Drivers Blamed For Out of Control Toyotas - Again

PolygamousRanchKid writes "An intensive 10 month investigation into possible causes of unintended acceleration in Toyota cars found no fault with the automaker's electronic throttle control systems, the Department of Transportation announced Tuesday." Didn't the NHTSA say essentially the same thing last July?

Comments

Just to clarify..

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Drivers Blamed For Out of Control Toyotas - Again

Since none of you actually RTFA's, I thought I'd do my good deed for the day and point out that they mean the people behind the wheel are the problem, not the gas pedal drivers.

Re:Just to clarify..

[Gohtar]

Windows has detected a Gas Pedal compliant device and is attempting to find the drivers for it. Windows could not find drivers for your device, the device may not function properly until the drivers are installed.

Re:Just to clarify..

[blair1q]

Since one of the people behind the wheel was Steve Wozniak (previous slashdot story hyperlinked here), and he said he'd actually been able to replicate unchecked acceleration by the cruise-control system, I'm not trusting Toyota.

They have a vested interest in not finding a cause. He could not have any possible interest in making a claim of observing a misbehavior in a car he likes to drive.

Nor should anyone at Toyota trust Toyota.

Nor would I trust the government. They're not likely to be bringing A+ talent to the party.

Re:Just to clarify..

[angelwolf71885]

WARNING: the device " Gas Pedal " has performed a fatal operation

Re:Just to clarify..

[c0lo]

When there is a crash, logging stops and it all gets dumped to permanent storage.

And the rest of the data after the major crash is captured by the extra added layer of "Telepathy Controlled Protocol" - good that we are forced now to tap into IPv6 address space.

Re:Just to clarify..

[oracleguy01]

They have a vested interest in not finding a cause.

While I'm unsure if there is indeed an actual software problem, you kind of do have a point. If I'm not mistaken drive by wire type systems for other things like planes are more regulated and have more legally required testing.

Toyota and the other car companies do have a vested interest in it not being a software glitch because it would cause a huge public outcry. Lawmakers would probably add new regulations to make them put their hardware through more rigorous testing and possibly 3rd party code inspection. Which I'm not against actually but the car companies would hate it.

Not to mention that it would open the door for lots of lawsuits claiming such and such happened due to a software fault in the car.

Re:Just to clarify..

[amiga3D]

They have a vested interest in finding the cause....just not in making it public. Certainly in any system that relies on computer control glitches are possible. Finding an obscure bug can be next to impossible.

Re:Just to clarify..

[mirix]

Not every accident involves a car being ripped to 30 pieces. Seems perfectly feasible that the brake and gas pedal are still connected to the ECU shortly after the accident.

Whereas planes generally end up in pieces...

Re:Just to clarify..

[Quiet_Desperation]

collecting the pitch/roll/yawn as well as the engines RPM's and level of fuel-tanks

The level of yawns might be a clear indicator of what caused the crash.

Re:Just to clarify..

[nitehawk214]

Any crash you can walk away from is a good crash.

Re:Just to clarify..

[commodore6502]

I don't buy the National Transportation Board's results. Especially given Congressional testimony by one of those drivers that she *shifted to neutral* and the car still kept accelerating.

And then of course Toyota admitted that the car ignores such inputs. Seems like a problem with the control logic.

Also this isn't Toyota's first problem. They've had previous engineering mistakes, like a V-6 engine that ran too hot, turned the oil to sludge, and died after 20-30,000 miles. THEN to add insult to injury, Toyota blamed the drivers for "failure to change oil" even though drivers had dealer records proving they serviced the car on schedule.

That led to a class-action lawsuit - Toyota versus U.S. and Toyota lost.

Re:Just to clarify..

[Electricity Likes Me]

The lack of skid marks indicating braking action should be a fairly good indication it wasn't the care though. The braking system in all cars is power-assist, but still directly mechanical. Couple that with the observation the brakes can overpower the engine in all the Toyotas this complaint is aimed at, and it's a fair guess that "dangerous stupidity" is being rewritten into "car fault! Clearly! I'm calling my lawyer"

I mean, we have a model of this type of event before. Just now we have a new boogieman in the form of computers.

Re:Just to clarify..

