How to Stop an Accelerating Toyota

No-one has mentioned the possibility of turning off the ignition, either.

If you turn off the ignition you will lose power steering and power brakes could lock steering wheel. As a reply to the odds maker thats all well and good until you find yourself behind the wheel with gas pedal stuck. Being that Japan owns more of us then China right now and they are freindly I would hate to see the global climate if Toyota was to go out of business the worlds big two have major issues right now.

"If you turn off the ignition you will lose power steering and power brakes could lock steering wheel."

If, by ignition you mean the "key", there is no key in many modern vehicles.

If you have an ignition key and turn it off with the car in DRIVE you will not lock anything. Things will be harder to do. Like brake and steer.

Most people in that situation probably would not hit auxilary on the ignition, when turning off engine which if the steering wheel hits in the area of lock position it will get stuck there try it but do it in a open parking lot.

At the risk of repeating myself, you cannot turn the ignition key to the lock position when the shift lever is in drive. The wheel will not lock unless the selector is moved to park and the key moved into the locked position.

Power brakes will still work, there is a small reserve of vacuum held for this reason.

Power steering will stop, steering will be very heavy, this is a minor point as steering is still there and panic will help your muscles!

The steering will ONLY lock if you are stupid enough to actually remove the key as well . Even then, till a hole lines up it will be free.....

"ONLY lock if you are stupid enough to actually remove the key as well"

This is wrong! The key has nothing to do with it. It just allows you to change the position of the switch.

This thread is full of errors! Far worse, than Bush's joke.

On all cars that I have driven, leaving the key in did not allow the car to lock the steering.

Are you saying that Toyota's are different in this respect? That just turning off the engine will lock the steering?

On BMWs, you have a button to turn on/off the engine.

Pushing on the key makes it free to remove.

The next time I drive one I will try and see what actually locks the steering.....

If true, I will never need reminding to NEVER think of a) driving a Toyota b) Buying a Toyota.....if I accidentally forgot the sh-t with accelerating uncontrollably.....

That is simply too dangerous for words......what were they thinking of??????

Lynlynch, you are wrong, at least on modern BMWs.

I tested one out today, the steering only allowed itself to lock once the key was removed, even though I had stopped the engine with the start/stop button......

The two appear to be mechanically interlocked in some way, though I did not pull it apart to see how it functioned......

I cannot imagine a manufacturer allowing the steering to lock if power fails for example, for any reason whatsoever......except maybe Toyota?

I have personally not heard of any problems on BMWs (at least on this side of the Atlantic!!), though some links on this blog cite other manufacturers...(I didn't read them all.....!!)

Yes, I heard one woman testyfying at the Congressional hearing, she drove a Lexus, it took off, she put it in neutral and turned off the ignition and it kept accellerating and after some distance, it suddenly slowed down. But it continued at first being in neutral and ignition turned off. That sounded somewhat wierd and scary, but that was her testimony. She also applied the brakes but they did not work.

I do not know what happens with these computer gas feeds.

That sounds quite implausible. I'm sure the ECM does not act on the brakes. The linkage to the transmission is surely mechanical and again the ECM would not override the manual selector. Sounds like the plot to a movie... Christine

According to the testimony and backed by the tow truck driver and the husband the following happened. In order to start this car you must have the key fob with the chip on you when you enter the car. After the vehicle was brought to a stop and the tow truck arrived the tow truck driver asked the husband to put the car in neutral which he did and the car started. The wife had the key fob on here some distance from the vehicle. This should never have happened. Again the operator had little or no control of this vehicle.

I think I saw this on a CSI episode. Either that or the OnStar car that wanted jewelry for itself instead of the girlfriend.

You're much more likely to be struck by lightning than die from a bad accelerator. If I'm going to put effort into slim odds, I'd rather play the lottery.

Folks who drive Toys should go to a driver school to practice these defensive maneuvers so that in the event that the car runs uncontrollably, they will be well versed to react to these spontaneous events.

The curriculum would be custom designed to address the known problems.

CR4 members could design such a course. I'll start.

Don't text while driving a Toy.

Become familiar with controls not normally deployed while driving which may be helpful in a runaway (i.e. shift lever, ignition key, emergency brake, Bible (or Koran).

etc., etc.

I would add that everybody should be educated in these maneuvers.

The "driver education" we see now in the USA is basically driving around at 30 mph, and parallel parking.

Now, because of "budget cuts", the government in this area is dropping even that.

One of the drivers that died from this was a police officer. I would assume he had plenty of training in defensive driving.

