Last post on Oct 29, 2013 at 7:25 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Camry, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Highlander, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Avalon, Toyota Tundra, Toyota Sequoia, Pontiac Vibe, Automotive News
#2093 of 3623 Re: . [anythngbutgm]
Mar 05, 2010 (6:37 pm)
I am the original owner of a 1995 Toyota Avalon with 156,000 miles and never had a recall. I did replace 2 timing belts, one set of spark plugs, one set of front brake pads, a battery, a fan belt and a front axle that was probably my fault by driving into a hole in the rode. That car is fifteen years old, has been garaged and looks and runs like new. I have had zero complaints. I bought that car because my prior two Toyotas were also trouble free with zero complaints.
Based upon my experience with Toyotas, I purchased a 2008 Toyota Avalon Limited and now have 24,000 miles on it without a repair or a complaint. It is the best car that I have ever owned or driven. I recently received a call back to repair the accelerator pedal, the driver's side all weather floor mat and the VVT-i Oil Hose that has been reported to break and leak the oil out of the car. I am disappointed that these things have occurred, but I am hopeful that corrections will be made and my car will run as well as it is running today. Call backs are not a new phenomenon and have occurred with most if not all car manufacturers. This is a wake up call to all car manufacturers and their workers to put out a better product or their jobs are on the line.
#2094 of 3623 UA is not limited to Toyota only!
Mar 05, 2010 (6:58 pm)
This was posted by another user in another thread.
By using the data above, I can conclude that VW has twice as many complaints about unintended acceleration than Toyota in 2009. Toyota's getting crucified for something that isn't particularly uncommon or unusual. Similar to Audi 5000, where ALL UA on Audi 5000 complaints and deaths are drivers' error. Not suprising due to US law system, sue and blame the other!
#2095 of 3623 Re: UA is not limited to Toyota only! [tomjava]
Mar 05, 2010 (7:47 pm)
Let try another post to show the chart.
#2096 of 3623 Take a look-see all of ye...
Mar 05, 2010 (7:48 pm)
ATTENTION ALL DEALERS:
Many of you likely have Toyota owners and potential customers coming into your store because of Toyota’s Unintended Acceleration recalls. Many may worry there’s something more than floor mats and “sticky” pedals. And you probably would like to be able to show them proof that Kia vehicles indeed have better designed Electronic Throttle Controls than Toyota. Well, here’s how, just in time for Toyota‘s new sales blitz..
First, print Dr. Gilbert’s testimony to Congress from here:
energycommerce house gov/Press_111/20100223/Gilbert.Testimony.pdf
Note I took out the hyper text protocol indicator and replaced the dots with spaces, so add those back.
Next, print out the Toyota recall procedure from here:
images thetruthaboutcars com/2010/02/Tech-Instructions-Preliminary-Posting-BIL.pdf
Don’t forget to add the http and periods back.
You’ll want to highlight in Dr. Gilbert’s statement where he said he shorted the sensor leads together without any trouble code being set, and where he said he then connected those two leads to 5V reference voltage and produced WOT acceleration with no DTC/MIL. On the recall procedure, you’ll see the system acceptable voltages on pages 8 and 9. You’ll want to point out two things: At WOT, the two sensor voltages can in fact overlap. And that full system reference voltage is a valid input and wouldn’t set a DTC. Just like Dr. Gilbert’s tests found! It looks like 5V on side 1 might set a code, but the tests indicated that’s not the case, not surprising since there’s only a 10% difference anyway.
Next, you’ll want to print the system description and specs from the Shop Manual for your car. CAUTION: not every car in the line-up has ETC.
CAUTION: I’m basing what follows on the Hyundai Azera manual. I cannot fathom that Kia’s system differs, but be sure to verify this. If anyone finds any discrepancies, PLEASE let me know.
I found it under Fuel System>Engine Control System>Accelerator Position System. The system description and specs clearly show that this system uses resistors to do two things: Choke the maximum voltage on side 1 to 4.35V, so the system can detect a short to reference. And on side two, voltage is choked to 50% of side one. So if a foreign voltage was introduced or somehow induced in the sensor leads, the ECU would know that since it’s ALWAYS looking for side one to be twice the value of side two or a code will be set!