[FrameRotBlues]

But you'd have to know what it does, and then trust it to work as expected. If it were to disconnect the batteries, would it also remove the power of power-assisted steering and/or brakes? Headlights or hazard lights?

That circuit would also introduce more expense, more wiring points, and therefore more points of failure. If someone thought it was fun to hit the e-stop while the car was under load (going up a steep hill), and it failed (contacts welded together) after the 99th time of that kind of practice, who would be at fault? Does that qualify as operator abuse? How would that/could that be logged?

I wrote this farther down and I'll copy and paste it here:
I work with industrial controls for a living, and while I understand the necessity of e-stops in an industrial situation, those situations are not encountered by the public - the operator requires extensive safety training of that machine first and foremost. Just like you wouldn't expect your 5-year old to operate your table saw with no prior training, you cannot expect an e-stop button to solve the problems that a mentally incompetent operator can bring to the table. Drivers already have a way to disable their vehicle - the ignition switch. Whether or not they think about using it is a training/human issue. Providing one or 10 local emergency stops does not change the fact that it is a training/human issue.

Re:Just to clarify..

[tbannist]

I'm not sure Steve Wozniak's story is relevant. After doing a bit of research, I found another site that paraphrased Wozniak's own (alleged) explanation of the problem that should be linked from the story you linked. It seems his acceleration problem is that if he presses the "go faster" button on the cruise control 10 times (or more) in a row in rapid succession, the car goes faster than he wants it to go.

I'm not sure that's actually unexpected behaviour.

Re:Just to clarify..

[Macman408]

I'm a Mac geek. I love Woz. But I trust Toyota more than I trust him on the matter, and here's why.

I own the same car as the one Woz noted his problem on; a 2010 Prius V (now called the Prius Five for 2011), with the Advanced Technology package. This means it has the radar cruise control.

The way cruise control works in some cars, like my dad's old Honda Accord is this: you press the button/lever to set a speed. Then, you press and hold a button/lever to accelerate. When you release the button, that's the new set speed, and there's no more acceleration.

In the Prius Woz and I have, it's a bit different; there's a screen a bit to the right of the speedometer that shows the radar cruise control status, including the set speed. Each time you nudge the cruise control stalk up, the set speed goes up by 1 mph. If you hold the stalk, it jumps up in increments of 5 mph. This has no relation to your current speed; if I'm at 50 mph, I can nudge it 5 times to set it to 55 mph, and my actual speed will only be at 51 mph by the time I'm done - so the car keeps accelerating until it gets to 55, a while later. If the car is at least 5 mph below the set speed, it'll open the throttle all the way, and accelerate much more rapidly than normal; so if you nudge the cruise control stalk up enough times, eventually it'll accelerate as fast as possible, until reaching your new setting. This is probably the "unintended acceleration" Woz experienced: After nudging it enough times, the difference between the set speed and the current speed is >5 mph, causing faster acceleration. In a different car, nudging it repeatedly like that would repeatedly accelerate a fraction of a mph, then keep the current speed as the new set speed, and would never continue accelerating past the time that you release the cruise control lever.

Steve also mentioned that nudging the lever down has no effect until he's done it 10 times or more - well of course not! While he's in his rapid (perhaps not intended by him, but it's what he told the car to do) acceleration, he nudges the lever down 10 times - and by that time, the car's speed and the set speed are back at the same level, so it stops accelerating.

I can't say I blame Steve though - he's not the type of guy that's likely to have the time to read the manual for his car (he admitted being very busy, otherwise I expect the nerd in him would be like the nerd in me, prompting him to read it at least twice). He probably assumed it behaves like his last car (or my dad's Honda Accord, or many other cars), where it will stop accelerating once you release the lever - rather than increasing the set speed on the screen while you hold the lever, and then continuing to accelerate to that speed after the lever has been released. (Rereading his comment on /., I note he also said this: "I am sure you can't turn the car off with the keyless power button..." This is certainly wrong - when the car is in motion, you can turn the car off by holding the power button for 3 seconds - another behavior mentioned in the manual.)

