toyota electronic throttles vindicated by NHTSA

Get into a 1500-horsepower twin-turbo Corvette drag car, stand on the brakes and the gas at the same time and see what happens. You're gonna go nowhere.

Now how is it that a 75-horsepower (charitably) Prius can overwhelm it's brakes?

Yea, these people berkeleyed up and hit the wrong pedal, or panicked and didn't know to hit the brake pedal when their cruise got stuck, or they had 7 floor mats in their car and the pedal got stuck under them. They like to sue people to avoid blaming themselves (yay!), so they sued Toyota.

That's the long story short. Only that part of it gets lost among the bullE36 M3. Any car's brakes can easily overwhelm it's own power of acceleration.

The people just have no idea how to drive. Isn't there a judge or NHTSA rep or anyone along the way that can just slam the door on these ignorant shiny happy people' faces whilst saying "Learn how to berkeleying drive?"

Twin_Cam wrote: Get into a 1500-horsepower twin-turbo Corvette drag car, stand on the brakes and the gas at the same time and see what happens. You're gonna go nowhere. Now how is it that a 75-horsepower (charitably) Prius can overwhelm it's brakes?

Because the Corvette isn't moving, so the brakes aren't dissipating any energy.

The Prious is moving, so the brakes get hot. And instead of simply slamming on the brakes and bringing the car to a complete halt, they tried to control the car, heating the brakes to fade saturation.

Ignorant wrote: wcelliot wrote: Ignorant wrote: Give in to your electronic overlords people.. They're better. Fascinating how your political/economic opinions tend to color your engineering ones as well. At least you're consistent. ;-)

Right, and by that logic your political beliefs put you squarely into the, Relay cabinets were good for my forefathers and therefore they're good for me.. camp.

You could not have further missed the point...

You are programmed to prefer "overlord" domination of your free will for the "good of the whole" (and to force it on me against my will) while I am programmed to want free will/control free from overlord control even if it means an overall less efficient operation. This appears true in your opinions of political philosophy, economics, and now apparently engineering.

(Soros recently opined that the Chinese form of Government/economy was superior to the US for this very reason... that the "overlords were better" and allowed to implement programs for the "good of all" without worrying about all that "individual free will" stuff. Same philosophical argument you make here.)

I have no problem with efi, dbw, etc... as long as they function for me and I'm free to make the car do what I want. Better technology does not have to come with those "strings" attached... efi is a good example... it can provide better power, economy, and throttle response than a carb. All positive. Ditto for electronic igntion, etc...

But once you take advantage of the technology to take control away from me (for my "own good"), then you've crossed the line. DBW is awesome if it opens the throttle when I push the pedal and closes it when I let off. But add in an overlord that says "I know what you'd like to do here, but I'll decide how to do it for best economy/emissions rather than best power" and it's epic fail.

Politically, economically, or in engineering, I don't care if the overlords are "better"; I'm unwilling to voluntarily ceed control to them as you are...

wcelliot wrote: DBW is awesome if it opens the throttle when I push the pedal and closes it when I let off. But add in an overlord that says "I know what you'd like to do here, but I'll decide how to do it for best economy/emissions rather than best power" and it's epic fail.

DBW can provide whatever throttle response you want, including options not available via cable (infinitely variable curves, the ability to smooth torque dips for more consistent response). The manufacturers don't always do what we'd most like with that capability. This, I think, is very similar to engine management tuned for economy, boost held to a lower level than GRMers might like, hyperactive stability control, etc... Lots of technology that can be great for performance is not used to that end by factories, but opens new doors for modification.

I'd love to see this thread continue when somebody finds reliability data for both types of control, or some other interesting data points.

I'd respectfully suggest that any observations of the form "If you [like/hate] DBW, you must be the kind of person who [collects granola nuggets which look like Jerry Garcia/collects spent shells which resemble Newt Gingrich]" belong in Off-Topic Discussion or nowhere at all, please and thank you.

Wasn't their a video of a Formula one car playing a national anthem?

Applying political motivations to vehicle control systems is even more harebrained than anything else said in this thread. Please keep your rancid peanut butter (politics) out of my delicious chocolate (cars).

ransom wrote: I'd respectfully suggest that any observations of the form "If you [like/hate] DBW, you must be the kind of person who [collects granola nuggets which look like Jerry Garcia/collects spent shells which resemble Newt Gingrich]" belong in Off-Topic Discussion or nowhere at all, please and thank you.

