles in the USA (and elsewhere) since the 1970's, and many models had one long before that? I could kill my 1939 BSA M20 by thumbing a button on the left handlebar. We haven't seen them in cars, but if these are the kind of designs that the car makers are going to be selling, they'd have to be beyond idiots to not have a panic system. If this kind of failure becomes more commonplace, they would do well to consider their future liabilities.

Even so, it would be simple to design a panic system for a modern car. The kill switch would need to be hardwired to the ignition and lockup-style torque converter. Hit the switch, and the ignition loses primary current, and the torque converter is locked up. This has two benefits: the power brakes, steering, etc. do not lose power, and the vehicle gets additional braking performance from the stalling engine.

Yeah, I know. Too simple. It would never work.

This must be a common thing...

[wazerface]

I have an auto Ford Focus ZTS and when I let cruise control sit at exactly 60mph (right where it thinks about shifting) it sometimes punches up to 80+! I always found that reassuring.

Kill switch on spellcheck?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it just me, or do a lot of people not know how to spell "brake", "brake" and "braking" ?

"Officer! I can't stop accelerating!"

"Stop trying to break the car and try braking instead."

kill switch is an OK idea...

[cr0sh]

...until you realize most people would react real strangely to losing power steering and brakes. Still, better for the car to come to a stop than keep accellerating...

This has been around since the late '80s

[Andy Dodd]

Chrysler released their electronically-controlled automatic transmission in '88 or '89. It was one of the first such transmissions, which is why for quite a while it was one of the most problematic ones. They fixed most of the mechanical defects within 2-3 years, but they were STILL fixing control issues in the firmware in '95. Doesn't help that electronically controlled transmissions are more sensitive to fluid type than hydraulic ones. Chrysler's 3-speed hydraulic automatics can pretty much run with any transmission fluid (Dexron/Mercon or Chrysler ATF+3 or +4), while their 4-speeds will die within a few thousand miles if you put anything but ATF+3 in them. Even today, LOTS of mechanics still try to get away with straight Dexron or Dexron with additives in Chrysler 4-speed automatics.

Nowadays almost all automatic transmissions except the most basic 3-speeds are electronically controlled.

What a stupid story

[DrVomact]

I don't believe a word of it. The guy just wanted to see how fast his new car could go.

Like, it's not possible to put this car into neutral? You can't pull the ignition "chip" out? Heck, even if it were Satanic RFID technology that works when the "key" is anywhere near the ignition lock, you could always hurl the damn thing out a window.

Testing is rigorous?

[cr0sh]

That's an understatement, at best. I once (somehow) went to a conference on software quality assurrance, most of it was talking about UML and Rational Rose, etc - but all of it was in the context of designing systems not to fail - 5 9's or better uptime and such.

There was long discourse on fly-by-wire systems used by large commercial aircraft - and how expensive (big $$$$) it was to re-certify the software if even a single line was changed - the whole thing had to be retested, to verify that a single line change would not cause the entire system to crash. I am sure this extended to hardware and such as well (I mean, the hardware on which the software was running - which was some kind of three-way computer system which decided things by voting on action courses).

Now, hardly any of this related to my job at the time - I wasn't doing software and testing it because if it failed, people could die - so little of the conference related to me. But now that we are starting to see "drive-by-wire" vehicles and technology, I tend to wonder how much testing and redundancy they will put into it, from model year to model year. Somehow, I doubt it will be anywhere near as much as commercial aircraft manufacturers do (there are also probably FAA and government laws/rules to abide by as well) - the costs would be prohibitive at best. If anything happens, the costs will be passed on to the consumer.

I expect, at least for the first few generations of drive-by-wire, we are going to see a greater percentage of deaths and injuries from vehicles of this nature (compared to same model non-drive-by-wire vehicles)...

Sure blame the car

[mnmn]

Someone decided to take his new Audi out for a spin, and just hated the speed limits over a wide clear straight highway. Solution? "Help my cars speeding on its own".

Even if it was, he really couldnt hit the brakes? Why? Hes got brake-by-wire or something? How strong the engine has to be to beat a fully stepped-on brake anyway? Especially in higher gears.

If I were on a superhighway, and my 300hp car decided to speed, I wouldnt mind letting it have its way for a little while. Until you reach downtown of course.

