Toyota Traded Quality for Quantity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Kestas
Originally Posted By: PT1
They did redesign the tanks but several thousand people died from that defect.

lol.gif
Too rediculous.


http://www.autosafety.org/history-gm-side-saddle-gas-tank-defect

Really? Start reading....my brother owned 3 of them and was given money because of the class action suits. GM killed a lot of people with the side fuel tank design. All of the documentation is there.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
There were not several thousand pickup truck gas tank deaths. Heck, the only explosions we ever saw were the rigged one's on TV!


http://www.autosafety.org/history-gm-side-saddle-gas-tank-defect

You guys must all be too young to remember these. Make sure you click on the link to all of the deaths and you can scroll to the bottom to see which ones where people were burned to death because they couldn't escape the vehicle.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: rszappa1
This happened on Sunday here in Louisville....

By Jon Chrisos – bio | email
Posted by Alane Paulley - email

LOUISVILLE, KY (WAVE) - A Louisville man remained hospitalized in intensive care Sunday after crashing his 2010 Toyota Camry - and the model he was driving is among those included in Toyota's most recent recall.

Toyota's major recall involved eight of its most popular models, and although the automaker says it has a fix for what it calls "sticking accelerator" pedals, it looks like it will come too late for a Louisville man who crashed Jan. 29 in a recalled Camry.

Paula Allen says her husband, Todd, was pulling into a parking spot off Blue Lick and Preston in Okolona Saturday night when suddenly, for no reason at all, the car took off at a high speed. Paula says her husband tried to brake with both feet, but the car wouldn't stop.

The 2010 Camry is one of the eight models that Toyota recalled less than two weeks ago because a defective gas pedal could cause unintended acceleration. Toyota says the problem is rare but hasn't released any numbers about how often it's happened.

Rescue crews were able to get all four men out of the Camry and to University Hospital. At last check, Todd Allen was in intensive care with a possible spinal cord injury and no feeling in his legs. The Allens say they didn't even know about the recall until a nurse told them about it Saturday night.

We also checked with LMPD and officials confirmed the crash happened but a report won't be available for at least another day.

Our call to Toyota for reaction wasn't immediately returned.

Copyright 2010 WAVE-TV. All Rights Reserved.
If you go to wave tv website they have a vidio...

See, now the "fix" doesn't make sense in light of the situation.

There is NO WAY he would be giving the car heavy doses of throttle pulling into the parking spot.

If the throttle only stuck under light throttle, he would have been easily able to stop it.

Rather, the car took off by itself.

Which means the gas pedal fix is complete and utter [censored].

And another life is possibly lost.
 
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: 7TFord
Originally Posted By: Durango
Please forgive me but it's hard for me to fathom all those people who got hurt over a metal plate/shim. This world is a real bummer.:-(


It's even harder to fathom that maybe all that was required to prevent someone from being hurt was to stick a toe under it or reach down and pull up on the pedal. Things happen quickly though when you are at the wheel!


Most accidents happened with different pedal design (denso). CTS pedal recall is not connected with the bulk of the sudden acceleration accidents.

People, why it is so hard to understand. The problem is most likely in the software. Go to toyota owners forums and read what really happens.

http://rav4world.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24750



That was my understanding too that it was related to the computer sofware but others indicated it was more related to a mechanical issue in nature. If that's so then the Lexus line of cars needs to be looked at separately as well as the first issue about the roll over crashes.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL


See, now the "fix" doesn't make sense in light of the situation.

There is NO WAY he would be giving the car heavy doses of throttle pulling into the parking spot.

If the throttle only stuck under light throttle, he would have been easily able to stop it.

Rather, the car took off by itself.

Which means the gas pedal fix is complete and utter [censored].

And another life is possibly lost.


This is exactly what happens with the CTS pedal issue. The pedal doesn't return. You only have to press it 1/2 way to really get going. No doubt the guy was an old geezer who couldn't think enough to go into neutral either. I wouldn't doubt it if the guy hit the gas instead of the brake.
 