I'd respectfully suggest that I was making no observation of the kind, but will take note that I need to be more careful to tailor my comments and observations to the understanding and interest of the audience.

Bill

dculberson wrote: Applying political motivations to vehicle control systems is even more harebrained than anything else said in this thread. Please keep your rancid peanut butter (politics) out of my delicious chocolate (cars).

Now that's funny right there, I don't care who you are! ;-)

I've been trying to keep politics out of cars for decades, but it keeps forcing its way back in, more and more intrusively each year. Why do you think the electronic overlords are there in the first place?

Electronic overlords are overlords in name only, I promise. There's nothing political about it.

I guess they are put in place due to regulation, but the regulation has less to do with free will than the 40k deaths per year due to traffic accidents. People are idiots, so they get their toys dumbed down for them. It's sad, but I'm not going to assign any overarching ideology to it.

Edit: oh, and thanks for recognizing that I was trying to be funny. ;-)

OMG I found a flounder.

Ohh boy.. He mentioned the great right wing bugaboo Soros..

Agree with flounder 100%. Sorry, bill. .

dculberson wrote: Electronic overlords are overlords in name only, I promise. There's nothing political about it. I guess they are put in place due to regulation, but the regulation has less to do with free will than the 40k deaths per year due to traffic accidents. People are idiots, so they get their toys dumbed down for them. It's sad, but I'm not going to assign any overarching ideology to it. Edit: oh, and thanks for recognizing that I was trying to be funny. ;-)

Bingo!

Societal evolution has has a much bigger influence on regulatory intrusion than does ideology. There are far more people driving today (than 30-40yrs ago) and far fewer of them see a car as entertainment; it's an appliance. Manufacturers have always found innovative ways to meet regulations and to increase the performance levels of even the most basic of platforms. People, on the other hand, have evolved in the opposite direction.

Cars, no matter how good they now are, are built to work for the lowest common denominators and there's a lot more of them than us.

Javelin wrote: Considering the P71 had a sticky throttle, I'd do what I did then. Pump the pedal to try and get the return spring to bring it back (which worked), and if it didn't I'd use the ignition key to turn the engine off and pull over (which I had to do on a 62 Rambler once). In the same situation, what would I do with a DBW? The computer is racing the engine for some reason and my foot inputs do nothing, and there's no key to turn off. Now my only option is to slam the brakes, shift to Neutral (if the auto box will let me), and hope I can get the thing turned off completely before the motor blows. How is that so hard for you to understand?

All of them??

Our Edge has a key. Both of my trucks have keys, both of my Flex's have keys.

And I'm still able to shift to neutral.

Why do you condemn DBW via the Toyota example? You keep doing that. Why? That, I just don't understand, yes.

Plus, as I posted before DBW is capable of seeing the error, and also trying to shut everything down itself. Again, just because certain OEM's may not does not condemn the technology.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Because there are unforseen circumstances that your programmers will never guess. You tell me DBW is totally safe for the gas pedal as long there's a key and Neutral, yet it's been proven to you that other manufacturer's don't have that (I have no idea if there's any Ford like that right now). So you have this stupid idea to take the actual input of the DRIVER away from them, and you end up with DBW steering (Mercedes), brakes (already going there with this bogus pre-stopping BS that never works coughvolvocough), and who knows what else.

So even if you do limit the tech to JUST the throttle, it still has to work when Janaynay spills her Mochafrappacrappa all over the floor 3x a week and her precious dog Bubbles pees on it while barking and wearing a sweater and the Cheerio crumbs from Kristen, Tristen, and Jisten jamb up the workings. Combine that with modern day craptastic wiring quality (all of VW Group, Jaguar, Mercedes-Benz, "organic" looms that disintegrate, etc, etc), the Chinese factory for the Tier 3 supplier cranking the module parts out by the million using recycled steel from the ship breakers, and coding that has to live in the ECU or BCM with the FaceSpace/OnStar/Gizoogle Maps software and the bloody thing is damn well going to break in ways you can't even comprehend!

Look, for the last damn time, I LIKE technology. Bring on the EFI, DI, Turbochargers with variable vanes, electronic assist power steering pumps, 4-channel ABS, and Variable Valve Timing. I own 4 computers, 3 digital cameras, and a smart phone okay, I am not a tech Luddite. Just leave the physical connection in between me and the damn car ALONE. When I turn the wheel I want the tires turn, when I stomp on the gas, I want full freaking throttle.

