Oops! The 2010 Prius Manual Contradicts Toyota's Emergency Instructions

B is like a jake brake, but ONLY when there's no go-pedal demand
asserted. Otherwise, it's just like "D".
.
_H*

 

Exactly. Shift to B mode and take your foot off the gas, and the ICE is spun up as a jake brake. Press the gas a bit and the jake brake action stops. Press more and the ICE powers the car forward as normal.

Tom

 

Isn't the limiting factor on braking distance the adhesion of the tires to the road rather than the ability of the brakes to slow the wheels?

IIRC, when you push the brake pedal fast and hard, Brake Assist kicks in and all braking is by the discs

 

+1
Just checked - the same page is in my 2009 manual.

 

There is no so such wording in the manual for my 2007. So the question is, why did it get added for 2008 and beyond?

 

Hmm, maybe there will be a recall for the owner's manuals of the 2010 Prius and any others w/the bad advice....

IIRC, Honda a few years ago had a recall for some owner's manuals because a toll-free number for customer service or help in there was actually a phone sex #. I think someone must know the details on this and can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

There are multiple factors. Good tires and their adhesion is one of the most important ones, so do not buy junk tires.

But after that engine breaking is another factor which helps normal mechanical breaks in stopping the car. Also prevents brakes from overheating prematurely in severe braking conditions.

 

This doesn't mean anything to me.

Of course in a manual, Toyota cannot "recommend" shifting into Neutral or Powering off, it's would be dangerous under "normal" driving conditions.

But in described "emergency" situations? I still say, if the brakes aren't working, Neutral or Power Off are viable "emergency options". But it in no way suprises me that in a owners manual designed to communicate how to use the vehicle under "normal" circumstances there is a section warning people "not" to shift into other gears while driving and/or power off while driving...because "normally" it isn't a wise thing to do.

 

Has anyone actually tested that pressing P while in motion will only put the car in neutral? It sounds so wrong to do so....

 

I did try P (like many others) and my 2005 Prius simply goes to "N" (neutral)!

EDIT: and if I recall correctly it does a dual short "beep" while doing so.

 

Yes.


KTXL FOX40 - Sacramento breaking news, weather, sports and social media -- KTXL

 

Well in fact a Jake Brake, or actually an engine exhaust brake does turn off when you put your foot on the accelerator pedal.

 

This discussion falls into the category of "no good deed goes unpunished"

Toyota was considering, among other things, the emergency brake boost by the engine which is lost when the car is put in neutral. Of course, IF the engine is out of control, this boost may be useless, so there is not a single ideal instruction. Drivers are usually not responsive to nuanced instructions. This is not an easy trap to solve. The translation from Japanese to English did not help.

In a simpler world, it was assumed that a person was responsible to become familiar with the quirks of his car. Now it is up to the maker of the car to warn us of everything that MIGHT go wrong or PAY big time.

Since attitudes, perceptions, and abilities vary with people, this is asking more of car makers than is possible. We are watching the "perfect storm" which results from that.

It is absolutely amazing to me. We have better cars than ever before together with a high level of hysteria over how "dangerous" these cars are.

 

Now that you mention it I do remember that incident.

But you have to admit that would be a lot better than being stuck interminably in a phone queue listening to atrocious music. Another great idea from Honda!

 

The "do not under any circumstances" part of the wording is something that can easily be exploited in a courtroom. It could certainly be shown that a reasonable person could have read that phrase and taken it to mean that it includes emergency situations too because of the harshly all-inclusive wording. The manual implies that it could be a catastrophic mistake to shift the car into neutral or shut off power even in an emergency situation -- and that it would be a mistake to do such things even in an emergency.

That type of faulty wording is a serious mistake to put into a car manual whether it be a hybrid or not. And, it certainly could cause a liability issue if exploited. A reasonable person could be expected to take that advice literally. And, it is reasonable to take that advice literally because a reasonable person has not extensively studied the workings of this complex automobile and would have to take the advice of the Toyota engneers at face value as to what is safe procedure.

If you were taken into a nuclear submarine and shown by the engineers certain buttons (that operated a sprinkler system) to NEVER push while the submarine is in motion . . . then if there is an emergency fire you are not going to push those buttons because due to the complexity of the technology involved you are going to rely heavily on the literal interpretation of the expert advice given as being the safest. Those buttons could later be proven to be the way to have escaped from a tragedy. But, given the advice you had at the time you made the best decision based upon that expert advice.

