Slashdot Mirror
Toyota Recalls 625,000 Hybrid Vehicles Over Software Glitch
hypnosec writes: Yesterday we discussed news that over 65,000 Range Rovers were being recalled over a software issue. Not to be outdone, Japanese car manufacturer Toyota on Wednesday recalled 625,000 hybrid vehicles globally to fix a different software defect. The automaker said the defect in question might lead to shut down of the hybrid system while the car is being driven. The recall was due to software settings that could result in "higher thermal stress" in parts of a power converter, potentially causing it to become damaged. Toyota dealers will update the software for both the motor/generator control ECU and hybrid control ECU in the involved vehicles.
Oh wait, whats that about battery damage?
The automaker said the defect in question might lead to shut down of the hybrid system while the car is being driven.
Uh yeah. But you left out the only good quote in the article, which would have been better than the copy above: "In limited instances, the hybrid system might shut down while the vehicle is being driven, resulting in the loss of power, bringing the vehicle to stop," (sic) the car manufacturer said." This is not "shut down of the hybrid system", this is "shut down of the powertrain". Because it's a hybrid. That is the system.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I had a power conversion unit failure in my Prius just two months ago. It cost me $3400 to replace. Now this.
Fuck you, Toyota. Your Prius is going straight to the crusher the next time it breaks.
Looks like the auto industry is following in the software industry's footsteps in adopting the attitude to release early at any cost, all else be damned, and patch later (maybe). We need to stop this in it's tracks with massive lawsuit action, jury's will likely rule against the car industry in this since almost everyone drives and is concerned about auto safety and there is historical precedent. Once there are a few billion dollar rulings against auto manufacturers, with any luck we can extend it to other types of software and make everyone's life a little better.
That way YOU could work on your own car again without an IT degree (not to mention breaking DMCA rules if you try to crack into your OWN car)...and you'd not be dependent on a software malfunction, nor have to worry about your car being 'hacked'...
Simple to use, simple to diagnose and repair.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Things are going to be like this from now on. Software bugs in your car's software are going to a part of life. Does car software auto-update yet? If not, that's another brilliant "solution" that someone is going to come up with to "fix" the problem. It won't fix it at all, of course, the problem is that car software is rushed out without testing to meet unreasonable deadlines set by marketing. Since features sell cars, the problem will never go away.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
So... would installing a wireless, GMS or even just bluetooth interface on all cars have cost more or less than recalling over 600k vehicles?
OTOH, unless you do it like Tesla, where internet access is part of the sale price, we'd have the same syndrome as with gaming consoles where software is released in a buggy state since it can be patched easily later on. With cars, that would not be a good thing.
it's means it is
the plural of jury is juries.
Dealer: Don't worry, sir, you can fix the windscreen wipers automatically turning off if the rain gets too heavy by upgrading to CarOS 2016, which also features a range of other enhancements we believe may interest you.
Customer: But CarOS 2016 is widely reported to need more processing power than my Car 2012 came with. Do I need to upgrade my hardware as well?
Dealer: Sorry, sir, but for safety reasons there are no user-serviceable parts in your Car 2012. We recommend upgrading to Car 2016, which is fully capable of running CarOS 2016 this week.
Customer: So by "upgrading", you mean "buying a new car", right? Well, I guess I have no choice. What was it I heard about the steering feature being updated in the new software as well?
Dealer: Actually it's been removed, sir. It's a safety issue. The manufacturer had reports that a couple of people fell asleep after 18 hours of driving without a break on long-distance straight roads, and scientific research shows that the risk of accidents is lower if the steering wheel is tied to hold it in place. Removing the steering feature will do that for everyone, automatically, making them safer any time they go for an 18 hour drive on a long-distance straight road.
Customer: Gee, that sounds a bit extreme. What if I want to turn a corner while I'm driving on a road with bends and junctions?
Dealer: Don't worry, sir. That issue has been logged in the tracker, and a workaround has been scheduled for the winter 2016 update to CarOS for those who still want to use the steering feature. I hear it involves adding a joystick, some sticky tape and a new subroutine written by the CEO's neighbour's daughter in JavaScript, so it will surely be very reliable and deal with the issue once and for all. As long as the release is out by the end of 2016, and you buy your car 2016 with a long-term support plan for the software, that update will be free. And it'll hurt my margins but I can do you a special deal on the long-term support plan as long as you buy it today: yours for only nine nine nine five.
