Toyota's runaway-car worries may not stop at floor
- Thread starter tenderloin
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: brianl703
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing wrong with it. Keyed switch, detented turn action, hidden safely at the side of the steering column. When manufacturers went to a push button start, I think it's more of a marketing gimmick to mimic race cars, but brings zero advantage to the consumer.
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing wrong with it. Keyed switch, detented turn action, hidden safely at the side of the steering column. When manufacturers went to a push button start, I think it's more of a marketing gimmick to mimic race cars, but brings zero advantage to the consumer.
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: Dualie
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Notice above GM person doesn't flame Toyota...now if it was a GM PT1 and his croonies would be all over it!
Notice the CEO from Toyota publically apologized to the family.If it were a GM they would deny it and hide behind some lawyers skirt. The Ford Firestone issue killed almost 800 people before they even admitted it was an issue. Remember how Ralph Nader got his start?
I beg to differ stupid drivers killed 800 people. the tires were only the trigger to very poor decision making.
The Firestone tires were of very marginal quality and never tested by Ford to be validated on the Explorer. The Goodyear tire that Ford rejected for $.25 per tire would not have failed under those circumstances. There is literally thousands of pages of independent testing regarding the subject. The owners of the vehicles in most cases ran them underinflated but proper vehicle testing in desert conditions would have failed the validation. But at that time Nassar was cutting expenses as he wanted to make Ford "like GE". He admired Jack Welch's method of managing General Electric and was envious of how GE stock was skyrocketing in the 1990's. So he tried to take a highly capital intensive engineering driven auto company and run it the same way. Didn't work and problems like the Explorer tire issue slipped between the cracks. IIRC there were over 100 people killed in Explorers before Ford QA even knew about it.
Toyota, Honda, and GM used Firestones of that era with no issues. Heck, Toyota and GM used the Wilderness AT on the 4Runner and the Sierra/Silverados with few issues. Honda used the FR680 and FR690 as OEM on the Civic and the Affinity on the Odyssey during the whole Ford/Firestone debacle with few problems.
DBW is nothing new - the aerospace industry has been using it for a while as fly-by-wire, but the system isn't completely foolproof. It all falls down to who programs it. An example is Airbus and Boeing - Airbus's FBW strategy is computer first, pilot last and the plane's computers will not relinquish control to the pilot unless there is a grave situtation where it is too late. Boeing believes that the pilot has the last say over the plane - their FBW systems allow for more human interaction.
Originally Posted By: Dualie
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Notice above GM person doesn't flame Toyota...now if it was a GM PT1 and his croonies would be all over it!
Notice the CEO from Toyota publically apologized to the family.If it were a GM they would deny it and hide behind some lawyers skirt. The Ford Firestone issue killed almost 800 people before they even admitted it was an issue. Remember how Ralph Nader got his start?
I beg to differ stupid drivers killed 800 people. the tires were only the trigger to very poor decision making.
The Firestone tires were of very marginal quality and never tested by Ford to be validated on the Explorer. The Goodyear tire that Ford rejected for $.25 per tire would not have failed under those circumstances. There is literally thousands of pages of independent testing regarding the subject. The owners of the vehicles in most cases ran them underinflated but proper vehicle testing in desert conditions would have failed the validation. But at that time Nassar was cutting expenses as he wanted to make Ford "like GE". He admired Jack Welch's method of managing General Electric and was envious of how GE stock was skyrocketing in the 1990's. So he tried to take a highly capital intensive engineering driven auto company and run it the same way. Didn't work and problems like the Explorer tire issue slipped between the cracks. IIRC there were over 100 people killed in Explorers before Ford QA even knew about it.
Toyota, Honda, and GM used Firestones of that era with no issues. Heck, Toyota and GM used the Wilderness AT on the 4Runner and the Sierra/Silverados with few issues. Honda used the FR680 and FR690 as OEM on the Civic and the Affinity on the Odyssey during the whole Ford/Firestone debacle with few problems.