Remember, this isn’t taking advantage of Toyota’s misfortune. This is a key safety feature that Toyota lacks, just like Active Head Restraints on some of their cars. Remember too that Toyota has avoided warranty claims for repairs on cars that have had UA and likely has avoided costs on cars that might have otherwise experienced MIL for transitory electrical events. Plus they’ve likely avoided negative survey responses on “Check Engine Light”/MIL. Whether or not this design is the root cause of Toyota’s UA claims, it’s still obvious Kia took extra caution and designed extra safety features in that Toyota didn’t.
I think Toyota's as guilty as all hell. Period. See ya and I really wouldn't wanna be ya Toyota.
#2097 of 3623 Re: UA is not limited to Toyota only! [tomjava]
Mar 05, 2010 (8:23 pm)
This appears to be the long term study from 1999-2009. Edmunds did a study ovver the last 3-4 years of all NTSA complaints February 22, 2010. You can find in at the bottom of their homepage - press/news releases
The second study found Toyota did have the highest SUA/UA complaints. Ford came in second, etc.
The first study which was a long study found Toyota 17th.
I consider the second study more informative as it tells you how manufacturer is doing more recently.
#2098 of 3623 Re: . [anythngbutgm]
Mar 05, 2010 (8:32 pm)
Hope NHTSA is not eliminating some complaints as they have done so often in the past.
Good to see this report for 2009 models only. There would be other reports though. THIS REPORT IS FOR ONLY 2009 MODELS. COMPLAINTS OF OTHER YEAR MODELS WOULD HAVE EXISTED FOR 2009 ALSO.
So one fulty aspect to this study does exist. Only 2009 model study done. All other year models not counted. Why was this study pushed??? That is good question??
Just food for thought.
#2099 of 3623 Re: . [obyone]
Mar 05, 2010 (8:38 pm)
Toyota did not do twice, but will most certainly not happen again. I noticed, but let it go. On watch now.
#2100 of 3623 Re: . [sharonkl]
Mar 05, 2010 (10:37 pm)
Just curious. What was it that they didn't log down? Was it the only thing it was in for? I'd think it would be difficult if you took it in for one item and they didn't note it. Would be like could you sign here acknowledging that we did correct the item that we didn't log down...lmao.
#2101 of 3623 Re: . [gilseidman]
Mar 06, 2010 (3:41 am)
I understand your problem , I have had 74 GM products over 53 years and in the beginning the used ones I bought were not bad but $150.00 got you a 54 Chev. $500.00 a 55 Chev. convertible all good cars. The Enclave I have now has great mileage carries my mother (94 the 15 Th of this month) her walker ,the wife ,the dog and it has the Ford/GM six speed transmission with the tow pack.Their has been re calibration once on the trans. The big thing with all the builders of cars in North America, is not one of them knows what the buyer wants. This being said,not one of the customers knows what he wants either. The Dealers being reinstated 600 will help put people back to work. Then you watch Toyota sales come back ? The people having good jobs working for a GM Dealership do also buy Toyota ( would this make sense to you?)
#2102 of 3623 Re: . [obyone]
Mar 06, 2010 (6:17 am)
Just curious. What was it that they didn't log down?
On my 5000 mile first service I took a list of 11 complaints to the dealer. He typed them all into the computer while I stood there. When they were done he explained why they did not do anything about 9 of the items. When I got my paper work all it showed was the oil change and service. One of the things they claimed they did was not what I asked. I wanted all my tires brought up to 36 lbs. I guess it was too much trouble to also pump up the spare to keep the TPMS light from coming on. So when I checked them the next day they were still at 32 lbs. I finally crawled under and brought the spare up to 36 along with the rest of the tires.
Next time I went in I told them the tailgate still did not go up when it was below 45 degrees. They had no record of that being addressed on my previous visit. I quit using them for Service. I used a dealer in Indiana on our long trip to do the 15k mile service. Pretty much the same lame excuses for the tailgate and high priced oil change.
I got Walmart to do my 20k mile service. Using Mobil1 synthetic it cost the same as Toyota oil change with dino oil. Toyota wanted $125 for an off brand synthetic oil change. I will only use the dealers for warranty which I did buy the 7 year platinum $0 deductible plan. Still have those issues which they seem useless to fix. I wonder if my hitting my head on the tailgate when it does not go all the way up is a safety issue? I guess I need to talk to my Congressman, while they have Toyota on the hotseat.