Sudden Acceleration Verdict Is in - its not a electronic issue

Anyone who has studied logic will immediately understand the fundamental conflict in this thread: There is no way to prove that something is perfect. You can prove that something is flawed by demonstrating a single failure, but the logic doesn't work the other way around. Even an item with a flawless record can conceal a failure waiting to happen, given the correct set of circumstances. It's much like gravity, where we have always had it, so it seems reasonable that it won't suddenly let go, but we can't prove it with certainty. I may float off of my chair before I finish typing this note.

Given this logical conundrum, how do we ever decide whether something is safe to use? First, we design with safety in mind. We try to think of all the ways that something can go wrong, and avoid those failure modes in the design. Secondly, we assume that we aren't smart enough to anticipate every possible failure mode, and consequently build failsafe mechanisms into the system. This is an admission that things fail, but when they do, we want the failure to be non-catastrophic. Lastly we do extensive testing to verify that a design behaves as expected.

Does all of this prove that a given system or design is flawless? No, we know that nothing can prove that. What it does tell us, if rigorously applied, is that the likelihood of a residual flaw is very small. If we are uncertain, we pay a lot of really smart people to do even more thorough analysis and testing, which further reduces the likelihood of a residual flaw.

The take-away from this is that there is always a chance that a flaw is still there, but hasn't been exposed. Anyone who truly wants to believe that there is a flaw can cling to this tiny hope and say "See, you can't prove that there is no flaw", and they will be completely correct. It can't be proved, even if the odds are vanishingly small.

Tom

 

OK but have these tests been run on the other hybrid you own?

I'll answer that: no. And why are you ok with that? Has the Prius had any cases of UA that don't seem more reasonably blamed on user error than anything else than the vehicle you are driving now?

 

i'll answer that, no.

 

i think evpv is clinging to that hope the way you are clinging to the rock in your avatar.

 

It's too bad this entire back-and-forth wasn't closed and concluded with Tom's post. It pretty much summed everything up that's been going on for 15 pages now.

 

To paraphrase NASA: "BigFoot may still exist, but all we found were LeadFeet."

And to paraphrase evpv: "Dying during dunking does not prove she was not a witch."

 

evpv and socalev mistakenly believing that my residence is Torrance when my profile has read Redondo Beach all long is just too much for it to be coincidence. evpv and socal's sharing similar screennames, similar "let's have an open discussion and be civil" first posts, attacking the same members and sharing the same flawed logic lead me to believe they're the same person or members of the same astroturfing group.

evpv/socalev, you've been exposed!

 

I sold my Prius.

Toyotas have 10 times higher percentage of unintended acceleration complaints than the next closest manufacturer, so I chose a vehicle not manufactured by Toyota.

 

Like I said, I'll be happy to meet you or talk on the phone, send me a PM. Do the same for socalev and we can all get together.

 

"Toyotas have 10 times higher percentage of unintended acceleration complaints than the next closest manufacturer"

Link ?

Addendum: I found this Edmunds analysis posted on the 'truth about cars' website, added as thumbnails below. Prius is mid 20's in the list that has had mat related incidents culled. But we should keep in mind that the reported events most surely includes anti-skid events which are more common in Toyotas because of the aggressive programming, but are not accelerations at all.

evpv's accuracy in statements appear to approach the level of his reasoning ability.

 

You're so sure socalev is willing to meet with us? Obviously you're members of the same astroturfing group.

 

Regardless of complexity, it is just as reasonable for owners of every Toyota model, in every design iteration (especially of the throttle control system), to make the same demand. The number of vehicles tested will be huge, and be an ongoing project forever.

And then it is just as reasonable to extend this to all other brands.

 

Nice find.

This argument has obviously become a total farce. All of us know Prius' are still safe and I like the analogy above about drowning of the witch.

 

Toyota: Most Complaints by Manufacturer by Wide Margin
Toyota, including its Toyota, Lexus and Scion brands, had 1,133 consumer complaints of unintended acceleration filed with NHTSA through Feb. 3. The complaints cover model years 2005 to 2010. Toyota's number of complaints for unintended acceleration exceeds similar complaints for the other Big Six manufacturers combined.



Nine of the top 12 models with the most complaints of unintended acceleration are made by Toyota. In addition to the Camry, Tacoma and ES 350, the other Toyota models among the top dozen are: Toyota Prius, No. 5 with 85 complaints; Toyota Avalon, No. 6 with 79 complaints; Toyota Tundra, No. 7 with 66 complaints; Toyota Corolla, No. 8 with 55 complaints; Toyota Highlander, No. 11 with 42 complaints; and Toyota RAV4, No. 12 with 41 complaints.

Toyota Leads in NHTSA Unintended Acceleration Complaints, Edmunds.com Analysis Shows - Auto Observer

 

^ this fails to look at complaints per cars sold, but expect them to drop now that the Toyota scare is over.

 

32K colors

our resident sleuth.

you figured it out ! socalev and evpc are the same person!! once again you have came to the rescue and saved the prius society.

I see that evpv has offered to meet you and also offered that i would meet you.

i would be more then happy to meet up with you, just show you how much of a moron you are with all of your theories. I will take a picture with me you and evpv once we meet up and post it for all to see. (as i have nothing to hide) Also when we meet up, i will tell you where i work, what cars i drive and would expect you to also post up that once again you were wrong.

Please let me know when your would be available, however i suspect you are quick with theores, but reluctant to meet up and then post on the board that you are infact wrong.

looking forward to meeting you regardless, and just so you know, none of this is personal, i have nothing against you, but might suggest that you get some help with the delusional thoughts and being so quick to post theory as fact when you have nothing to back up what you are saying and are headed for an EPIC fail.

 

Yeah, yeah, it'd be very easy for an astroturf group to coordinate that.

 

It also fails to exclude mat related complaints. And of course it does not exclude traction control 'events' which are as we know not a malfunction at all.

Yawn. Other than evpv and a couple of lawyers, does this topic interest anyone else ? I'm bored stiff, and plan to go find a thread with some religious nut trying to tell me that bigfoot must exist because she has never been proven to not exist. Or was that god ? Other people's fantasies just start sounding like the same nonsense regurgitated.

 

Without also mentioning the number of cars on the road these numbers are absolutely meaningless; impossible to infer anything from them at all. I made a car, btw, the Skoorbmax1000. It consists of a piece of plywood with three shopping cart wheels on it. It has a spotless safety record. In fact, my brand is safer than any other brand out there, from Ford to Toyota to Volvo. They should all ask me how I have such a safe vehicle with zero complaints to NHTSA and zero accidents, 100% safe vehicle.

 

Well then, let's take a break and go for a drive: Toyota Simulator