DBW is nothing new - the aerospace industry has been using it for a while as fly-by-wire, but the system isn't completely foolproof. It all falls down to who programs it. An example is Airbus and Boeing - Airbus's FBW strategy is computer first, pilot last and the plane's computers will not relinquish control to the pilot unless there is a grave situtation where it is too late. Boeing believes that the pilot has the last say over the plane - their FBW systems allow for more human interaction.
Last edited:
For anyone that is interested ABC World News with Charles Gibson is doing a report about that tonight Tuesday Nov 3.
Three seconds is two and nine-tenths too long! It should be instant!!
I've driven many cars with the hazard light button placed very! prominently on the dashboard and have never once 'accidentally' hit it. I would imagine the same would go for your fancy ignition buttons.
I've driven many cars with the hazard light button placed very! prominently on the dashboard and have never once 'accidentally' hit it. I would imagine the same would go for your fancy ignition buttons.
I thought so as well until I took my ES350 and tried the kill feature. 3 seconds is very quick in reality and the car didn't get to really high speed before it shut off. When it shuts down it really shuts down so you wouldn't want to hit it accidentally on the interstate. But the issue with me is that I was never told by Lexus of this feature. THAT is inexcusable IMO. If the come up with a ket retrofit I'll be first in line though.
Originally Posted By: nthach
Toyota, Honda, and GM used Firestones of that era with no issues. Heck, Toyota and GM used the Wilderness AT on the 4Runner and the Sierra/Silverados with few issues. Honda used the FR680 and FR690 as OEM on the Civic and the Affinity on the Odyssey during the whole Ford/Firestone debacle with few problems.
The problematic tires were the Firestone 500 series tires made at the Decatur IL. plant which was a plant with severe union issues. The other brands & plants were fine. IIRC the problem was tread seperation due to some adhesive issue causeing all the blowouts. The other issue was Firestone not taking fast enough action to recall the tires and stonewalling the issue. But all their other tire brands were fine.
Toyota, Honda, and GM used Firestones of that era with no issues. Heck, Toyota and GM used the Wilderness AT on the 4Runner and the Sierra/Silverados with few issues. Honda used the FR680 and FR690 as OEM on the Civic and the Affinity on the Odyssey during the whole Ford/Firestone debacle with few problems.
The problematic tires were the Firestone 500 series tires made at the Decatur IL. plant which was a plant with severe union issues. The other brands & plants were fine. IIRC the problem was tread seperation due to some adhesive issue causeing all the blowouts. The other issue was Firestone not taking fast enough action to recall the tires and stonewalling the issue. But all their other tire brands were fine.
Originally Posted By: brianl703
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing IMO. But some Einstein invented this push button deal and now everyone is moving in that direction. Is it better? Not IMO. I can see absolutely ZERO benefits to a pushbutton versus a key.
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing IMO. But some Einstein invented this push button deal and now everyone is moving in that direction. Is it better? Not IMO. I can see absolutely ZERO benefits to a pushbutton versus a key.
From what I've seen on this thread so far, it appears that there are at least three ways to get one of these runaway Lexuses under control:
1.) Brakes (but may require stopping the engine or putting tranny in neutral to actually stop the car)
2.) Shifting the tranny into neutral
3.) The push button ignition switch that takes 3 seconds to shut off the engine
My understanding is that automotive braking systems are designed to overcome the engine developing full power, giving you enough time to stop the car while disconnecting the engine from the drivetrain (putting it in neutral) or killing the engine. Now if the driver of the Lexus in San Diego didn't know about the push button kill switch, he still should have been able to put it in neutral. Either the driver panicked and hit the brakes without attempting to put the tranny in neutral, or he tried to put the tranny into neutral with the tranny not actually going into neutral for some reason (linkage failure, tranny failure, etc.).
Is there a transmission issue here? Seems like a possibility to me...
