Sudden Acceleration Verdict Is in - its not a electronic issue

right. but then, you can say that about any car, they've probably all had reports of u/a.

 

Isn't the DOT secretary a former UAW guy? That would explain everything.

 

Interested in the Prius?

Doubtful.

Did not say that the problem does not exist. You could test a million cars, and never be sure.

But, IMO, a lengthy, thorough and impartial investigation was conducted and it was concluded that the problem is not electrical in nature.

Look further at what? Don't you think the engineers involved with this high profile investigation didn't carefully think through the possible systems that could cause the problem...and then carefully looked at all of them. I love it when the lay person, such as yourself, tries to second guess experts in the field. Good God, man, give it a rest.

Or, it could mean that it was driver error. Audi, with entirely different systems than the Prius, faced exactly the same issue...and after a year long investigation that almost bankrupted Audi, it was concluded it was driver error.

Please. Stick to your software. The brakes will stop the car regardless of regerative braking or not...and yes, at full throttle. And if you don't trust the brakes, hit the off button.

So, according to you, some electrical/software glitch causes the car to race out of control...even though investigations turned up nothing to support your theory....and still, the owners of these cars with UA could not either: (1) apply the brakes and/ or (2) push the power button.

Please.

My logic is not flawed, but your reading comprehension is.

To be clear - there are no absolutes here. Only plausibilities. Given that no facts have turned up anything regarding an electrical cause, it is my opinion, and I'm sure most rational and objective observers, that the most plausible cause is driver error. One need only spend a few hours driving around any city, or read boards like this, to come to the logical conclusion that there are many careless and/or idiotic drivers. I see them in droves every time it snows...it's as if people forget how to drive when snow hits the ground....spin outs and crashes everywhere. No, many people simply don't know how to control their own vehicles. But I'm pretty confident the engineers at NASA got this right...:rockon:

But the reality is, that no matter how many investigations were to be done, just like the JFK conspiracy, there will always be people unwilling, or unable to accept the findings.

 

I had the problem twice with my 2005 Gen II. Both instances were due to the driver's side mat jamming on the accelerator arm. Nothing more.

 

engineer--- my post wasn't about whether the car does or does not have the issue.

It was simply based on your request for someone to find a fault in your logic.

your response to someone doing exactly what you asked
a) you doubt that i'm interested in a prius... (is that a fact or theory on your end and has nothing to do with your invitation or argument)
b) you did infer that the problem doesn't exist based on nasa's findings, you further went on with the argument that the issues must be driver error. Because nasa tested 6 camrys doesnt even prove that the problem doesn't exist in a camry. Only that the nasa reported not finding an issue, for you to then infer any relation to a prius or that it is driver is isn't logic or fact based.. It is your "engineer logic" or voodoo science.
c) i never said anything about brakes or cars racing out of control. Only that the prius has an electronic braking system.. the rest is up was made up by you in some attempt to back up your flawed logic.

your last paragraph is where you actually agree with my post which is in direct conflict with your earlier "logic post" where you invited everyone to find holes in your illogical argument. there are no absolutes here only possibilities - these are now your words and my point exactly when i responded to your post.

NASA's study doesn't prove anything about the prius (and really nothing about the camry either)..and certainly nothing in your "logical" post about how everything must be driver error.

I see how your engineer mind works
- challenge everyone to find fault in your flawed logic.
-when someone does you tell them they are wrong, while agreeing that your logic is flawed.
throw in some accusations along the way.

 

bisco,

you are correct and that is my point, you could say that about any car!!

 

I think that we must be reading different posts as I have difficulty finding where Engineer said some things that you claim he said.

If in fact he said all of the things you claim, your posts would be clearer and more convincing if you quoted his exact words in context then explained specifically where and why you consider his conclusions and assessments to be unreasonable.

When paraphrasing people often change the meaning, perhaps inadvertently, then take exception to something they have created themselves that is quite different from what was actually said.

 

we don't need to make more of this then it is.

1) FACT he did challenge everyone to fault his logic
2) FACT he then justify's nasa's testing of 6 camrys as they are smart, and that somehow they know since they are smart that these 6 camry's represent all of the different systems in use across toyotas lineup.
3) FACT he then goes onto say that it all must be driver error.

When he responded to my post, he actually agreed withe the whole point of my thread which is, there are no absolutes and that anything is still possible.

that is the readers digest version, along with him telling me that i'm not interested in a prius and that i don't have any comprehension skills.

 

socalev,

You may say or think you're interested in the Prius, but I doubt it. You've done absolutely nothing to counter evpv's flawed logic (particularly his citing flawed studies by Gilbert, Ronald Belt and Quality Control Corporation) and are instead picking fights with a poster who is actually using some logic. Moreover, you sound like evpv's mini-me. From the thread that the moderators so nicely spared us:

Are you also working for an insurance company or lawyers suing Toyota?

So much for open communication, open dialog, and keeping the conversation at a fact-based level.

 

Your opinion is those studies are flawed. My opinion is that the NASA study is flawed because they only tested 6 old Camry's. Their study has nothing to do with this forum because they didn't test a Prius.

For the record:

I have never been employed by an automotive company, insurance company, research company, or law firm.

I have never been involved in any law suit against Toyota or any other automotive company.

How about you 32kcolors?

 

Why do you ask? You've already made up your mind that I work for Toyota in Torrance.

 

I asked because you asked. I gave an honest answer, I'd like to hear yours.