Finally, Steve told Wolf Blitzer that his problem was more akin to a button on the radio not working, as he could always cancel cruise control or press on the brakes and it would stop accelerating - so even if you believe his assessment, it's his personal opinion that it's a "surprising behavior", and not a safety issue. He also clarified that after he initially mentioned the problem, it became clear that his issue was distinct from the others reported in the media, and he didn't know if it was a widespread problem, or confined to his single car - but in any case, using the brakes always worked to stop the car, unlike most of the unintended acceleration cases in the media.

Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[ustolemyname]

What they also confirmed was that mechanical issues were a factor. Just because there is no fault with the electronics doesn't mean the machines were perfectly fine.

So far there are three known causes of unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles: improperly installed floor mats, sticky pedals, and driver error.

That's the second paragraph of TFA. What, submitters don't RTFA anymore?

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[treeves]

That does not conflict with the summary or the /. headline. "Driver error" is included in the list, and the submitter did not say that was the ONLY cause.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[arcsimm]

The summary is reasonably accurate: the NHTSA noted that while those are known problems, the "vast majority" of reports were most probably caused by driver error. NASA even noted that the frequency of reports was most directly correlated to the amount of media attention the issue had received, and not at all with design changes.

In short, this was the Audi 5000 all over again, and people need to learn how to drive instead of blaming their mistakes on their cars.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[h4rr4r]

No, this is a simple user error. Besides mechanical linkages get stuck all the time. I used to have a 1987 corolla that had that problem in its old age. As I am not incompetent I was able to unstick it by popping the gas. If I could not have unstuck it I would have put the clutch in or shifted to neutral.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[MasaMuneCyrus]

Your entire point is moot because
1.) In a drive-by-wire system the brake always takes priority over the accelerator and there is at least double, if not triple redundancy in anything that could ever possibly fail. In the even more unlikely scenario of all redundancies failing, all drive-by-wire systems I'm away of cut the engine. In addition, brakes are never brake-by-wire, and the handbrake works, too.
2.) Toyota's drive-by-wire system didn't fail even once.
3.) The chance of every piece of a drive by wire failing in such a way as to cause your car to accelerate uncontrollably is probably similar to your chance of being struck down by a falling meteorite. In the unusual even that it does happen, you can shift your car into neutral to stop.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[StikyPad]

So far there are three known causes of unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles: improperly installed floor mats, sticky pedals, and driver error.

"But I repeat myself." (With apologies to Mark Twain).

Just because there is no fault with the electronics doesn't mean the machines were perfectly fine.

True, but just because the machines weren't perfectly fine doesn't mean it's not the driver's (or owner's) fault. Essentially these are all issues that the operator is responsible for, *especially* ensuring proper operation of the controls before taking the vehicle out on the road. Even in the (thus far) fictional scenario where an electronic malfunction sends the vehicle into WOT, if you don't know how to mitigate that by shifting into neutral and/or turning off the engine then you've directly contributed to the end result. Yeah, sometimes people panic and do the wrong thing, but that's still the individual's fault.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[demonlapin]

A couple of incidents made the news, a few stations publicized it, and a bunch of people jumped on the bandwagon thinking they'd get big bucks in a settlement.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[amiga3D]

Actually the F-16 had an inordinate number of problems. Unfortunately since it's a single engine fighter (idiotic) these generally resulted in lost hardware. We nicknamed it "the lawn dart."

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[burnin1965]

There was non of this when the throttle body was an actual link to the accelerator.

From the NHTSA recall database...

CHRYSLER SEBRING 1997 ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 2.5L V6 ENGINES, THE THROTTLE CONTROL CABLE CAN FRAY CAUSING THE THROTTLE TO BIND OR STICK. THIS COULD POTENTIALLY RESULT IN A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

DODGE RAM 1995 PICKUP TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH DIESEL ENGINES. THE THROTTLE CABLE COULD UNRAVEL (FRAY) OR BREAK RESULTING IN LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL. A THROTTLE THAT DOES NOT RETURN TO IDLE COULD RESULT IN UNEXPECTED ACCELERATION, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.