I saw some where where they tested those vehicles and the brakes were able to stop all of those vehicles with the accelerator fully depressed.

Right! How hard is that? I've never owned a car that could overcome the brakes. I've watched people "brake peel" (maximum vehicular abuse!) with old school Lincolns that had drum brakes on the front and huge V8 engines and the rear wheels would turn but the front brakes kept the car stopped.

not just toyotas

http://www.safetyforum.com/sua/

http://www.safetyforum.com/fordsua/

http://www.antony-anderson.com/cruise/6-freq.htm

To many electronic controls

"I saw some where where they tested those vehicles and the brakes were able to stop all of those vehicles with the accelerator fully depressed."

There may be a correlation to make here.

Most cars these days are more or less electronically controlled, including the fuel injection system. Fully depressed accelerators have a specific effect in fuel injected cars. It may force the engine to starve the fuel flow.

It may be possible to trick the ECM as I do at times with fuel injection cars to floor the gas, which tricks the engine into thinking there is too much fuel and it may react to it cutting back on the fuel.

This is the principle unlike carburetor cars where many people are used to hitting the gas pedal to flood the carburetor to enrich the fuel to air ratio or mixture in order to start. At times, I have come up on cars that because people couldn't start their (fuel injected) cars they kept pressing the gas peddle to start it.

So I floor the gad pedal to force the engine to THINK it is a super rich ratio and it retards the fuel supply.

What all that have to do with being able to stop the vehicle with the brakes when the vehicle is accelerating out of control.

I was responding to your post (#5) comment and suggestion that with the accelerator depressed fully, they were able to stop the car with the brakes, but the correlation is that if you starve/cut off the fuel supply, a car cannot accelerate right ?

That is why I said: "There may be a correlation to make here."

Wherever you got that info about "I saw some where where they tested those vehicles and the brakes were able to stop all of those vehicles with the accelerator fully depressed." is what brought me to think of starving the engine of fuel during startup as I previously explained.

The issue is either mechanical or electrical, and if the computer is under the assumption you are flooring the gas pedal when your foot is not even touching the gas pedal, it becomes an electrical issue. The new design is much different than the old one, and I believe that this is all linked to a new component related to the TPS (throttle position sensor). The new design employs an electrically controlled motor rather than the old mechanical way the linkage between the gas pedal and the TPS. I am sure someone here can elaborate but it seems a plausible approach to this deadly problem.

The amount of braking power needed to stop a vehicle that is accelerating as such is huge, even from a "stop" position, without already in motion at any given speed and brake systems are dependent on the fact that an engine is not fighting it at 5000 rpm at the same time.

So the way I understand it, as I have done in the past with many cars and trucks, flooring the gas pedal has the adverse affect in fuel injection systems. Your comment suggests that they were able to stop the car by braking, AND flooring the gas pedal right ? So because I know that when starting a fuel injection automobile you can cut the fuel supply at the injectors by depressing the gas pedal, (which is different when a car is running of course) that is what made me think of it when you said I saw some where where they tested those vehicles and the brakes were able to stop all of those vehicles with the accelerator fully depressed."

Your comment brought the correlation to me, but one thing is, that once a car starts, you CANNOT starve the fuel injectors of fuel because it thinks you are accelerating. That is also what perplexed me about your comment but it made me think about it. The reason it works when you are trying to start a car I believe is because the ECM knows the engine is not running because it does not get the proper info from the CAM sensor and another sensor which I can't remember. This is a very interesting problem and I appreciate the old design really because the design still has the mechanical element that even if the cable snapped, etc., the accelerator would snap back to "0" because it is spring loaded.

Where did you see that by the way ?

Brakes could do the job if pressed hard enough. Neutral is always a resource - the engine would go red, but the injection would surelly cut off to avoid further damage. Turning the ignition off can be done carefully, because you can turn off the "on" position without locking the steering wheel. In this case, I agree, brakes would be hard to press. I really think the problem is not the car resources themselves. I think the problem is that there are many people out there that does not make any idea of how a car works, they only learn that you should go inside the car (where the AUTOMATIC gear shifter will always be in PARK), put on the safety belt, turn the car on, put gears in DRIVE, and that's all you need to know, as far as the car is running and all pointers in the panel are not showing any red mark (sometimes the car stops before they realize... it's amazing of how many cases of a stupid thing like running out of fuel we hear around here...). Thanks God, at least my wife mentioned she heard about the case, and that if it happens to her someday, she could simply put the car in neutral and stop, or, at least, find a good escape area to let the car come to rest without harming the occupants. The car may be damaged, but so what? I think I have been able to teach her some important things about cars and physics. That's my girl...