Originally Posted By: PT1

This is exactly what happens with the CTS pedal issue. The pedal doesn't return. You only have to press it 1/2 way to really get going. No doubt the guy was an old geezer who couldn't think enough to go into neutral either. I wouldn't doubt it if the guy hit the gas instead of the brake.


LOL! Sure, blame the victim. This is was Toyota did up to now.

Is the RAV4 owner an old geezer too? (1 minute into the video):
http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/n...C3F2454D05654BB
 
Originally Posted By: PT1
No doubt the guy was an old geezer who couldn't think enough to go into neutral either. I wouldn't doubt it if the guy hit the gas instead of the brake.


Incompetence and stupidity?
 
Originally Posted By: PT1
This is exactly what happens with the CTS pedal issue. The pedal doesn't return. You only have to press it 1/2 way to really get going. No doubt the guy was an old geezer who couldn't think enough to go into neutral either. I wouldn't doubt it if the guy hit the gas instead of the brake.

You must work for Toyota, blame the customer, we have legendary toyota quality LOL

Why do you defend them at every turn?? Too many kool aid drinkers on this forum.
 
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: c502cid
I was referring to what PT1 was spewing internet nonsense about, the GM fuel tank issue.


You mean this:


The side saddle fuel tank design installed in over 10 million trucks
- all 1973-87 General Motors full-size pickups and cab-chassis trucks
(pickups without beds) and some 1988-91 dual cab or RV chassis - is the
worst auto crash fire defect in the history of the U.S. Department of
Transportation. Based on data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System
(formerly known as the Fatal Accident Reporting System), over 1,800 people
were killed in fire crashes involving these trucks from 1973 through 2000.
(Attachment A is a list of fatal C/K fire crashes
by state since 1993.) This is more than twenty times as many fatalities
as in the infamous Ford Pinto. Despite a voluntary recall request from
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in April 1993
(Attachment B) and an initial defect determination
by Transportation Secretary Federico Pena in October 1994 (Attachment
C), GM stubbornly refused to initiate a recall.

Like Ford and Chrysler, GM made pickups with gas tanks inside the cab in
the 1960's. Because of concerns about the safety of placing the gas tank
inside the passenger cab, the Big Three auto makers all considered relocating
the tank outside the passenger compartment in the early 1970's. Chrysler
engineers specifically rejected placing the tank outside the frame because
of safety concerns saying, "A frame mounted fuel tank mounted anywhere outside
the frame rails would be in a very questionable area due to the new Federal
Standards requiring 15 MPH side impacts for all vehicles. . . . Any side
impact would automatically encroach on this area and the probability of
tank leakage would be extremely high." (Attachment D.)



Nope I mean this.....
According to the now debunked 1993 report which aired on Dateline, this placement made the trucks capable of exploding when involved in a side impact accident[4]. The faked video was staged by expert witness against GM. Bruce Enz of The Institute for Safety Analysis used incendiary devices and a poorly fitting gas cap to create the impression of a dangerous vehicle[5]. Fatality figures vary wildly. A study by Failure Analysis Associates found 155 fatalities in these GM trucks between 1973 and 1989 involving both side impact and fire[6]. The Center for Auto Safety, Ralph Nader's lobbying group, claims "over 1,800 fatalities" between 1973 & 2000 involving both side impact and fire.[7] Other commentators noted that regardless of the any increased risk of fire, the GM trucks had statistically indistinguishable safety records in side-impact crashes from their Ford and Dodge equivalents, and were safer in all crashes than passenger cars in general.[8]
 
Thanks for that. The sensationalism needed a counterpoint.

Too many people have an agenda here.

This is standard corporate behavior. They exist only for a profit.

I also don't think their 'fix' is anything other than a band aid.
 
