Have a problem with pointing out the truth. The FACT is that the lexus can be shifted to neutrral under runaway conditions. It has been proven TWICE and both were cited in this thread.
To explain it in simple terms for simple people:
The cause of the runaway was Toyota's fault. The deaths were due to driver error.
Harry K
If you are talking a diesel you are correct. On gasoline engines both air and fuel must be regulated TOGETHER. Either fuel is shut OFF or the throttle (air control) needs to be closed in concert with the reduced fuel flow.
MOST variable displacement engines disable the cyl by keeping the valves from opening as well as shutting off the fuel. Running an air compressor takes power. Bad for economy. An engine with all the valves closed requires very little NET energy because the copressed air stays in the cyl and pushes the piston back down again.
Just because there are two confirmed cases where it was proven that it _can_ be shifted to neutral under runaway conditions...
Harry K
/- Hide quoted text -
Damn. I have to go out and try teh "over the cliff" recovery maneuver now!
Waiting for sa's next strawman.
Harry K
Thinking about it might be helpful if you think the right thoughts and the exact same thing happens in reality that happens in your dream.
Just because actual practice isn't practical, doesn't mean you are excused from doing it.
Slamming into a concrete bridge abutment isn't practical either, but people still do it.
yes
Everybody and their brother hangs up a sign and claims to be a "computer tech". Do you also do clairvoyant tea leaf readings? Screen door repair?
Well, you still failed.
-snip-
I've never claimed to know anything about the computer under my hood. Are you saying that if a couple wires were abraded & shorted to the frame for a millisecond that wouldn't leave a code? And that is acceptable? [is that a mechanical or electronic problem? or do the mechanics say electronic and the electrical engineers say mechanical?]
Who knows what the professor actually did-- but on camera he completed a circuit and the car took off- pulled the wire & the engine went back to normal. no code.
No chance that the right 2 wires in that harness, when connected, could cause the fault?
I would say that whatever the cause- it *is* unlikely- because considering the number of those cars out there, a lot of them have had no problems. But I think there is a problem.
Jim
It's still not necessary to cut the fuel flow off *completely* in order to stop runaway acceleration.
For that matter, as has already been cited by Harry K, it's not necessary to cut the fuel flow off _at all_ -- the brakes alone are enough to stop runaway acceleration.
They have to be regulated together *under normal conditions* in order to maintain emission standards. That obviously isn't important in an emergency. Reduce the fuel flow to a trickle, and the engine *will* slow down, regardless of what happens to the airflow. Under runaway acceleration, the primary consideration -- indeed, the only consideration -- is the need to get the car stopped. Any damage that may or may not occur to the engine or the cat is of comparatively little importance.
Show us where what you claim above has been proven. I've seen people saying that a NORMAL functioning Lexus can be shifted into neutral. I've seen people report that Toyota has said that the shift linkage is only mechanical and it can be shifted into neutral while being driven. Neither of those proves that it's true under runaway conditions. As I've said before, unless you know the design of the car and what is linked to what, you are making assumptions unsupported by the facts.
If you have a link supporting that Toyota has tested shifting a Lexus into neutral on a track going at topspeed with full throttle, I'd be very happy to see it.
That would be a start. But then the other component would be that you would also have to know by design that nothing in the tranny could prevent it from being shifted, even if not designed to do so intentionally. I'd want to see exactly what prevents the shift lever from moving into ANY position under any circumstances. For example, is there a lock that keeps it from moving into park when the car is moving? And what determines that, how the mechanism works, etc. You would need to take apart the trannys from the wrecked cars and do a complete forensic investigation of the components.
I'm not saying it's likely all the cars could not be shifted, just that if we jumped to conclusions without ALL the facts, a lot more people would be dead today. Why do you think it takes so long for the NTSB to carefully analyze plane crashes instead of saying the pilot was stupid, he should have been able to land the plane?
Also note that I'm not saying how the cars are or are not designed or what caused anything. All I'm saying is that until more investigations are done and more facts are established, it's premature to be calling a dead CHP officer, among others, stupid for not being able to shift the car.
Actually, your whole approach to the problem is remarkably similar to Toyota's. For years they dismissed reports of both runaway acceleration and wrecks as driver stupidity instead of doing a complete investigation before jumping to conclusions.
e
I can. Neither of you knows exactly how the various systems on these cars work or are interlinked. Only a complete investigation which includes knowing how the cars are designed and actually analyzing the components from the failed cars will show whether the cars could have been stopped or not.
Following your approach, the NTSB would be wasting it's time taking years to investigate plane crashes. They could just arrive at the site and shoot from the hip.
september.org:
Thank you Jim. Good to see someone following the discussion agrees.
Nonsense. A computer in any reasonable context means a CPU of some kind executing a program defined by software. There most certainly are many computers in a car today. Aside from the ECU, there typically are CPU's for things like the ABS brakes, climate control, radio, GPS, air bag, etc. Some or all of those computers may be linked together, some may issue commands to others, etc, but that doesn't mean there are a lot more than 1.
dpb wrote: ...
Speaking of whom, I saw that by pure coinky-dinck that yesterday was his retirement flight shower landing day (along w/ one other longtime crew member also on the now-fabled flight)....
Hoping for a long and no water landings one...
--
And your source for that would be? Everything I've seen over the years is that there are more and more microprocessors, ie computers in cars. And that only makes sense as cars become increasingly complex. Do you really believe the radio, CD player, GPS, etc are all controlled by one computer and that it makes sense to do that, when you can have a cheap local microcontroller that tends to functions right where they need to be handled, eg radio, gps, climate control.
Here's a news story that says you are wrong:
snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote in news:hmoa3a$ncc$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:
OK,now tell us HOW you propose to "reduce fuel flow" other than adding more code to the existing computer programming,which you deny advocating.
The only point under discussion in *this* subthread is whether it's necessary to stop, or merely reduce, the flow of fuel in order to stop runaway acceleration.
Do try to keep up.
snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote in news:hmom8k$6pg$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:
IOW,you CAN'T. I've noted that you avoided answering the same question in my other posts.
Hide quoted text -
Help us out here and show us where that was proved. Perhaps I missed it.
It's incredible how quick you are to condemn drivers. Many drivers may have known what to do, but were unable to do it in sufficient time. If your car suddenly went to full acceleration in traffic with you in the left lane and you couldn't react to the totally unexpected and act, I'm sure you'd have a very different opinion. Hindsight is 20-20. You know the outcome was a total wreck. But if the car started accelerating in heavy traffic, with you in the left lane, going 70mph, what would you do? The standard reply here is turn off the car, shift to neutral, stand on the brakes as hard as you can. Is that what you would do in the first 1 sec? The first 2 secs? Or would you apply the brakes, increasing the distance between you and the car in front of you, while you figured out what was going on, what to do next and at the same time avoid hitting another car? My first reaction would be that maybe the cruise control is engaged. Figuring out how to disengage that on a rental car or even a car you drive regularly but don't use the cruise control, could consume precious seconds. And so it goes. The bottom line is I would not necessarily fault drivers or call them stupid unless you were in their shoes or know all the facts. And at this point, it's clear that no one, including Toyota, knows all the facts.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.