I haven't seen any conversation around here concerning the Toyota problems. I currently work retail which means I talk with a lot of people each week from all walks of life. Several things people always like to talk about: their phones, their computers and their cars.
Lately, I've heard some comments that a conspiracy of sorts is in play. It goes like this: Toyota has a software problem that they refuse to admit to; local dealerships are aware of it AND large insurance companies like Farmers are also aware of the problem. The argument used during the banking/financial crisis "too big to fail" is being used once again for America's largest auto manufacturer and its largest insurers, both of whom stand to suffer greatly should it be released that both parties knew of these problems and attempted to hide the facts. Not to mention the banks who extended credit to Toyota buyers who may find their assets' values in jeopardy. They could be upside down on their loans pretty quickly.
This week I heard a first hand story of a woman whose Toyota Avalon brakes failed and caused a bad accident. The local dealer held the car for three weeks waiting for a response from headquarters. Finally, Toyota would only say that there was no recall issued for this vehicle. True, but not really what the owner was asking. The lady was not cited by the patrolman, the insurance company fixed both cars with little comment and the local dealer refused to give the woman a list of repairs and repair parts. Sounds fishy.
I honestly believe they have a software problem but I don't know about the rest. I saw where an angry ex-employee of a car lot was arrested for engaging the dealers' "lock-out" software which disables a vehicle and starts cars honking using the on-star system. Doesn't seem like much of a stretch to envision an enemy of Toyota remotely doing the same or planting a bug within a system as well.
America needs another good conspiracy don't we?
That's funny because I thought the big conspiracy was that there is nothing wrong with these cars.
The whole thing is just being fabricated by GM and Ford, and Congress is playing along to demonize what has become the #1 car manufacturer in the world, so that GM can make its comeback.
And if you think about it, considering the 800-bazillion Toyotas that are on the road, it is highly unlikely that they actually have a software glitch or there would be a whole lot more dead drivers.
At least they investigated and debunked that idiot Prius driver. He was a real-estate con-artist who was 5-months behind on his lease for the vehicle, and had recently declared bankruptcy.
My explanation is simpler: You've either got people faking the problems in an effort to win the liability lottery, or you've simply got people who stomped on the accelerator instead of the brake or their foot missed the brake entirely.
Quote from: Hawkins on March 18, 2010, 10:10:53 PM
At least they investigated and debunked that idiot Prius driver. He was a real-estate con-artist who was 5-months behind on his lease for the vehicle, and had recently declared bankruptcy.
Just wondering where you got this info from. The last I heard was that Toyata was investigating and couldn't replicate the results (which would be a big duh either way).
There is less skepticism about the Prius that crashed in New York. The Cali guy is suspect of, but not proven to be a scammer. If you hold to the conspiracy theory, the first thing you would do is cull his past and discredit him.
Here's the thing that really makes it a good story. Road and Track conducted a study with several different vehicles (not Toyotas) where they forced the cars into a full acceleration, then simultaneously applied the brakes in a panic stop scenario. The brakes in all the vehicles were able to overcome the engine. Some of them were programmed to shut the engine down while others simply slowed down. Even the Ford Mustang with a hi-po engine eventually stopped. R&T's conclusion was that these other manufacturers had faced the problem of erratic accelerator performance by watching Audi's problems and failures back in the 90's and making adjustments. They surmise the Toyota execs tried to skate.
Some people believe the UAW is tampering with Toyota cars. I think Toyota has a defect and they don't know how to fix it, cars today are more complex than the 1973 moon rocket was. Simpler is better.
Quote from: sauerkraut on March 19, 2010, 10:17:20 AM
Some people believe the UAW is tampering with Toyota cars. I think Toyota has a defect and they don't know how to fix it, cars today are more complex than the 1973 moon rocket was. Simpler is better.
This is so wrong-headed on several levels.
First of all, UAW workers are employed at Japanese car plants as well as American plants. So there's no logic for tampering.