FORD ESCAPE 2001 SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH SPEED CONTROL. THE SPEED CONTROL CABLE CAN HAVE A CRACKED OR MISSING SPEED CONTROL CABLE SERVO CAP LOCATING TAB. THE LOCATING TAB COULD ENTER THE SERVO CLUTCH CAVITY AND INTERFERE WITH THE SPEED CONTROL SERVO CLUTCH. ALSO, WATER COULD ENTER THOSE UNITS THAT CONTAIN A CRACKED OR MISSING SERVO CAP LOCATING TAB, EVENTUALLY CAUSING CORROSION THAT COULD INTERFERE WITH THE FUNCTION OF THE SPEED CONTROL. IF EITHER OF THESE CONDITIONS OCCURS AND THE SPEED CONTROL IS USED, THE SPEED CONTROL COULD PREVENT THE THROTTLE FROM RETURNING TO IDLE, RESULTING IN A STUCK THROTTLE. A STUCK THROTTLE COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.

FORD F150 1998 THE THROTTLE IS UNABLE TO RETURN TO IDLE DUE TO ICE FORMING IN THE THROTTLE BODY WHEN THE TEMPERATURE RANGES FROM -10 TO -40 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT. INCREASED BRAKE PEDAL EFFORTS OR SOME INCREASE IN STOPPING DISTANCE COULD RESULT.

KIA SPORTAGE 1996 THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ASSEMBLY COULD BIND OR STICK DURING OPERATION. THIS CONDITION CAN CAUSE THE ACCELERATOR TO HOLD THE THROTTLE PARTIALLY OPEN, RESULTING IN LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL INCREASING THE RISK OF A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.

CHEVROLET CAVALIER 1996 THE ACCELERATOR CONTROL CABLE COULD HAVE BEEN KINKED DURING ASSEMBLY CAUSING HIGH ACCELERATOR PEDAL EFFORT, STICKING ACCELERATOR CONTROL CABLE, OR A BROKEN ACCELERATOR CONTROL CABLE. IF THE ACCELERATOR CONTROL CABLE STICKS OR BREAKS, UNWANTED ACCELERATION AND/OR LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL CAN RESULT INCREASING THE RISK OF A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.

FORD F600, F800 1990, 1991 THE THROTTLE CABLE WHICH RUNS FROM THE ACCELERATOR TO THE GOVERNOR ASSEMBLY HOUSING MAY HAVE BEEN KINKED DURING ASSEMBLY, CAUSING EXCESSIVE WEAR OF THE CABLE HOUSING INNER LINING. THIS COULD RESULT IN EITHER FRACTURE OR STICKING OF THE CABLE. IF THE THROTTLE CABLE FRACTURES, ENGINE SPEED WILL RETURNTO IDLE. IF THE CABLE JAMS OR STICKS, THE ENGINE WILL REMAIN AT THE SPEED ATWHICH IT WAS RUNNING WHEN THE JAMMING OCCURRED. A STUCK THROTTLE COULD RESULT INLOSS OF CONTROL AND AN ACCIDENT.

FORD RANGER 1990 THROTTLE LEVER MAY CONTACT THROTTLE BODY AIR INLET TUBE, WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR THROTTLE REMAINING OPEN FOLLOWING RELEASE OF THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL FROM THE FULL-THROTTLE POSTION IN TRUCKS WITH 4.0 L ENGINES. UNCONTROLLED ACCELERATION COULD CREATE LACK OF CONTROLAND CAUSE AN ACCIDENT.

VOLKSWAGEN RABBIT 1984 THE THROTTLE SHAFT OF THE CARBURETOR MAY CRACK AND EVENTUALLY BREAK AT THE THREADED HOLE FOR THE THROTTLE PLATE CONNECTION DUE TO EXCESSIVE VIBRATION OF THE THROTTLE SHAFT. CONSEQUENCE OF DEFECT: IF THE THROTTLE SHAFT BREAKS, THE THROTTLE WOULD NOT RETURN TO ITS IDLE POSITION. THIS COULD RESULT IN LOSS OF CONTROL AND AN ACCIDENT.

So the accelerator problems started before fly by wire, I guess its time to give up on those new fangled throttle cables and springs, maybe go back to the buggy and whip. Just be sure to carry a pistol to shoot that horse if it accelerates out of control.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[fractoid]

I just have to wonder that if it IS indeed driver error, why so many more incidents with this make?

The error in question was choosing to drive this make? :P

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[Zancarius]

3.) The chance of every piece of a drive by wire failing in such a way as to cause your car to accelerate uncontrollably is probably similar to your chance of being struck down by a falling meteorite. In the unusual even that it does happen, you can shift your car into neutral to stop.