Dealer: [Aside to audience] And if that update gets postponed into 2017, the out-of-contract support will cost them [pinky gesture] one million dollars! [Riotous evil laughter]
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
And still more deadly, despite the lack of software flaws.
I wouldn't mind interior door handles made from die-cast aluminum as apposed to cheap plastic either. {$30 for a plastic door handle, you're kidding?} My current vehicle has so many design flaws that didn't exist in older vehicles I've owned I sometimes think we are going backwards.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
OMG a vague possibility of the car losing power and rolling to a stop. High risk of at least someone being stranded, somewhere. This is a common risk with any car ever!
It's great that Toyota is fixing this minor issue, but is this actually Slashdot worthy?
Seriously! So fucking what?
I think you are romanticizing the past. Will you get rid of automatic chokes, electronic ignition too? I'm old enough to remember cars in those days. My 1972 Buick Le Sabre Estate Wagon had a very intricate starting procedure. You had to push the gas pedal all the way to the floor to set the choke. Then pump the gas pedal 2-3 times to prime the carb. Then you had to "crack" the gas pedal just the right amount. THEN you could turn the ignition key. Assuming the car turned over, it MIGHT start. Then, if it did not, you pumped the gas pedal one more time in case there was not enough fuel yet. Don't do it twice though. If you did, the engine was now "flooded" and you had to wait 15 minutes to try again. It's also possible that the one extra pump of the pedal flooded it. If you were lucky, the car started on the first try, but more likely it took 2, maybe 3 turns of the key to get the thing to start.
Today, you get in, turn the key enough to engage the starter. I you let it go, the car continues to crank until started. At least that's what my Expedition does. Anyway, it starts every time unless the battery is dead, or there is some other big problem. Sure, your old car was easy to work on. That's just another way of saying that it was always broken by today's standards.
Brawndo: It's what plants crave!
You know...I'd really pretty much like to go back to simpler cars, without all the computer bullshit, and make it mechanical again. Carburators, easy to use manual transmission, etc.
That way YOU could work on your own car again without an IT degree (not to mention breaking DMCA rules if you try to crack into your OWN car)...and you'd not be dependent on a software malfunction, nor have to worry about your car being 'hacked'...
Simple to use, simple to diagnose and repair.
Unfortunately older cars are gross polluters compared to newer cars. Older cars don't have any of the active passenger safety equipment that newer cars have and many of those systems don't work especially well without computers to operate them.
I work on cars for my entertainment, having ruined a good hobby in computers by making it my profession. There are advantages and disadvantages to all of the changes in the auto industry. I've found the sweet spot to be around 1995. I drive a '95 Impala SS because it has the best balance of the advantages of the newer technology (multiport fuel injection and plenty of power, overdrive transmission, four-wheel-disc antilock brakes, power-everything, decent fit-and-finish) and the advantages of older tech (easy to work on with plenty of room around the engine and transmission, true power steering gearbox with pitman arm, separate shocks and springs) so I can actually service the car at home without too many special tools. Before I knew how to work on cars I had an MN-12-based '93 Thunderbird that in hindsight was fairly easy to work on even if the 3.8L V6 had a significant design flaw, and I expect that the Panther-based Crown Victoria and Mercury Marauder are similar in construction given their design heritage.
We actually test-drove a couple of Chrysler 300s yesterday and I poked around under the hood a bit; they definitely are not as easy to service as the older stuff (especially the AWD version, which I would prefer) but are still easier to work on than just about all of the FWD stuff. The only FWD car that I've even come close to enjoying working on is my wife's Integra, the hood opens up very far and the cowl doesn't overhang the engine bay, so it's actually possible to reach stuff. Still harder than most RWD, but much less onerous than many others.
I do miss simple, but I don't miss 12 miles per gallon like I got in many older vehicles, nor do I miss having to make seasonal carburetor adjustments to keep it running decently.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
And still more deadly, despite the lack of software flaws.
That is true, but a lot of the safety benefits in modern cars come from primarily mechanical systems like seatbelts, crumple zones, airbags, and designing the outer areas to be less damaging to others in the event of a collision.
Some of the other big improvements in recent years might involve some software but it can still operate independent of the main control systems, for example rear-view cameras, and better exterior lighting. Even if you have sensor integration for things like blind spot warnings or the high-end headlights that run on semi-permanent high beam at high speeds but adapt to avoid dazzling other road users, the system as a whole doesn't need to be integrated into the basic control systems for, say, the engine, brakes, or power steering.