As for "simpler is better," I don't think you'd like to drive new cars that don't have electronic ignition, nor would you like working on a Commodore computer.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on March 19, 2010, 10:21:37 AM
This is so wrong-headed on several levels.
First of all, UAW workers are employed at Japanese car plants as well as American plants. So there's no logic for tampering.
As for "simpler is better," I don't think you'd like to drive new cars that don't have electronic ignition, nor would you like working on a Commodore computer.
Really? Which Japanese plants in the US have been organized by UAW? I wasn't aware of any which weren't joint ventures with US based manufacturers.
Quote from: sauerkraut on March 19, 2010, 10:17:20 AM
Some people believe the UAW is tampering with Toyota cars. I think Toyota has a defect and they don't know how to fix it, cars today are more complex than the 1973 moon rocket was. Simpler is better.
I would have to say that "simpler is better" depends on what your purpose is. With cars, if you want something that is easy to work on, then yes, it applies. However, if you want efficiency, better emmisions and safety, then simpler is not better . I would hate to be driving an old detroit beast daily with today's gas prices.
Quote from: sauerkraut on March 19, 2010, 10:17:20 AM
Some people believe the UAW is tampering with Toyota cars. I think Toyota has a defect and they don't know how to fix it, cars today are more complex than the 1973 moon rocket was. Simpler is better.
Simpler doesn't let you get almost 400 horsepower out of a naturally aspirated V6. Simpler is wasteful of resources.
With complexity does come the need for greater engineering discipline, especially when replacing mechanical controls with software. It can be done. (Take the Space Shuttle as a great example of getting the software side nearly perfect, even as the hardware turns out to be not so great)
Quote from: nathanm on March 19, 2010, 05:19:08 PM
Simpler doesn't let you get almost 400 horsepower out of a naturally aspirated V6. Simpler is wasteful of resources.
With complexity does come the need for greater engineering discipline, especially when replacing mechanical controls with software. It can be done. (Take the Space Shuttle as a great example of getting the software side nearly perfect, even as the hardware turns out to be not so great)
Aircraft and spacecraft incorporate some form(s) of redundancy for fly by wire. I haven't seen that on automobiles. It may be there but I haven't seen it.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 19, 2010, 11:26:51 PM
Aircraft and spacecraft incorporate some form(s) of redundancy for fly by wire. I haven't seen that on automobiles. It may be there but I haven't seen it.
Yes, but fly-by-wire in airplanes is different. Computer controls the engine in automobiles. Same is true of airliners, especially the Airbuses, but they also employ computer control on the their control surfaces (essentially, steering the plane). Automobiles still use rack and pinion steering, at least most of the new ones I know do. There's the difference. Not necessarily as needed on automobiles.
Quote from: Hoss on March 19, 2010, 11:49:09 PM
Yes, but fly-by-wire in airplanes is different. Computer controls the engine in automobiles. Same is true of airliners, especially the Airbuses, but they also employ computer control on the their control surfaces (essentially, steering the plane). Automobiles still use rack and pinion steering, at least most of the new ones I know do. There's the difference. Not necessarily as needed on automobiles.
Tell that to Toyota owners with "fly by wire" throttle controls. (At least that is my understanding.) My ex-airline (retired) pilot friend says that even the engine controls on the airbus have redundancy.
Some new cars have "electric power steering". I haven't found out yet exactly what that entails. I hope there is still a mechanical path.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 20, 2010, 12:09:11 AM
Tell that to Toyota owners with "fly by wire" throttle controls. (At least that is my understanding.) My ex-airline (retired) pilot friend says that even the engine controls on the airbus have redundancy.
Some new cars have "electric power steering". I haven't found out yet exactly what that entails. I hope there is still a mechanical path.