 

32k colors

-- i've done nothing to counter evpv's flawed logic....

1) i think this is what you honestly believe you are doing- despite the fact that it just makes you look overly defensive of the prius and illogical.
2) why would you be surprised that i'm not doing it. You and 6 other posters on the forum seem to do it. the vast majority don't do it.. so why would you expect me to do it? The minority is a majority in your mind.
3) evpv's logic on the subject of unintended acceleration and the prius, hasn't been proven to be flawed, and isn't illogical. -- we don't know, although engineer claims to know and i bet you think you know too. The reality is none of us know either way. you are scaring me with the delusional pattern in your views of the word.

i must work for an insurance company or lawyer

-1) there you go again. Wild accusation with absolutely no proof or info to back it up. adding it to the list
a) evpv and his friend are one in the same
b) evpv works for gm
c) evpv is a lawyer
D) now i am a lawyer or work for an insurance company.

to be clear i don't know if any of the above are true or false except D. (which is false) however i find it very odd that that doesn't stop you.

anyone can play the accusation game but it doesn't get us anywhere. Let's try it this time back on you.
1)your location used to be torrance, now it suddenly changed to redondo beach
2)toyota just so happens to be headquartered in torrance but after evpv asked if you worked for toyota you changed it.
3)you constantly defend the prius
4) any new poster asking a question that might be even slightly interpreted as negative- you call "troll" even though you don't know and are assuming.
5) you say that anyone posting a news article about lawyers suing toyota must be a lawyer or work for an insurance company

Therefore using your logic, i would say that you MUST work for toyota. How does this make you feel?

your comment-- so much for keeping the conversation at a fact based level.
- with all the accusations from you and wild theories and the irrefutable logic from "engineer" it is hard to keep it fact based and professional.

But we sure are trying to not fall prey to the PRIUS posse that you, engineer and a couple other diehard defenders think you have

 

That was directed at socalev (his citing a link to 7 insurance companies suing Toyota for SA), not you. Besides, I've already told you on two separate occasions what I do for a living.

 

I'm just asking for an honest answer. Shouldn't be that difficult.

 

While writing that, I was reading a quote from La Hood saying basically the same thing:

But the NASA spokesperson said something not equivalent:

The NHTSA and NASA Executive Summaries are also very clearly not "saying basically the same thing" you portrayed. NHTSA:

And NASA:

Because of these and your comments about the other studies you posted, you and I are clearly not using dialects that parse English sentences in the same manner.

Your dialect would serve very well for a career as a spokesperson in political issue advocacy. I'll stay in electrical engineering.

 

It was never ever Torrance. evpv was the one who thought I live in Torrance and I told him to check my profile again. And now it's you, socalev, who's confused? It's read Redondo Beach from day one.

 

NASA:

"Because proof that the ETCS-I caused the reported UAs was not found does not mean it could not occur. However, the testing and analysis described in this report did not find that TMC ETCS-I electronics are a likely cause of large throttle openings as described in the VOQs."

NHTSA:

"Because proof that the ETCS-I caused the reported UAs was not found does not mean it could not occur. However, the testing and analysis described in this report did not find that TMC ETCS-I electronics are a likely cause of large throttle openings as described in the VOQs."

Ray LaHood, US Secretary of Transportation:

"And today we have heard clearly and affirmatively that NHTSA, America’s traffic safety organization, was right all along. NASA's team found no electronic flaws in Toyota vehicles capable of producing the large throttle openings required to create dangerous unintended acceleration incidents."

Toyota Press Release:

"We hope this important study will help put to rest unsupported speculation about Toyota's ETCS-i, which is well-designed and well-tested to ensure that a real world, un-commanded acceleration of the vehicle cannot occur."

(Toyota spins the NASA summary, saying SUA "cannot" occur.)

Orange County Register front page headline:

"U.S.: Toyota Flaws Fixed"

(NASA didn't even test any of the cars that were recalled)

Prius Chat:

NASA proved that the Prius is safe. All unintended acceleration cases are driver error.

(When in reality NASA didn't even test a Prius)

 

Yes, the Prius MIGHT have a UA issue. It might ALSO be that 1/10 Priuses have a lb of C4 under the driver's seat that will go off at exactly 20k miles. None of us can say with absolute certainty that it doesn't have that C4 or that in fact there is a team of invisible Bigfoots prowling the US looking for Prius owners and these Bigfoots are going to attack all Prius owners on Feb 31/2012. We just can't be sure that's not the case.

There is:

1) No case ever of proven UA in a Prius from the electronic system
2) After spending a long time going over the code and systems nobody has been able to find a case in which the electronic system could get it to speed up

For those who will only be happy if it's found that the Prius IS susceptible to this they will never be content. There is no way to prove 100% that it's not susceptible if it isn't, only that it is susceptible if it is.

evpv is caught up on a fringe consideration. One that technically has merit but realistically, statistically is irrelevant. If a 2010 Prius was tested and found to be ok he could as easily claim that 2011s are different or that the Prius II and V are different due to differences in their electronic systems.

 

I'm not getting that picky. The fact is, Toyota commissioned a study by Exponent, but they only tested Camry's and didn't test a single Prius. Then the government commissioned a study by NASA, but they only tested Camry's and didn't test a single Prius.

The fact is, a Prius hybrid is much more complex than a common Camry. I don't accept any conclusion that clears Prius cars based on a test of something other than a Prius. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.