That's what I don't understand. There was at least one incident where the individual(s) involved in a fatal crash had sufficient time to phone 911 and describe their emergency but it didn't occur to them to pop the vehicle into neutral, use the handbrake, and pull over to diagnose the problem with the vehicle stopped?

I'm sorry, but if (if) the vehicle did anything unexpected to me, that'd be my first reaction. To hell with the engine--if it blows, it blows--they can be replaced, lives can't.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[noidentity]

I just have to wonder that if it IS indeed driver error, why so many more incidents with this make?

Could it be driver error that is made more likely as a result of a design issue in the car? Pedals too close together, feel too similar, some shit like that?

You assume that every make of car has an equally-distributed demographic of user. Let's say that a particular model appeals mostly to teenagers, and another appeals mostly to old people. If you saw an increase in wrecks in one or the other, it could be due to the model, or teens/old people.

Re:Mostly true, but slightly spun summary.

[arcsimm]

Correlation does not imply causation, but it it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively. The Toyota unintended acceleration problem has all the hallmarks of a self-perpetuating media feeding frenzy, and none of the empirical evidence that's come to light suggests that, beyond a few mismatched floor mats or a very rare mechanical defect in the gas pedal, the real problem is that most of the American driving public would rather have a convenient scapegoat rather than own up to the fact that they can barely distinguish the gas from the brake.

Heard this before a few times

[rasper99]

Same result starting with Audi 25 years ago and many more since then.

PEBSWAC

[MrEricSir]

Problem Exists Between Steering Wheel And Chair

Re:PEBSWAC

[v1]

so, more evidence supporting the popular conclusion that people are just looking for someone to blame for their panic-stomp-on-gas-instead-of-brake reaction.

Either trying to avoid the insurance deductible, or the embarrassment of public knowledge of your bad driving I suppose.

Re:PEBSWAC

[Midnight Thunder]

So do we conclude pure user error or should we be considering a user interface design fault as well?

Good design should aim to reduce avoidable user error.

Re:PEBSWAC

[MrEricSir]

We can start by requiring alcohol manufacturers to make their bottles and cans an unusual shape that doesn't fit in any car's cup holders.

Re:PEBSWAC

[EdIII]

You know normally I would agree.

However, I remember the case of Koua Fong Lee who ended up in prison. I sincerely have a hard time believing that somebody with no history of mental problems, in a car with relatives, in a car with his wife and unborn child, would accelerate down an offramp into another car... on the way home from church.

In order to believe that Toyota has no defects I would have to believe this man just lost it and started screaming "no brakes! no brakes!" to his family while plowing into another car at 70-90mph. He also purportedly had plenty of time to stop starting at the beginning of the offramp, so it would have been a very prolonged panic-stomp-on-gas-instead-of-brake reaction. Which is strange, because if I recall correctly one of the reasons he ended up in prison was the very lack of tire tracks showing that he did brake which the prosecution used to show intent, not manufacturing defects in the car *because the onboard computer could not be wrong*.

So I still don't know about this and I have a vested interest in it not being true since I love Toyota. Had a Prius and hybrid Highlander. I want to get another one, but this situation still gives me pause.

Re:PEBSWAC

[green1]

"Paranoia" as you put it, while driving, is a GOOD THING. The single largest danger on public roads right now is that people don't realize how dangerous it truly is to operate a several thousand pound machine at speeds more than 10 times faster than they can run. Anything that makes people realize this, and gives them a way to safely bring a malfunctioning (for any reason) vehicle to a stop, is welcome in my books.

Beyond that, your assertion that people can disable their vehicle with the ignition switch is basically false in the vehicles being described here. To disable the vehicle you have to press and hold the start button for 3-5 seconds, this is not labelled in any way, is not intuitive, and is not something the driver has ever had to do in the course of their normal activities. In addition it is no where near "quickly", and it also relies on the same computer operating properly that you may be trying to shut down for a malfunction.

This is way beyond poor design, and in to things that should be criminal.

Re:PEBSWAC

[adolf]

Even with no assist from the engine, the brake pedal is physically connected to the brake pads via hydraulics. There is no way for software to prevent the brakes being applied if you put your foot on the pedal.

