Last week a 61-year old named James Sikes, who filed for bankruptcy several years ago, found himself unable to stop his 2008 Toyota Prius as it raced along the highway at over 90 miles per hour. The 911 dispatcher "repeatedly pleaded with Sikes to shift into neutral. He simply refused....."
Fun fact: the gear shift in the 2008 Toyota Prius is conveniently mounted so that one can shift while keeping both hands on the wheel.
“I thought about” shifting into neutral, Sikes said at a televised press conference the day after the incident. But “I had never played with this kind of a transmission, especially when you’re driving, and I was actually afraid to do that.”
Might there be more going on behind the scenes of this whole "Toyota scandal" than the average MSM-watcher is aware of? Theodore H. Frank, in the Washington Examiner:
We went through this a generation ago with the Audi 5000 and other autos accused of sudden acceleration, and, again, mysterious unknowable car components were supposedly at fault....Back then, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)...found that sudden acceleration was several times more likely among elderly drivers than young drivers..."
We’re seeing the same pattern again today. Initial reports of a problem, followed by dozens of new reports “coming to light” as people seek to blame their earlier accidents on sudden acceleration.
(...)
In the 24 (Toyota) cases where driver age was reported or readily inferred, the drivers included those of the ages 60, 61, 63, 66, 68, 71, 72, 72, 77, 79, 83, 85, 89—and I’m leaving out the son whose age wasn’t identified, but whose 94-year-old father died as a passenger.
Hmmm. Clearly, it's time for a class-action age-discrimination lawsuit against foreign car manufacturer Toyota. Their customers' lives, after all, "can suddenly become hell-on-wheels."
How can I best say this - OK - here goes -Sikes is a phony and a liar. He will file a law suit for millions as he has a track record and will show his colors (note the American spelling) again.
Ebd: the Audi incidents were far more likely amoung women if memory serves...
The "cause": Audi had placed the brake and gas pedals too close together - "victims" pressed the gas when they thought it was the brake, they pushed harder and voilà, unintended acceleration.
This toyota problem seems to be too low a placement if the gas pedal to the floor snagging on a floormat. Any car has enough braking power to bring it to a stop even under full-throttle conditions. It seems that the "victims" panic and donot stand on the brakes until the car comes to a stop and the turning off the ignition. Not fully pressing on the brakes causes them to overheat and fade in time and then the brakes become unable to stop the car. Driver error just like the Audi issue is the cause. Poor engineering makes the "issue" more likely in toyotas vs other makes.
I agree, bob, I don't think there's any doubt. The most damning thing about it, though, was the sheer credulity of the live network coverage in the US. I mean, it just doesn't pass the sniff test that it didn't occur to a 62-year old guy who's a member of an auto club (it's in one of the links) to put his car in neutral and then hit the brakes.
The Balloon Boy rises again. As Michael Fumento notes in his excellent CFP article (the first link in the post):
"The lack of skepticism from the beginning was stunning. I combed through haystacks of articles without producing such needles as the words 'alleges' or 'claims.' When Sikes said he brought his car to a Toyota dealer two weeks earlier, recall notice in hand, and they just turned him away, the media bought that, too. In Sikes We Trust. Then the pundits deluged us with a tsunami of an anti-Toyota sanctimony."
Phone call or turn off the key - drivers choice.
Steering will be unassisted but will still work.
Brakes will work (assisted, even) a number of times.
I too think that Sykes is a phony,but one of the original accident victims was a state trooper and his family.I doubt if this trooper was elderly as his children and wife who were also in the car were fairly young.Toyota has a problem with some of their vehicles that needs to be corrected,unfortunately some unscrupulous people will try to benefit from this,Sykes is only one of many.
I've never even been in one of those pixie-powered sparkle buggies, but from what I understand, the transmission is controlled by the computer, which may not even allow you to shift into neutral, the brakes are shit and most of the braking is handled by the regenerative braking system, which refuses to function if there is power going to the wheels. Nice....(not).