So many vehicles are coming out with this keyless start/stop. You have to hold the stop button in for three seconds to stop the motor, not easy in panic mode. I will not buy one. Like I said before, driver's ed must be a thing of the past. Just give 'em the car and let anybody drive. It must be insulting or degrading to expect someone to actually know what to do in a dangerous situation. Take lessons in how to drive a car? How demeaning. I have the money, that must mean I can drive, right? What's neutral? That's a guy thing, not for sophisticated ladies to bother with. I'm 16 now, and I deserve to drive, it's my birthright. Don't try to tell me anything, I know it all, already.

this sibject has already been discused

http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/51077/Solving-Toyota-s-Acceleration-Problem

I guess that was meant to be a joke....

Please clearly label it as such just in case the 1 in 1 million believes you....

Safety is not a jokey subject.....

Could it be possible with modern electronics in automobiles, That the anti-lock brake functions are involved in this situation and the vehicle cannot stop as one normally would under normal conditions? This could get hairy, since I am no electronic engineer what are the pro's opinion on this?

A good question. However, if it were to be that the antilock brake system were dependent on the proper functioning of other systems in the vehicle and were not designed in a failsafe manner which we must assume to be standard practice for any mission critical system, I would be terribly surprised. From what I can tell from a quick search it appears that the ABS control module is independent and only concerned with ABS. This only makes sense. Let's say worst case it looses power. Surely this is a failsafe condition or cars would be crashing all the time.

I had to agree with you about ABS with the following exceptions

I do know that basic ABS systems can be affected by on board VHF radio Transceivers.

I know this because of some problems i had with rovers fitted with ABS on police vehicles where the ABS stopped working (and left the car with no brakes) when using the VHF units.

Also i found the following,

http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/search.aspx?q=STABILITY+CONTROL&x=16&y=19

Now the basic ABS should be independent form ECU but on the stability control unit the ABS forms part of another system so failure becomes a reality.

just a note on VW vans the transporter range.

On applying the brakes the engine slows down automatically, ie if you try braking whilst pressing the accelerator (unusual i know) the brakes override the accelerator, Now this to me suggests a connection between ABS and Engine Management.

Vehicles today are far to advanced.

Manufacturers have had to make these ( so called improvements) to cater for the poor driver performance of a minority of drivers who drive to fast for road conditions, And rather than address driver training, They have tried to make the cars compensate for rubbish drivers.

I personally have disconected the abs module, there is no difference in braking power, however the car had more brake grab since it skid to a stop more than once, makes sense if you know how these parts work! !! As for accelerating ,no the steering will not lock if car is in drive,olny when in park! its safe to shut the key off! better than neutral ,cause engine will over-rev giving you a big headache of a mess!

Not knowing the exact method of Toyota controls but listening to the testimony of some of the victims and having a good knowledge of how electronic controlled machinery operates please note. There are few if any mechanical connections to Ignition,Brakes,Transmission,Throttle, etc.on an electronically controlled vehicle. Most reply's state (Hit the brakes and put transmission in neutral) but if these items are overridden with the computer it will not work. When you move the shift lever on the consul into neutral on some Toyotas all you do is move an electrical switch which in turn tells the computer you wish neutral but what happens when the computer does not respond--you stay in gear.You try to turn off the engine the device or switch tells the computer you wish to turn off the engine but the computer says not now. Most all vehicles have some form of anti skid braking system controlled by a or the computer and from my experience this can and will override what you are trying to do. They even state in the manual of some vehicles not to pump the brakes as it upsets the designed anti skid properties. Your vehicle goes into uncontrolled acceleration due to the computer and most or all of the above will not respond due to the computer not accepting the command for what ever reason. I have seen this on production machinery and have heard the testimony of Toyota runaways. I myself will not condemn the victim of not reacting in a rational fashion knowing that all controls with exception of the steering was controlled by the computer with out my input. My advice to Toyota is fix the computer and do it quickly since the evidence is very strong that it is a computer problem. Aircraft that have fly by wire have up to four fail safe features or systems according to my aviation associates. Obviously Toyota has none of which several are required.

From what I knew while I was in the auto repair industry, US DOT required a physical connection between the brake pedal and the stopping apparatus (master cylinder etc.).

I don't know that this would have changed. However, with the addition of ABS, the computer control system can and does modify the actions. It is plausible that the computer would reduce the amount of braking available in a runaway condition.