All cars have that now (fly by wire throttle controls), and any car that has EFI has had it for years. Don't have the throttle plate anymore. It's a potentiometer that reads the position on the accelerator. Problem as I understand it is that Toyotas have a software flaw in the car that allows the runaway throttle behavior. Sofar, no others do. If Toyota would just acknowledge the flaw and correct it, this should be over. But like ALL big industry, they feel like they can do no wrong, so they deny the problem.
Quote from: Hoss on March 20, 2010, 01:04:32 AM
All cars have that now (fly by wire throttle controls), and any car that has EFI has had it for years. Don't have the throttle plate anymore. It's a potentiometer that reads the position on the accelerator. Problem as I understand it is that Toyotas have a software flaw in the car that allows the runaway throttle behavior. Sofar, no others do. If Toyota would just acknowledge the flaw and correct it, this should be over. But like ALL big industry, they feel like they can do no wrong, so they deny the problem.
And a redundant system is more likely to catch that error.
Here's a little tidbit. The patrolman who worked the accident I described above, told the woman that her black box should have recorded the operations of the car just before the collision. That would have shown whether there was indeed a brake system failure.
But the mechanic at the dealership told her that Toyota black boxes do NOT show the history of systems operations in the last 5 minutes of operation. That means there is no recording of possible system failures in any accident. Why would that be?
Think about it from their perspective. No way to prove their responsibility. No reason to show up in court and defend episodic software failures either. Any long term failures can be tracked, vehicles recalled and repaired, but the more difficult transient failures are covered by insurance. And insurance companies, if they know about this 5 minute black out, are involved with a deception that protects the corporate giant instead of their insureds. Who pays the premiums? The insured. However, by protecting Toyota they not only avoid law suits, they shift liability to the insured. That could be why her insurance company paid, no questions asked and why she was not cited for failure to stop. If so we're all being scammed.
Anyone know about the operations of black boxes and whether they differ by manufacturer?
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 20, 2010, 12:58:21 PM
And a redundant system is more likely to catch that error.
It's also more likely to drive up costs. You think the big auto makers want to price their product out of the middle class? That's their bread and butter. Especially with Toyota.
They presumably vary within even one manufacturer's output. Speaking out of hand here, the Prius has a good deal more instrumentation than other cars in Toyota's lineup and it makes sense that their "black box" would record more data. AFAIK, many cars' computers constantly record the most recent 5 - 20 seconds of OBD-II data.
The Truth About Cars blog has a lot of good writing on the subject with many knowledgeable commenters.
EFI cars have -not- had DBW throttle for years. No EFI car I've owned except the present one (2006 model) has DBW, not even the 2002 Exploder. There is still a throttle plate but the computer has full control of it with DBW. Cable throttle cars did have some kind of air bypass that the computer could control to regulate idle and such, but overall control was still in the driver's right foot (in combination with the computer's fuel maps - which were still ultimately deployed by the whim of the foot). Towards the end of the Dark Ages, many carb'ed cars had computer controls on emissions and fueling as well.
I'd wager that just about any car equipped with disc brakes and built within the last forty years could stop itself with the throttle stuck open. Pure speculation, of course. Certainly any car available to us within the last twenty is that capable. The Prius has kind of a multi-stage braking system, where the first part of the pedal travel is regenerative (wheels turn the electric motor as a generator) and more emphatic braking switches to the ordinary hydraulic setup. Beyond that, a "panic" braking input automatically drops the transmission into neutral and slows the engine speed to idle. Of course, if there's a set of perfect storm type coincident failures, the software that governs all this might not fulfill its panic stop duties.
Electric power steering just means that the pump is driven by an electric motor instead of the gas engine (by way of a belt). Most of what I read complains of a "lack of feel" or "feedback" from such a setup, but it's got a lot of growing up to do.
Now that's out of the way, I'm glad to drive a manual transmission. I have two, count 'em, TWO pedals that will stop the car one way or another. Plus a lever to disengage the engine from the drive wheels. Plus a regular ignition switch. Plus a thorough knowledge of the owner's manual that tells me explicitly how my particular car handles all that stuff. I feel safer just talking about it.
