UPDATE: you're up to 100 mph, would you kill the engine, or shift into neutral?

[Islander]

The "smart throttle" is also a preventive device, and the cop would easily have survived if his loaner had had it.

"Smart throttle" refers to a "fly-by-wire" system that has no mechanical connection between the accelerator pedal and the throttle. It works, and is even used on some high-performance motorcycles, but it depends on the car's computer working properly at all times, so it adds one more thing (or group of things) that can go wrong and cause a very hazardous situation instead of preventing one.

[Islander]

HHMMMMM. Wonder why a normal driver would not immediately hit the brakes a s the car took off.

And this guy wasn't just a normal driver, but a police officer, whom one would assume had had professional driver training. As well, the car was a Lexus, a premium car that you'd expect to have premium brakes that should have been able to stop the car.

I don't understand why he didn't brake hard or downshift, or shift into Neutral or even shut off the engine, instead of making a phone call which could have been no help at all in the few seconds available.

My guess is that the driver panicked instead of dealing rationally and effectively with the emergency situation.

[Islander]

I don't think I ever had a car that wouldn't shut off in drive but I'm sure there are some new ones that might have that blocked.

Years ago, I was driving my 1990 5.7L Caprice (ex-police model) on the highway and ran out of fuel. I knew that the fuel pump sends excess fuel to the injectors and the surplus is returned to the fuel tank, so I reasoned there was still a bit in the tank. I shifted to Neutral and shut off the engine, letting the car coast for a half-mile or so, then restarted it, put in back in Drive, accelerated gently back up to speed, then repeated the process five or six times until I reached an off-ramp with a nearby gas station, where I filled up.

It didn't seem all that technical and power steering is hardly needed at highway speeds.

[WMcD]

I am very skeptical on general claims and any individual claim, and of course they should be examined on a case by case basis according to actual evidence.

I was involved as a lawyer in a case where a man's wife claimed the car, while she was parking it, suddenly accelerated backwards through the garage wall into the kitchen. It came to rest burning rubber on the linoneum. Later, very convincing evidence showed that the husband was in the driver's seat at the time and was very drunk. So the police were told it was the sober wife was driving and the episode was blamed on the mysterious turn on of cruse control.

There are some anecdotal reports where someone will say, "The harder I stepped on the brake, the faster the engine reved." They deny they got the wrong pedal but that is the only rational explanation. When an accident is due to driver errror, the driver will blame cruise control. In other cases someone loses control for whatever reason, and then, again, it is the car computer which is blamed. Maybe they believe it, themselves..

And there are situations where someone is "upside down" in a lease and is looking for some reason to get out of it. A claimed run away is a good hob goblem in a Lemon Law claim. "It ran away the other night and I just don't feel safe. I took it to the dealer three times and they don't find any malfunction." The next argument is that the manufacturer/dealer is refusing to fix the problem. They are evil.

Yet manufactures will put it in their records for the sake of accuracy and govenment compliance.

What happens in the 'scientific' world of examination is that all of these, IMHO, frauds, become evidence. The next time there is a claim by a plaintiff, his expert engineer will say: "Of course this could have happened, look at all the previous reports of things very similar."

It is like a witch hunt. There are previous reports of witches, so this one could/must be correct and not made up.

Hang the witch..

Wm McD

[wuzzzer]

Considering that it takes most cars a pretty decent amount of time to accelerate to speeds around 100mph, I would hope that any person with a high enough IQ to get a driver's license would realize that shifting into neutral would fix the problem. Why anyone would attempt to turn the engine off is beyond me.

[jheis]

In the San Diego case, the driver was a seasoned off-duty CHP officer with lots of high speed driver training under his belt. The car was a loaner from the dealer while his car was being serviced - so, he, apparently was unfamiliar with the car, hadn't read the manual & didn't know the three second drill on how to turn it off. The call to 911 was from the driver's brother-in-law who was a back seat passenger in the runaway Lexus. He reported wide open throttle & no brakes. No idea why the driver was unable to shift it into neutral, but things happen very quickly when a powerfull car goes to WOT. The driver had his hands full trying to thread his way through heavy traffic at 120 mph. Unfortunately, his luck ran out & he rearended a SUV, struck an embankment & the car burst into flames killing him, his wife, their 13 year old daughter, and the wife's brother.

Toyota blames the floor mats....

There have been over 2,000 of these "incidents." 16 fatalities so far....

[sunburnwilly]

Downshift and let it blow , if it's a manual . Put it in neutral if its auto . I would have long been applying the brakes before it ever got to that .

[jheis]

As was pointed out in the above articles, hit the brakes twice at WOT and the vacumn is depleted. Without power assist, the engine easily overpowers the brakes.

[russ69]

Considering that it takes most cars a pretty decent amount of time to accelerate to speeds around 100mph, I would hope that any person with a high enough IQ to get a driver's license would realize that shifting into neutral would fix the problem. Why anyone would attempt to turn the engine off is beyond me.

Because it works? Done it 100 times. Didn't you ever take Mom's car and blow the muffler off by running down the road, shutting off the engine then turning it back on? KA-BOOM! Loads of fun! That 5000 pound station wagon didn't turn or stop too well without power assist but I never put it in a ditch or ran off the road.

Thanx, Russ

[sunburnwilly]

As was pointed out in the above articles, hit the brakes twice at WOT and the vacumn is depleted. Without power assist, the engine easily overpowers the brakes.

Still , you would realize that something was wrong and be doing something about it .