1.) Brakes (but may require stopping the engine or putting tranny in neutral to actually stop the car)
2.) Shifting the tranny into neutral
3.) The push button ignition switch that takes 3 seconds to shut off the engine
My understanding is that automotive braking systems are designed to overcome the engine developing full power, giving you enough time to stop the car while disconnecting the engine from the drivetrain (putting it in neutral) or killing the engine. Now if the driver of the Lexus in San Diego didn't know about the push button kill switch, he still should have been able to put it in neutral. Either the driver panicked and hit the brakes without attempting to put the tranny in neutral, or he tried to put the tranny into neutral with the tranny not actually going into neutral for some reason (linkage failure, tranny failure, etc.).
Is there a transmission issue here? Seems like a possibility to me...
Originally Posted By: raffy
From what I've seen on this thread so far, it appears that there are at least three ways to get one of these runaway Lexuses under control:
1.) Brakes (but may require stopping the engine or putting tranny in neutral to actually stop the car)
2.) Shifting the tranny into neutral
3.) The push button ignition switch that takes 3 seconds to shut off the engine
My understanding is that automotive braking systems are designed to overcome the engine developing full power, giving you enough time to stop the car while disconnecting the engine from the drivetrain (putting it in neutral) or killing the engine. Now if the driver of the Lexus in San Diego didn't know about the push button kill switch, he still should have been able to put it in neutral. Either the driver panicked and hit the brakes without attempting to put the tranny in neutral, or he tried to put the tranny into neutral with the tranny not actually going into neutral for some reason (linkage failure, tranny failure, etc.).
Is there a transmission issue here? Seems like a possibility to me...
I think he panicked by not knowing the pushbutton could shut off the car. I bet he pushed it multiple times and didn't hold it in for 3 seconds. I can imagine that he may have gotten tunnel vision once the car wouldn't shut off with the button. Similar things happen to airline pilots which is why they are trained on multiple redundant repetitive emergency procedures. When something fails their training kicks in. That guy never had that chance but certainly had the time to call 911 so my guess is that he was in panic mode and was distracted by having to swerve all over the road to avoid hitting someone at high speed. The pushbutton while looking very simple is a major deviation from the keyed ignition that has been in place for decades. Add to the fact no training or orientation on the system and you have a recipe for disaster. I can really see how this could have happened having this same vehicle and having to learn the system on my own.
From what I've seen on this thread so far, it appears that there are at least three ways to get one of these runaway Lexuses under control:
1.) Brakes (but may require stopping the engine or putting tranny in neutral to actually stop the car)
2.) Shifting the tranny into neutral
3.) The push button ignition switch that takes 3 seconds to shut off the engine
My understanding is that automotive braking systems are designed to overcome the engine developing full power, giving you enough time to stop the car while disconnecting the engine from the drivetrain (putting it in neutral) or killing the engine. Now if the driver of the Lexus in San Diego didn't know about the push button kill switch, he still should have been able to put it in neutral. Either the driver panicked and hit the brakes without attempting to put the tranny in neutral, or he tried to put the tranny into neutral with the tranny not actually going into neutral for some reason (linkage failure, tranny failure, etc.).
Is there a transmission issue here? Seems like a possibility to me...
I think he panicked by not knowing the pushbutton could shut off the car. I bet he pushed it multiple times and didn't hold it in for 3 seconds. I can imagine that he may have gotten tunnel vision once the car wouldn't shut off with the button. Similar things happen to airline pilots which is why they are trained on multiple redundant repetitive emergency procedures. When something fails their training kicks in. That guy never had that chance but certainly had the time to call 911 so my guess is that he was in panic mode and was distracted by having to swerve all over the road to avoid hitting someone at high speed. The pushbutton while looking very simple is a major deviation from the keyed ignition that has been in place for decades. Add to the fact no training or orientation on the system and you have a recipe for disaster. I can really see how this could have happened having this same vehicle and having to learn the system on my own.