One word: ABS.

Give the pedal a good hard push on ice with bad tires, and you'll quickly see that there most assuredly is a software method to prevent the brakes from being applied.

Anecdotally, I've also experienced reduced braking power on more than one vehicle with malfunctioning ABS due to wiring faults and/or bad wheel sensors: If the system disables itself as it is supposed to, this isn't a big problem. If it has not yet detected the fault (and, mind you, it resets the fault indicator every time you start the vehicle), stopping even on dry pavement can rather more interesting than anticipated.

I'm not suggesting that this is a part of the Toyota problem. I'm merely suggesting that your absolute generalization is generally not absolutely correct.

Re:PEBSWAC

[on the 8ball]

His initial idiot defense attorney failed to present evidence from an insurance company investigator that showed the brakes WERE applied. Also his car had ABS brakes so there would NOT be any skid marks due to how they work. A total shaft job on this poor guy by the local prosecutor who deserves a spot in hell for it.

Then you have the state patrol officer in CA who was unable to stop his Toyota despite all his efforts. As captured by a 911 call during the event.

Also there is a college engineering professor in IL (?) I think, who demo'ed a way that the electronic control board could fail WITHOUT notifying the black box.

Finally, the govt report relies totally on the black box data, but if that was bypassed then all their conclusions are worthless.

Also if this is just due to driver error, why it is only happening mainly on Toyotas? Answer me that!!

So now it's official.

[cvtan]

The cars are not perfect, but they are smarter than the drivers that own them.

Re:So now it's official.

[noidentity]

Why don't DMVs have driving simulators where you train to handle adverse situations well? Hell, even common ones like a busy traffic light intersection would be good to train on, where things happen that are tricky to handle well. Do it many times and you learn to have the right response automatically. I'd have loved something like that.

Re:wait what?

[h4rr4r]

It can be all kinds of things, the design of the pedal or which brand of idiots by what car. What I do bet is that this does not happening in stick shift vehicles. I suggest banning slushboxes as a solution.

Re:wait what?

[zAPPzAPP]

If I would crash a Toyota because of my own idiocy, I know what I would claim... "Yes, the car accelerated on it's own, just like in the news!"

Well then ...

[PPH]

...we should be expecting new drivers on patch Tuesday.

No surprise really...

[Martin Spamer]

The incompetent are unaware of their level of incompetence and therefore must blame external elements. It called the Dunning Kruger effect.

Re:No surprise really...

[Beardo the Bearded]

It's got a real name now? Wow, I remember when that was just called the "wearing the juice" study.

Re:wait what?

[Dachannien]

If it was American drivers faults, why then did we not see a rash of similar accidents with other manufacturers vehicles?

If you had R'ed TFA, you would have R'ed this:

"Unintended acceleration is not exclusive to Toyotas," [NHTSA deputy administrator Ron] Medford said, pointing out that two-thirds of the unintended acceleration reports the agency has received in recent years involved vehicles by other automakers.

That's what you get for

[Arancaytar]

Installing that proprietary crap from the vendor. ... wait, not that kind of driver? Oh.

Because other drivers don't get off scott free

[SuperKendall]

If it was American drivers faults, why then did we not read about a rash of similar accidents with other manufacturers vehicles?

Fixed that for you.

We didn't read about this happening with other vehicles because other drivers couldn't get out of trouble by claiming it was the "car that did it" the way Toyota drivers could at the time.

No, there HAS to be a problem!

[CCTalbert]

Otherwise you can't have lawsuits and everyone receive lottery-like settlements!

Engineering and science must take a back seat on this one, driver error isn't an interesting enough answer.

Re:PEBWAC

[Man On Pink Corner]

Woz was talking about a different problem, something that affected the cruise control's control loop behavior at wide-open throttle. IMHO he was experiencing a corner case that had nothing to do with the sensationalized incidents.

The fact that so many of the drivers who experienced this particular "malfunction" were over age 60 tells you all you need to know.

Re:Everything old is new again

[Anonymous Coward]

What's that? A propendancy of incompetent douchebags who like, use, wear, drive the same item?