I predict Government Motors (GM) and Chrysler will soon have a bunch of sappy TV commercials touting thier so-called quality, MADE IN AMERICA, motherhood and apple pie, union labour, yes we can, hopey changey vehicles. Maybe even some footage of some fat assed slob on the assembly line saying he's doing his part to keep the children safe, yadda, yadda, yadda....
Doesn't pass the smell test and the government lapdog media is all too willing to burn Toyota at the stake. What next, Disney and Bugs Bunny cartoons (ala WWII era) demonizing the evil Japs?
My Camry is 100% fine. I know how to shift it into neutral at highway speeds. I'm also 45 years old, so I'm a safe driver, but why muddy the waters with facts? I'd sooner there be mandatory driver training for anyone over the age of 65, but that wouldn't be very libertarian of me now would it?
Kill all the lawyers.
Frankemm, I imagine there's a bit of an engineering problem, something along the lines of what Gord describes, but - without casting any hard aspersions here, because I don't know the details - being a state trooper doesn't obviate the possibility of making claims with an eye to financial gains. And, perhaps more to the point, I frankly find it very, very hard to believe that a state trooper would be unaware that one can put a vehicle in neutral and then apply the brakes.
As for putative "victim" Sikes, here's more from Fumento's piece at CFP:
“I was afraid to try to [reach] over there and put it in neutral. I was holding onto the steering wheel with both hands—94 miles an hour in a Toyota Prius is fast.” Yet for much of the ride he had a phone in one hand. And this is especially interesting: Most gear shifts are on the console, requiring the hand to drop to shift. But, as this image shows, in the 2008 Prius it’s located on the dash within inches of the steering wheel precisely to allow shifting without the hand leaving the wheel. I sat in one and did it easily. Another unique feature of the shift is that it’s amazingly simple, with only forward, reverse, neutral and “B.” The express purpose of “B” is to slow the car while preserving the brakes, as in a steep descent. Sikes actually could have shifted into two different gears."
For a guy who's a long-time member of a car club to suggest, as Sikes did, that he was afraid that his car would "flip" if he shifted into neutral doesn't pass the first sniff test.
The best line ever about the Toyota "scandal" was Kate's dry quip -
"Nice car company you got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it."
Verily.
I was thinking, just the other day, that this is a wonderful opportunity to milk Toyota. Why not? If they want to dominate the US market, let them live with the whole package.
Lots of US firms have been hit with bogus lawsuits. Goodyear had to pay millions to a guy who was drunk, and driving 100 mph, because they hadn't properly warned him his tires were only safe to 85 mph.
As for shutting down a vehicle with a stuck throttle, it's harder than you might think. I've had it happen, several times. Once, after a tune-up, my throttle linkage got stuck on a vacuum hose, when I floored it. You have to turn off the key, without locking the steering. Hitting neutral, under full throttle is going to destroy something. If it's a standard, the clutch might explode, and take off your feet.
I remember the Audi episode, and it was mostly older drivers (who else would drive an Audi 5000?). That was most likely a pedal placement problem.
I drive an 84 Mustang SVO, and I really have to wear proper footwear. The brake pedal is purposely close to the gas pedal, for high performance heel and toe shifting. With winter boots on, it's impossible to work the pedals safely.
No matter what happens, Toyota will survive, just like Tylenol did, because it's a quality product.
I'll go one better: never mind the fact that he was in a "car club". When both I and my wife learned to drive (YDC and some YD knockoff, respectively) the one thing they drilled into us over and over was that you hit neutral whenever you have to brake suddenly. Twenty years later, and my hand still reflexively reaches for the shift whenever I have to stomp the brakes.
But Daniel, aren't you afraid your car will suddenly flip if you put it into neutral?
/%>∞>
Yes, well, I don't drive one of those little ego-masturbation hippie-mobiles, either.