[twistedcrankcammer]

All motorcycles have kill switches but no car does? I wonder why,it's good for bikes and not for cars? I have had stuck throttles, I just turned off the engine, I guess I've been wrong all this time? You loose power assist after a short time but you can still brake and turn. My car has 400 hp, if the gas sticks you want to turn it off quick before you gain too much speed. You are not going to be able to select neutral very well when you are pinned in the seat and gaining speed fast, plus you'll need both hands to steer when the power steering fades.

Thanx, Russ

Speaking from a standpoint of someone with alot of miles behind 1,400 HP, I have my doubts as to why anybody who would think it would be a panic descission behind 400 HP, should even have a drivers liscense!!

Having said the pevious, I will state the obvious; Almost all new cars come standard with a rev limiter!! Puting it into neutral and applying the brakes won't hurt the engine a bit!!!!

Putting the engine in a lower gear at too many RPMs could over rev and blow the engine!!

Turning the engine off with a stuck throttle with fuel injection could possibly hydraulic the engine!!

Doesn't take alot of thought here, just some basic understanding of how an engine works!!

Roger

[JJkizak]

The only stuck throttle problem I would worry about was my old 1968 L-88 Corvette and then it was a manual tranny but it would scare the crap out of me.

JJK

[Groomlakearea51]

JJK's answer brought back memories of the Z-28 racing days of yore..... Turn the key off and leave it in gear, especially leave it in gear. Also, had a 68' 426 Hemi Roadrunner with the Torqueflite that I ran in the NHRA "stock" class (B/SA). Well one day, the twin AFB's (big ole' Carter carbs) linkage retaining pin inside the firewall broke.... and what a ride. Turned the key off, kept it in drive and slowly but surely, with much backfiring, big flames (hot unburned fuel coming through the headers...) it rolled to a stop...... What a ride. [H]

[russ69]

Turning the engine off with a stuck throttle with fuel injection could possibly hydraulic the engine!!

With EFI The fuel gets cut off when you kill the engine. It kinda takes the fun out of turning the key off, you don't get the fuel into the exhaust and it doesn't give you a big bang like a carburetor car does, Like I said done it many times, no problems.

Thanx, Russ

[jacksonbart]

How do you explain this one?

[lotusmark]

I heard an interesting quote this week that would apply in this situation. Something like...."Stupidity is the greatest determiner of destiny."

[Islander]

How do you explain this one?

Whenever you approach a level crossing, remember that the train always has the right of way, both legally and logically.

The owner of that car was lucky to have so little damage. I've seen cars turned to confetti in a collision with a train. That locomotive likely had no more damage than a broken headlight, if that. A six-axle loco like that weighs around 290,000 pounds or about 145 tons. Each wheel and axle assembly (not counting the attached traction motor) weighs about a ton and a half. Locomotives have serious amounts of mass and momentum, never mind the mass and momentum of the rest of the train.

[mike stehr]

That's quite a nice hood ornament for the BNSF engine.

Back in 1982 I was living with my middle sister in Portland Oregon for awhile. I helped a friend of theirs tow a '70's Cadillac Eldorado with a cracked block across town. He was towing with a 3/4 or 1 ton Ford van.

But this guy was a total nut. He starts driving full blast everwhere. I was having a hard time trying to pilot that Cadillac with no power steering or brakes with him wide open everywhere. It was rough trying to stop both of us with no power brakes.......especially with him just stopping and going.

Of course, I ended up tagging him in the rear-end. It was light hit, and he just laughs and takes off again. After flying down a congested street speeding, and almost hitting a car, I had enough.

We're doing about 50mph, and I buried the E-brake. And then using the steering wheel as leverage, I put both feet on the brake pedal and put all my weight on it. The van went from 50mph, to about 5mph real fast, with the rear end swinging right and left on that chain. He gets out to bark at me. I told him to slow down or I'll just walk back......you can tow the cadillac by yourself......

He chilled out.

Back at home in the mid-eighties, a good friend was putting a 350 chevy motor and turbo 350 tranny into roughly a '72 vintage Vega wagon. He was doing it for another friend who owned it. He gets it running, and we take it for a spin.

Now it's pretty much impossible to jam a turbo 350 up into reverse or park. It probably can be done if one forces it hard enough, I suppose. But's it's real easy to do if you forget to hook up the vacuum modulator to the transmission.

As we are cruising, he throws into low and jumps on it. From low into second, from second into drive, from drive up into reverse...BAM! We went from about 45-50mph to a dead stop, with a rear wheel blazing in reverse. I went into the dash and windshield, he ate steering wheel. We didn't get hurt at all, just woken up really good.

He knew right away he forgot to connect the vacuum modulator. He fixed that and it was fine.

I would think Toyota will deny everything and stick with the floormat theory, until someone catches a car in the act, traces the defective part/parts, and can prove that the part/parts are defective and causing the problem.

[jheis]

Lots of troubling unanswered questions about the case. All the interviews I've read say that if anyone should have been able to deal with a runaway car, it was the CHP officer behind the wheel.

No idea why he was unable to shift into neutral - or have the passanger pull it into neutral - but SoCal traffic flows at about 80 mph, so they would already have been moving pretty fast when the car took off. Not much time to think, but the brother-in-law in the back seat had time to make a 911 call, so it seems like someone should have been able to do something to prevent this tragedy.

James

[skonopa]

How do you explain this one?

Wait a second? Is that still the "new car" sticker in the rear passenger window?