The car has "sudden" acceleration when you press the fucking gas pedal. You panic because you're a fucking idiot and thought you pressed the brake pedal. Instead of pulling your foot off the gas and pressing the brake pedal you press harder on the gas because you still think it's the brake pedal. Instead of slamming the car into park or reverse you keep on going down the freeway, parking lot, etc in a panic because you're a fucking moron.

These people all need their licenses revoked and to be issues permanent public transit passes, preferably tattooed on their forehead so they don't lose them.

Re:wait what?

[h4rr4r]

Which is easily accounted for with them selling a huge percentage of cars sold, and their incompetent 60+ target demographic.

Re:How does the actual system work?

[h4rr4r]

If your car suddenly accelerates and you cannot shift into neutral or press the brakes to stop it, you are not qualified to operate a motor vehicle.

Re:But... the Woz

[somersault]

Read the article the guy (kind of) linked to. Woz is talking about a cruise control issue, not a "sticky gas pedal" as others complain about. And hitting the brakes cancels the acceleration. Anyone who is using cruise control should be ready to hit the brakes, and even observing their speed from time to time, or at least be aware that the cars revs are rising and the world is moving by at a faster rate. It's not auto-pilot.

Re:But... the Woz

[h4rr4r]

Different problem. Read the Woz's description. His complaint is only about the cruise control.

There IS a problem with the cars

[Lucky75]

Just because they "found no problem" (publicly) with the cars, doesn't mean that there isn't one. I've experienced one of these things accelerating personally (multiple times, actually) and I can tell you that there IS something wrong with the cars. I didn't crash into anything, so I don't really have any reason to lie, Don't believe these "findings".

Re:There IS a problem with the cars

[h4rr4r]

Ok so we should believe you over the actual experts?

How is this for a little thought experiment;
Odds that their is some conspiracy to cover this up, vs the known fact that none of these drivers were capable enough to simply put the vehicle in neutral and might have been poor enough drivers to be actually standing on the gas and thought it the brake.

Re:There IS a problem with the cars

[PortHaven]

Ditto, I had a similar occurrence with my Prius. It's actually an older model. I suspect a glitch in the cruise control.

In my situation I hit the break, and slowed the car. But then it accelerated when I released the brake. The engine rev'd up. It did so the same way cruise control does if you've got a heavy load and hit a hill.

Re:wait what?

[h4rr4r]

I live in a city, I do fine. Most Europeans live in cities and they all drive standards.

Disappointed

[maugle]

I am very disappointed with these findings...

Back when they thought the car could just flip out and accelerate wildly, a Prius was a man's car! Oh, "I need some groceries, I guess I'll drive to the store in my ticking time bomb death machine!" You just can't get much manlier than that!

Now it's back to being a wussy hippiemobile.
Sigh.

Re:wait what?

[h4rr4r]

A standard transmission driver would have just pressed the brake and clutch at the same time. This means even if he was holding down the gas by mistake the car would have slowed down.

Automatics are terrible at getting you where you are going safely. I constantly see people using the brake in bad weather when down-shifting would be far safer. The same with going down steep inclines.

If you cannot put down the cell phone and big mac to shift you are not responsible enough to be operating a motor vehicle.

Not buying it....

[PortHaven]

As I had this happen myself. I do not buy the whole "human error".

And there might be a very very easy way to prove or disprove that statement. If it is human error, than the same incident should occur throughout all brands with approx. the same level of occurrence.

If it is happening significantly higher with Toyotas. Then there is clearly a non-human error issue. Simple logic here. But the fact that I had this occur to me once with my Toyota leaves me to suspect Toyota. Thankfully, I did not get into an accident. And within 2-3 seconds I got it to stop. (I do wonder if it might be tied to the cruise control system.)

NHTSA != Toyota

[DragonWriter]

Since one of the people behind the wheel was Steve Wozniak (previous slashdot story hyperlinked here [slashdot.org]), and he said he'd actually been able to replicate unchecked acceleration by the cruise-control system, I'm not trusting Toyota.

The results announced by the Department of Transportation were of the study conducted by the NHTSA (which, remember, fined Toyota for not responding promptly enough to the floor mat and pedal design issues) with the assistance of NASA, not by Toyota. So, whether you trust Toyota would seem to be irrelevant.

Nor would I trust the government. They're not likely to be bringing A+ talent to the party.

