Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Toyota in decline in 2009?
3628 messages, Last post on Nov 29, 2009 at 9:15 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: nippononly (Nov 10, 2009 6:58 am) |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Nov 10, 2009 7:28 am) As to why the SD Sheriff's Office is sitting on the black box, I don't know (waiting for litigation which is inevitable)? |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Nov 10, 2009 6:58 am) Highlander sales are bound to be down this year. They are all produced in Japan and Toyota has cut back all vehicles made in Japan except the Prius due to currency considerations. The Highlander should move to Princeton, IN in the future along with the Sienna. |
|
|
Replying to: surrfurtom (Nov 07, 2009 4:36 pm) 1) I can vouch that you could bounce a Honda/Toyota/Audi motor off the rev limiter in neutral all day and night and the engine won't self destruct. In fact, Honda motors are their happiest at the rev limiter. My friend took his Geo Prism with a Toyota motor to the rev limit every other shift for 100,000 miles, no problems. At an Audi Performance Driving School Fun Day I did recently, they said because Americans can't shift sticks and work clutches anymore, they'd rather we just all kept it in 3rd gear around the track and just bounce off the limiter over and over. Audi decided the engines would be fine obviously, and that the wear and tear would cost less in the long run then having Americans shift gears more than twice to 3rd and ruin even robust clutches. I didn't see any Audi Engines fail at the track, and they had several groups of 10 or so vehicles going all day long. 2) If you'd rather risk your safety over revving your engine a bit by putting it in neutral, then that is a personal decision, and I would call that a bad decision and operator/driver error, so we are back to square one. It all comes down to operator/driver error. |
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Nov 08, 2009 11:05 am) Not really... depending on the time of day it happened, that stretch of the 125 in San Diego/Santee is lesser congested than most any freeway in San Diego County. He just ran out of road, but if he was a good driver, he of taken the 52 west exit and tried to make the WIDE turn on the wide 2 lane ramp. In a Lexus, it might be impossible at 120 mph though, but I think I could make the turn at 120 in my A3, granted, with no other traffic in the way though. |
|
|
Replying to: 210delray (Nov 08, 2009 3:02 pm) First, since when do people pay any attention to the 2 numbers posted on an aluminum plate? Speed limits are paid no attention to because they are arbitrarily set too low to generate revenue for good for nothing CHP-like agencies. Second. there are a million situations where I might need to accelerate myself out of a jam going at 80 MPH down the freeway. If you want to be limited to 80 or less, go buy a Yugo.
|
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (Nov 12, 2009 9:04 am) A common sentiment among speeders. But most people look at the 2 numbers and add a 5-10 mph "cushion" so they won't be stopped. You can go 70 mph legally on Cali freeways, and 75 or 80 in nearby states. Not high enough? In today's traffic with all of the driver distractions? No thanks. Second. there are a million situations where I might need to accelerate myself out of a jam going at 80 MPH down the freeway. Name ONE (actual, not theoretical -- and not from hooning on the freeway). Funny, I've never had to go 80 in 40+ years of driving to get out of a jam. Steering or braking -- plenty of times. Accelerating more vigorously -- yes too, but not up to and beyond 80 mph. |
|
|
Replying to: 210delray (Nov 12, 2009 9:13 am) My argument to that is that if speed limits were raised to 100 MPH maximum then you wouldn't see people on the freeway doing their makeup or talking on their hand held cell phones anymore. People might actually take driving seriously at those speeds and safety would be improved across the board. Plus, while 75 to 80 in CA is doable, 80 can get you a ticket because a lot of speed limits are underposted to 65, so then you are 15 over. NMA studies have shown that people will drive at a speed they are comfortable driving in general, whether the two numbers say 35 or 55, people will drive what they want, unless they see a CHP officer around hiding behind a bush. Speed Surveys taken where speed limits were increased show that the actual speed of vehicles increased by only 1 MPH with an increase of 10 MPH in the speed limit. The difference was that the previous speed limit made violators of the majority of drivers, while the new one 10 MPH higher (which was more reasonable) made the majority of drivers law abiders. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 210delray (Nov 12, 2009 9:13 am)  But I think the public would scream bloody murder if speed limiters on vehicles were mandated to 85 - 90mph. I bet it would fall into a huge "Big Brother is taking away our freedom! argument. For the record, I took a 1993 Ford Probe up to 130 while racing my friend in a Honda prelude on a 2 lane highway. Looking back on that as an adult, I am thankful that I wasn't killed or killed someone else for my stupidity as a kid. 
|
|
|
Replying to: 210delray (Nov 12, 2009 9:13 am) Most of the million situation are theoretical, but that doesn't mean they couldn't happen. Have you ever heard of the best defense being a good offense? I've been driving for over 15 years now, and since I haven't caused an at-fault accident in that time involving another vehicle, I think that qualifies me as an expert. I've managed to avoid many not-at-fault accidents too, but in San Diego you get both civilians and police officer's rear-ending you because they are terrible drivers. Hard to avoid rear enders....especially when your not even moving in both of my cases where I had not at fault incidents. Now for the non-theoretical: I have many times observed bad drivers doing dumb unsafe manuevers (or just plain not paying attention or talking on a phone) on the freeway. I'll be cruising along comfortably on the highway at 80 in the fast lane, and they might be right next to me. I am not going to go side by side with a driver like that one second longer than I need to be, so if there going 75-80, I'm gonna pick it up a bit when I pass them to lessen the amount of time I'm in their "adjacent area." This is defensive driving at it's most effective, with a good offensive move. By avoiding a dangerous situation and minimizing the hazard and my exposure to it. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Toyota in decline in 2009?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