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: raffy
From what I've seen on this thread so far, it appears that there are at least three ways to get one of these runaway Lexuses under control:
1.) Brakes (but may require stopping the engine or putting tranny in neutral to actually stop the car)
2.) Shifting the tranny into neutral
3.) The push button ignition switch that takes 3 seconds to shut off the engine
My understanding is that automotive braking systems are designed to overcome the engine developing full power, giving you enough time to stop the car while disconnecting the engine from the drivetrain (putting it in neutral) or killing the engine. Now if the driver of the Lexus in San Diego didn't know about the push button kill switch, he still should have been able to put it in neutral. Either the driver panicked and hit the brakes without attempting to put the tranny in neutral, or he tried to put the tranny into neutral with the tranny not actually going into neutral for some reason (linkage failure, tranny failure, etc.).
Is there a transmission issue here? Seems like a possibility to me...
I think he panicked by not knowing the pushbutton could shut off the car. I bet he pushed it multiple times and didn't hold it in for 3 seconds. I can imagine that he may have gotten tunnel vision once the car wouldn't shut off with the button. Similar things happen to airline pilots which is why they are trained on multiple redundant repetitive emergency procedures. When something fails their training kicks in. That guy never had that chance but certainly had the time to call 911 so my guess is that he was in panic mode and was distracted by having to swerve all over the road to avoid hitting someone at high speed. The pushbutton while looking very simple is a major deviation from the keyed ignition that has been in place for decades. Add to the fact no training or orientation on the system and you have a recipe for disaster. I can really see how this could have happened having this same vehicle and having to learn the system on my own.
That is still weird, since this guy was supposedly a trained CHP officer. My first reaction, and how I was trained back in the days of driver ed, would be to shift the tranny into neutral, then hit the brakes, and shut off the engine after stopping. Surely he would have been trained that way also. Maybe he just forgot his training, but something still seems strange. I still wonder if maybe the transmission failed somehow, not allowing the driver to shift it into neutral. Admittedly that's speculation as none of us was there when it happened. Hopefully the investigators are looking at that as a possible scenario as to why that car couldn't be brought to a safe stop. Then there's the question of why the car became a runaway to begin with.
In any case, I bet Lexus goes back to the keyed ignition after this episode!
Originally Posted By: raffy
From what I've seen on this thread so far, it appears that there are at least three ways to get one of these runaway Lexuses under control:
1.) Brakes (but may require stopping the engine or putting tranny in neutral to actually stop the car)
2.) Shifting the tranny into neutral
3.) The push button ignition switch that takes 3 seconds to shut off the engine
My understanding is that automotive braking systems are designed to overcome the engine developing full power, giving you enough time to stop the car while disconnecting the engine from the drivetrain (putting it in neutral) or killing the engine. Now if the driver of the Lexus in San Diego didn't know about the push button kill switch, he still should have been able to put it in neutral. Either the driver panicked and hit the brakes without attempting to put the tranny in neutral, or he tried to put the tranny into neutral with the tranny not actually going into neutral for some reason (linkage failure, tranny failure, etc.).
Is there a transmission issue here? Seems like a possibility to me...
I think he panicked by not knowing the pushbutton could shut off the car. I bet he pushed it multiple times and didn't hold it in for 3 seconds. I can imagine that he may have gotten tunnel vision once the car wouldn't shut off with the button. Similar things happen to airline pilots which is why they are trained on multiple redundant repetitive emergency procedures. When something fails their training kicks in. That guy never had that chance but certainly had the time to call 911 so my guess is that he was in panic mode and was distracted by having to swerve all over the road to avoid hitting someone at high speed. The pushbutton while looking very simple is a major deviation from the keyed ignition that has been in place for decades. Add to the fact no training or orientation on the system and you have a recipe for disaster. I can really see how this could have happened having this same vehicle and having to learn the system on my own.
That is still weird, since this guy was supposedly a trained CHP officer. My first reaction, and how I was trained back in the days of driver ed, would be to shift the tranny into neutral, then hit the brakes, and shut off the engine after stopping. Surely he would have been trained that way also. Maybe he just forgot his training, but something still seems strange. I still wonder if maybe the transmission failed somehow, not allowing the driver to shift it into neutral. Admittedly that's speculation as none of us was there when it happened. Hopefully the investigators are looking at that as a possible scenario as to why that car couldn't be brought to a safe stop. Then there's the question of why the car became a runaway to begin with.
