Just need to vent...

Cops on crowd control duty.

I'm working near a long-planned special event and I certainly understand the need for public safety and crowd control, but the lack of coordination on the ground is stunning.

A lot harder to respect them when they don't show any respect for each other.

 

Just think how the Toyota executives are venting. 102,000 engines replaced? Even if done for only $5,000 that would be over ½ billion dollars.
Doesn't include all those rental cars - each for several days.
.

 

Wasn’t the v6 engine failure due to inadequate cleaning before assembly? I would strongly guess the new engine is a great engine, like nearly all Toyota engines. I don’t understand the logic here that keeps the engines damaged by debris means the engines are no good.

 

Suggest a way. 102,000 failures suggest otherwise. Main bearings don't fail because things aren't perfectly clean. This will cost Toyota well over ½ billion. Can't help but think of the irony ... how if these had been a hundreds thousand + Electric vehicles, Toyota wouldn't have had this problem.
.

 

102,000 units recalled, not failed.

 

Isn't the recall due to the likelihood of premature failure though?

 

That is very different than 'already failed'. We have received many recall notices over the decades, over all brands we have owned, only a couple of which where for failures we had actually experienced.

 

"If you can find a better-built truck than Toyota - buy it!"
-done.

I'm actually a fan of Toyota trucks.
I simply do want to pay the price delta over a "lower brand" - GMC in my case.
My current model is my 4th in a row, and I can count the number of failures requiring a visit to a mechanic on all of them over 30 years on one hand.

My SIL is a Toyota fanboy, and he insists that Yotas are 'much better.'
They actually are (see above.)
He's learning.
When he met my baby girl, he was a Ford fanboy.

 

I thought the issue was said by Toyota to be debris in the engine, maybe that’s wrong. Main bearings could rapidly wear if abrasive from grinding operations wasn’t washed away for one possibility. I think the manufacturing of engines is highly automated.
All makes extensively test their engines. Rapid bearing wear wouldn’t pass.

 

From a site quoting Toyota.
Toyota goes on to explain more in detail, adding that “…for these engines in the subject vehicles, the pressure on the main bearings due to the engine configuration is such that, if the aforementioned machining debris adheres to the bearings and operation of the engine continues at higher loads over time, failure of the bearings may occur. This can lead to potential engine knocking, engine rough running, engine no start and/or an engine stall. In the subject vehicles, an engine stall while driving leads to a loss of motive power.”

Bearing material is somewhat soft, and debris can imbed. Once it does that it acts as a grinder on the crankshaft journals is how I would interpret it. And/Or the extra friction from imbedded debris tears the soft bearing material off during use. Like how a bonded diamond grinding wheel does wear down as the diamond particles dislodge from the bonding material. So if someone uses a lot of force instead of letting the diamonds grind, the wheel rapidly wears due to the bond being overwhelmed.

 

Toyota seams certain about the exact manufacturing date(s) that will possibly be affected. It begs the question what processes were started/stopped before & after this time frame.

 

I move on to letting them handle it since I don’t own that vehicle and never will. I never thought about imbedded bearings that much but it makes sense and why oil changes should be kept up.

 

It is sad for Toyota but recalls seem to coming out a lot more these days....and doesn't have to be ICE engines:

Tesla recalls 1.85 million vehicles over unlatched hood detection problem

Tesla recalls 1.85 million vehicles over unlatched hood detection problem | Fox Business

And BMW....

BMW recalls over 291K vehicles due to rear cargo rail detachment risk

BMW recalls over 291K of its X3s over interior rear cargo rail's risk of detachment | Fox Business

Looks like I'll be keeping my 2021 Prius AWD going until the wheels fall off....just checked the oil after going 2,000 miles since the oil was changed and barely has any color...a very good sign. (My V-8 in my 2014 Tundra is the same way...just a golden-brown after 5,000 miles.)

 

Cars are very complicated and have 1000's of different parts supplied by 100's of different venders with many using automated processes.
Not surprising there are sometimes problems that develop- but all in all they are handled and corrected.

Many years ago our family owned a Chevy Vega and then a Ford Pinto - talk about unsafe vehicles those 2 may take the cake.

Also owned a 1969 Chevy Stepside Pickup - the gas tank was in the passenger cab right behind the drivers seat- you could tell how much gas you had in the tank by the sloshing sound when you took a hard turn.

Can remember when seatbelts were a new-fangled option - air bags would have been a figment of someone's futuristic imagination, cars are much safer now days. They are also more reliable - years ago if a car went close to 100,000 miles it was a minor miracle worthy of conversation and admiration. The 1969 Chevy pickup was ready for the rust heap and unsafe to drive at 58,000 miles.

Realize none of that relieves the frustration and inconvenience of a recall or problem

 

My very first car, when I was in High School (1979) was a 1977 Ford Mustang II. But it was just a Ford Pinto (4-banger) and even though it was only 2-years old, broke down on the drive home from the dealer! I went 20-years, after that, before I bought another Ford and got a 1997 Ford Escort...wasn't a bad car but traded it in for a Ford Windstar Van in 2000 (should've gotten a Toyota Sienna but those early models were butt-ugly).

 

I bet you remember the Ford Pinto self destruct mode if you were hit hard in the back end - probably would need a bulldozer to load it after the Fire Department put the fire out.

 

I do remember that and how many were angry at Ford letting the bean-counters decide to go ahead with the bad, and dangerous design....from the article:

In 1977, Mark Dowie of Mother Jones Magazine using documents in the Center files, published an article reporting the dangers of the fuel tank design, and cited internal Ford Motor Company documents that proved that Ford knew of the weakness in the fuel tank before the vehicle was placed on the market but that a cost/benefit study was done which suggested that it would be “cheaper” for Ford to pay liability for burn deaths and injuries rather than modify the fuel tank to prevent the fires in the first place. Dowie showed that Ford owned a patent on a better designed gas tank at that time, but that cost and styling considerations ruled out any changes in the gas tank design of the Pinto.

Source: Ford Pinto Fuel Tank - The Center for Auto Safety

 

Gosh, I had a Vega back in the day, for a year or so. It supposedly was also a fire trap because of gas tank design. Also famous for burning oil like crazy. I've posted a link to a fairly interesting story about how the Vega came about and why it was supposed to sweep the "imports" to the sea.

I can't complain much about it, oil was cheap in those days -- and I fully know that my HOT, HOT, HOT girlfriend back then was mostly attracted to me by the Vega, which I had tricked out with custom paint and interior-- HAHA. Wow, the guys used to tease me about how I attracted Carol -- whom the guys nicknamed the "LOVE BUNNY."

Unfortunately, I finally managed to wreck the Vega and after I was "put on the street," Carol moved on to a guy with a tricked out Camaro. Last I heard, she was married to one of the top cardiac surgeons in Southern California. She's probably driving a Porsche nowadays.

https://www.motortrend.com/vehicle-genres/chevrolet-vega-terrible-cars-that-shouldnt-have-been-terrible/