Last post on Jan 31, 2010 at 11:48 AM
You are in the Toyota Camry
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Camry, Sedan
General Toyota Recall Questions/Comments: Accelerator Stuck Problem Recall
#114 of 447 Re: Solid facts and source documents [millwood0]
Jan 24, 2010 (11:26 am)
You're neglecting a few points, VERY important points IMMHO.
70-80% of braking HP is expended on the front wheels/tires, matter of physics, that. Just look at the beefiness, robustness of the front brake system vs the rear if you need verification.
These are primarily, if not altogether, FWD or F/awd vehicles....The engine is DIRECTLY driving the very wheels most needed for braking HP. With a RWD you could LOCK (absent ABS) the front wheels with braking HP while the rears might remain spinning due to run-away engine. BIG difference in braking dynamics.
Say you going at hwy speeds, 65MPH, and decide you need to slow down, not quickly, just slow down..?? How long, for what period, would you moderately apply the brakes before you realized they were not having the "proper" effect...??
So now you have just begun the run-a-way engine sequence with the brake pads/rotor "pre-heated". But now you come to the realization that something serious has gone wrong...
With the engine at WOT there is NO manifold vacuum for replenishing the brake vacuum motor. How many times do you think the average driver would release and reapply, thinking pump up the master cylinder, the brakes in this case and end up with NO brake assist...?
"..otherwise the story is vey hard to comprehend.."
Not for someone involved in managing a software development team for more than 40 years. You cannot imagine how much time and effort is spent finding field reported software bugs once product is shipping. Factory lab testing of software, no matter how comprehensive, will NEVER equal field, actual customer use/testing.
Look at the screw up Lexus did with the new transaxle design for the early production RX300. It appears that NO ONE thought about, considered certain aspects of actual driver use, utilization of the transaxle. So the Camry's A140E was redesigned, made much more robust, seriously so, for use in the 1999 RX300 with F/awd.
The primary reason for the "abolition" (Toyota's term) of key components of the old design, components in use for tens of years, was to provide room for a more robust design. But a side benefit was a serious improvement level in FE. So now Toyota was trapped, they could not go back to the old design absent sacrificing that FE improvement.
They could have, of course, followed Ford's lead(***), but that isn't the Japanese, HEADS DOWN, cultural approach
So Toyota and Lexus are still, TODAY, struggling with the unforeseen results of the design flaw inadvertently incorporated into these transaxles, adopted across the fleet by 2002.
*** Ford adopted a variable displacement ATF pump to solve the inherent flaw in the new design and still get improved FE. ATF pumping volume can be maximized at idle but then incrementally minimized as engine RPM rises.
#115 of 447 Re: Tricked by Toyota [revit]
Jan 24, 2010 (12:03 pm)
In late 1991, November, I bought a new 1992 LS400. Within weeks I had discovered that the LS had a terrible propensity for quickly fogging up the front windshield interior surface. I worked with Bellevue Lexus and Lexus factory representatives throughout the following months, into the spring of '92, to resolve this problem but with NO success.
In the summer I decided for safety reasons to park the LS400 until/unless the issue could be resolved. I also filed a lemon law case to return the LS400.
Lexus did several things over the following year but the most important of those was flying an engineer in from Japan to check my HVAC control module for proper operation, including the correct firmware version.
He arrived with what was clearly a make-shift, one-off, unpainted, no labelling aluminum testing box. He removed my HVAC control module and plugged the testing box connections in, completed his testing, and informed me that my HVAC was operating according to factory specifications and had the correct firmware version.
It is my firm belief today that what he actually did was reprogram (" reflash")(***) the module so that the design flaw inadvertently incorporated at the factory was eliminated. Throughout the early trouble-shooting, '91-92, Lexus had focussed on my supposed improper use of recirculate, telling me again and again, to NEVER use the recirculate mode during the winter months.
Intentionally using recirculate mode in winter time NEVER entered my mind.
Then in the spring the instructions about not using the recirculate mode changed, "subtly" changed. Changed so subtly that I don't at first note the change. In retrospect I suspect the Lexus Bellevue technicians (Chuck Smiley, service manager at that time) charged with dispensing the new information were told not to "accentuate" this new change in the HVAC operational directions, or were simply not told at all.
The new directions were to manually depress, when initially starting the car, or putting the HVAC system in "auto" mode, the fresh mode PB even if/when the light was already on indicating the system was already in fresh mode.
There was a second anomaly involved this PB function which Lexus freely admitted but viewed as not important. When you manually over-ride, manually select, some functional aspect not already selected via auto mode, the auto mode will/would extinguish. Not so with regards the fresh/recirculate "rocker" type PB switch.
The 1993 LS400 HVAC system does not exhibit this anomaly.
*** At trial the Lexus attorney went beyond the boundary, too repetitively in asking me if the fogging had recently re-occurred. Since I had parked the car for almost a year at that point that was all I could tell him in response.
But that questioning, line of questioning got me suspicious.