I have a very difficult time believing in these conspiracy theories. Are lawmakers and top executives in huge companies in cahoots? Certainly, but I have little faith in our present government, insurers' and carmakers' abilities to orchestrate an elaborate (and effective) plan to screw everybody.
Quote from: Hawkins on March 18, 2010, 10:10:53 PM
At least they investigated and debunked that idiot Prius driver. He was a real-estate con-artist who was 5-months behind on his lease for the vehicle, and had recently declared bankruptcy.
Toyota's "Baloon Boy" approach of discrediting people may backfire...
EL CAJON, California (AP) — A California Highway Patrol report released Wednesday said an officer saw brake lights flashing after arriving to help slow a speeding Toyota Prius on a Southern California freeway.
The account in the report is consistent with details the driver and CHP officer gave reporters shortly after the incident. Toyota, however, has cast doubt on the driver's story.
The lights were on "for a period of time and would turn off, indicating the driver was possibly pumping the brakes," CHP Officer Todd Neibert wrote in his seven-page incident report.
"I was within ¼ mile of the vehicle and could smell the heated brakes which indicated they had been used extensively."
Quote from: Hoss on March 20, 2010, 01:27:46 PM
It's also more likely to drive up costs. You think the big auto makers want to price their product out of the middle class? That's their bread and butter. Especially with Toyota.
It would be interesting to know if a second computer would be more expensive than keeping a mechanical cable to the "throttle". I believe even the new cars still have a butterfly valve (or multiple ones) of some sort to control air flow.
Yes, cost would go up.
Although I'm sure Toyota will eventually fix the problem, they will lose some customer base if their reputation for safety and reliability degrade. That would be even more costly. No need to cite the obvious examples.
I think that most new cars are really above the affordable level of the middle class anyway. Car loans used to only be for 3 or maybe 4 years (decades ago). Now in order to make them (choke, gasp, wheeze) affordable, loans are available out to at least 6 years.
Quote from: patric on March 20, 2010, 02:03:27 PM
EL CAJON, California (AP) — A California Highway Patrol report released Wednesday said an officer saw brake lights flashing after arriving to help slow a speeding Toyota Prius on a Southern California freeway.
The account in the report is consistent with details the driver and CHP officer gave reporters shortly after the incident. Toyota, however, has cast doubt on the driver's story.
The lights were on "for a period of time and would turn off, indicating the driver was possibly pumping the brakes," CHP Officer Todd Neibert wrote in his seven-page incident report.
"I was within ¼ mile of the vehicle and could smell the heated brakes which indicated they had been used extensively."
Sounds like driver error to me.
Quote from: buckeye on March 20, 2010, 01:43:51 PM
Electric power steering just means that the pump is driven by an electric motor instead of the gas engine (by way of a belt). Most of what I read complains of a "lack of feel" or "feedback" from such a setup, but it's got a lot of growing up to do.
If the way the pump is driven is the only difference, the feedback should not be an issue.
GM has frequently (always?) used a slightly flexible segment in the steering column connection to the driving gear in the gearbox or rack & pinion (Backed up by hard stops to limit deflection) to allow the boost, at the same pump pressure, to be modulated to provide feedback. At least from the 50s to 1998, those are the years I have any shop manuals for. I remember that Chrysler products (friend's 66 Charger) had a lot less steering feel than my 66 Buick Skylark GS. I don't know how the MOPAR system worked.
Edit:
I looked up Electric Power Steering on Google/wikipedia. The configuration you mention exists/existed but the newest EPS is different. EPS mechanically connects an electric motor to the steering column shaft (or equivalent in the steering box / rack & pinion unit) and directly applies torque to reduce the steering effort by the driver. Lots of magic in how much and when.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 20, 2010, 12:09:11 AM
Tell that to Toyota owners with "fly by wire" throttle controls. (At least that is my understanding.) My ex-airline (retired) pilot friend says that even the engine controls on the airbus have redundancy.