Please stop telling me about how much better it is becasue A: It's not (it's more expensive because you have to pay to code the things; you tamper with the input/output for better economy and don't tell me you don't because you do and you damn well know it; and they'll be impossible to replace in 30 years when I'm restoring the car, hello Reatta touchscreen and Turbo Coupe Ride Control Shocks) and B. I don't want that stupid idea migrating into other parts of the car like it already has (DBW steering, no keyed igntion, electronic parking brakes, automatic parallel parking, etc, etc).

These "engineers" you trust so much to place all of our lives into also created the Aerostar/Windstar (how many millions of those have you recalled now?), the Cruise-Control module fire-starters (thanks for not admitting to all of them having a problem, even though they're the same part), and the 4.6/5.4 "mod motor" spark-plug thread blowout debacle. Do you see why sane people don't want their control totally in the hands of some electrons made by the lowest bidder and designed by some boffin?

You know, repeating the same thing over and over and dismissing what the other person added doesn't make your point any stronger.

Seems to me it's all a matter of you don't like it - fine. But that doesn't mean you can claim it's more dangerous or likely to fail. Only stats can do that. So stop trying to argue your way into convincing someone it's somehow bad when that's just not a reasonable way to do it. Say you don't like it, realize you're going to be sad for the rest of your life if you don't get over that, and move on. Cars are all going to be at least throttle by wire before you know it, and there's absolutely nothing that another five paragraph post is going to do about it. Personally, I trust your scare-quote hypothetical engineer more than some random enthusiast's gut instincts. Gut instincts are horrible this sort of thing. But science? It works, bitches!!

Tell me that when the electronic steering and brakes fail on your 2025 car and you have ZERO input into what happens after that. It's a safety issue, pure and simple. It would be like not putting a manual emergency release on automatic doors (required by law) in buildings, not having a manually-operated "Emergency Stop" button on industrial equipment (required by law), or not having a mechanical way of lowering the landing gear in your aircraft (required by law).

So why shouldn't be required by law that when I drive a car the stupid thing actually steers, stops, and goes based on my inputs, even after an electronic or hydraulic failure?

damn, you are angry for some reason.

And, yes, I do have trust in those engineers. See, there are studies that are done, and requirements that need to me met- once again, just because Toyota has had problems with DBW doesn't mean the same thing for everyone else. For that matter, the debacles you illustrate for Ford are different people, too. If a part meets ALL of the requirements, and I do mean all of them, what is wrong with choosing the lowest bidder?

Failures mean different results, therefore requirements are different.

Must be tough for you to drive a car. But then again, if your Miata is any indication, you have some bad luck.

Javelin wrote: Tell me that when the electronic steering and brakes fail on your 2025 car and you have ZERO input into what happens after that. It's a safety issue, pure and simple. It would be like not putting a manual emergency release on automatic doors (required by law) in buildings, not having a manually-operated "Emergency Stop" button on industrial equipment (required by law), or not having a mechanical way of lowering the landing gear in your aircraft (required by law). So why shouldn't be required by law that when I drive a car the stupid thing actually steers, stops, and goes based on my inputs, even after an electronic or hydraulic failure?

So you don't think there are some rather stringent requirements if parts fail?

Why do you keep ASSuming I am blaming Toyota for this mess? I have mentioned the woes of many other companies, including Volvo, Mercedes, VW, and your own. I am so angry because you refuse to actually read anything! You pick one or two lines, ignore everything else, and then pretend you're right again. You absolutely refuse to acknowledge any points being made at all (parts availability in 30 years, existing electrical/mechanical engineering issues with FORD, supplier quality control issues, organic degredation of electronics, software integration issues, safety issues, etc, etc, etc).

I proved you wrong on Ford taking government loans, I proved you wrong on F150 / F-150, I proved you wrong on dealer modifications, and I've shown you mutliple times here that your precious engineers are not foolproof, yet you refuse to acknowledge my arguement.

I want a mechanical fail-safe back-up. That's it.

Bring on the tech on top of that. Get your guys cracking on Direct-Injection across the range, 6 and 8 speed transmissions, dual-clutch units, and whatever else you have cooking in there.

Just leave a mechanical attachment between my input and the car.

