Tragic car accidents related to Toyota have continued to erode consumer confidence in a once stellar automobile manufacturer. Here is a time line of some of the more recent news stories related to the Toyota recall. So far there have been three major recall issues including: misfitting car mats, unexpected accelerator issues and faulty spare tire mounting issues. These manufacturing issues can lead to accidents on the highways.
DETROIT: Toyota Motor Corp on Friday confirmed the results of a consumer reports test where a Lexus luxury SUV slid out in a tight turn, prompting the magazine to call it a “safety risk.” The magazine’s warning to US consumers not to buy the 2010 Lexus GX 460 luxury SUV until the issue is resolved was the latest blow to the automaker’s reputation after massive recalls that have sparked congressional hearings and lawsuits.
“Our engineers in Japan replicated the driving procedure and have duplicated the Consumer Reports result,” Lexus spokesman Bill Kwong said in a statement. Toyota was “evaluating potential remedies” and it was too early to determine the timing of a repair,” Kwong added.
Toyota halted sales of the SUV in the United States on Tuesday and stopped production overall after consumer reports warned that its handling made it a risk to roll over. Toyota is also testing stability controls on all of its SUVs.
The sales suspension will remain in place until Toyota is confident that the issue is resolved, Kwong said. US safety regulators are seeking a $16.4 million fine against Toyota for its handling of a recall involving defective accelerator pedals. The automaker has until Monday to decide whether to pay the fine or challenge it.
If you are involved in an accident and you think it may be related to the Toyota recall issues it is a good idea to ask a Georgia car accident lawyer your rights involved in your claim. Georgia personal injury law is explicit regarding these issues, however, legal advice may be necessary in order to make you whole again after your accident. the consumer Reports article is affecting nationwide sales of the Lexus GX 460. Toyota has voluntarily suspended the slaes of this vehicle until further investigation.
WASHINGTON — Toyota is temporarily halting sales of the 2010 Lexus GX460 after Consumer Reports issued a rare “Don’t Buy” warning amid concerns the large sport utility vehicle has handling problems that could cause it to roll over during sharp turns.
The Japanese automaker said Tuesday it had asked dealers to temporarily suspend sales of the SUV while it conducts its own tests on the GX460. Toyota said about 6,000 have been sold since the vehicle went on sale in December.
The magazine said the Lexus problem occurred during tests on its track with an unusually fast turn. The GX460′s stability control took too long to adjust, which could cause a rollover if one of the sliding wheels were to strike the curb or another obstacle, said Gabriel Shenhar, Consumer Reports’ senior auto test engineer. The Associated Press
On Tuesday, Consumer Reports announced that its tests had uncovered a dangerous handling problem that caused the rear end of the GX 460 to swerve, putting the sport utility vehicle at risk for a rollover. “When pushed to its limits on our track’s handling course,” the magazine wrote on its Web site, “the rear of the GX we bought slid out until the vehicle was almost sideways before the electronic stability control system was able to regain control.”
If you have a Toyota recall issue or a Georgia personal injury law question, please contact our office so we can help. We are Georgia car accident lawyers dedicated to helping you resolve your legal issues.
For a FREE consultation with our attorneys concerning your accident, call 1-888-315-8840
At Link & Smith, P.C. our goal is to provide exceptional legal services. We strive to achieve the highest standard of legal ability and ethics for the protection of our clients through team work, extensive resources, and 40+ years experience. We believe that serious injuries deserve superior results. For a FREE no-obligation consultation regarding your legal concerns, contact us today or call us toll-free at 888-315-8840.
[...] Toyota currently has three major recall issues they are seeking to correct as well as a federal inquiry into all recall issues and recently filed class action lawsuits which includes a request for the [...]
The problems with the GX460 simply have to be in the software, operating through various hardware components already on board. More and more responsibilities have been placed on these basic things, mediated through computers, or as Toyota is careful to say, “electronics” and Toyota simply has not handled the integration of all these items very well and now many Toyota products, particularly the Prius, are beginning to look more and more like SOUTHERN ENGINEERING, beneath whatever slick veneer Toyota has managed to place around them.
Toyota in its defense of the Prius has always maintained that there is no defect in their electronics in the Prius, and by extension other vehicles in their lineup including the Lexus, since their testing has shown no defects. But this is clearly bogus and hardly anybody with any knowledge of computers has bought into it. If Toyota itself believes any of it, it would indicate MAGICAL THINKING on their part, that merely thinking something is perfect makes it perfect, or that thinking some problem has been solved makes it go away.
So a lot of SAFETY FEATURES have developed from modest beginnings, based on a few basic features in hardware, and enabled by increasing computer power and driven forward by increased powers of imagination by software engineers at the automobile makers. There is nothing basically wrong with these safety features if they are carefully executed but lots of errors can creep in that are hard to recognize. Toyota seems to be having the most problems in this area. And just because something is labeled a “safety feature” does not mean that we should not continue its eventual usefulness. Many of the faults of which Prius owners complain online seem to be software related, but reading through lots of these posts reveal little if any attempt to define what the mechanism of the fault is. One would like to develop the simplest theory which explains all the known facts and to make predictions which could be tested by experimentation.