I did have the opportunity to drive a 2005 model a few years back on the way back from a party. They're horribly designed. I had less head and elbow room in the driver's seat than in my Suzuki Swift, and it was virtually impossible to see out the back or the blind spots. It was an uncomfortable drive, and the constantly changing dashboard LCD is a terrible distraction.
ToyotaQuiddick.
dp: "... under full throttle is going to destroy something. If it's a standard, the clutch might explode, and take off your feet."
Good thing that doesn't happen on bikes when the rider misses their shift.
I've missed a few shifts, and I usually lift off the throttle, when it happens. It's those sustained runaways that can lead to an explosion. That's why race cars have steel "scatter shields" over their clutches.
Yep, race cars with a zillion HP, not a frigging Prius. He's just another hack in the lynch mob mentality that the US Gov't. (one of the owner's of GM) is generating in the hopes that this will make their auto industry profitable.
dp: a clutch is not going to explode if you press it while under load. A clutch experiences no force when its disengaged (pressed) now if you where to let go of the clutch while the engine is at full throttle you could break something but unlikely. But even then it would NOT be dangerous.
A clutch removes the power to the wheels by separating the driven and the drive plates, worst case you'd fry a clutch by riding it but it won't explode when attempting to remove power going to the ground
also most of these cars are FWD, meaning the clutch is on the trans-axle no danger to the driver, where in a RWD its at least near the driver.
Drag / race cars have cages becuase forces at work and the desire to save weight.
Even if you put it in N your engine won't explode (right away) there is an automatic rev-limiter, ever wonder why you can't go past the redline (unless your forcing the engine vs the engine forcing you) Its not good, but the car is moving and the coolant is running so its safer then the unplanned declaration that comes with hitting a tree.
End of the day, a problem with a car that gets magnified by poor drivers, poor understandings of their vehicles and a poor job by our betters in the media.
"Unintended Acceleration" incidents are almost invariably the result of driver error. I'd put it down to a form of cognitive dissonance. The driver believes he (or she) has his foot planted firmly on the brake, but in fact, it's on the accelerator.
I, along with several friends, was a witness to just such an incident back in the 1980s. Older gentleman, 80+, was in the process of parking his car at the end of a row of parked cars. He'd backed up, and not got it quite where he wanted it. He shifted to Drive, and suddenly the engine raced, and he shot ahead into a brick wall, causing minor damage to the car. He steadfastly maintained that he had his foot planted firmly on the brake, and that the car accelerated on its own. The brake lights NEVER came on. Shaken, but unhurt, he got out of the car, and I and my friends checked the car over. Nothing was wrong. Good, firm brake pedal, and the brake lights came on when it was depressed. Nothing wrong with the accelerator linkage, either. One of us started the car back up and parked it where he had intended it. It worked perfectly. No "drive by wire" in a 1961 Studebaker. Not even a throttle cable. Hard linkage and bell crank, baby.
Point is, the driver didn't "make a mistake". That implies an error in judgment. Driving, like walking, and countless other everyday activities, involves a conditioned reflex, if I dare use the term. You form an intent to stop, or stop reflexively if a hazard presents itself, and the necessary steps are (normally) performed automatically. You don't "think" about lifting your foot off the accelerator, and shifting it onto the brake, it happens automatically. It's SO automatic, in fact, that on the rare occasion it doesn't, as in the instance above, you are still convinced it DID happen. It's actually easier to believe the car is plagued with gremlins than to believe that your own built-in operating system slipped a cog. But slip a cog, it does, every once in a while.
By the way, shift to Neutral, every time you apply the brakes? Whatever for? That's plain crazy. At any speed above a walking pace, an engine with the throttle closed acts to SLOW the car. It's called compression braking. If you shift to neutral, you lose the benefit of that, and are relying 100% upon the braking system to slow you down. Furthermore, you've just abdicated a measure of control over the vehicle. Suppose the hazard situation that prompted you to brake changes, and you need to accelerate quickly to avoid a collision? A half-second lost, at highway speeds could mean a dozen meters or more, enough to get you past that speeding cross-traffic, or whatever.
