- Toyota hosted a technical presentation to support its electronic throttle control system.
- Independent experts were asked to demonstrate unintended acceleration.
- Experts reproduced the issue using cars from BMW, Ford and Subaru.
TORRANCE, California — In what looked like a corporate parody of Toyota's congressional hearings, the Japanese automaker on Monday hosted a lengthy technical demonstration designed to disprove critics who charge that its electronic throttle control could fail, triggering unintended acceleration.
"There isn't a ghost issue out there," insisted Kristen Tabar, Toyota Technical Center's general manager of electronics systems, at the end of the 75-minute session. Reporters had pressed Tabar about mounting complaints from consumers who say they have experienced problems in recalled vehicles that have undergone repairs.
Toyota brushed off some of those complaints, which have been filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, by saying some repairs may not have been done completely.
"We are aware of these reports that vehicles have had some sort of incident after the repair was made," said Toyota spokesman Mike Michels. "Only a few have been confirmed and verified. In some cases, it had to do with the repair not being done completely. If modifications are deployed and done properly, they are effective." He added: "We remain confident in the recall remedies."
Monday's session took place in a cavernous and pristine garage and involved one Toyota official and four independent experts, including a Stanford University professor, seated at a table in front of microphones. It was reminiscent of the setting on Capitol Hill in which Toyota executives endured hours of humiliation at the hands of lawmakers — only this time, Toyota was completely in charge. At the start of the session, Michels decried the "rush to judgment" against Toyota.
In a twist that seemed to draw other automakers into the controversy, the experts were surrounded by competitor vehicles, including the Chevrolet Malibu, Chrysler Crossfire and Town & Country, Ford Fusion, Mercedes-Benz E-Class and Subaru Outback. Michels took pains to spell out that "there is absolutely no suggestion of a defect in any of these vehicles." He said the point of including them was to show that "speculation is easy; science takes a lot more effort."
During the session, the experts reproduced unintended acceleration in three of those non-Toyota vehicles to refute the claims of David Gilbert, an associate professor of automotive technology at Southern Illinois University. Gilbert had earlier testified on Capitol Hill that he was able to re-create unintended acceleration in a Toyota vehicle through a rather simple engineering manipulation.
"I could re-engineer this building and cause it to go up in flames, but that is not realistic," said Subodh Medhekar, a principal engineer with Exponent, an outside firm that has been working for Toyota and testing vehicles for problems. He added that vehicle manufacturers like Toyota should not be under pressure to "detect unreasonable events."
Shukri J. Souri, another Exponent principal engineer, said: "The elephant in the room is rewiring the circuitry to have it do what Dr. Gilbert wanted it to do."
Souri said the point of tinkering with non-Toyota vehicles was to show that "a vehicle can be rewired to do exactly what you want it to do."
The experts painstakingly showed what they called the "unreasonable" steps that Gilbert took to rewire existing Toyota circuitry to create unintended acceleration.
But at least one of them, Chris Gerdes, a professor of mechanical engineering at Stanford University and director of its Center for Automotive Research, seemed to qualify his comments a bit in a soliloquy on "how engineers think." He also noted that Toyota "is an affiliate member" of his program, "[although] the analysis I'm here to discuss has been formulated with complete independence."
"Engineers will rarely use the word 'impossible,'" he said during a discussion on whether Toyota's fail-safe systems are infallible. "Is the system infallible? I don't think I could ever make that statement. I simply don't think in those terms. But I've never seen evidence [of unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles]. The public hears this as evasiveness."
He added: "We [engineers] do better communicating to Vulcans than humans sometimes."
Inside Line says: Toyota puts forth a mighty effort to rebuild its damaged image in an unusual public relations exercise. — Anita Lienert, Correspondent
Add A Comment »
jasonmzw20 says:
10:25 AM, 03/09/2010
bswopes says:
09:25 AM, 03/09/2010
This sounds like more of Toyota's spin machine working. They aren't addressing the issue that Dr. Gilbert tried to focus on; that they can create a fault that the system won't record. Holding a press conference to lampoon a researcher when they have very serious issues with their vehicles and their business model was a huge mistake.
So should BMW, Ford, and other manufacturers that exhibited the same "problem" using the same method be held to the same standard?
The reason the ECU does not throw a fault is because there isn't a fault. Manipulating the pedal to trick the ECU into seeing a VALID pedal output is not a good way to prove something. Why would engineers work to create a solution to a problem like that that can't be replicated in the real world? Why should Toyota have to and not other automakers?
200 ohms between the two pedal wires is a very low amount of resistance. Water condensation typically sees resistance values at about 1000 or more, which would, in fact, throw a fault.
bswopes says:
09:25 AM, 03/09/2010
This sounds like more of Toyota's spin machine working. They aren't addressing the issue that Dr. Gilbert tried to focus on; that they can create a fault that the system won't record. Holding a press conference to lampoon a researcher when they have very serious issues with their vehicles and their business model was a huge mistake.