The Federal government requires that the newest jet transports monitor a minimum of 88 definite parameters in their “black boxes” but actually the manufactures have gone far beyond this, monitoring over 700 channels of data in the latest models, including lots of data from the engines, positions of control in the cockpit, position of control surfaces, lots of data at intermediate points etc.
The ABS has yaw sensors to detect skidding sideways & speed sensors on all four wheels to detect wheel slip. The ABS operates on slippery surfaces by using valves in the ABS brake control unit to increase and decrease braking forces at each wheel up to 20 times per second. The ECU operates to reduce engine power as needed and this requires the ability to restore or INCREASE engine power when traction improves.
So next consider TRACTION CONTOL, developed later, which acts by detecting a drive wheel that is spinning and applying a braking force to that wheel, sending more power to the other wheel with more traction and reducing engine power, which means that it has to be able to restore or INCREASE engine power when required.
STABILITY CONTROL is just a further refinement of these concepts depending on increasing computer power to get the job done.
Further, Toyota in its Prius model has this cute little feature that uses radar to help control the distance from the vehicle in front. Again one can see that the system must have the capability of either decreasing or INCREASING engine power and thus vehicle speed to get this done.
So we have all these neat safety features which depend on many different things operating perfectly in concert, controlled by computers, which must be operating without error. Notice that all of these features have the requirement of both decreasing and increasing engine power and vehicle speed. This provides the perfect mechanism to explain all the episodes of unintended acceleration UA that Toyota continues to deny, except to invoke bogus explanations like gas pedal entrapment under the floor mats and issues of stuck gas pedal which can be cured by inserting a magic little shim. These two explanations for UA meet with little acceptance outside of Toyota itself and those who seem to be their fan boys.
So my point is that all these software issues now interact with all the basic hardware features already on board to produce the PERFECT STORM for Toyota. So there was the well-publicized San Diego case of James Sipes, with the wild 20 minute 30 mile chase down the freeway, followed shortly by the case in Harrison NY where a Prius underwent UA from a standing stop and struck a stone wall. These two cases, the first at high speed and the second from a standing stop simply indicate to me that the PRIUS IS UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED.
http://priuschat.com/forums/gen-ii-prius-technical-discussion/30593-gas-bladder-exposed.html
Summary: There needs to be a general recall on all Prius gas tanks prior to 2010 because of potential for emissions control system failures.
David, this is a follow-up on our conversation at Boulder Toyota several days ago regarding the Prius fuel tanks prior to introduction of the conventional tanks on the 2010 Prius. .
So this is the so-called bladder gas tank of the Prius. The whole thing is a nightmare. The top and bottom are molded resin rather than metal as I had stated. It is not clear how much if any the bottom flexes to accept gasoline. It would have helped if he had shown what I assume is the bellows action that must occur along the sides as the tank fills, that is how the tank gets deeper. In any event the pictures shown in Toyota’s manuals are clearly and highly deceptive and arguably meant to obscure the issues. Frankly I can see how Toyota would not want to admit just how poorly designed this tank is. You are a sales and leasing representative for Boulder Toyota and presumably highly trained but you had trouble believing my description of the tank and for good reason. “Highly implausible” is how one might describe the design of this tank and Toyota should never have approved the design anyway.
There are lots of posts online of users having trouble getting the tank to take on acceptable amounts of fuel, the tank spitting back after filling, of tanks being ruined due to presumed over-filling leading to replacements costing $1000, of users unexpectedly running out of gasoline, being stranded in dangerous situations, of expensive calls for tow trucks etc. Various manuals go through drawn out procedures for testing various performance issues with the tank that seem highly subjective to me, with high probability of not solving anything. There seems to be a strong tendency for Toyota to blame the user for over-filling and refusing to take any responsibility whatsoever for anything.
There are lots of valves and controls and everything seems confusing. I would not blame Toyota for not wanting to be involved and taking the path of least resistance and declaring everything to be “normal.”
Ventilation, by manifold vacuum, of the space between the rigid metal outer shell and this resin bladder, is not constant but occurs only upon a “duty cycle” driven by the ECU. So if gasoline is leaking into this space due to a leak in the bladder, ventilation might not be adequate to keep it cleaned out. Gallons of gasoline accumulating in this space would then lead to reduced fuel tank capacity. I would not be impressed by any of Toyota’s claims that this would be easily detected or impossible in the first place. All the steps described in diagnosis show just how uncertain Toyota itself is in the whole process. Such leaks are a constant concern to Toyota as they discuss the issues. Gasoline leaking into this space and being ventilated away clearly would help explain many of the low mpg problems discussed online.
If this could be developed into an issue of failure of the Prius emissions controls, Toyota could and should be forced into a massive recall to replace the tanks with the new more conventional tanks.
So there is a valve run by some sort of detector that is supposed to allow air in the space to be expelled to the outside as the bladder fills and failure of this valve and/or detector would account for lack of ability to accept gasoline and spitting back etc.