Re:Remember the Audi 5000's "Unintended accelerati

[violet16]

You're right about Audi, but your explanation here seems pretty unlikely. It requires that:

1. The driver was so profoundly stupid that he drove for 100 miles before realizing he was pressing the accelerator instead of the brake. (That is, this is not like the Audi split-second acceleration.)

2. During that hour, the police never said, "Please check that you are not pressing the accelerator, sir."

3. When the driver eventually managed to stop the car by braking, he failed to realize that when he did so he removed his foot from the accelerator (a position in which, according to your explanation, it had been locked solid for the last hour).

I certainly acknowledge there are stupid drivers out there, but it seems improbable that someone this stupid could have reached adulthood without strangling himself while trying to tie his shoelaces or something.

Who's on 1st?

[ElitistWhiner]

Great comedy for the courtroom! Really, your honor, my Renault ran her over. I had nothing to do with it. I tried everthing but nothing seemed to work except my cell phone. So I called 911 to report the hit and run.

-r

For any german readers:

[Anonymous Coward]

aus der übersetzten Version:

"I thought, my last Stuendlein struck." :)

Re:Interested

[JoeHunt]

Actually in all automatic cars I have driven you can turn off the ignition in any gear, you just can't pull the key out unless it's in Park.

What's wrong with drive by wire?

[xtal]

Works for 747s and most modern aircraft..

Re:What's wrong with drive by wire?

[thogard]

747's are drive by plumbing not drive by wire. There is only one Boeing commercial plane thats drive by wire and its got the same hull losses as Airbus fly by wire planes. The hull losses on fly by wire are higher than the old hydraulic systems. I don't think I want a fly by wire car either when the old stuff works so well.

Surprisingly, it was an automatic

[name_already_taken]

Looks like the P124 comes with an automatic. But, it's not "articulated". Creative license on the part of the reporter, it looks like.

Although, I guess it's not too surprising. In the USA at least, most cement mixer trucks and fire trucks are automatic, whereas large class 8 trucks (semi trucks or 18 wheelers as they're known here) have a manual transmission with another range box behind it. The ones I've seen have a direct shift lever going into the transmission and a compressed air shifter for the range box.

By the way, The big monster snow plow trucks the County sold off at the auction two years ago here were automatics, with a Cat 3208 diesel V8 engine. I mention them because the brakes were more than capable of stopping the truck even with the accelerater floored. It was interesting watching people who'd never driven a large truck before trying to get their purchases out of the county fairgrounds.

Know your car electronics

[Anonymous Coward]

Ie most cars have a fuse box inside.

To stop one car a short did it well. Fitted algator clip. Connecting the earth door pannels to the fuse box can blow the main power fuse link to the engine control system in some cars. Now power to the engine control system engine not running well if not stop engine will stop car will stop also cruse control is on the same fuse link. Note a theif does not want to do this so no problem inside the car.

It is all on the fuse link you blow so knowing your wiring can save you life.

Known problems with this methord fried wires ie the one used to fuse out can be killed can car lights will not work in some case.

Re:Know your car electronics

[Anonymous Coward]

Many cars also have fuse boxes inside the engine compartment (under the hood). The fuse boxes inside the passenger compartment usually control stuff not related to the engine directly. Besides, you'd probably have to take your eyes totally off the road to open the fuse box door to blow (or remove) the fuses.

A good way to throw a rod

[jarsyl]

This reminds me of the story told by the guy who sold my friend a "parts" Jeep. It was an old vehicle (early 1980's) and had serious rust damage to the floor in front of the driver's seat. The owner had patched this with a board. One day he lent it to a friend, who happened to push down too hard on the accelerator pedal. This in turn got stuck under the board, causing the engine to accelerate greatly. Panicking, the driver put the clutch in to slow the car. Without any load on the engine it raced even higher and threw a rod through the block, destroying the engine.

Perhaps this is why this French fellow didn't try and put the car into neutral? And what's all this "he couldn't stop the car because he started it with a magnetic card"? I have yet to encounter this design, or any that doesn't let people turn off their ignition. People do panic in these situations, but TFA claims he drove for one hour under these conditions. Very suspicious.