Originally Posted By: c502cid
Nope I mean this.....
According to the now debunked 1993 report which aired on Dateline, this placement made the trucks capable of exploding when involved in a side impact accident. The faked video was staged by expert witness against GM. Bruce Enz of The Institute for Safety Analysis used incendiary devices and a poorly fitting gas cap to create the impression of a dangerous vehicle. Fatality figures vary wildly. A study by Failure Analysis Associates found 155 fatalities in these GM trucks between 1973 and 1989 involving both side impact and fire. The Center for Auto Safety, Ralph Nader's lobbying group, claims "over 1,800 fatalities" between 1973 & 2000 involving both side impact and fire. Other commentators noted that regardless of the any increased risk of fire, the GM trucks had statistically indistinguishable safety records in side-impact crashes from their Ford and Dodge equivalents, and were safer in all crashes than passenger cars in general.


RALPH NADER !!!! Bwaah HaHaHa
lol.gif
lol.gif
lol.gif


Any statistic that has his name associated with it should be immediately dismissed as pure organic animal fertilizer.

And indeed the opposite of whatever he claims should be immediately suspected as likely truth.

My dad used to say "never stand in the way of a determined idiot"

Accidents cause fires, gas tanks do too when equipped with incendiaries.
Funny I never saw the gas tank incendiary option on my order sheet.
I guess I'll just have to settle for the Kamikaze option.
Oh the Kamikaze option is now standard.....Cool !!!!
crackmeup2.gif
crackmeup2.gif
crackmeup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: c502cid
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: c502cid
I was referring to what PT1 was spewing internet nonsense about, the GM fuel tank issue.


You mean this:


The side saddle fuel tank design installed in over 10 million trucks
- all 1973-87 General Motors full-size pickups and cab-chassis trucks
(pickups without beds) and some 1988-91 dual cab or RV chassis - is the
worst auto crash fire defect in the history of the U.S. Department of
Transportation. Based on data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System
(formerly known as the Fatal Accident Reporting System), over 1,800 people
were killed in fire crashes involving these trucks from 1973 through 2000.
(Attachment A is a list of fatal C/K fire crashes
by state since 1993.) This is more than twenty times as many fatalities
as in the infamous Ford Pinto. Despite a voluntary recall request from
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in April 1993
(Attachment B) and an initial defect determination
by Transportation Secretary Federico Pena in October 1994 (Attachment
C), GM stubbornly refused to initiate a recall.

Like Ford and Chrysler, GM made pickups with gas tanks inside the cab in
the 1960's. Because of concerns about the safety of placing the gas tank
inside the passenger cab, the Big Three auto makers all considered relocating
the tank outside the passenger compartment in the early 1970's. Chrysler
engineers specifically rejected placing the tank outside the frame because
of safety concerns saying, "A frame mounted fuel tank mounted anywhere outside
the frame rails would be in a very questionable area due to the new Federal
Standards requiring 15 MPH side impacts for all vehicles. . . . Any side
impact would automatically encroach on this area and the probability of
tank leakage would be extremely high." (Attachment D.)



Nope I mean this.....
According to the now debunked 1993 report which aired on Dateline, this placement made the trucks capable of exploding when involved in a side impact accident[4]. The faked video was staged by expert witness against GM. Bruce Enz of The Institute for Safety Analysis used incendiary devices and a poorly fitting gas cap to create the impression of a dangerous vehicle[5]. Fatality figures vary wildly. A study by Failure Analysis Associates found 155 fatalities in these GM trucks between 1973 and 1989 involving both side impact and fire[6]. The Center for Auto Safety, Ralph Nader's lobbying group, claims "over 1,800 fatalities" between 1973 & 2000 involving both side impact and fire.[7] Other commentators noted that regardless of the any increased risk of fire, the GM trucks had statistically indistinguishable safety records in side-impact crashes from their Ford and Dodge equivalents, and were safer in all crashes than passenger cars in general.[8]



PT1 - Nope I'm not too young to remember. But this poster hit the nail on the head - THIS is what I remember.
 
What also strikes me as odd, is the fact that Toyoda himself, as a president, is no where to be found and did not speak of this matter at all. Normally, the president, just like the one before Toyoda, would publically apologize and vanish, never to be heard from again.