I would refuse to ride with any driver who habitually shifted to neutral upon applying the brakes.
Its "Car Wars". The 21st century episode.
"Plenty of brake authority"
A quick vid from the folks at Popular Mechanics showing how, even at full throttle, there is more than enough brakes to stop a car going 50 mph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOMYjiCiTYg
I remember the whole Audi debacle from the mid 80's, and while I never claimed to be a mechanical engineer, it always struck me as strange that the brakes, transmission and throttle, three totally independent systems, all failed at exactly the same time in the worst possible manner. And all on one of the best engineered vehicles on the planet.
It did not help Audi's case much when the fine folks at 60 Minutes decided to do a story on it. Since they could not replicate the "fault", they rigged the car to do it.
What I'd like to know is the results of the neurologic exams of the drivers involved in these incidents. One disease that increases with age is Parkinson's disease and the one thing that Parkinsonian's can't do is two things at once (when they are consciously attempting it). A classic way of diagnosing Parkinson's in a patient who's walking beside you (aside from their gait and lack of arm swing) is to shake their hand while they're walking. As soon as they start to shake your hand they immediately stop walking. In the case of a stuck accelerator one has to remove ones foot from the gas pedal and shift the car into neutral and apply the brakes in a very short period of time (as well as turning off the ignition which works just find in pre-1970 vehicles which aren't cursed with non-responsive steering wheels when the vehicle key isn't in the right position).
When I last looked at the fitness to drive regulations from the MVB, Parkinson's disease was not one of the exclusionary criteria for an older driver to keep their license. The problems in Parkinson's often start a decade or more before it's diagnoses and I suspect that early, not yet diagnosed Parkinsonians are a lot more dangerous than other drivers of the same age but with normally aged brains.
OT:
Speaking of getting roughed-up...
"MORE than half of all communities in Britain are being terrorised by gangs of global warming scientists, it was claimed last night."
[...]
"He said: "They told me my contention was erroneous and suggested I was being paid lots of money by General Motors. And then one of them kneed me squarely in the balls.""
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/environment/the-communities-living-in-fear-of-global-warming-scientists--200807221114/
If a Prius could go over 90MPH it would be a sales feature.
Prius.
Toe-jam between the duals on tractor trailers.
At least with the acceleration problem I don't have to worry about them in Toronto suddenly braking when they cut me off and "disappear" under the hood.
Somewhat O/T, but I just this past weekend bought myself a shiny new car from the other side of the Pacific.
I looked at a couple Toyotas, but nothing really jumped out at me (no pun intended!)that was in my price range.
Decided on a 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0L Turbo. Fun little rig with just the right amount of stupid under the right foot. Especially if you turn off the traction control.
From the very beginning, I was too far away to smell burning brakes on this story, but not so far that I could not smell both a rat and a skunk.
AtlanticJim said: "It did not help Audi's case much when the fine folks at 60 Minutes decided to do a story on it. Since they could not replicate the "fault", they rigged the car to do it."
I recall that NBC did the same when in the late '80s, there were stories that the saddle tanks on GM/Chev pickups would explode in side collisions. After several attempts, NBC couldn't make it happen, so they detonated a squib on the fuel tank to make it happen for the video they showed...saying that it really happened. Problem was, when shown in slow motion, the detonation could be seen happening BEFORE impact!
Daniel Ream
Shifting to neutral when braking is not only nonsense but against the rules.
I'm not sure about passenger car driver road tests, but if you do that during a big rig road test......you become a 4 wheeler. Also shifting gears in an intersection is a no-no.
The idea is that engine braking is a necessary component to control the vehicle.
The old term for neutral is "Mexican Overdrive".
You know what I find interesting? That this "sudden acceleration" problem with cars from the Numero Uno car company in the USA should come to light -after- two of the Big Three get nationalized.