Re:A good way to throw a rod

[iggymanz]

you'd be amazed at the number of people who drive automatic transmission cars who have no idea what the N, 1, 2 positions are for...

not to mention...

[Anonymous Coward]

coasting in neutral is illegal in most countries.

+2 misleading

[ishmaelflood]

+4 Informative?

Bizzaro world mods again.

"If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way."

The engine is either running, in which case you will have power steering, or off, in which case you won't. There is no 'low power mode' which is what you seem to be implying.

The vacuum reservoir in your servo will give you at least one assisted, braked, stop with the engine off.

Both systems still work even when un-assisted, you'll have to push hard on the brake pedal, but the steering will be fine. Few people /need/ power steering in a normal car except for parking.

The reason you don't turn the key all the way is that that will engage the steering column lock. Trust me, it is a very bad idea to engage the column lock while driving.

"If you are traveling at a high rate of speed losing power steering/braking will cause more problems for you."

Wrong, see above

" First try neutral and even a lower gear if for some reason neutral isn't engaging. It's going to over-rev the engine but personally I'd prefer to replace a transmission or the entire engine rather than my blood or organs."

Most modern engines have rev limiters. If you knock them into neutral then they'll just sit at the red line. Not pretty, but not the end of the world. I don't think you could force a manual box into a lower gear easily, but it might work. Many modern auto boxes won't change down until the operating speed is within parameters. Neutral will work for manuals or autos.

You are very close...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, there could be a firmware bug in the car's powertrain management computer. The car could indeed stall if you shift into neutral when the vehicle speed is above the speed limiter threshold.

Think about it this way:
0. GM gets sued if original equipment tires fail when people drive their cars above the rated speed of those tires, so keeping the vehicle speed below that speed is very important to GM's bottom line. (People sue a lot these days, even when they're in the wrong.)
1. The computer is programmed to maintain the engine idle speed, depending on coolant temperature (faster idle when the engine is very cold, lower idle speed once it's warmed up)
2. The computer is programmed to cut the fuel off (fuel injector pulse width = 0 milliseconds) when the vehicle speed exceeds 105 MPH. (The maximum speed rating for the OE tires)
3. The driver is an idiot. He accelerates to 105 MPH on a (apparently very steep) downhill road, and is bouncing off the overspeed fuel cutoff.
4. The driver is really an idiot; he shifts into neutral.
5. The computer sees the engine speed drop below the desired idle speed because of the fuel cutoff, and opens the idle speed air valve wider to try and bring up the idle speed, but it has no effect because no fuel is being injected.
6. The programmers at GM never imagined anyone would do this, and decided that the overspeed fuel cut-off would override all else, even idle speed control.
7. The engine does indeed stall, even though the car is doing >105MPH; the engine is not being driven by the car's forward momentum because the transmission is in neutral.
8. Driver loses power steering, but doesn't notice because power steering isn't needed when the car is moving at speed, and the car still has vacuum reserve for two full application of the power brake assist. Driver does see the check engine and oil pressure lights because the engine is stalled and the ignition switch is on.
9. Aerodynamic drag slows the car below 105 MPH, but the engine doesn't magically restart unless the driver puts the transmission in gear (manual), or uses the starter (automatic).
10. Idiot driver freaks out.

Don't put your car in neutral when it's moving.

Learn to drive

[bluGill]

Nonsense, you are just driving like the typical idiot. There is no need to have your front bumper within 6 inches of the car in front of you at all time. Back off a little, relax, and find the average speed of traffic. I drive in stop and go traffic all the time, yet I rarely have to use the brakes! And as a bonus I'm introducing laminar flow to the situation and easing congestion.

Re:Learn to drive

[Cederic]

I have to stop at 17 junctions and/or traffic lights, in addition to general changes in speed: that's a lot of going into neutral and/or changing gears; that's also just my first three miles on the 55 miles home in an evening.

So whether I drive like an idiot or not, there's a tremendous amount of clutch work required. Being able to avoid braking is utterly irrelevant; when the car is stationary it must be in neutral (or clutch depressed) or the engine will stall. To move again that situation must change.

Operating a clutch hurts my knee. I'd rather skip the pain and drive an automatic - idiotically or otherwise.

~Cederic

SkyNet testing itself

[aggiefalcon01]

Ah, this is just SkyNet testing itself before it starts armageddon.