So there must be more to the story if the president does not want to speak publically about recent events.
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
What also strikes me as odd, is the fact that Toyoda himself, as a president, is no where to be found and did not speak of this matter at all. Normally, the president, just like the one before Toyoda, would publically apologize and vanish, never to be heard from again.

So there must be more to the story if the president does not want to speak publically about recent events.


BusinessWeek wrote about this last week.
Toyoda finally spoke up about it at the World Economic Forum in Davos on the 29th, I think a day after the BW article.

Linky:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/toyota-ceo-apologizes-deeply/story?id=9700622

Most of the press was more concerned why he was driven away in an Audi...a little research easily reveals that Audi is the official car of the forum, and attendees are required to be driven to/from the even in one of the 190 Audis provided.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
What also strikes me as odd, is the fact that Toyoda himself, as a president, is no where to be found and did not speak of this matter at all. Normally, the president, just like the one before Toyoda, would publically apologize and vanish, never to be heard from again.

So there must be more to the story if the president does not want to speak publically about recent events.


KrisZ,

The president of Toyota USA spoke on the TV news this morning. Now the head honcho back in Japan has been silent. The news also quoted to say that the gas pedal issue may also be linked to the on-board computer in their flag ship line (Lexas).
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: c502cid
Nope I mean this.....
According to the now debunked 1993 report which aired on Dateline, this placement made the trucks capable of exploding when involved in a side impact accident[4]. The faked video was staged by expert witness against GM. Bruce Enz of The Institute for Safety Analysis used incendiary devices and a poorly fitting gas cap to create the impression of a dangerous vehicle[5]. Fatality figures vary wildly. A study by Failure Analysis Associates found 155 fatalities in these GM trucks between 1973 and 1989 involving both side impact and fire[6]. The Center for Auto Safety, Ralph Nader's lobbying group, claims "over 1,800 fatalities" between 1973 & 2000 involving both side impact and fire.[7] Other commentators noted that regardless of the any increased risk of fire, the GM trucks had statistically indistinguishable safety records in side-impact crashes from their Ford and Dodge equivalents, and were safer in all crashes than passenger cars in general.[8]

I can attest to that pick up truck's general safety. In '83 my Dad was driving an '82 Chevy pick up and was hit head on at high speed by a drunk driver in a huge 70's model car. My Dad came home uninjured and the drunk guys had injuries. There is no way in the world one would be uninjured or likely survived that kind of impact in any '82 vintage Japanese pick up. Same thing in a side impact. Have you seen the doors and cab sheet metal on an 80's Toyota pickup? It's barely thicker than a pop can. The side saddle tanks weren't idea, but the truck was overall a very safe vehicle to be in at the time.

I'd bet if you compared miles driven and accident fatalities and injuries rates over time, the asian vehicles would not look so good in relation.
 
Originally Posted By: c502cid
Nope I mean this.....
According to the now debunked 1993 report which aired on Dateline, this placement made the trucks capable of exploding when involved in a side impact accident[4]. The faked video was staged by expert witness against GM. Bruce Enz of The Institute for Safety Analysis used incendiary devices and a poorly fitting gas cap to create the impression of a dangerous vehicle[5]. Fatality figures vary wildly. A study by Failure Analysis Associates found 155 fatalities in these GM trucks between 1973 and 1989 involving both side impact and fire[6]. The Center for Auto Safety, Ralph Nader's lobbying group, claims "over 1,800 fatalities" between 1973 & 2000 involving both side impact and fire.[7] Other commentators noted that regardless of the any increased risk of fire, the GM trucks had statistically indistinguishable safety records in side-impact crashes from their Ford and Dodge equivalents, and were safer in all crashes than passenger cars in general.[8]

The Dateline report was a complete scam. GM paid off the truck owners with a $1,000 off coupon so they could buy a new truck with the new fuel tank. Sorry nice try but GM killed 1800 people and Dateline was probably on the take (cough Gm Payoff cough) to make that show.

Please cite the "other TV commentators" LOL Please cite who "debunked" these reports.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top