As to the cause of this uncontrolled acceleration, I recall the case of an elderly driver who killed nine people by driving through a farmers market. By accident.
www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/07/16/farmers.market.crash/
"...Weller drove his 1992 Buick LeSabre "at least at a moderate rate of speed" for three blocks along the market street, which was filled with pedestrians, "striking dozens of people." The car stopped only after a pedestrian was thrown into the air and landed on the windshield of the vehicle..."
"Joe Crisman works in a building along the street where the market is held. He witnessed the accident and said the driver appeared befuddled. "He looked very, very confused," Crisman said. "I think he was just mentally out of touch. He seemed very confused when he stepped out of the car. He definitely shouldn't have been behind the wheel. He was definitely not quite with it."
Loki's point is extremely salient. There's a hell of a lot of geezers out there who are on the ragged edge of a crash every time they turn the key. Anything unexpected happens to disturb their calm and Kaboom. Opportunity comes along to explain why they're inside the store window with their five year old Toyota that has 8,000 Sunday-only miles on it, its like a gift from the heavens.
I'm reminded also of the time an elderly gentleman was unable to complete a left turn through two complete cycles of a stoplight, with advance green. Every time I would go forward, he would go forward. I finally got out of the car, walked across the street and asked him what the hell he was doing.
He didn't know what day it was. He was completely fracked. Nice old guy, but he had no more business being behind the wheel than a French poodle. So I went back to my car, made a U-turn and got the hell away as fast as I could before he accidentally killed me. He may still be there, blinker going, trying to figure out if green means go or stop.
Clearly, we must blame Toyota. At least until Gubmint Motors sales figures pick up.
sasquatch, I remember being told during driving classes to bang the shifter into neutral during a panic stop or on ice, but only in an automatic. This would have been ~1972. The theory was an automatic doesn't really have engine braking, its always pushing forward even at idle. Given 1960's drum brakes and crappy brake proportioning, every little bit helps.
That's the theory. In practice you don't have time to screw around in a panic stop, but I do it on ice sometimes to keep from locking up the front end while the backs are still turning.
In a stick shift obviously engine braking is your friend, although I've still never had time to drop a gear in a panic stop. To me, panic stop means you don't have time to say "oh sh...!"
The people who drive the Prius are the same loons who are afraid of Earth's Climate. Now they are all afraid to drive their stupid over-priced little death traps they scream ... see me ... see my Prius ... I care! Oh ... I have more money than you.
Good Lord, do you know how long it takes a Prius to get to 94 mph ? I could eat a Popeye's 3-piece spicy with redbeans and rice before it hit 75.
Toyota needs to go the extra mile and prove this scam job was created in the cellar of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Thank you for clarifying, Phantom. Good Lord, some people around here have trouble with reading comprehension.
Dang it Ratt, now I'm hungry. about the only way to get a Prius going 90 is to feed the hamsters meth.
btw, Bubba Sykes' lawyer is already making the talk show rounds, claiming it happened but you can't repeat it. Something about divine intervention or paranormal phenomena. Sounds like a job for Myth Busters or even Ghost busters.
The AGW fraud has almost run it's course, now the media need a new issue to hype and wring their hands over.
Toyota, it's your turn in the barrel...
I just checked with the local MTO testing facility. Not just big trucks.
With a standard transmission if when stopping you should declutch prior to almost stopping you have failed.
Shifting in an intersection is not a biggy with a car but a fail on a qualified road test.
BTW----down-shifting only increases engine braking. Not practical in panic stops but engine braking is still a big factor. Declutch while braking and you can easily detect the effect.
Reading comprehension....
LEAVE--THE---THING---IN--GEAR!!!!
BTW...the MTO inspector was of the opinion that some YDC instructors should not be driving...let alone teaching.
Meanwhile I have reservations about MTO personel...especially re vehicle inspections....