Great...

[sl4shd0rk]

Just another idiot doing 120 on the freeway while talking on a cell phone. This is not a related incident. ;)

Ironically...

[babybird]

Ironically, the parking brake on this car is not manually controlled.

next time i'm gonna' notify the police in advance

[jdkane]

Sounds like a helluva way to get out of a speeding ticket.

exactly.

[agent2]

i read the article, thought for about a second, and called bullshit.

"finally pressed on the breaks as hard as he could and it finally stopped before a toll booth."

yeah...right. I mean, i believe it happened, but he just got where he was going much faster. he's a smart guy.

Not entirely

[babybird]

These are good points except for the following:

First, the ignition. In this car, the ignition is not a physical switch you can just twist to off. It is an electronic switch operated by a smart card. Starting the car is done with a push-button. Shutting it off is accomplished by shifting into park and removing the smart card.

Second, the brakes. Most power assisted brake systems use vacuum assist. This does not work at full throttle because the engine has no vacuum. You'll have power assist while the vacuum reservoir has vacuum, but that isn't nearly enough to bring any car to a stop from 120 MPH at full throttle. Secondly, there are the factors of brake fade, and fluid boiling when you're talking about speeds this high and factory equipped brake systems.

Third, the cruise control. I can't speak for all cruise control systems, but I've seen many systems where the cruise control system is linked to the throttle in such way that the gas pedal goes down when the cruise control applies throttle, however if you lift the gas pedal with your toe it has zero effect on the throttle position with the cruise control. The reason for this is that it would destroy the cruise control system if you were to lift the gas pedal while the cruise control was applying throttle.

Fourth, the previous reply addresses the shifting into neutral suggestion. I suspect many cars have such a feature.

Fifth, considering that he ended up some 100+ miles from his destination, I don't think he was just trying to get away with driving that fast. If he did want to drive his car that fast, it would be very easy to just drive to the autobahn and do so perfectly legally. Many europeans have such a luxury. ;)

Re:Not entirely

[Anonymous Coward]

Even vacuum assist brakes can be operated if the booster fails. You just have to press harder. There is always a physical link between the pedal and the master cylinder as a backup.

The brake pedal has a switch such that when the pedal is depressed, the switch contact is closed, the brake light comes on and the cruise control is disabled.

a minor error at that

[jdkane]

He mistakenly had his foot on the gas instead of the brake and then noticed only after driving more than 100 miles.

You must work for Renault. C'mon admin it, you're in the PR department. :)

Re:a minor error at that

[DaveJay]

Whoops -- I missed the part about it being for 100 miles. Yeah, I call BS on that one -- I'm now firmly on the "saw the cops coming and made up a story" side. :)

replying to way OT: that's cancer AND smallpox

[LinuxHam]

why would you want to find a safe vaccine for a disease which has been officially eradicated?

Its obviously a little dated, but.... this distributed computing project allows researchers to swing processing power between the two projects (there are actually 2 in there). I lost my Dad to cancer, and my wife lost 4 family members (ages 19 to 50) and is expected to lose a 43 year old aunt this year to breast cancer. My wife constantly checks to make sure we're running this screensaver as much as possible. If the time comes that we face a biological attack of smallpox (specifically because it is eradicated and because no one's vaccination is effective anymore) I would want to know that we helped discover a vaccination out that doesn't kill, what, 1 out of 20 recipients of the vaccination.

Finally, it was one of IBM's earliest grid projects and I work in a small section of IBM Global Services that brings grid and On Demand offerings to our customers. I would like to be able to bring this to customers who want to capture spare CPU cycles across hundreds or thousands of desktops companywide and turn that into a huge virtual batch queue. I'm doing my part to continue to bring usage data to IBM and help improve the offering. It directly benefits cancer research, protection of the public, and my job.

Oh, also I switched to this sig after someone tracked me down back when I used a sig I've used elsewhere to spam me about his company's offerings that matched a wishlist I posted here. I needed to put something different, so I think its worth it.

Re:replying to way OT: that's cancer AND smallpox

[Bertie]

Interesting answer. Thanks.