The trouble really starts when instead of operating a set of properly independent systems, the lines get blurred. Someone thinks it's a great idea to have the car automatically call for help if it's in a collision and the occupants are unable to do so themselves -- and that person is right, it is a significant benefit if the worst happens -- but then the easiest route to implement that feature winds up hooking the remote communications system into the same sensors as the airbags or the fuel injector control systems or the ABS so it can trigger at the right time.
Unfortunately, most vehicles have traditionally operated on relatively open architectures internally. Each part of the system assumes each other part is trustworthy and will co-operate properly when sharing resources like communications channels within the vehicle. But with so much dependency on software and so much complexity in each part of that software now, those old assumptions are not doing well. Throw in external interactions, from the emergency call feature to the anti-theft tracker to the car radio and on-board entertainment systems to the remote keyless entry system to the integral garage door zapper, and you have real potential for very bad things happening.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Looks like a good excuse to waste time with our friends at Tosche station!
Exactly. Yes, a vastly higher percentage of failures on modern cars are unlikely to be readily fixed by a handy owner. At the same time it is certain to be true that the absolute number of breakdowns is vastly lower, because they are so much more reliable overall.
I do miss simple, but I don't miss 12 miles per gallon like I got in many older vehicles, nor do I miss having to make seasonal carburetor adjustments to keep it running decently.
The early 80s had a lot of cars that broke the 50mpg barrier and throttle bodies didn't require seasonal adjustments, they also had timing chains instead of belts that are supposed to be changed every 30k miles like some of the mid 90s models. A yearly tuneup took about 45 minutes and involved a timing light, cap, rotor, plugs, and maybe plug cables.
You have got to be kidding. Yes, those cars were easy to work on, they had to be as they required constant service. Ever wonder why all the 'service stations' became 'mini-marts'? Because new, electronically-controlled, cars no longer provided the steady cash stream that all that mechanical crap did.
I remember when I was a kid in the 60s that a big part of the family vacation budget was 'get the car ready.' Going on any trip of more than a few hundred miles meant 'major tuneup' - points, plugs, distributor cap, rotor, idle adjustments, etc. And of course it had to be done ahead of time, because there was a fairly good chance that something would not be right and it would have to go back.
My current car has 102K miles on it, and the only service it has ever required is fluid and belt changes.
Wow...you sound like you had a bit of a junker (POS) car.
I had a used '78 280Z I bought in high school. It ran like a top. I just put the key in and turned the ignition one and off it ran.
Very little mechanical problems with it.
I rarely had to do much to it but change the oil filter in it along with the oil periodically.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Exactly.
Today's modern car got to be "twist and go" - you insert key, twist, and car is running. Doesn't matter if it's -40C or +40C (let's say -40F to 100F).
Hell, you can even put the wrong octane gas and it'll still work! (if it needs premium, you can put in a tank of regular and it won't kill itself from knock/preignition). The computer handles it just fine. And while not wholly recommended, normal consumer level cars that say they need mid-grade often run just fine on regular (I won't do it to say, a BMW, but a Toyota or Honda? Sure).
Plus, starting the car after it's been running for a while doesn't result in vapor lock.
And let's not forget all things mechanical are perfect, for more than one automatic transmission has needed recall because a hole was 1/32" an inch too small. (The hole was in the control unit - a mechanical computer, if you will).
In fact, if you want to "go back to the good old days" take up flying. Small piston single engine planes are purely all mechanical for the most part - the spark's done by magnetos, even. You manage the carburettor (some have fuel injection, but it's continuous, always spraying fuel), the mixture, etc.
And many pilots are anticipating the day when instead of all that, they have a simple throttle and the rest of that stuff is managed by a computer (FADEC - Full Authority Digital Engine Control) - two of them for redundancy.
Hell, with something as "complex" as a servo-controlled throttle has gotten rid of annoyances like stuck throttle cables.
The modern car is actually very freaking reliable. You won't believe how far some people will actually run them - they will buy a 25 year old car for $1000 and literally run it into the ground - oil changes? Well, they'll dump a quart in every month of so. Check engine light? Been on for 10 years, if it hasn't burned out yet. Yeah, it doesn't perform as good, the transmission is laggy and all that, but even a simple tune up costs more than the car's worth.
After all this is such a minor little bug, hardly even an annoyance, having the entire vehicle shut down while you're driving it.