Sasquatch, you are talking about manual transmissions, the Prius uses an electric drive.
I'm with DP: Welcome to GM's world. The age thing is probably valid although one doesn't want to unfavorably stereotype an entire swath of the population. My first better half ran the largest independent garage in SF. His elderly customers, say 75+ during that era invariably purchased sedans with the largest engine option available. One gentleman had I think it was a Dodge Coronet with a massive hemi. His wife took the keys away after he scalped it trying to race the garage door into the garage as it fell. She then preceded to mire it any available ditch which isn't easy in San Francisco as well as clip adjacent cars whenever exiting parking spaces. Made the garage lots of dough. Some luxury liners with high horse motors coupled to front wheel drive will display strong torque steer when the gas is engaged energetically which also has put more than a few of the elderly into the nearest available ditch according to my service manager. I wondered about it after standing on my Eldo at 30 one lovely morning. The car took off like the proverbial BOOH but required some attention to the steering since it's trajectory was about 11:00 to where I intended. Still miss that car. What a beauty.
The flow of events is very simple:
1) The Media works for Obama/Government.
2) Obama/Government owns Toyota's competition (government motors).
3) Obama/Government decides Toyota must be attacked.
The easy way to deal with a stuck peddle:
If a floormat sticks the accelerator down, first use your heal to pull it back. I had a mat which did this several times until I tossed it out. That seems to be the story with most of the Toyotas. I have a Honda and the peddles are mounted the same way. I suppose Government Motor's team of Obama hit-men will slim and crawl out of Chicago to go after Honda next.
If the mat isn't the cause, neutral will blow your engine so shut off the engine and brute-force the breaks and steering (the power assist will not function.)
If you have no brute force, slowly pull the hand break (not all at once because you don't want to lock them or you'll loose control of you car.)
If you didn't already know this, instead of following these instructions, you should take out your driver's licence, toss it in your fireplace, sell your car and buy a bus pass.
Neutral WILL NOT blow your engine. They have rev limiters for a reason. Plus, if it's a matter of damaging the engine of a new car in a runaway situation, you can bet the company will cover the damage.
You don't have to be old to be unable to handle a powerful car. Years ago, I roomed with a 25-year old immigrant from Manchester, England. He was thrilled to live in Canada; he tripled his salary over night. His first major purchase?
A 5.0 liter Mustang. His previous vehicle? A motor scooter in Manchester. His winter driving experience? None. Number of times he put his car in a ditch in the first six months? Seven. Number of times I'd drive to work with him? Zero.
YG - don't be so sure about "warranty coverage". Step 1, blame the floor mat.
Jason, you the MAN.
Sasquatch, still missing the automatic transmission vs. manual transmission dichotomy here dude. :) On ice, while trying to turn or stop at low speeds (because we know not to use high speeds on ice, right?) it can be beneficial to shift your automatic into neutral. Because as we know, brakes are biased so the front locks before the back, automatic trannies will keep the back tires turning when the front is locked, and we want maximum braking power with zero locking on ice.
Unless doing donuts of course, but that's a special case.
So to prevent lockup and maximize braking, it is sometimes useful to shift into neutral, with an automatic, on ice, when you have time to fool with that sort of thing. Like in the slow motion ice-storm sliding down a shallow hill kind of thing.
Now as to manual transmission, I habitually pop it in neutral and let the clutch out, -when fully stopped-, at a stoplight etc. This is a holdover from my biker days, when I would always idle in neutral. Because once upon a time I saw a guy whose clutch cable broke while he was revving his bike at a stoplight. He lived, because he was the luckiest SOB on planet Earth that day. I also knew a kid who crashed himself into a wheelchair because he didn't look after his brake linkages. Launched into the air, hit a tree limb and fell off. Broken back. He's 50 some odd now, still in the wheel chair.
So I always idle in neutral, and if questioned about same by officious MTO weenies (which has happened) I tell them the motorcycle story. Linkages can break, plan for disaster.