Your associates are right, But having 4 computers still doesnt stop the faults.

with all the backup systems in the world go faulty theres no stooping it.

a car with only one system doesnt stand a chance.

your not allowed to use cell phones and game boys on planes. BUT NO SUCH RULES IN CARS

Murphy law. if it can happen it will happen.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6523467.ece

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2010/02/24/240402/Chinook-Mk239s-safety-critical-backup-system-was.htm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6523467.ece

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/061209b.html

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kit-eaton/technomix/why-hudson-river-plane-crashes-will-happen-again

Any of us is more experienced in these matters than the average driver. Yet we can't agree on the most effective way to deal with this problem. I don't believe it is realistic to think an average driver will be able think and react in time to prevent accidents. It's like giving someone a weapon with the belief that they are equipped to defend themselves. It takes training and practice to react properly in high stress situations. IMHO the most effective way to deal with this problem is to fix it.

From what I have gathered information wise, Toyota has had this problem longer than just this year. Could it be there was a bug in their system that some additional modification has now brought it up front and they may not want to confirm this? Just maybe that's why it's taking so long to come up with a definitive solution. I sure would like to know just what that accelerator pedal fix really does.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/18/cut-it-out-toyotas-recalled-pedal-modification-remedy-detailed/

and this details the pedal fix

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/recall-fix-toyota-confirms-plan

for those of you who dont know how to search on the internet

This is old news with exception of the pedal shaving. Up until yesterday there were 12 reports of repaired Toyota's having runaway acceleration problems after the repair. The main problem is the computer does not show the problem on a diagnostic read out. What ever is happening is not being recorded in such a fashion to retrieve the information. Like I wrote before they had better get inside the computer cuz that is where this problem originates.

The Peter Principle is the principle that "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." This has happened to Toyota. Fly by wire is ok in military jets, they have ejector seats, and Uncle Sam is picking up the tab. The actual cause of this problem is going to get buried, big time. The CEO of Toyota has already given congress a unveiled threat of job losses if they don't back off. Toyota has already suffered sales loss, and will go downhill until they figure out how to get credible again. It will get to the point to where people will not want to get into a Lexus. Remember the Edsel?

The Edsel did not kill anyone like this machine. Yes it had some problems but it is agreed that it was just very bad timing and a questionable design for the time and economy. Big problem was the pushbutton shift since all the power train was standard Ford. We must also remember that Ford learned a huge lesson from this and have had very few flops since. Then again there were no computers controlling the functions.

Thank you Pete, for the Toyota pedal fix references. Unless I'm reading more into this I am very skeptical of the pedal fix solution. There are too many unexplained things happening according to the reports, that just a stuck accelerator pedal is causing the uncontrollable take-off of the vehicle. There has to be more to this problem than Toyota is admitting. I wonder what is really going on over there(Japan)?

Take a look at this link

http://laguna2.2dci.free.fr/img/4121a.pdf

Diffrent car i know but i bet the keyless system is the same

faults on cars the list goes on and on

http://www.safetyforum.com/cgi-bin/cginews.pl?search=toyota&method=Exact&field=all&x=17&y=10

Never mind. This is hopeless.

The real problem is Micro$oft (and collaborators)

Let me explain.

Programmers these days like to drag and drop functions into a program (Rapid development) without exactly knowing what they do.

I had a look at some code of these youngsters and nearly fainted.

After sending an output to a device that does return a success or error code. but instead of testing the response he disposed of it and assigned a true to the action. the result was is that next IF in the program assumed the previous command successful and did nothing to rectify.

The same might have happened with Toyota.

I have a 1991 Camry - Almost solid as a rock.

Hendrik in his #43 posting is heading in the direction of a comment I was "itching" to make.

Cars have a lot of software in them and there will be even more in the future. No reasonable technical person can tell us that there won't be software problems, some with very bad results. My new cable TV box sometimes goes crazy and it will not turn off even when I turn it off. The only way to stop it is to pull the plug. This will happen with cars. Please note that I did not say "might happen". Thus, all above postings are good for the current problem, but they do not address the bigger problem.

There should be pressure applied to governments to require a simple "kill switch" in any new car where the ignition switch does not have the MECHANICAL SWITCH ONLY capability of removing power from the ignition. Computerized cars would be much safer from these rare but deadly problems if the driver had access to a mechanical switch that is in the coil circuit of a relay for the ignition power supply. Switch off equals ignition dead. Good software, bad software, it doesn't matter. Dealer put wrong software or other component in during service, it doesn't matter. Software screwed up by too many big meetings and not enough common sense, it doesn't matter. Hackers or foreign government find way to go in through Bluetooth/WiFi/whatever and hack the cars software, it doesn't matter.