In any case, I bet Lexus goes back to the keyed ignition after this episode!
Originally Posted By: PT1
The problematic tires were the Firestone 500 series tires made at the Decatur IL. plant which was a plant with severe union issues. The other brands & plants were fine. IIRC the problem was tread seperation due to some adhesive issue causeing all the blowouts. The other issue was Firestone not taking fast enough action to recall the tires and stonewalling the issue. But all their other tire brands were fine.
For starters, it wasn't the 500. That was back in the 1970's.
Other plants were not fine either.
The problematic tires were the Firestone 500 series tires made at the Decatur IL. plant which was a plant with severe union issues. The other brands & plants were fine. IIRC the problem was tread seperation due to some adhesive issue causeing all the blowouts. The other issue was Firestone not taking fast enough action to recall the tires and stonewalling the issue. But all their other tire brands were fine.
For starters, it wasn't the 500. That was back in the 1970's.
Other plants were not fine either.
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: brianl703
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing IMO. But some Einstein invented this push button deal and now everyone is moving in that direction. Is it better? Not IMO. I can see absolutely ZERO benefits to a pushbutton versus a key.
Definintely agree with you on this concern.
This constant drive to put new and more complex and complicated systems in cars is bordering on the lunatic at this point in time. Granted this is a luxury product and as well all know the goal is to add as much gadgetry as possible to "entertain" the driver and please the occupants.
I too am just fine with the keyed turn to start method. It has been fine for decades and I see no reason to change it, just to be "trendy".
Originally Posted By: brianl703
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing IMO. But some Einstein invented this push button deal and now everyone is moving in that direction. Is it better? Not IMO. I can see absolutely ZERO benefits to a pushbutton versus a key.
Definintely agree with you on this concern.
This constant drive to put new and more complex and complicated systems in cars is bordering on the lunatic at this point in time. Granted this is a luxury product and as well all know the goal is to add as much gadgetry as possible to "entertain" the driver and please the occupants.
I too am just fine with the keyed turn to start method. It has been fine for decades and I see no reason to change it, just to be "trendy".
Originally Posted By: Vizzy
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: brianl703
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing IMO. But some Einstein invented this push button deal and now everyone is moving in that direction. Is it better? Not IMO. I can see absolutely ZERO benefits to a pushbutton versus a key.
Definintely agree with you on this concern.
This constant drive to put new and more complex and complicated systems in cars is bordering on the lunatic at this point in time. Granted this is a luxury product and as well all know the goal is to add as much gadgetry as possible to "entertain" the driver and please the occupants.
I too am just fine with the keyed turn to start method. It has been fine for decades and I see no reason to change it, just to be "trendy".
Speaking as someone who has (and has always had) keyed ignition, I will say that keyed ignition makes absolutely no sense to me. Yes, I'm used to it since I've been using it for my 25+ years of driving, but it makes no sense to me. It's an antiquated and unnecessary mechanical system to activate something which is electronically controlled. 10 years from now the Nintendo generation will be looking at this and wondering 'why on earth do I have to turn a key?'.
If this guy had a keyed ignition and accidentally locked the steering column (a pretty real possibility) a whole other group of people would be talking about the 'dangers of keyed ignition'.
Lastly, not directed at you--but at many of the comments; something seems to have gotten lost here. THE ACCELERATOR NEVER SHOULD HAVE STUCK IN THE FIRST PLACE!! Maybe I should repeat this again: THE ACCELERATOR NEVER SHOULD HAVE STUCK IN THE FIRST PLACE!!
It seems that a lot of judgmental, holier-than-thou folks know exactly how they would have responded under these circumstances. Personally, I like to think I'd have just put the car in neutral--but I'm also aware that hypotheticals are just that: hypotheticals. I have no idea what I'd have done under the circumstances.
I mean, people are blaming the guy because he 'didn't read the owner's manual'?? Seriously??? OK, so you're a)one of the less than 1% who would read the owner's manual when getting a loner car nearly identical to you own, and b)you 'know' this guy didn't read the owner's manual?? c) I looked at my own owner's manual--I didn't see anything about how to safely turn off the engine at highway speeds, d) you 'know' what you'd have done in those circumstances...