The only two cars that I am aware of that were sold in the US that even came close to what you're suggesting were the early CVCC-based Honda Accord and the Suzuki Swift, sold as the Geo Metro here. Fuel economy was the only thing going for these cars.
It's unfortunate, but size really is equated with comfort and luxury, and often for good reason as size gives room for features and room for the occupants find a comfortable seating position, and longer and wider wheelbases usually make for more comfortable rides so long as the suspension is calibrated for the weight of the vehicle and the passengers (as opposed to a cargo load that may or may not be present), as the longer wheelbases usually put the passengers further away from both suspended axles.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
That's because you had a Datsun and later Nissan. American cars through the 70s and 80s were quite terrible in terms of reliability. That said my 87 300zx did have leaky fuel injectors which causes many a deadly fire. Nissan had a recall notice on it so I brought it in before I ever encountered such a fate. Of course two months later the AC stopped working due to a crack in a radiator hose. With pressure restored AC would not turn off until the car overheated and blew the top of the radiator off.
Contrast that today with my Infiniti G37 which had an absolute perfect track record for 6 years before the slave cylinder on the clutch decided it didn't want to hold hydraulic fluid anymore. Fortunately Infiniti roadside assistance took the car and replaced the clutch all under warranty. Some of that was probably me driving like a jackass though. Apparently it was a known issue among the mechanic circles but didn't happen enough to merit a recall.
I spent many hours on that 300zx and I only have to deal with oil changes for my G37. Cars have come a long way. At least there is no longer calibration for carbs, that at bit many a classic car owner especially if they use too much either to start it up.
There were a lot of them and even some of larger vehicle like the buick century were getting in the 40mpg range
http://www.mpgomatic.com/2007/...
if (headlights draining too much power to operate safely) then shut off headlights
Anyone see a flaw in this, say, driving at 80 mph on the highway at night?
Engineers should not fight the wrong fight
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Electronic fuel injection became popular because of the benefit of fuel efficiency mandated by the federal government. Fuel injection also makes the car more reliable and will not need adjustment every 20,000 miles or so like a carburetor would.
There is nothing that says you can't change your own ECU in your car to an aftermarket one. Here are several that will fit most engines... http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1311.R1.TR10.TRC0.A0.H1.Xfule+injec.TRS0&_nkw=fuel+injection+kit&_sacat=0
Most of these kits are as easy as swapping out to a new carburetor. It will void your factory warranty but so would putting an aftermarket carburetor on your engine as well. Also, more DMCA problems either going to an aftermarket injection system.
Depending on how much you want to spend and how popular your car is, you might even be able to find an intake manifold for your engine to swap it back to a carburetor. Most Chevy, Ford and Mopar V8 have that option available to you. I do know of some 6 cylinder intake conversions. 4 cylinder engines are going to be tough.
If you really, really want a carburetor for a 4 cylinder I would bet dollars to doughnuts that a muffler shop could make you an intake for any carburetor that you brought them to fit your engine.
As for manual transmissions, it is easy to swap your auto transmission for a manual one. I did it myself for a 1992 Toyota Supra Turbo. If your car has a manual transmission version, go to the junkyard find the manual version, get the pedals, the master cylinder and manual transmission. Yank out the auto trans along with the ECU for the auto trans and put it in the trash. Install all the manual parts... Profit!! If you don't feel comfortable doing it, there are plenty of repair shops that will do it for you. You can now work on your own car.
If there is something on your car that you can't repair yourself, replace it with something you can. You don't have to keep any of the powertrain in your car that you don't want there. The only thing that you have to worry about is emissions if you have that in your state.
I swapped out the engine from a 6 cylinder 1978 Datsun 280z to an LS3 motor and trans. There are even kits to buy on the internet to make it a bolt up option. The year that I did the swap, there was one more year that the car had to pass emissions. The almost new LS3 V8 easily passed emissions for the 1978 inline 6 cylinder.
Something tells me you are just afraid to work on your own car, or just don't want to any more.
Your 1978 Datsun 280z was fuel injection and probably an automatic trans. Plus it was Japanese.
Not to be outdone, Japanese car manufacturer Toyota on Wednesday recalled 625,000 hybrid vehicles globally to fix a different software defect
I'm glad the recall is to fix a different defect. I would hope Toyota wouldn't recall some of their cars to fix a software defect that only exists in Land Rovers.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Range Rover recalled over 65,000 cars? It wouldn't happen to be 65536 cars, would it? That might be a clue.