Re:replying to way OT: that's cancer AND smallpox

[Anonymous Coward]

NP, thanks for making me review my position. I forgot to mention that I work in the area specifically mentioned that put the NYC/North Jersey financial district on permanent terror level orange, so its not like I fear terror attacks but live/work in the cornfields of Kansas. Its very real to me.

talking ideal conditions here

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not "high speed" until you have to swerve to avoid something, or brake suddenly at 120 in that PoS.

brakes engine

[Anonymous Coward]

I do. The brakes can easily overpower and even stall the engine (because they oppose a lot more torque than the engine has, even if they might have less power).

cruise control is rpm-dependent

[wotevah]

hence, if you set it in second gear then re-enable it in third, it will want to go faster.

Ironic...

[WebCowboy]

...because if your Nissan is less than five years old, then it was engineered by the same team as the Renault that is the subject of the article. This is because Renault and Nissan practically merged some time ago. Renault is the single biggest shareholder in Nissan (about 40% owned), and Nissan owns 15 or 20% of Renault. from a corporate structure standpoint, their arrangement is almost identical to the Renault/American Motors alliance from 1978 to 1987 (American Motors Jeep division had to divest AM General--makers of the Humvee--because US regulations did not allow the vehicles to be supplied by a foreign company. Odd how "American" motors was considered a FOREIGN company by the federal gov't in the last decade of its existence).

If it weren't for Renault management Nissan would not be around today as they were nearly bankrupt when they formed their alliance. Whatever the rep for lack of quality Renault had, they learned from experience and became quite a well run company. And I wouldn't discount the possibility that Renault parts are being used more and more in Nissans (and vice versa of course...the two brands are even starting to visually resemble each other).

Back in the AMC/Renault days the same thing happened--a Renault diesel engine, instrument cluster and bucket seats turned up in a handful of Jeep models sold in North America. The AMC Alliance/Encore was mechanically identical to the Renault 9/11, except that AMC supplied different accessories (bumbers, grille, headlamps, wheels, radio...). AMC was also planning to bring the Espace to the US and Canada to compete with the Dodge Caravan (possibly to be assembled alongside the "AMC/Renault Premier" in Brampton, Ontario). Of course, that plan was quashed when Chrysler took over, but the Canada-built R25 was sold as Eagle Premier and Dodge Monaco.

The same thing is happening to Nissan, except Renault seems to have learned from its mistakes. This time it seems they are not only trimming the fat and get in effective management like they tried with AMC, they figured out that ultimately you cant stay in business seling junk. I KNOW some Renault engineering/styling is finding its way into Nissans, and they definitely source most if not all of their parts through common suppliers. Thankfully, for the most part Renault is learning from Nissan about quality control.

Re:Ironic...

[drinkypoo]

My nissan is from 1989 and has nothing whatsoever to do with Renault; It was designed in Japan by Japanese people (because caucasians are just too damn tall) and sent over here on a ship. Interestingly only the US ever got S13 convertibles (S13 and S14 are the cars called "240SX" sold in the US) and Japan had to wait until the S15, which did not end up being sold here. Coupes were shipped here and changed into convertibles by a company which specializes in that sort of thing, a process which included the addition of a second door latch and reinforcements to the doors for rigidity.

I'd be surprised if Nissan took on much technology or even much design from Renault, because Nissan has continually defined styling for the Japanese auto industry in a way that even Honda cannot claim, resulting in major influence over the US market as well. Unfortunately, as you perhaps allude in your comment, they have typically fallen down in the marketing department. Or, perhaps it's that Nissans don't end up back at the dealer very often because of their reliability, although the parts sure should keep them in business considering how much they cost...

I don't entirely discount the possibility, it's not like I think that Renault has never done anything right, although I certainly can't come up with any examples. There's an old Dauphin at the body shop at school that has a lovely 3-lug design, what an excellent plan that was. That's a pretty ancient vehicle, though.

Re:Ironic...

[Rockenreno]

Good choice in cars... I drive a '96 240sx. :) Love them S chassis...

I have to ask...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why was he speeding at 120 mph to travel a few miles?

Re:I have to ask...

[boa13]

No. He had set his cruise speed to 80 mph, the speed limit on the highway, and the speed most people drive at.

I call bullshit!!!

[type40]

The car wouldn't have started in gear. Ever heard of a neutral safety switch? It's this little thing in your transmission that prevents the starter from engaging if the gear selector isn't in N or P.

