Quote from JJ72 :

the computer won't disfunction entirely, some part of it will be working

I sure as hell hope they're engineered that way, anything else would be hugely dangerous.

These types of systems just fill me with paranoia considering all the time I've spent wrestling with broken computers. Mechanical links fail as well of course, but they can usually be made to fail safe. I'm not sure that's quite as easy to guarantee once a computer is involved, though that may be my ignorance showing.

If I'm going to be smeared across the mountain-side I want it to be because of something physical and real like a stuck throttle wire, not programming error.

Quote from JJ72 :

Turning off the ignition is quite a trouble though, as you have to hold the start button down for 3 seconds, unless you checked the menu beforehand you won't know what to do with it.

apart from that those buttons are idiotic cumbersome and serve no purpose whatsoever anyone whos had a laptop crash on him or herself in the last 10 years or so (ie pretty much everyone) must be able to come up with the idea of holding the button for a few seconds to turn the thing off

Quote from Shotglass :

anyone whos had a laptop crash on him or herself in the last 10 years or so (ie pretty much everyone) must be able to come up with the idea of holding the button for a few seconds to turn the thing off

Last 10 years? Try since nearly the beginning of home computing. I remember the trouble I had with my girlfriends new 286 computer in 1990 and had to hold the button down for 3 seconds to turn it off. The concept certainly shouldn't be new to anyone from elementary school through a good bit above middle age (halfway to dead as Kev would say.)

hm all the cpus i remember that still had the 86 in their names came with cases that had proper power switches instead of the buttons that iirc came when atx hit the scene
but thats not the point either way i think anyone who can be considered alive should have come across that kind of button before

On a related note, the interesting thing is that Aygos/107s/C1s without stability control (including mine) are unaffected, but cars with ESC or whatever they call it have the dodgy throttles. Weird, eh?

Toyotal recall. Should be a film


i'll grab my coat and sorry if this was done earlier in the thread. cba to look through

Anyone read about the latest recall for the 2010 Tundra? 2 units recalled.


Two.

apparently toyota have now decided that stuck throttle pedals are good pr
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/ ... xus_photoshop_fail_02.jpg

those drivers are doing some sick burnouts... wait, where are the drivers? do Lexus' come with autopilot now?

also, they appear to have rims that stay in place when the wheels move (anti-spinners?). I can't justify the price of a Lexus for such a rice / gangsta feature.

wait I can't get anti-spinners or an autopilot on my Lexus? that's false advertising. a**holess.

apparently toyota isn't done yet... did anyone see that consumer reports video of that lexus doing a hard turn? that thing is supposed to have electronic stabilizers... guess they don't work.

I think the TC issue is simply because the US News want to bash the imports they used to praise to sell some US cars - newslfash, push a 2 ton 4x4 into a bend at 80 MPH and it wont grip that well - even so, while it got tail happy it didnt actually spin, it just allowed more control to the driver before the electronic nannying finally fixed it...

There is a thing I donot understand:
Without considering the modern gearboxes wich have automatic and sequental modes a classic automatic has this layout:

PRND12, where "N" is the neutral. You should have a button on the side of the lever wich let you move the shifter once pressed, something like a clutch button.
Now, if the man had an automatic he still could be able to disengage the engine and then stop right?

Quote from Asphalt Scream :

There is a thing I donot understand:
Without considering the modern gearboxes wich have automatic and sequental modes a classic automatic has this layout:

PRND12, where "N" is the neutral. You should have a button on the side of the lever wich let you move the shifter once pressed, something like a clutch button.
Now, if the man had an automatic he still could be able to disengage the engine and then stop right?

A bit old news now. They've gone on to the Lexus recall...

Yes, you can shift to neutral with an automatic. You don't even have to push the button. Just a bump on the gear selector will pop it into neutral. A simple concept, but people just simply think it's "automatic, I'm not suppose to move that thing."

My wife included. Every time we are running to the store in her car, we are climbing a long, steep, windy hill. I take it out of overdrive (button on the side of the lever) and I hear constantly, "What's that orange light on the dashboard?" "Why do you take it out of overdrive?" "Quit taking it out of overdrive!" blah, blah... Drives me crazy.