#116 of 447 More...
Jan 24, 2010 (12:25 pm)
It was easy enough to discover the change in the HVAC operation for the '92 vs the '93 LS400. In the '93 if you manually depressed the fresh or recirculate PB the "auto" mode light would extinguish.
So, how do I know the HVAC firmware in my '92 was "reflashed".
I have purchased no fewer than three used '92 HVAC control modules from EBAY over the past few years. The first of these, admittedly was due to the need to replace the failed LCD display on my '92. But since I had a "new", different, '92 HVAC control module to experiment with that's what I did.
Turns out that there is a major difference in the operation of my original "reflashed" 1992 HVAC control module and other '92 HVAC control modules.
What Lexus didn't tell me early on about the detailed operation of my '92 LS400 HVAC control mode. Didn't DARE tell me absent letting the "cat out of the bag".
When in "auto" mode, the "auto" indicator light ON, AND the FRESH indicator ON, the 1992 HVAC system will operate the system at least partially in RECIRCULATE mode even in the DEAD of winter.
It turns out that Lexus was trying to tell me how to properly operate fresh/recirculate functionality but WITHOUT pointing out the anomaly, seriously UNSAFE anomaly in that operation.
Bottom line. Lexus' attorneys actually committed fraud, knowingly so, on the court, legal system, in order to prevent the design flaw in the '92 LS400's HVAC system from becoming well known.
So, good luck with the run-a-way engine episode.
#117 of 447 Re: Maybe a dealer can answer this [millwood0]
Jan 24, 2010 (12:36 pm)
I can only agree that if the Both of US did not exist, we would not have
any comments to make.
#118 of 447 Even more...
Jan 24, 2010 (12:37 pm)
To help combat the windshield fogging problem in my 1992 LS400 I learned to leave the windows down, religiously so, each and every night in the garage. That allows the condensation on the evaporator vanes to dissipate outside the cabin.
I also installed a switch under the dash that I could easily actuate if the windshield began to fog over and I needed to use the defrost/defog/demist mode. The switch would add resistance to the cabin's IAT, Internal Temperature Sensor making the HVAC system think the cabin was COLD. The new effect was that when I then actuated the defrost/defog/demist mode I would get LOTS of HEATED airflow to the interior surface of the windshield.
I prevented the A/C compressor from operation in the winter time by adding, switching in, a resistance to the OAT, Outside Air Temperature sensor circuit, making it seem to be always below freezing outside.
Just weeks ago I developed a new modification for the '92 HVAC control module that automatically adds the "resistance" to the IAT circuit whenever the defrost/defog/demist mode is entered.
#119 of 447 Re: Solid facts and source documents [wwest]
Jan 24, 2010 (12:54 pm)
"With the engine at WOT there is NO manifold vacuum for replenishing the brake vacuum motor."
are you sure about that?
take some highschool physics classes or ask your mechanics.
better yet, take out your car and step on the gas / brake at the same time and see if you can lunch your car.
don't worry, you can safely do that in your garage, as long as you have norm strength in your leg.
#120 of 447 Re: Tricked by Toyota [silvercoupe]
Jan 24, 2010 (12:56 pm)
"Now she is afraid to drive the car!!! "
the only thing a reasonable husband would do is to get her another vehicle RIGHT AWAY.
what are you waiting for?
#121 of 447 Re: Solid facts and source documents [hackattack5]
Jan 24, 2010 (12:57 pm)
Further to this CR did a video on this issue. It's very informative. Shift to Neutral. Stomp on the brakes and DO NOT let up. As soon as you let up at WOT you loose the vacuum boost and then your accelerating with essentially no brakes.
Along this line Toyota has an FAQ on the subject on its website.
Stomp on the brake and do not let off the pedal.
Do not pump the brakes.
Do not brake slowly...STOMP!
Shift to Neutral.
All of this is good info for all modern cars that don't yet have the brake override function installed yet...from every maker.
#122 of 447 Re: Making the gas pedal shorter [revit]
Jan 24, 2010 (1:04 pm)
This is false. You continue to repeat the same false statements from the LAT as you did in Post #1. Get over it. Toyota showed where the LAT made up much of that article. The proof was printed here at Edmunds as well as many other places.
This AutoBlog column is simply another restatement of the false article that the LAT printed. YOU continue to say how scandalized you are by that article, yet you won't sell your Camry to quiet your fears and presumably you are still driving it with no problems.
#123 of 447 Re: Tricked by Toyota [rick03]
Jan 24, 2010 (1:10 pm)
Do some research before slamming anyone.
You bought your car on Jan 12th and you asked a question. The answer that you got was accurate because the new voluntary recall was not announced until this week. Cut the guy some slack, he told you the truth because he knew exactly what you knew on Jan 12th.
From the letter from Toyota to NHTSA you should have no issues on a new vehicle. Read the letter and the comments by NHTSA. The situation might arise in very isolated cases when the piece becomes worn, not when it's new.