Trusting the government is, OTOH, at least relevant to the issue, since this was a government study. However, your stated basis for dismissing the government study (which amounts to "Steve Wozniak said something different, and the people working for the government are stupid") is pretty vacuous.

correlation != causation

[Surt]

Just because a lot of Toyotas are out of control doesn't mean there's a problem with Toyotas. Clearly, out of control drivers prefer to buy Toyota.

Really?

[neowolf]

So then a disproportionately high number of people who can't tell the difference between the brake and accelerator just happen to drive Toyotas or Toyota-built cars? Sorry, not buying it. There is a pretty serious design flaw at work here, and this report doesn't really exonerate Toyota.

Neurtal? We don't need no steenkin' neutral!

[Ungrounded Lightning]

A far simpler thing to do that will leave the power steering working is to shift into neutral.

Shift? Neutral? I thought we were talking about a Prius.

The Prius has no shift, no clutch, no neutral. It has a planetary gear system with:
  - The engine and one electric motor-generator (MG1) on one shaft,
  - another motor-generator (MG2, or "MGS" for "speed") on another, and
  - the drive shaft to the wheels on the third.
Transmission "shifting" is done by electronically controlling the relative speeds and torque directions of MG1 and MG2, transferring power from one to the other and/or between them and the batteries.

If the computer commands it to drive the car forward you have no way to intervene.

Who's going to repair Toyota's reputation?

[RogueWarrior65]

This sort of thing has me raising eyebrows. Toyota was crucified in the court of public opinion and hauled up before a congressional inquisition (NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!!) with few real facts to back it up. IMHO, those congressmen who went on a witch hunt owe Toyota an apology. Sure, companies need to admit and rectify problems but government and the media regularly get away with firebombing companies and regular people and they get away with it.

it's still Toyota's problem

[PJ6]

Anyone with engineering and manufacturing experience, particularly in an industry where your mistakes can kill people, would say that calling the cause "driver error" is a red herring, totally irrelevant. If they found, after controlling for age and demographic and whatnot, that Toyotas were causing deaths significantly more often than other cars (this is the case, right?), it doesn't matter what the cause is - it's a design fault. Period.

Re:PEBWAC

[Runaway1956]

Edge cases be damned. You kicked the car out of gear, intentionally or otherwise, it's up to you to get it back INTO gear, or shut the engine down, or sit there looking foolish after the engine comes apart spectacularly. As for the recent spectacular Toyota problems? I'd have to experience an instance to believe all the hype. I remember the MORON cop who claimed that his car was accelerating uncontrollably. What did he do? He called the police department, and asked that the intersection be cleared. They played his phone call several times. What did the cop NOT do? He didn't shift into neutral. He didn't turn the key off. He didn't downshift, which would have made the top speed of the vehicle much lower. He didn't intentionally drive into something with give to it. He did not try driving into something less lethal than oncoming traffic, such as a pond, a field, a ditch, or even some undergrowth among some trees. Back when the earth was much younger, and we had to watch for dinosaurs crossing the road, we had to learn DEFENSIVE DRIVING. Apparently, no one teaches real defensive driving anymore. Today, the term has a connotation of "bad driver, busted for DWI". In my high school, every student eligible to apply for a driver's license was REQUIRED to take defensive driving - even if he never intended to get a license! Defensive driving means, the very last thing you ever want to hit, is an oncoming vehicle. Hitting a rock wall is slightly more survivable, than hitting an oncoming vehicle. Hitting a large tree is even more survivable. Running through an orchard of smaller trees is vastly more survivable. It will take a lot to convince me that the vast majority of these accidents were caused by anything other than driver stupidity. Take control of your life. If you can't control that vehicle - meaning, if you don't know HOW to control it under any and all circumstances - then DON'T DRIVE IT!!! Oh yeah. I have had a throttle stick on me. Several times, in fact, in a Mack Cruiseliner. The solution was, to stick my toe UNDER the accelerator, pull up, stop the truck, get out, and replace the broken throttle return spring. Something any moron can figure out. Also, I had a sticky butterfly on an old carbureted chevy to stick a couple times. Lifting on the accelerator didn't solve the problem - but turning the key to "off" did the trick. Think fast, or die. I'm alive to talk about my experiences, so I guess I'm a fast thinker.