Quote from mrodgers :

people just simply think it's "automatic, I'm not suppose to move that thing."

My wife included. Every time we are running to the store in her car, we are climbing a long, steep, windy hill. I take it out of overdrive (button on the side of the lever) and I hear constantly, "What's that orange light on the dashboard?" "Why do you take it out of overdrive?" "Quit taking it out of overdrive!" blah, blah... Drives me crazy.

we keep on telling you people its just better in every way to be european but you wont listen... you never will

These are reasons why I refuse to get a newer car, I'll stick with my old honda motorcycle, or get an old datsun or something. At least with those I don't have to worry about the electronic baby sitter second guessing me.

I have dealt with a stuck throttle only once, on my first motorcycle, an old 77' honda. It was just common sense to me to cut the ignition, and if I coulden't do that, it's not hard to put a bike in neutral or pull the clutch in. Hell, I've driven enough cars with that electronic crap to know you CAN do it in one of those too.

Some people just don't have the mindset to drive, they can't comprehend the mechanics of driving a motor vehicle.

Quote from Shotglass :

we keep on telling you people its just better in every way to be european but you wont listen... you never will

Don't have to tell me Shot. The only reason I'm in an auto is because I had to get rid of mine prematurely because of a problem (Toyota Tacoma rusted frame a year before Toyota bought them back at 1.5 times the value) at the same time Wifey's vehicle needed replaced. Wanted her to have something newer and more reliable with the kids in the car so I got her old junk as a hand-me-down.

I drove an auto from 1988-1990 as a parent's hand-me-down, then drove manual through 2007 when I ended up with my wife's car. Back then I was a new driver. Now, it's been driving me crazy for the past 3 years.

In other news! If you hit a curb, your car might flip! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pswOGMx8Tzo

so basically what theyre saying is if you are an idiot misjudge a corner and correct too slowly you might get the car sideways? who would have thought a car that reacts like a car would

I hadn't seen the video yet. This is of course old news now. You guys are just a bit slower to get it way over there.

Imagine, an SUV not able to handle a corner move like that. Seems that this old fictional story needs to be brought up from my old 4wheeling days....

Quote :

A couple of weeks ago, NBC's "Dateline" aired a tv segment all about the dangers of sport-utility vehicles (SUVs). They put the SUV's through a slalom test, and noted that the vehicles were prone to rolling when subjected to sudden steering movements. No kidding Sherlock, they aren't sports cars! They interviewed an ex-SUV owner who rolled a SUV after only putting 12 miles on the odometer, but failed to mention anything about possible driver inexperience. They said that during a collision, SUVs were more likely to injure the occupants of cars than cars would (really? duh). It was uninformed, one-sided, and biased, and drew a lot of comments from the Toyota 4x4 Mailing List when one of the listers brought it to our attention. So, why am I mentioning this on the Humour page, you ask? Well, after reading the replies from the listers, I decided to post the following tongue-in-cheek message:


Subject: Toy4x4 List tests sports cars for Dateline
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 23:37:33 -0700
From: Greg Sue
To: [email protected]

Numerous persons have reported that sports cars are dangerous, unsafe,and poorly engineered, so an investigative team from the Toyota 4x4 Mailing List was sent to validate their claims and report back to Dateline. Tested sports cars include Chevrolet Corvette, Mazda Miata,and Acura NSX, which seemed to be representative of all sports cars currently on the market (they are all more-or-less the same).

The Toyota 4x4 Mailing List Investigative Team (T4MLIT) took these vehicles out for a day to some of the roads they usually drive, and have made the following observations:

All vehicles exhibited a severe lack of articulation on rocky and rutted terrain (average RTI: 14). This apparent engineering error greatly contributed to numerous 3-point situations, necessitating increased throttle usage to get through certain obstacles. This increased throttle usage put driver and vehicle at great risk in off-camber situations, resulting in a roll-over of the Miata. The Miata's windshield and frame collapsed under the weight of the vehicle (the only convertible-top vehicle in the group), and it was only luck that the test driver did not suffer serious injuries. Although the driver of the Miata had only put 12 miles on the odometer, he maintained that his unfamiliarity with the vehicle's handling had nothing to do with the obvious design flaw.