Some new cars have "electric power steering". I haven't found out yet exactly what that entails. I hope there is still a mechanical path.
Yes -and if the transmission is also "shift by wire" with no backup you can't shift into "N" if the engine runs out of control and computer goes bonkers (or gets a glitch) since that computer also controls the transmission shift lever and the computer won't let a moving car shift into "N"... Now if the cars KEY is also on/off/start by wire the computer may not let you shut the engine off of a moving car because the computer will think that is unsafe- what can a driver do? I think just about all new cars today are drive by wire. What I said early on in another post is that some people believe a UAW guy is standing along side the roads & highways and zapping Toyotas he sees passing by with a electron ray gun pulse to disable or confuse the Toyotas computer and make the car run out of control. I don't believe it- but at another forum there is a poster who seems think that is the case, I doubt he's the only person who believes that way. :-\
Quote... newer EPS mechanically connects an electric motor to the steering column shaft
Oh, that's cool. News to me, I'll have to do some reading.
I may be wrong, but pretty sure it would take a significant EMP to disable or seriously disrupt a car's computer - significant enough that the device required would arouse no small interest on the side of the road.
Quote from: buckeye on March 22, 2010, 01:33:44 PM
Oh, that's cool. News to me, I'll have to do some reading.
I may be wrong, but pretty sure it would take a significant EMP to disable or seriously disrupt a car's computer - significant enough that the device required would arouse no small interest on the side of the road.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_steering
About 1/2 down in the text it describes the system.
Always heard that the NSX had electric power steering (usually spoken in a low, reverent tone that belied ignorance of its workings) but suffered just that very ignorance. Certainly the NSX was never faulted for poor steering feel, although that comment's been made about the S2000 on occasion. I agree with the article that manual steering does offer the best feel. Interesting stuff and illustrates cars' increasing dependence on software. DBW steering? Seriously? That scares me a lot more than a throttle failure.
Making cars safer is a worthy and necessary pursuit, but it's getting to the point that the safety -software- makes a car easily drivable in a much more dangerous circumstance. It's now possible to drive faster and with less concern for quick control inputs in inclement conditions, but should a driver overstep the stability/traction control software's ability to adjust and correct, the consequences are worse. In a sense, these systems are enabling ever-increasing incompetence in the driving public.
Give me a cabled throttle and clutch, manual windows, unassisted steering and ABS that's easily defeatable (for snow and gravel).
To put on the tinfoil hat: In a few years, the government will have full ability to take control of your car -at any time-. In fact, there's an OnStar commercial demonstrating it. Oh sure, they'll only ever take control of a car when there's reckless law breaking going on, right? "You never need worry, citizen, TRUST us; we're the government and we're here to help. Oh shoot, are my horns showing? Don't let them see the tail either."
They said on channel 2 today that the government is now going to get involved with Toyota's "speed-up" problem. I'd guess Toyota cannot figure out what the problem is or they don't want to figure it out because the fix is too costly. I knew it all along it had to be in the 'lectronics or computer system, it's not the gas pedal or floor mats.
Quote from: sauerkraut on March 30, 2010, 09:46:06 AM
They said on channel 2 today that the government is now going to get involved with Toyota's "speed-up" problem. I'd guess Toyota cannot figure out what the problem is or they don't want to figure it out because the fix is too costly. I knew it all along it had to be in the 'lectronics or computer system, it's not the gas pedal or floor mats.
Nah. They just want to be industrial spies so they can fix GM.
From buckeye:
"I'd wager that just about any car equipped with disc brakes and built within the last forty years could stop itself with the throttle stuck open. Pure speculation, of course. Certainly any car available to us within the last twenty is that capable. "
I maybe wrong, but what is one of the biggest advances since disc brakes? Anti Lock Brake System. You can't lock up the brakes with the foot brake anymore. Lock the brakes you get the friction from the tires sliding on pavement and slow down. ABS pulses the brakes so they don't lock up, and if you have a car that is accelerating at 3/4 to wide open you start applying the brakes and press harder or even jam on the brakes and the pads heat up and glaze over until they become useless. I think that the should program the ECM that brak overides throttle, period.