But for arguments sake let us say that the neutral safety switch was broken or disabled. The throttle was open far enough that when the cop started the car it would have flooded.

You sir are full of it.

Re:I call bullshit!!!

[avanha]

Plenty of older cars didn't have the neutral safety switch. At least several times I tried to start my car with the transmission in gear and got a nice lurch.

Re:I call bullshit!!!

[type40]

my 64 plymouth Valiant wagon with the push button automatic has a neutral safety switch.
If the bottom of the mopar line 1964 A-body has one I think the 1968 chrysler newport (C-body) would have one.
odds are that the Newport had a 383 in it and as I pointed out if the throttle was that far open the engine would have flooded.

Like I said parent is full of it.

Re:I call bullshit!!!

[avanha]

Your argument is persuasive, but even if the the car didn't have a neutral safetry switch, it sounds like a bullshit story.

BMW.....

[goober1473]

Sounds to me like he was just trying to keepup with the BMW infront.

Not the first time...

[Anonymous Coward]

That happened to me way back when I was a kid circa 1986. Our Chevy Suburban kicked in three times in different situations, once throwing us into an intersection after stopping at a red light. Luckily, slamming the transmission into park stopped us.

Whatever happened to simple mechanical systems with one or two levels of mechanical redundancy? Too expensive to save lives? Hmmm...

State of mind is definitely a key player

[putaro]

In my opinion, he could have stopped the car much earlier, but was panicked. To those who say he should have had no problem removing the smart card, try doing that while controlling a car at 120 mph on a non-empty highway (at one point, he had to overtake a truck by driving on the emergency lane!).

I had a situation like this when I was in college driving my old '77 Datsun pickup (this was in 1985 or '86). No electronics in that puppy, but the linkage that increased the idle revs when the air conditioner was on (air conditioner was long dead by the time I had this truck) broke, fell down and stuck the throttle on at full blast as I was going down the freeway.

Of coure, this being a '77 Datsun pickup, I think I topped out at less than 80 MPH but it was not a fun feeling. It took me a minute or so to figure out that I could drop into neutral (manual transmission) and turn the engine off (no power steering on that baby either :-) ). If the vehicle had had more horsepower and I had started out-accelerating other traffic and needed to steer around them I could have easily not had the presence of mind to handle the situation. You do not immediately think of turning the engine off while you're driving. It's just something you never do.

Very fishy!

[RealNecator]

As far as i know, Renault has no breaking-by-wire system, therefore hitting the brake really hard, some kind of braking has to occur, even if the car refuses to add the braking-power-amplifier(?).

Re:I chose my car because it has no power steering

[fucksl4shd0t]

I can believe in the Sentra withotu power steering, just like I can believe in the Tercel without power steering, and a few other of the really cheap cars that are made to sell brand new for really cheap. The Celica isn't one of those cars, that's all. It's a sporty thing, and the target market of the Celica actually wants power steering.

Surprised you changed the motor out on that Sentra instead of changing the timing chain. Now, instead of being able to say "It's got 3 million miles on it with the original engine".....

That engine is pretty indestructible. :) Change the timing chain at regular intervals and you'll never want anything else done to it.

It's a controlled deflation

[purduephotog]

The tires don't explode, they just go flat. At some point tho the rubber will no longer carry the car forward and you'll be spinning the rims on pavement (loads of sparks, VERY fun if they're aluminum or magnesium). But at that point there is no traction available. Throwing the guy into a dirt road or gulley would just spin the wheels, allowing for a safe egress from the vehicle.

Obviously a better solutlion might have been to jack his car up and let the wheels spin free, then stop him. But I ca'nt think of any easy way of doing that quickly :(

Re:It's a controlled deflation

[dcam]

You are missing the point. He was travelling at 120 miles/hr. I'm not great at converting that to real units, but it pretty fast. Take out the tyres at the speed and I think you can expect some problems, things like spinning into walls. Jacking the car up at 120 miles/hr is somewhat less practical.

Downshifting and Deceleration

[virg_mattes]

> If you downshifted, the car would have still redlined, but it wouldn't have been going 95 mph.