The fact that SUA occurred during the conference on a vehicle that wasn't on their recall list is a wild coincidence, but shows that Toyota isn't being as thorough as they claim and haven't properly identified the cause of the problem. And now they're telling us that the cars that have had a recurrence of SUA after going in for recall repairs "weren't fixed properly"? Well then how can we have any confidence in ANY of the repairs that they are doing? Or any Toyota vehicle?
alman08 says:
08:02 AM, 03/09/2010
oh yeah, my car ate my burger, too!
alman08 says:
08:01 AM, 03/09/2010
so the family of Saylor is suing Toyota, and now this is happening in San Diego area with CHP in that area all over the TV media? haha... nice freaking try. First of all, if you're trying pass another car on I-8, it's rather difficult because everyone is driving pretty damn fast there, and to do it on a Prius of all cars? and what about shifting that damn thing to neutral? i'm telling you... these stupid people need to learn now to come up with the perfect lies and perfect stories first...
I do wonder how much these actors and actresses got pay...
titancrew says:
07:48 AM, 03/09/2010
The Prius in the news was not stopped by a police cruise. The Prius stopped on its own and then the police cruiser stopped in front of it. The car was so out of control, the driver was able to drive for over 20 minutes on a busy San Diego freeway. Something stinks. Did someone stepped on cow manure.
1487,
So are you saying that Dr. Gilbert experiment is a valid real world malfunction? C&D braking test on UA was more valid than Dr. Gilbert's. Do you have a link to where he said it was not a pronounce in other manufacturers? I don't think he ever said that nor did he ever experimented with other makes. His testimony is here:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20100223/Gilbert.Testimony.pdf
His experiment is a basic failure from a scientific stand point. What he created was just a remote control throttle because he created the valid signal that the ECM see as WOT. Hence, no codes were set. The same situation was created in other makes by Exponent using Dr. Gilbert's procedures and those vehicle also had no codes. That must mean those vehicle have a problem with their electronic throttle control.
1487 says:
06:18 AM, 03/09/2010
I dont recall the professor saying it was impossible to repeat this in other vehicles. I believe it was stated that the results were not as pronounced on some of the other vehicles he sampled.
This still doesnt answer the question about why Toyota has faced far more complaints on this issue than other automakers. Toyota is saying "all vehicles respond the same way to this interference" which is the same as saying there is no problem because you cant duplicate the test results in the real world. if there is no problem there should be no more complaints from Toyota owners than other owners.
If Toyota continues to say there is no problem they are essentially saying their owners are liars. Its that simple.
I will be glad when this is over so they can stop playing all these ridiculous commercials thanking people for standing with them. The ads are pathetic.
mklrivowner says:
06:09 AM, 03/09/2010
debbaranko -
The Prius in the news was not subject to recall. Not that it was "fixed". It had gone for service the evening before and the owner was told his car wasn't on the list.
Either way, it's pretty damning. Either the fix isn't working, or it's far deeper than Toyota is letting on.
I also noted that Toyota says They are aware of the cases of repaired vehicles malfunctioning again. They say that some of those cases were confirmed, and some of those cases were due to repairs done improperly. But that still leaves a few cases that were confirmed, and the fixes were done properly and they STILL had issues.
Not that I was looking at a Toyota to begin with, but let's just say I'll cross them off the list.
tbone85 says:
05:34 AM, 03/09/2010
"ABC better be ready for a suit of its own. This smells like rocket motors to me, or at the very least, sounds like lost revenue from Toyota pulling ads from the network."
Battling the media is a like a scorched earth policy--you might win and not even realize it becasue you've been so damaged. GM's move in the article you linked failed miserably. ABC is owned by Disney, and they could passively hit Toyota from scores of different media sources (eg feature Fords or Hyundais more prominantly on ESPN.) Best to find another strategy.
debbaranko says:
11:14 PM, 03/08/2010
Evedently Toyota wasn't watching the news today when a already fixed Toyota Prius had to be stopped by a police cruiser due to faulty electronics. Looks like Toyota is trying a Hail Mary to save its image. Unfortunatley, its not working. My friends and neighbors are dumping their Toyotas like there was no tomorrow. I don't blame them. I'm very happy I dumped my Lexus after the Toyota Engine Sludge Cover Up a few years a go. Maybe congress would like to talk to the millions of us that had to suffer through that with no publicity.
babber says:
06:24 PM, 03/08/2010
What a poorly written (or biased against Toyota) article.
"In a twist that seemed to draw other automakers into the controversy,...." They did this because Gilbert said he was only able to do it in a Toyota, which obviously was a lie. Why not mention this Anita?