At the start of this thread I referenced a Road & Track article that showed even the strongest high performance cars today, like the Mustang, have braking systems that are able to overcome their high horsepower. I will look it up and post it here. That is the reverse of cars in the 60's-70's that could easily overcome their drum type brakes with their 450+hp motors because they didn't have disk brakes or ABS. I think it was the Cadillacs that first came out with the system which was problem prone and unreliable at that time.
The question here it seems is whether the Toyota system has a glitch that engages full throttle, overides the ABS and forbids the car from shifting into an electronic neutral. The conspiracy to me is that many people in the insurance and enforcement areas seem to be aware of the problem but Toyota acts totally surprised.
Hard to say what happened with the Sikes guy in CA, but he was able to slow to under 50 with the CHP talking to him by PA, then go ahead and slow down and stop. 911 dispatcher told him repeatedly - as in over and over - to put the car in neutral and turn off the key. He refused to do either. He made a comment about "you had to be there". I think there was a whole lot of panic involved.
At the end, he was able to stop. Then the CHP backed up to touch his bumper AFTER he had come to a stop. He did not touch the Prius until after the car was stopped. (All this from CHP statement and 911 call transcripts.)
After driving a butt-load of cars and trucks for well over 3.0 million miles, including Corolla and Camry, I am having a tough time believing the brakes could not stop a Prius. Or any other available commercially available car/truck with an automatic transmission. Or a manual for that matter.
I tend to lean to the idea that he is an at least somewhat less than exceptional driver. (Personal responsibility anyone?)
I guess the 250 applications of brake at about 1/2 pressure makes me skeptical.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 30, 2010, 10:27:03 PM
After driving a butt-load of cars and trucks for well over 3.0 million miles, including Corolla and Camry, I am having a tough time believing the brakes could not stop a Prius. Or any other available commercially available car/truck with an automatic transmission. Or a manual for that matter.
Now I have to ask, have you ever attempted to brake while excellerating? How about while excellerating when already in motion at 70mph? I've had an excellerator stick on me. Brakes don't exactly overcome this with a great deal of ease. I'm not saying that this guy shouldn't have handled the situation differantly, if the cause was ligitamate, but I'm saying that a situation like this is a different situation then your day to day driving.
Quote from: custosnox on March 30, 2010, 11:06:42 PM
Now I have to ask, have you ever attempted to brake while excellerating? How about while excellerating when already in motion at 70mph? I've had an excellerator stick on me. Brakes don't exactly overcome this with a great deal of ease. I'm not saying that this guy shouldn't have handled the situation differantly, if the cause was ligitamate, but I'm saying that a situation like this is a different situation then your day to day driving.
I have in my 30 years of driving, cooked the brakes on a couple of cars, both disc and drum brakes and have had them fail. The first time was with my Triumph TR7 after a couple of intense driving sessions, I had them fail from high speed glazing of the brake pads on the front of the car to the point that no matter how mch pressure I applied to the pedal nothing was going to happen, this was in 1983. In 1992 I cooked the brakes on a 1990 Honda Civic Si carrrying too much speed through the Salt River Canyon on Highway 60 (the same one that runs through OK and MO) that by the time that I got to the bottom of the canyon my brakes were smoking. I have also cooked the brakes on race cars at Hallett, and on all of these occasions there was no ABS or traction control on any of the vehicles. This does not include the times that I was working for freight companies in Tulsa, that because of the load on the truck I was driving exceeded the limit of the truck I was driving.
I am not an expert, nor an engineer in the automitve realm, but I know from personal experience that an engine wide open can overcome the the braking system on most cars/trucks. If you are doing 65 or 70 in a car, and it accelerates without your contol, you can easily burn out the brakes in a short period of time because the compounds of the brake pads are very mundane, they are soft so that the average driver only has to put in minimal effort to slow the car down.