If he stepped on the clutch and the brake, the car will decelerate faster than any downshifting could cause. The only reason to use the transmission to brake is in low-traction conditions (or, of course, in the case of brake failure). If your car is throttled up out of control, the best answer to safely stop the car is to disengage the engine and use the brakes to bring it to a stop. At best, downshifting will slow you down less quickly than the brakes, and at worst, downshifting too far can cause the car to "overbrake" and skid, and antilock braking systems can't compensate for transmission braking.

Virg

No comment

[Hoi Polloi]

Ahhhh...I plead the 5th amendment

more you learn , the more you are afraid ....

[Gopal.V]

> I'm an Electronics Engineer and I'd never trust a drive-by-wire car. Things go wrong; you have to have some sort of mechanical over-ride for a life-critical system like a car.

Makes me wonder what a Mechanical Engineer thinks about the car :). I suppose this is a very common attitude ?.
I'm a computer engineer and I don't take my credit card even near the PC ... I unplug my PC often when I don't need the network , run rsync of the critical data into around 13 machines on the network and keep a printed copy of my ssh keys when I go on vacation .. But I don't worry about my bike or it's engines or the office lifts .. Maybe the more you know how it works, more you are afraid it might fail ?.

Ignorance is bliss ;)

Haiku, hmmm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Panic freezes thoughts
Screams and smoking brakes don't help
Turn it off, stupid!

Toadsan

Fords experience the same problems

[tgrigsby]

There have been a number of similar problems with Fords over the years. People shift into drive and the car takes off, or they get up to a given speed and the car continues to accelerate, etc. The problem is not with the operation of the vehicle, but in the car itself.

Check the Anti-Ford Page site for more info:

http://www.tgrigsby.com/views/ford.htm

Renault is suing the guy

[loudici]

I just heard on the french Radio that Renault had the car looked at by a court appointed expert, denies the whole story, and is suing the guy for damaging its brand by making false allegations.

Re:Remember the Audi 5000's "Unintended accelerati

[SysKoll]

You're right. The driver probably either 1. mixed up the brake and gas pedals as you mentioned, or 2. saw the telltale flash of an automatic speed-trap radar in his rearview mirror and decided to create that story in a silly attempt to escape the fine and loss of points on his license.

Renault, as of Oct 6, announced that a detailed examination of the car showed no fault and that they are going to sue the driver for misrepresentation and false declaration.

to get that kind of speed out of a french car....

[bill11082]

he must have been going in reverse

shiny red button

[bill11082]

anyone else think that cars without keys should have a shiny red button that kills the engine

Eh?

[DABANSHEE]

With every car I've owned, locking the steering involves turning the key all the way to the left, while turning the ignition off involves turning the key just one notch to the left.

Useally the key has settings something like this:

-Lock
-Acc
-Ignition
-Start

Meaning turning the key to "Acc" will turn the engine off without locking the wheel.

French American behind the wheel?

[MasTRE]

This must have been some French guy behind the wheel. I mean, to drive an automatic car in France is rather rare for a native. Were he driving a normal car, all he would have had to do was to depress the clutch pedal and viola - the car would have stopped.

Re:French American behind the wheel?

[Arimus]

Even on an auto all that's needed is to drop the auto box into neutral...

Re:French American behind the wheel?

[El Cabri]

I think the VelSatis has a sequential gearbox -- a clutchless manual that can either be controlled manually or by a computer. It's relatively common on newer cars in Europe, unlike traditionnal auto which indeed has always been rare.

All Your Child

[MegaFur]

I'm proud to be the owner of a rare 2004 +5 mod on an "All Your Base" riff.

(Note: This is not a flame/troll) I would like to be able to say that you're pathetic for being proud of such a thing. I would like to be able to say that... but I can't. Because if I had a post like that, I'd be proud of it too. :-)

Re: brake fade

[Oddly_Drac]

"Actually, I was under the impression that brake fade (assuming modern vehicles) has more to do with expansion of hoses and the like under heat stress than "gaseous buildup" between the brake pads and disc."

I'll admit to having never heard of that, mainly because the brake hoses are of _hydraulic_ quality which have to cope with fairly insane pressures. The gaseous buildup I referred to is the contact layer betwixt a rapidly spinning metal disc and the ablative asbestos and lead mix that vapourises under hard braking conditions.

"Modern brake pads don't outgas, as far as I'm aware."