Honestly, many of the comments on this thread make me sick, seriously.
Originally Posted By: PT1
Originally Posted By: brianl703
What was wrong with that concept, anyhow?
Nothing IMO. But some Einstein invented this push button deal and now everyone is moving in that direction. Is it better? Not IMO. I can see absolutely ZERO benefits to a pushbutton versus a key.
Definintely agree with you on this concern.
This constant drive to put new and more complex and complicated systems in cars is bordering on the lunatic at this point in time. Granted this is a luxury product and as well all know the goal is to add as much gadgetry as possible to "entertain" the driver and please the occupants.
I too am just fine with the keyed turn to start method. It has been fine for decades and I see no reason to change it, just to be "trendy".
Speaking as someone who has (and has always had) keyed ignition, I will say that keyed ignition makes absolutely no sense to me. Yes, I'm used to it since I've been using it for my 25+ years of driving, but it makes no sense to me. It's an antiquated and unnecessary mechanical system to activate something which is electronically controlled. 10 years from now the Nintendo generation will be looking at this and wondering 'why on earth do I have to turn a key?'.
If this guy had a keyed ignition and accidentally locked the steering column (a pretty real possibility) a whole other group of people would be talking about the 'dangers of keyed ignition'.
Lastly, not directed at you--but at many of the comments; something seems to have gotten lost here. THE ACCELERATOR NEVER SHOULD HAVE STUCK IN THE FIRST PLACE!! Maybe I should repeat this again: THE ACCELERATOR NEVER SHOULD HAVE STUCK IN THE FIRST PLACE!!
It seems that a lot of judgmental, holier-than-thou folks know exactly how they would have responded under these circumstances. Personally, I like to think I'd have just put the car in neutral--but I'm also aware that hypotheticals are just that: hypotheticals. I have no idea what I'd have done under the circumstances.
I mean, people are blaming the guy because he 'didn't read the owner's manual'?? Seriously??? OK, so you're a)one of the less than 1% who would read the owner's manual when getting a loner car nearly identical to you own, and b)you 'know' this guy didn't read the owner's manual?? c) I looked at my own owner's manual--I didn't see anything about how to safely turn off the engine at highway speeds, d) you 'know' what you'd have done in those circumstances...
Honestly, many of the comments on this thread make me sick, seriously.
Originally Posted By: JOD
I mean, people are blaming the guy because he 'didn't read the owner's manual'?? Seriously??? OK, so you're a)one of the less than 1% who would read the owner's manual when getting a loner car nearly identical to you own, and b)you 'know' this guy didn't read the owner's manual?? c) I looked at my own owner's manual--I didn't see anything about how to safely turn off the engine at highway speeds, d) you 'know' what you'd have done in those circumstances...
I think its a pretty sad state of affairs that more people havn't read their owners manuals. I am not talking about a sit down 1 hour cover to cover read but skim over the document and learn about the stuff you have never seen before.
Outside of firearms, nothing comes close to the automobiles ability to render serious harm on others and so many people treat their vehicles like they are microwave ovens. Seriously if there is something important enough that a casual driver of a car (like this guy renting a vehicle) needs to know, Toyota should have put a warning label on the sun visor or something.
I mean, people are blaming the guy because he 'didn't read the owner's manual'?? Seriously??? OK, so you're a)one of the less than 1% who would read the owner's manual when getting a loner car nearly identical to you own, and b)you 'know' this guy didn't read the owner's manual?? c) I looked at my own owner's manual--I didn't see anything about how to safely turn off the engine at highway speeds, d) you 'know' what you'd have done in those circumstances...
I think its a pretty sad state of affairs that more people havn't read their owners manuals. I am not talking about a sit down 1 hour cover to cover read but skim over the document and learn about the stuff you have never seen before.