All vehicles also exhibited a striking lack of ground clearance. This fact was painfully obvious when we took the NSX through a small creek, only to have the undercarriage hang up on a small rock. The resulting water cascading in through the drivers' window was slightly disconcerting to the driver, who was used to driving his taller Toyota 4Runner. The end result was that the ECU shorted out and died, but not before water was sucked in through the unusually low-mounted air intake. Our test drivers found it amazing that any vehicle manufacturer
would build a vehicle with such limited ground clearance, then expect anyone to drive it on a back-road.

The vehicles were not equipped with the proper equipment for the terrain. This test involved a high-speed run on a twisting logging road, including some muddy patches. As the Corvette was the only vehicle to escape unscathed thus far (save for some minimal body pinstriping and undercarriage scrapes), we were only able to test it, and not the others. It was decided that this would not abnormally skew the test results, as this vehicle was similar in design to the other now-disabled test vehicles, and would in all likelihood produce identical test results. We found that the V8-equipped Corvette, with it's wide Z-rated mall-terrain tires, tended to fishtail wildly in corners with just a minimal application of throttle. In addition, those tires were absolutely useless in any kind of mud, and would not self-clean no matter how much spinning they underwent. This appeared to be due to the lack of voids between the lugs; we think that perhaps a narrower all-season tire may be a more appropriate venue. Finally, when we aired the tires down, the 45-series tires did not have enough sidewall bulge to protect the 17-inch aluminum rims.

As the Corvette was still running, we decided to subject it to a crash test with a SUV. Our testers used a 1997 4Runner with an ARB front bumper, 3" lift, and 33" tires, and attempted to engage the Corvette in a head-on collision. The 4Runner ended up driving over the hood of the Corvette, crushing in the Corvette's windshield with it's front tires. We propose that manufacturers who build such low-slung, aerodynamically-shaped vehicles should incorporate a frame-mounted 6-point cage to protect the occupants in the event of a front-end collision with a SUV. Still, others have proposed that instead of
manufacturing passenger cars to tougher crash standards, SUVs and other vehicles should instead be manufactured to the lower crash tolerances of passenger cars! The T4MLIT thinks that all vehicles, including sports cars, semi-tractor units, and buses, should be built to SUV standards, to keep everything fair. But I digress.

This brings us to the obvious conclusion that no sports cars should be driven on rocky or rutted terrain, or they will suffer damage or even a life-threatening roll-over. And when driven on the street, they have a tendancy to severely injure their occupants when involved in an accident with a well-built vehicle. To paraphrase the great Ralph Nader, all sports cars are unsafe at any speed.

Note: The T4MLIT has submitted a warning-label design proposal to the sports car manufacturers to warn new drivers of the potential hazards:

WARNING!

This vehicle has stiffer springs, and less ground clearance than you are used to. It will not handle like your SUV. Do not attempt to drive this vehicle in the same manner as you would your SUV; doing so may result in serious injury or even death. Please read your owners' manual before attempting any hard-core 'wheeling.



Greg Sue
[email protected]
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Dunes/9948/

that quote made me mad in SO many ways :gnasher:

lol nice quote mrodgers

Quote from mrodgers :

I hadn't seen the video yet. This is of course old news now. You guys are just a bit slower to get it way over there.

Imagine, an SUV not able to handle a corner move like that. Seems that this old fictional story needs to be brought up from my old 4wheeling days....

...

The problem is that there are so many idiots who buy SUVs and drive them on the roads (thus decreasing general road safety levels). 'Funny' email, but seriously missing the point.

While on the subject of road safety: I was wondering, is it true that US drivers share a general aversion towards seatbelts?

everyone i know wears theirs for the mostpart

everyone in my family, except my dad cause he has like two accident examples where its worse to have one -_-

the only kids i know who dont wear them is the toolish ones who think they are the best....

in NJ everyone wears it. i did not wear seatbelts for a long time,it was in hungary tho,but after a crash(not big) i had with my lil sister with me,and saw her in slowmo going towards dashboard head on,its the first rule in my car,every1 seatbelts on! And anyway cops will assrape you if its not on. its even in commercials. for example `click it,or ticket`