Press "kill switch" and engine is dead with all other steering and breaking systems acting the same way they did before the kill switch was pressed. Yes, anything that requires that the engine turn will start to suffer if the engine slows down. Power steering, etc, might start to become non powered as the engine slows down, but the whole idea is to stop the runaway engine.

This is a foolish idea since it requires governments and big companies to use good common sense and admit that things can and will go wrong. But, it is simple, cheap and 100% effective.

Excellent comments exactly my sentiments. Just like industry a nice big red button on the dash or steering wheel to kill the beast. It will be the only answer as long as they want to get away from mechanical linkage. Well done.

I believe this is political. After all.. Toyota is GM (Government Motors) biggest competitor. I am afraid of the Govt. no trust! But shouldn't it be the other way around? Isn't this where accountability comes from?

I don't remember GM ever hiding data for three years that lead to the death of people accross the world. When Ford and Firestone had there issues I guess that was political too.

Fellas, just a little tidbit of information and purely OPINIONATED !!

As the world at breakneck speed heads towards a future that is entirely controlled, and operated by computers which usually ends up in a bastardization of hardware and software, I have become weary. When it comes to machinery, and especially a ton of steel that can be driven at great speeds giving a vehicle incredible potential to do harm to you and others, it is reprehensible to NOT have a mechanical override or component that interfaces with such operations as ACCELERATION OF A POSSIBLY HOMICIDAL MOTOR VEHICLE.

Let us make a correlation between your home computer and the multitude of computers employed in an automobile. How many times have you had a problem with it ? How many times has it crashed ? How many times have you had a software clash, glitch, driver issue, etc. ?

Another post here was great, I couldn't find it now, but it is important to understand. With computers, there is hardware and software. The software is so critical that no matter what the hardware architecture is, if the software is not on point, you are screwed. The point about software development is that if the code created is incorrect, you will have nothing but problems. What is the big deal ? Well, the real knowledgeable mechanics and engineers ARE NOT CODE WRITERS. And as the poster mentioned, their methodology is either flawed or executed improperly.

Do you think the person who wrote the code for an electronically controlled acceleration system knew what the hell a Throttle Position Sensor was and why it is not a good idea to take the only (safeguard) mechanical element of it out ? And when you have writers of code that are not the actual mechanics, or audio engineers for example that use the software, how do they really know the intricacies of what they are writing for ? And once again, the poster was correct in calling them out because software issues are usually originally found in the code, and there are so many abuses because there are tons of "templates", previous forms of code that can be adapted, and people use them so they do not have to start from scratch. But as some of my coding friends will tell you, if you didn't write the code to begin with, you DO NOT know the starting point, and you may overlook faulty or inapplicable code that preexists within it. And once you build intricate systems of codependency and integration, you increase the possibility of miscommunication or erratic behavior and whatnot.

Take an auto, which in BMW's case has probably 18 separate computers, all that talk to each other and many that are so integral to each other that many systems become incestuous and rely and effect each other. They share grounds, circuits, you name it. Even my truck that has three comps i often feel is too much computer technology to ask it to anything more complex and have longevity. And remember, we are not talking about doing cosmic computations ! Most of the time it's just monitoring voltages and resistance and relaying the data amongst sensors !!

There is also something else I believe is related to all of this. Computers have an intrinsic fault due to the architecture that cannot be avoided and that is commonly known as heat cycling in relation to chipset manufacturing. It used to be said you are better off leaving your computer on to reduce the effect of chips and such expanding and contracting due to the heating up and naturally cooling down of the materials (I think it is really the silicone based materials that are affected). So we throw a bunch of computers in a vehicle that is subjected to all the extreme environments and the fluctuations of weather that can be possible. So automobile computers are constantly taking more abuse than your home computer and expected to last, endure in extreme environments, and not CRASH ? Well... That's a tall order.

A bottom line ?

The world nowadays are filled with EXPERTS. What the hell does that mean anymore ? Oh, someone's a damn expert because they know everything they supposedly need to know about ONE THING ! Well how does that make you an expert if you have no idea how to do ANYTHING ELSE or correlate it or integrate it into anything else ????? The REAL expert is the one who can bring it all together, and is truly knowledgeable on MANY fronts so he/she can encapsulate all this info under one unified concept idea, process, invention or creation.

And remember, sometimes "advances" in technology are NOT ADVANCES AT ALL. The more computer oriented machinery becomes, the more fail-safes are needed. In the end, there may not be enough fail-safes. :)