Good point about the many reports where people say the Toyotas accelerated far above the speed they were driving at before it happened. If they were mostly that they were driving at highway speed, but then couldn't stop, it would be easier to believe it was stuck mat, pedal, etc. It seems kind of illogical that you could somehow shove the mat forward enough into the pedal without knowing it.
In the cases where someone starts a car up and drives into a store it's a lot easier to believe they mistook the accelerator for the brake. I read about these a lot and the other factor is they are almost always elderly.
What is mind boggling is that you want to blame the victims for not being able to overcome something THAT SHOULD NEVER, EVER, HAPPEN.
The victims are 0% to blame.
If you are walking down the street and some thug shoots you, should I hold you partly to blame for not wearing a bullet proof vest when walking? After all, people get shot walking down the street every day in America. You really must be an incompetent idiot not to have taken that into account.
You make the mistake of generalizing on the basis of a too-small sample -- in this case, a sample of one.
Trust Mercedes to do something bizarre. Your car is the exception, I assure you. *Every* vehicle I have ever owned used a cable to activate the same pair of rear shoes or pads that were activated hydraulically by the service brake. That list of vehicles includes three Dodges, a Plymouth, a Ford van, a Fiat, a Chevy truck, a Dodge truck, two Mazdas, an Oldsmobile, two Buicks, two Suburbans, two Saturns, and a Pontiac. _Every_single_one_ used exactly the same pads or shoes for the parking brake as for the service brake.
"Should" ain't "doesn't" no matter what it is; if it's mechanical it can fail.
Not reacting properly when there apparently was quite a lot of time (evidenced by 911 call in the CA incident) makes the participant an (albeit unwilling) accomplice in the result of a failure (granted) not of their doing initially.
Unless there was a complete failure of the ignition system _and_ transmission shifter as well as the accelerator, then yes, there's no doubt there was operator error involved as well as the mechanical failure.
Nobody's blamed those involved for the initiating event; only questioned the outcome as being inevitable.
The counter example cited is too dissimilar to be of any import -- in that case the remedy is to take some unusual precaution a priori (of course, if one is proposing a walk in a particularly unsavory area after dark if just might not be so unusual to either choose another entertainment venue or take the precautions); in the case under discussion it's the lack of an appropriate response to the event after it has occurred when there is ample opportunity to take corrective action (and afaik there's no data that says such actions aren't possible).
So, I'll disagree with the assertion that there's no culpability in severity of outcome independent of the driver in the incidents until and unless it's shown that the remedial actions were unavailable.
I worded that clumsily- The car had the same uncontrolled acceleration problem the week before- so there is a good chance that that driver had jumped on the brakes once or twice. Ii should have said "brakes may have been compromised".
snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote in news:hmjnqc$5uh$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:
some cars with rear disc brakes use a tiny DRUM brake built into the rotor center for the "emergency" brake,because disc calipers need so much more force to be effective.
either way,cable brake force is NOWHERE near the braking power that hydraulic discs have.
If a a problem was reported by the previous driver, none of what you say is an excuse for lending it out. It might be an excuse for returning it to the owner, but not for lending it out without notifying the borrower about the problem that they couldn't find or fix.
Maybe, maybe not. Probably not.
What do you claim was in the manual that he didn't know? If there were something really novel, the dealership should have explained it. If it wasn't really novel, then he would have been able to turn off the car.
So the operator is supposed to do the job of his dealership's mechanic onto the dealership's loaner car? For a problem that the operator had no opportunity to become aware of until on the road way out somewhere?
(Or was the operator supposed to not leave the dealership after returning the car until the dealership confirms successful diagnosis and repair of the problematic loaner car being returned by the operator? And to verify that the dealership was not dishonest about successful diagnosis and repair of the dealership's loaner car after it's return to the dealership?)
*Programming* a throttle override by the brake? As in relying on lack of electronic malfunction in order to have the brake reliably apply an override onto the throttle?
Since the override becomes necessary only in the event of a throttle malfunction, for the override to not work would require a second malfunction. Clearly two simultaneous malfunctions are *far* less likely than any single malfunction.
For additional safety, a mechanical interlock could be constructed -- but the electronic systems are more reliable.
You do have a responsibility to your self and others to be properly trained in the use of any machinery, be it a table saw, pistol, punch press or automobile. Just as pilots train over and over how to handle a crippled aircraft, drivers should know emergency procedures.
What do you do if the hood flies up? Tire blows out run out of gas slush from a passing car blinds the windshield you hit black ice a car cuts in front of you the truck next to you drifts into your lane and a few hundred other possibilities. These thing happen every day and a competent driver knows how to handle them to avoid a crash. Some days I play the mental game of "what if" while driving. When the emergency presents itself, I should be better equipped to handle it.
The victim is 0% to blame for the fault, but has a lot of blame for the lack of ability to handle the situation safely. In most cases, I'd say 100%.
Not true, My Sonata has rear disc brakes, but the parking brake has shoes inside of a drum. I've tried stopping the car with it and doubt it would have a lot of effect at full throttle.
OTOH, it does have a throttle over ride if you stop on the brakes. Engine goes to idle no matter the pedal position.
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.