On the opposite side I have owned and driven cars with agessive brakes, crossed drilled rotors and more agressive pads, that you actually have to ride the brakes a little to build heat in them so they function properly, if you don't they lock up very easily.
I still think that some of the issues for Toyota are the fact that they have cars that have unintended acceleration issues, but the fact that we have become reliant on driver aids in our cars, that we are no longer drivers in our cars, we are becoming merely passengers as we travel.
Give me a cable connected throttle, a clutch that requires my left foot, and a gear shift that requires my right hand. Keep the ABS, traction control, and the manumatic for spirited driving, I drive my car, I am involved in how it moves down the road.
There is alot to the mix here, the runaway cars happened more than to just person, and if the anti-lock brake is tied in to the computer, the system may not allow braking while the engine is under power, the computer may not even allow shifting when a car is in motion (as a safety feature to prevent transmission damage) .... Even If you can brake it will do alot of damage and over heat the brake pads and rotors and then the brakes fade out and will become useless and the car is still speeding away, some woman in Tennessee with a runnaway car on I-40 said that she could not brake, turn off the key or shift into "N" then just as suddenly as the car sped out of control it all came back to normal and then she pulled over. ???
dbacks, I'm not surprised you cooked brakes in the circumstances mentioned, especially with an overloaded truck! Sikes is a different story... They say he repeatedly and alternately stabbed at both pedals, presumably in a panicked stupor. I might be able to see overheating the brakes in that circumstance.
Surely you're aware that an ABS-equipped pedal (so to speak) does a better job of threshold braking than any human. Locking 'em up wouldn't have overheated the brakes but wouldn't have done a safe job of stopping him, either. If Sikes had stood on the pedal, I have every confidence they would've stopped his car.
Gotta disagree with you on the brake/throttle override thing. How do we left-foot brake at autocross, then? ;) However, we're in total agreement on "driving aids". Mostly, they just allow shoddier service from the nut behind the wheel.
QuoteI've had an excellerator stick on me.
Oh, I wish that would happen to me. Now a sticking accelerator, that's a different story... ;)
Quote from: custosnox on March 19, 2010, 01:13:02 PM
I would have to say that "simpler is better" depends on what your purpose is. With cars, if you want something that is easy to work on, then yes, it applies. However, if you want efficiency, better emmisions and safety, then simpler is not better . I would hate to be driving an old detroit beast daily with today's gas prices.
The 1960 Ford Falcon with the 144 cubic inch six was rated at 30 MPG on the highway. It would be easy today to build a simple, carbureted car with a 4 cylinder engine that would get 35-40 MPG.
I don't understand why manufacturers have changed to drive by wire for everything. What's wrong with a simple throttle cable?
I've read that steer by wire is coming. I don't think I would buy a car without mechanical steering.
Quote from: nathanm on March 19, 2010, 05:19:08 PM
Simpler doesn't let you get almost 400 horsepower out of a naturally aspirated V6. Simpler is wasteful of resources.
Who makes a ~400 horse NA V6 engine? I know Ford and GM both have 300+ horsepower non-blown V6 engines, and Ford makes a twin turbo V6 with close to 400 HP, but I'm not aware of a near 400 horsepower naturally aspirated V6.
Quote from: Hoss on March 20, 2010, 01:04:32 AM
All cars have that now (fly by wire throttle controls), and any car that has EFI has had it for years.
My 12 year old Chevy has EFI and a throttle cable. Never had any problems with it. In this case, I believe simpler is better.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 20, 2010, 02:19:50 PM
If the way the pump is driven is the only difference, the feedback should not be an issue.