Knowing where everything is, one should simply put the car up on a hoist and drill a small hole in a dependent part of the tank, using a battery powered drill to avoid sparks which could cause ignition of the gasoline inside the rigid shell . This would solve any problems related to retained gasoline and/or air. One could then see if the tank performs better. Further study would consist of drilling enough small holes to allow sounding with metal rods to detect any “tilting” of the tank at near-empty. Any such tilting could result in significant amounts of unusable fuel, since the drain in the middle would simply not be in the most dependent position. Large fuel gauge errors would also result. This probing with metal rods with the tank filled to capacity would detect issues with the bellows action not allowing full expansion.
Any holes in the bottom of the rigid shell could be easily repaired with small self-expanding rubber plugs commonly used to mount roof racks etc. Removing one or more of these plugs periodically might possibly but not necessarily allow one to detect gasoline leaks from the resin bladder. But in any event these leaks would be corrected by the general recall which I propose.
Steve
General issues with Lexus GX-460 recall for stability control problems Consumer Reports safety downgrade
Stability control simply uses computer power acting through hardware items already in place for ABS which has been around for awhile. The same general ideas also enable Traction Control. Conceptually there are at least two valves in the brake circuit to each wheel which can reduce or increase braking force 15-20 times per second in an attempt to get things just right, with the wheels all still turning but just on the edge of lockup for maximum braking. There are speed sensors on each wheel which enable the system to detect wheel spin or lockup, which of course are opposite conditions. In addition there are yaw sensors in two planes to each other which allow detection of skidding sideways, which indicates that things are getting more serious . The system also considers steering angle of the front wheels. So all this has to be evaluated by the system in real time which sends commands to the brakes but just as importantly to the ECU Engine Control Unit, which is required to modulate engine power as appropriate. This is all “fly by wire” and requires an attempt by the system to judge what the driver intends to do. But keep clearly in mind that if the ECU commands increases in engine power just as easily as it commands reductions. So if the ECU decides to assert its independence and out of the blue command an increase in power, we have the perfect explanation of all of the cases of UA which Toyota is trying to claim are impossible. Forget for the moment all of the theories about sticking gas pedals and floor mat entrapment.
Now in normal conditions on hard surface roads and with conservative driving, all of these systems are supposed to just stand by and one is not even aware of their presence. But as we discuss the situations below, just consider what the system could do if it decided to jump in with rogue signals during normal driving; sending bad signals to the ABS and ECU, catching the driver completely by surprise. A power reduction logically must be followed by a power increase, think of it as a power restore which got out of hand, and lo and behold we suddenly have the mechanism to explain all the claims of Unintended Acceleration UA experienced by drivers of different cars. Prius just seems to be catching most of the attention. UA might be happening to drivers who did not recognize it. Toyota for its part tries to talk drivers out of accusing them of causing UA.
Explaining complete loss of brakes is also quite easy. A computer glitch can show up at any time and announce itself by calling for an inappropriate pressure dump to the brakes of all four wheels. So the James Sipes Prius had burned out front brake pads without damage to the rear brakes. Simple enough. All modern brake systems isolate the brakes into two systems, front and back, to isolate faults and the general theory would suggest that the fault was in the rear brakes, overloading severely the front brakes.
In the case of wheel spin the system applies brakes to the spinning wheel which forces the power to the drive wheel with better traction. Otherwise for example with a wheel spinning on ice power simply follows the path of least resistance. The system also reduces engine power to help this process along.
In the case of brake lockup on ice, the system acts to reduce braking power to the wheels to keep the wheels turning with just the right amount of slip for maximum traction and importantly to keep the wheels turning rather than skidding to enable better steering. Power is often reduced in these situations too. Notice that if a skid to the side develops we are talking about Stability Control as well as ABS.
All of this is “fly by wire” which places more and more responsibilities on the electronic control circuits and the computer is expected to get things just right or bad things can happen, worse than if no such “safety systems” were present at all. Notice that all sorts of signals are flying around.
There are all sorts of little stories in the discussion groups which only be integrated into the bigger picture by invoking computer faults. The idea in developing a general theory is to pick the simplest hypothesis which explains all the known facts and which allows us to make predictions which can be tested by further study.
So far Toyota has shown no desire to enter the search for the truth. Flight data recorders are required on all transport class airplanes, along with cockpit voice recorders. These are commonly called “black boxes” but they are actually orange. These have been around for at least 40-50 years and are being improved rapidly. The FAA requires 88 channels of data be recorded on the newest biggest jets although the manufacturers are actually now recording over 700 channels of data. This data is valuable to the airlines and equipment manufacturers in normal day to day evaluation of systems performance but in cases of an accident they are impounded and under control of NTSB National Transportation Safety Board which is completely impendent from the FAA.
So with Toyota vehemently denying that anything can be wrong with their electronic systems, they run the risk of attracting the attention of computer experts intent on proving them wrong.
So that is where the invitation to NASA to join in becomes interesting. There may be people at NASA who have already spotted Toyota’s problems and who may have indicated to NHTSA that they were eager to jump into the fight.
[...] the rest here: 2010 Toyota Lexus GX 460 luxury SUV sales halted amid safety issue … Share and [...]