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
Not that big of an issue to me.
Well, I've got a good job and can afford the gas. I lost a a 1986 Porsche 911 Turbo to Katrina...on a good day it used to get about 10mpg...it wasn't really street legal tho.
I've just come into some money, right now I'm looking to get maybe a '76-'77 Trans Am 455 4-speed. They can be had restored in the $20K range.
I'm looking to put a slightly more aggressive crank in it..and boost the lethargic stock 200 hp or so it had to near 500hp. I'm also looking to make it more of a resto-mod type deal...with a better more modern suspension to it.
Back in the day, yes, this thing got maybe 10mpg...I don't expect much more today, but like I said, I have a good job and can afford it, and it will be my secondary 'fun' car for mostly on weekends or errands around town, not like I"ll be taking family vacations out of state with it.
But I do miss that rumble of the engine, and the torque from them.
And...it doesn't look like every other cloned car out on the roads today...nice to have something unique to play with. And...pretty straightforward to work on.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Those mpg figures from back then were from a different set of tests and were far from reality. We owned a 1982 Cutlass Ciera. 40 mpg? If you were traveling downhill AND had another car pushing from behind.
You don't really believe those numbers, do you? That chart claims that the Dodge Omni got 35 city and 55 highway. Two years later, according to the EPA the same car got only 26 city and 35 highway. What happened in those 2 years to cause a 33% reduction in mileage? Better testing.
I have owned an 82 cavalier, datsun 310, buick century, and pontiac 6000 all of them except the datsun 310 got that or better. The datsun was a stick, I was 16, and drove it like I was on a race track. A lot of those engines went from 1.7 - 1.8 to being 2.0 in 83-84 and they also had new emissions systems and new throttle body type not compatible with the 82.
I have NEVER owned an automatic transmission car in my entire life. Always manual...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
You're going to need a lot more than a crank to get those kind of horses out of a smog-era Trans-am. My brother had a '77 with the 455 and the compression in that engine is so low that you're talking at least new pistons plus the associated bore/hone/bearing job, and if you want those 500 ponies to not grenade you'll need a forged crank and probably H-beam rods, plus if they cheapened the transmission as the HP dropped and didn't need to be so strong, you'll probably have to replace that. Then there's the differential, which probably is highway-geared somewhere around 2.7:1, and you'll need at least 3.2:1 to be fun, probably more like 3.5:1 or 4:1 depending on what you want it to do. Then there's the crappy open-chamber heads, the inefficient intake manifold the carburetor sized for the existing powerplant, the logs they used for exhaust manifolds, etc.
You undoubtedly can make that car go fast, but it's going to cost you a lot more than $300 for a cam and a set of lifters.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
my 86 300zx has never, ever, ever skipped a beat.
That can NOT be correct...1976 was the LAST year for the 455 big block engine.
The '75-'76 were quite air restricted and all, but they still had the same power plant and all of the earlier cars, so they just need a little help to coax those horses back out.
But the '77 cars and on, were MUCH weaker and the 400 engine was the highest option after that.
I plan to do a bit more than just the crank...but you don't have to do a complete engine overhaul with the older ones like you'd have to do with the later ones.
1976 was also the last year of the round headlights on them...after that, it was the eagle eye Smokey and the Bandit style.
Just a piece of trivia...S&TB was supposed to be filmed a year or two earlier. They actually had to take some '76's and put '77 front nose caps on them to match with the others. But some of those cars, especially the ones barking the tires are NOT automatics, and they were not '77's..they were re-branded '76s.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I had meant to say cam, not crank in my previous reply.
It probably was a 400 in his car. Definitely the Bandit-era look to it.
Most of the seventies cars that I've played with (admittedly mostly Mopars) were much weaker than the cars from the sixties; power continued until about '71 or '72 and then dramatically fell-off with low compression. Chrysler discontinued the dual-quad and six-barrel carb options before '73 on both the small block and big block engines, and '78 was the last year of Chrysler's now-detuned big block in any passenger car, though it continued in light trucks for a couple more years. When my father bought his then-new '73 Charger SE the most powerful combination available was the 440 4bbl, presumably either a Thermoquad or an AVS.
I just wish that the emissions testing regimen would be revised for cars over a certain age. Everything '67+ that had to be emission-tested when it was built still has to be tested here, but engine tech and exhaust tech advances mean that most of the early emissions devices aren't needed but still have to be present to make the car pass an inspection.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.