Sliding up to a stop with your foot on the clutch is a major bad nono, we do not do that. Baaad nono.
A young nephew of mine recently had a YDC driving instructor. His driveway is at an angle to the street, he backed it in perfectly. She made him go out and back it in at 90 degrees, wouldn't listen to anything he said. Was quite surprised to find her car up on the grass, and was heard to exclaim "oh, your dliveway so clooked!". I understand his eye roll was quite expressive. ~:D
MTO question, how the hell does one pull a rig away at a green light without shifting inside the intersection? 1st is good for what, 3mph?
"without casting any hard aspersions here, because I don't know the details - being a state trooper doesn't obviate the possibility of making claims with an eye to financial gains."
Here's some detail: Killing yourself and your family is a piss poor way of trying to make any financial gains. It's necessary to distinguish between victims and "victims".
The idea that automatics don't have engine braking is, of course, ludicrous.
The torque converter is not magically unidirectional, and the transmission can be slowed by the engine just like in a manual.
Perhaps the reason people think they "don't engine brake" is because the TC makes it less effective than on a manual? In any case, they are incorrect.
Automatics "engine brake" every time you lay off the throttle and are going faster than the idle speed of the engine...
(Got an automatic, and want to see?
Get to speed, and let off the throttle. Note rate of slow.
Repeat, shifting into neutral at the same time.
Notice that the two numbers differ.)
(On the Prius topic, of course, it doesn't matter so much, as God only knows what the controlling computer will do with the transmission under Strange Circumstances, but it's certainly unlikely to hurt to either shove it in neutral.)
The MVB needs to:
Pull driver's license.
Sent note to driver with a date and two alternatives for a driver's re-test with special emphasis on emergency maneuvers.
After 3 successful shifts into neutral at highway speeds, PASS.
I think there's a lot of traction to Obama's Gubmint Motors wanting to stick it to Toyota, so to speak.
One question to all of the experts here: What IF your accelerator sticks when you're in the passing lane of a three or four lane highway? Sure, you can put your Toyota into neutral and apply the brakes, but what to do about the guy who's gaining on you at 140? How do you steer your car across three or four lanes of traffic to get off the road?
Seeing as I have a new Toyota, I'm not too happy when I envision this scenario. I don't lose sleep over it, but I'd like to feel confident in the passing lane on the 401 ...
Re: Posted by: Sigivald at March 15, 2010 4:47 PM
I don't really notice that big of a difference between slowing with Neutral on/off unless I turn overdrive off. I'm not sure if that's by design.
Sigivald, perhaps I should have said that the engine braking of automatics is small compared to standards. Which in turn is small compared to that of a diesel, of course. Jake brake and all that.
To be more specific, on ice it can be useful to put a rear-drive automatic into neutral so as to get maximum braking potential out of the back wheels. Something like a '76 Pontiac for example, which is the car I used to drive around in the winter. Nothing like big American iron in an ice storm to bring out the maximum skill in a driver. :) You can't drive it, you more guide it to drift, slip and slide where you want it to go. Like an ocean liner.
Front drive it doesn't matter, front wheel brake bias again. This time the brake bias overcomes the tendency of the torque converter to turn the front wheels, and you don't get that front-locked-rear-turning thing.
Modern automatics with ABS, front, rear or 4x4 drive it doesn't seem to matter what you do with the tranny. Push pedal down, let the robot do its work. ABS is the bomb.
The Prius though, is a drive-by-wire car. Lots of super-duper regenerative engine braking, electric motors driving while the gas motor isn't attached to anything but a generator, electric differential traction with computer controls, key doesn't actually turn anything on or off just authorizes the computer to free the control lockouts, oh baby.
In other words, no direct connection between the driver and the control actuators except for the steering and the emergency brake. If that.
I don't have enough faith in computers to drive one, frankly. I like to be the guy who decides what's going to happen, not apply to the CPU as one input in a control algorithm.