Is that really so hard to understand or to implement? They did it for 100 years with no real issues. Still haven't found a better shape than "round" yet for a wheel, either. Some things really are best as old-school, and driver CONTROL of the 8000Lb 9-passenger Canyonerro is one of them.

Having a direct mechanical link between you and the plate that meters the amount of air into your engine seems like a rather arbitrary "need".

If you really want a mechanical link connecting you to everything you really shouldn't drive anything with an ECU in it.

Even with a traditional cable system the EMS typically has to adjust fuel metering and ignition timing to work properly. Many of the issues brought up so far are not strictly DBW issues....

Having the throttle plates under complete control of the EMS just gives the engineer in charge of extracting as much performance from your engine as possible, one more tool with which to work.

why all the hate here people? Relax a little. Its not like we are discussing religion or politics here...

Javelin wrote: Why do you keep ASSuming I am blaming Toyota for this mess? I have mentioned the woes of many other companies, including Volvo, Mercedes, VW, and your own. I am so angry because you refuse to actually read anything! You pick one or two lines, ignore *everything* else, and then pretend you're right again. You absolutely refuse to acknowledge any points being made at all (parts availability in 30 years, existing electrical/mechanical engineering issues with FORD, supplier quality control issues, organic degredation of electronics, software integration issues, safety issues, etc, etc, etc). I proved you wrong on Ford taking government loans, I proved you wrong on F150 / F-150, I proved you wrong on dealer modifications, and I've shown you mutliple times here that your precious engineers are not foolproof, yet you refuse to acknowledge my arguement. I want a mechanical fail-safe back-up. That's it. Bring on the tech on top of that. Get your guys cracking on Direct-Injection across the range, 6 and 8 speed transmissions, dual-clutch units, and whatever else you have cooking in there. Just leave a mechanical attachment between my input and the car. Is that really so hard to understand or to implement? They did it for 100 years with no real issues. Still haven't found a better shape than "round" yet for a wheel, either. Some things really are best as old-school, and driver CONTROL of the 8000Lb 9-passenger Canyonerro is one of them.

Wow, that's easy- you keep harping on the fact that if the DBW fails, you won't be able to turn the car off, nor will you be able to shift into neutral. Well, that's a Toyota issue, not anyone else. So how is that NOT putting the issue with Toyota? Or does it not matter that even some of the very cars you have dirven with DBW has a key? You've brought that up many times now.

Do Toyota's issues matter? Sure. But that doesn't mean DBW is bad. Why don't you acknowledge that not all DBW systems are incapable of being turned off?

You never brought up parts availability- and I fail to see how that has any relevence here. And of the electrical and engineering issues you claim at Ford, which ones were due to DBW? Oh, I did recognize the engineers as I trust them- you did ask that.

You again claim that you have issues with suppliers, and didn't answer the simple question- what is wrong with the lowest cost supplier if they meet ALL of the requirements. Or is that a preception?

Organic degredation? A new issue for you? How are you so sure that there are no requirements for that?

Here's what's funny- you keep bringing up issues as if nobody has ever thought of them. Now, it isn't arrogant of you to assume that the hundreds of engineers who have been working on DBW for over 20 years haven't thought of it? Odd.

Not sure how the loans or the tradmark means anything. And I never said that engineers are not foolproof. Heck, even your cable operated throttle stuck.

What you refuse to see is that your "mechanical link" isn't much of a failsafe. You can open the throttle, and perhaps try to free it up, but you must rely on the spring. Do you think DBW systems don't have springs, too? At least, it must be irrelevant that the DBW is capable of closing the throttle.... Do you not recognize that many engineers have figured out that the "mechanical link" isn't any more reliable or better.

You refuse to acknowledge that OEM engineers have been over the possible failures with a fine tooth comb, understanding which ones need management, and understanding the rate of those failure. In this case, it's possible that someone made a poor choice.

I recognize that you want "mechanical" linkage. Yay.

Just becuase you cling to that preception does not make it better. That is all my point.

What about cable throttles with dashpots? That certainly can cause throttle lag.

ransom wrote:

Rustspecs13 wrote: My point is DBW has far FAR more failures to date, and always will.

How did you get there? And where do you get goggles to see the future of "always will", because I want a pair. I spent twenty minutes searching NTSB and NHTSA and general Googling, and I can't find any statistics at all. Not yet, anyway. If it's there, it's all buried under sixty-three hundred syndications of alternating complete vindication and demonization of DBW.