I'd find it hard to believe that there's nothing on the boundary layer between the pad and disc...

"This is also why you'll see many autocross racers insisting that such things as cross-drlled rotors only serve to increase the likelihood of the rotor cracking"

True enough. Drilling tends to locally change the nature of the metal and provide slight hardening that means that constant expansion and contraction will produce fractures. A similar reasoning is behind the discs that have a hollow space 'in' the disc itself, because it's more liable to warp, especially as it wears.

"The holes or slots were supposed to provide an escape route for the hot gasses coming off the pads"

Form over function; that's the way they were sold. In terms of the physics involved you'd want a nice big disc in a tough, high latency material to dump the heat, but then you have to trade off against the weight.

Re:2010 reference. Made me remember this...

[WhiplashII]

Funny that you bring this up. My father and I had a discussion about this - he said the computer guy was an idiot for removing the fail-safe. I disagreed, I said it just showed where he placed his faith. It was a decision, whether to trust the machine not to kill them all, or whether to trust a human not to irrationally kill the only machine that could save them. Turns out the computer guy was even "right." Even if HAL did go crazy they would have been killed in the shock wave anyway, so killing HAL could only have made things worse (because then they couldn't even control the ship they were on!).

Back to the subject at hand, perhaps the French as a society are placing too much trust in machines. This would be especially scarry considering the power source they employ. Not that nukes are inherently dangerous, more that hubris is inherently dangerous, and nukes spread the danger around...

On the other hand, perhaps making the car electric somehow saves lives? I don't know, but I don't see how it could.

about 130 fps

[purduephotog]

Give or take. feet per second .... point being rims don't accelerate the car any ;)
(but they sure do make good sparklers)

Part of me still thinks it's a bs stunt ;)

Re:about 130 fps

[dcam]

fps (interesting convergance, feet/second & frames/second) isn't quite what I meant by real units. 192 km/h or 53 m/s. That is pretty damn fast.

Rims may not accelerate the car at all, but they also don't provide any control. One you take out the tyres you have not guarantee of the car staying on the road.

Can't be accurate

[gerardrj]

The brakes in the car are not controlled directly by a computer. Yes there is a control system whereby a computer can modulate the brakes to prevent skidding or improve traction, but the control is not complete. In any car made in the past 20 years the brakes will bring the car to a complete stop even if the engine is locked at full throttle and the transmission is in gear. Even if the brakes fail, the transmission or clutch can be disengaged and the car will roll to a stop. It's simply implausible that a car's systems would fail in such a manner as to make the car unstoppable without injuring or killing the driver.

The problems aren't with technology, the problems are with the people. Especially in the U.S. people treat automobiles as being trivial devices. They get in, start the engine and drive off, while talking on the phone, doing paperwork, putting on makeup, listening to the radio. This works most of the time because the vehicles are so reliable and traffic tends to be predictable. But the issues come in emergency training, how to handle the non-normal situations.

What do you do when your front right wheel falls off on the highway at 70mph? What do you do if your windshield is suddenly smashed and you can't see? What do you do if your engine goes to full throttle?

Almost every other mode of transportation has months to years of training involved, not for the every-day routine stuff, but for those off-the-wall disaster scenarios and other like them.

In the end, I can't discount this man's report that the car spontaneously accelerated. I do completely discount his report that he was unable to stop it almost as soon as the problem was noticed.

Not the Brakes, but Brake Fluid

[feyhunde]

I had my brake fluid boil a few months back.

Barely alive, and damn lucky.

The shoes and pads were fine, but the heat and stress caused my master cylinder to bypass. Fun Fun stuff.

Happened to me once

[hansroy]

My first car was a 1981 AMC Spirit. 258 cid straight 6, automatic. Some time after I gave up on it and got a new car, I thought it'd be a good idea to see if the old beast still ran. I was headed to work on Route 84 in Naugatuck, Connecticut. I went to exit, but when I lifted my foot from the accelerator, the car kept hauling. If the tach still worked, I'd guess it was right at the rev limiter. Even with the mediocre front disc and rear drum brake system, I was able to get that tank down from ~70 mph to a stop by the end of the offramp.

As it turned out, the accelerator linkage broke and got stuck in the fully open position. A paperclip fixed this and got me home without blowing anything up.