GM has frequently (always?) used a slightly flexible segment in the steering column connection to the driving gear in the gearbox or rack & pinion (Backed up by hard stops to limit deflection) to allow the boost, at the same pump pressure, to be modulated to provide feedback. At least from the 50s to 1998, those are the years I have any shop manuals for. I remember that Chrysler products (friend's 66 Charger) had a lot less steering feel than my 66 Buick Skylark GS. I don't know how the MOPAR system worked.
The Charger had torsion bar front suspension. In theory, it should have handled better than the Buick but that may or may not be true.
Quote from: bugo on April 03, 2010, 05:31:18 PM
The 1960 Ford Falcon with the 144 cubic inch six was rated at 30 MPG on the highway. It would be easy today to build a simple, carbureted car with a 4 cylinder engine that would get 35-40 MPG.
My sister (reluctantly) had a 63 Falcon with the 144 cu in 6. That series of engines would probably not pass emissions requirements today. It didn't even have a PCV valve, just a road draft tube. That engine also only had about 85 HP. Most drivers today would not call that acceptable performance. When the 144 in engine ate #6 piston, I got a 200 cu in 6 that bolted in. 120 HP, I think. That had reasonable performance, even with the Ford-o-matic 2sp auto trans. I don't know if my sister kept track of the gas mileage. The Falcon I would have liked was the one with the 260 V8.
Quote from: bugo on April 03, 2010, 05:33:28 PM
I don't understand why manufacturers have changed to drive by wire for everything. What's wrong with a simple throttle cable?
I've read that steer by wire is coming. I don't think I would buy a car without mechanical steering.
With multiple "throttle" plates, they can control them individually to counter act any unbalance of any intake manifold. Helps performance and emissions.
Quote from: bugo on April 03, 2010, 05:54:18 PM
The Charger had torsion bar front suspension. In theory, it should have handled better than the Buick but that may or may not be true.
I know it had torsion bar suspension on the front end. Springs can be tuned to what the designer wants. Torsion bar takes up less space. I don't know if there was any design advantage to torsion bar over coil springs but my first inclination would be no or or the Formula 1 race cars would have been using it. Most of them that I remember from the era had coil springs. I won't say the Charger handled any better or worse than the Buick GS, only that the feel of the steering in the Buick was better.
My '61 Mercury Comet station wagon had that Falcon drive train - small straight 6. It was great and I would like to have another. It got better mileage than the '61 VW. 23 in city and 26-27 on road. There were no mileage ratings at that time. That didn't happen for years.
Brakes - just tested that stopping thing this weekend. Thursday evening on turnpike (no traffic around) and minimal fade. I only did about 1/2 dozen hard brakes - not the 250 half stops that Sikes did. Also, did basically the same thing just west of Las Vegas on about 28 Dec. Highway 160, just east of Mountain Spring is a nice little slope that drops down into the valley on west side of Vegas (interesting view on Google maps, satellite view). Pickup and 10,000 lb trailer. Even with lower gear (2nd automatic), there was plenty of braking. Could definitely smell brakes. Got some fade - good thing it's only about 6 miles of 9% grade. But was also definitely able to stop when I wanted.
Quote from: bugo on April 03, 2010, 05:31:18 PM
The 1960 Ford Falcon with the 144 cubic inch six was rated at 30 MPG on the highway. It would be easy today to build a simple, carbureted car with a 4 cylinder engine that would get 35-40 MPG.
That's correct, also the old Ford 300 six cylinders that was put in pick-up trucks for many years got good fuel mileage back in the 1960's and early 1970's then they started with emission controls and the fuel mileage dropped.
Quote from: bugo on April 03, 2010, 05:31:18 PM
The 1960 Ford Falcon with the 144 cubic inch six was rated at 30 MPG on the highway. It would be easy today to build a simple, carbureted car with a 4 cylinder engine that would get 35-40 MPG.
Even better to build a small car that meets modern safety standards, but it'd have a fuel injected engine roughly 2/3 the size that makes about 1/3 more horsepower with -far- cleaner emissions.
Don't get me wrong, there's no doubt the old Falcon did a fine job but there's no reason to regress back to it.