Proving that a victim has read the owner's manual is a good legal defense (for the victim driver) in this situation because a Prius owner could reasonably deduce -- after having studied the owner's manual -- that it would be a catastrophic error to shut off the vehicle or try to shift the gear into P or R while driving. And, the victim could also go further and state that having read the manual's advice he felt safe to over-ride the advice of police dispatchers who may not have knowledge of procedure's of a rare and advanced automobile. In other words a Prius owner could believe that he was more of an expert on how to safely manage a runaway Prius because there is not much a chance that a 911 dispatcher has also read a Prius manual yet. The 911 dipatcher's advice could be outdated information for "regular" non-electronic shifting cars with keyed ignitions.

But, of course the Toyota defense could point to the other pages which mention the concession that it may be possible to turn the power to the car off in an emergency by holding the power button down for three seconds. So, if you had read the first advice but missed the second part you would have had the problem. Ultimitely you would say that the owner is given conflicting advice in the manual: that he should NEVER turn off the car or shift into neutral while driving because he will lose control of the vehicle at high speeds . . . and then later that maybe . . . well . . . if you really need to shut off the car in an emergency . . . here is how to do it.

If this issue were brought into a courtroom I would think that if the first advice to never turn off the vehicle or shift into neutral while driving stood alone then it could easily help the victim to win the case against Toyota. But, as long as the other section about how to turn off power in an emergency was included in that manual then it certainly helps to break apart the "faulty owner's manual" argument of the Prius owner and place some liability back on the driver for operator error.

It would be really wise to get the manuals rewritten soon. But, of course that will imply fault for Toyota -- that the manuals have been incorrect in a serious manner. I know this sounds nit-picky, but in a court of law those details could show life and death liability.

I personally think that the adaptive cruise control is scaring the hell out of less-sophisticated drivers when it kicks in and takes control of the throttle -- a feeling of a ghost in the machine. This leads to fear and panic and bad decisions. Also, it takes compsure to remember to hold down the power button for three seconds or hold the shift lever for five seconds -- and, that composure is lost in the panic of certain types of untrained people. In a panic most people fall back into old behavior habits. And, cars with three second power buttons are not part of the old pattern of driving a car. Maybe they need to install the old standby big red button that says: "In Case Of Emergency Press Here" which shuts off the engine with a single tap.

 

Good post. I agree with you. Couple this with the police report and that tells me Sikes will never be prosecuted even if Toyota thinks he is guilty as hell...

 

Timpy
Welcome to PriusChat. I definitely see merit in your carefully worded post.

I have also decided not to own a car with the adaptive cruise control for the reasons which you mention.

But the emergency brake boost is FAR more likely to be useful than the putting the car in neutral. If a collision is imminent the emergency brake boost could be a life saver. Putting the car into neutral would eliminate the emergency brake boost. If the "reasonable" course of action is to dumb down the car so that it is overall less safe, that will serve no one.

I suspect that part of the problem is that Toyota engineers do not believe that runaway acceleration is caused by the car and that the company chooses not to offend the drivers. What the company should be doing is quietly encouraging its older drivers to install hand controls. And they should say in the manual IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR CAR IS RUNNING AWAY PUT IT IN NEUTRAL. Then make sure you are applying the brake to stop the car.

There is a lot more anger than there are accidents out there. Maybe people just need a "punching bag". The issue is not the car. The issue is that people are mad and they need blood.

If I were running Toyota, I would very politely say, "America we are doing our best. We see that this is not satisfactory to you. We have begun the process of closing down our American operations. We will maintain a small staff to support our loyal customers. Thank you very much".

 

Don't kill my prius, I'm very happy with my car

I have a 2008 Prius and was wondering how many people wouldn't give up there Prius? If Toyota were to take back your car.

My next question is how many Prius fans would join me (and all of my friends that bought a Prius because of me) in driving to Torrance next Saturday (March 20) to the Toyota USA Headquarters to show our support for this vehicle and Toyota (a company for revolutionizing the auto industry and creating a game changer in the cars of today & tomorrow.

Prius Owner
Chula Vista, California

 

My God - how daft do we believe the average American to be? How gullible? So if the manual says "never put liquids into the battery vent" and the car seat on fire, you'll just stand there and say, "Oh, the manual told me to never put any water near that area"?!

Toyota cannot be reasonably expected to consider a priori all situations which may arise. There is nothing wrong with their statement of "under no circumstances..." because while the literal translation may be taken as a completely prohibitive statement, the more "rational person" approach would be to temper that with some logical thinking/understanding that there may be circumstances beyond which the manual writers envisaged where it may be useful or necessary to execute the prohibited action.

When disaster struck, do you think all drivers followed the vehicle and traffic regulations? Do you think they obeyed one-way signs? Use common sense and a little bit of logic folks.