That's not hard to predict. If you complicate something, it becomes more prone to failure. I'm talking about word of mouth, talking to techs and people swapping engines. No official results.

I know if you unplug or move a DBW TB on a new nissan, you have to get it reprogrammed by nissan. it can't self learn. It will not return to idle/closed on its own until then either.

Javelin wrote: I am so angry because you refuse to actually read anything! You pick one or two lines, ignore *everything* else, and then pretend you're right again. You absolutely refuse to acknowledge any points being made at all (parts availability in 30 years, existing electrical/mechanical engineering issues with FORD, supplier quality control issues, organic degredation of electronics, software integration issues, safety issues, etc, etc, etc). I want a mechanical fail-safe back-up. That's it. Bring on the tech on top of that. Get your guys cracking on Direct-Injection across the range, 6 and 8 speed transmissions, dual-clutch units, and whatever else you have cooking in there. Just leave a mechanical attachment between my input and the car. Is that really so hard to understand or to implement? They did it for 100 years with no real issues. Still haven't found a better shape than "round" yet for a wheel, either. Some things really are best as old-school, and driver CONTROL of the 8000Lb 9-passenger Canyonerro is one of them.

This 100%.

When I talk about quality control, I'm talking about what the consumer gets in their car. GREAT thank you MR Engineer for doing your job. Testing and hopefully perfecting that DBW throttle body and system.

Mercedes is a nice simple car, they have very reliable electronics don't they? Oh no they are complicated, and can have some electrical issues pretty early in their life. Fords are much simpler tho, but they still have electrical issues too. Nissan, Toyota NOBODY makes perfect parts 100% of the time.

Then the manufacturer has some one make the part to a certain price, quality, and quantity level. So you have the pedal assembly, wiring, ECU, possibly separate DBW control module (maybe, I don't know every car, one of them might have a separate module), more wiring, then to the actual DBW T/B its self.

Plenty of room for wiring to get chewed through, tampered with, cut, modules to get spilled on, shorted out, beat on, etc etc. And with CAN, you short out your traction control button by spilling your pop for the 4th time, and WOOPS it messes with the signal that goes to the DBW T/B!

Or you have shoddy quality control, and your 2002 civic SI randomly goes to redline with no input, and no one can trace down the problem, with out randomly replacing parts! That mysterious T/B tests good, The wiring tests good, and the ecu checks out. One of those old fashioned drive by cable old hunks of metal is looking pretty good now huh?

ransom wrote:

Rustspecs13 wrote: My point is DBW has far FAR more failures to date, and always will.

How did you get there? And where do you get goggles to see the future of "always will", because I want a pair. I spent twenty minutes searching NTSB and NHTSA and general Googling, and I can't find any statistics at all. Not yet, anyway. If it's there, it's all buried under sixty-three hundred syndications of alternating complete vindication and demonization of DBW.

That's not hard to predict. If you complicate something, it becomes more prone to failure. I'm talking about word of mouth, talking to techs and people swapping engines. Not official results. I was going a little far with the more failures to date thing, but look at my point. That being between now and when DBW t/B's were put on the road, DBW has more failures whether they made made news or statics or not.

I know if you unplug or move a DBW TB on a new nissan, you have to get it reprogrammed by nissan. it can't self learn. It will not return to idle/closed on its own until then either. Wheres the springs in that to return it to closed? Dumb design huh?

We don't drive airplanes. They are far more strictly regulated, and when ever one crashes, its investigated to find the cause. Quality control is as high as it can be. Cars have a lot more leeway. That scares me when direct control is being taken away from me.

Ug I'm tired. I hope I got my point across I'm dead tired.

~Alex

yawn.. Throttle cable/linkages have been around for a hundred years +, I'll put money on the fact they have killed more people than DBW...

Come on people, you're going nuts on the "safety" aspect. After many years working in plant environments, I'll guarantee you those who run around waving the safety flag constantly or calling safety stewards every 2 minutes are those who:

1. are lazy

OR

2.are lazy and misinformed.

or

3.are lazy and minsinformed and troublemakers

yawn. Gas pedal is on the right, brake is one the left, seems like the prius drivers couldn't get that correct, because Chrylser had the same gas pedal supplier with the same issue... yawn.