Outside of firearms, nothing comes close to the automobiles ability to render serious harm on others and so many people treat their vehicles like they are microwave ovens. Seriously if there is something important enough that a casual driver of a car (like this guy renting a vehicle) needs to know, Toyota should have put a warning label on the sun visor or something.
Last edited:
man, we debated the heck out of this on one of the Toyota forums ...
i am amazed at the percentage of people who don't have either the common sense, problem solving acumen, or experience to shift a car that's stuck at WOT into neutral
completely shocked
shift to neutral, steer to safety, apply the brakes ... if you grenade the motor, so what! ... you're alive, your passengers are alive, and no innocents are harmed
gee whiz ...
i listened to the 911 call ... 49 seconds of calling 911 and praying
i got nothing again 911, 'cept it will take them longer than 49 seconds to figure out what you're talking about
i got nothing against praying either, but i'm told the big guy helps those who help themselves
i looked at the console and shift gate on the lexus in question, wouldn't have taken a second to shift it to neutral and end the crisis
man, who cares if you grenade a rental motor versus killing a bunch of folks
i am amazed at the percentage of people who don't have either the common sense, problem solving acumen, or experience to shift a car that's stuck at WOT into neutral
completely shocked
shift to neutral, steer to safety, apply the brakes ... if you grenade the motor, so what! ... you're alive, your passengers are alive, and no innocents are harmed
gee whiz ...
i listened to the 911 call ... 49 seconds of calling 911 and praying
i got nothing again 911, 'cept it will take them longer than 49 seconds to figure out what you're talking about
i got nothing against praying either, but i'm told the big guy helps those who help themselves
i looked at the console and shift gate on the lexus in question, wouldn't have taken a second to shift it to neutral and end the crisis
man, who cares if you grenade a rental motor versus killing a bunch of folks
Heck even if you could find N, why wouldnt you bang it into park or try any other gear than what you are in (locking it into 1rst would at least limit your speed to redline in 1rst gear.) Definately a driver training issue.
why park?
why turn off the ignition?
why risk locking the transmission?
why risk locking the steering column?
no different than on a standard shift, shifting to neutral eliminates the transfer of power from the motor to the drive train without locking up the steering, without locking the gearbox, without locking the rear end
neutral, apply the brakes, steer to safety
that's all she wrote
why turn off the ignition?
why risk locking the transmission?
why risk locking the steering column?
no different than on a standard shift, shifting to neutral eliminates the transfer of power from the motor to the drive train without locking up the steering, without locking the gearbox, without locking the rear end
neutral, apply the brakes, steer to safety
that's all she wrote
Well thats the obvious first answer, but geeze if N wasnt working or I couldnt find it I wouldnt hesitate to throw it into park, its better than a run away to top speed and then killing someone. Nothing good can come from a run away, how is blowing a tranny any more expensive?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
Originally Posted By: PT1
The problematic tires were the Firestone 500 series tires made at the Decatur IL. plant which was a plant with severe union issues. The other brands & plants were fine. IIRC the problem was tread seperation due to some adhesive issue causeing all the blowouts. The other issue was Firestone not taking fast enough action to recall the tires and stonewalling the issue. But all their other tire brands were fine.
For starters, it wasn't the 500. That was back in the 1970's.
Other plants were not fine either.
Better look up the facts. It was predominantly the Decatur plant. My firm worked on the aftermath. Lots of union sabotage from what I understand. It started with the 500 and the Wilderness brands were the ones on the Explorers that were the problem.
Originally Posted By: PT1
The problematic tires were the Firestone 500 series tires made at the Decatur IL. plant which was a plant with severe union issues. The other brands & plants were fine. IIRC the problem was tread seperation due to some adhesive issue causeing all the blowouts. The other issue was Firestone not taking fast enough action to recall the tires and stonewalling the issue. But all their other tire brands were fine.
For starters, it wasn't the 500. That was back in the 1970's.
Other plants were not fine either.
Better look up the facts. It was predominantly the Decatur plant. My firm worked on the aftermath. Lots of union sabotage from what I understand. It started with the 500 and the Wilderness brands were the ones on the Explorers that were the problem.
Last edited:
- Status
