Ask the Car People.SM


Toyota Halts Sales of Popular Models - Accelerator Stuck Problem Recall

3593 messages,  Last post on Apr 14, 2013 at 5:57 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum.

What is this discussion about? Toyota Camry, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Highlander, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Avalon, Toyota Tundra, Toyota Sequoia, Pontiac Vibe, Automotive News

Messages Page 356 of 360

#3551 of 3593 Re: Not the only ones [wwest] by circuitsmith

May 23, 2011 (11:07 am)

Replying to: wwest (May 18, 2011 12:08 pm)
"Rapidly becoming an urban legend, that."
 
Not a good way to put it. That implies it was never true.
 
"LITTLE used torque converter, was down-sized, made less powerful"
 
Got any reference to back that up?
On most mainstream automatics the torque converter is unlocked below ~40MPH.
With car companies striving for fractions of an MPG a low loss/slip torque converter is still desirable.
 
You should keep your foot on the brake when stopped on the street anyway so the brake lights will be on.

#3552 of 3593 Re: Not the only ones [circuitsmith] by wwest

May 23, 2011 (1:49 pm)

Replying to: circuitsmith (May 23, 2011 11:07 am)
"..unlocked below ~40 MPH..."
 
Nowadays the torque converter clutch is locked, bypassing the TC, unless being locked might result in the engine stalling. It will also be unlocked for even the most minor level of acceleration, in any of the higher gear ratios.
 
"..Got any reference to back that up.."
 
Other than the widespread adoption of the new "hill-start", automatic braking, no.

#3553 of 3593 Re: Not the only ones [wwest] by luckyseven

May 24, 2011 (8:17 pm)

Replying to: wwest (May 23, 2011 1:49 pm)
wwest, you need to stop imagining things and pass it for facts.

#3554 of 3593 70% of claims whacked by steve_ HOST

Jun 12, 2011 (10:55 am)

"Only California car owners — not those in other states — can take advantage of the state's favorable consumer-protection laws. The action drastically cuts the size of a potential class action against Toyota filed on behalf of consumers and calls into question speculation that the Toyota litigation could cost the automaker upward of $3 billion if it lost the federal case."
 
Federal Judge Drastically Limits Claims Against Toyota in Sudden-Acceleration Litigation (Inside Line)

#3555 of 3593 first of many? by steve_ HOST

Oct 01, 2011 (7:02 am)

"The first legal case against Toyota Motor Corp. over unintended acceleration was dismissed from a federal court in California under a judge’s ruling that the lawsuit should have been filed in a state court in Utah, where the plaintiffs’ accident occurred.
 
The dismissal won’t preclude the suit from being tried in a federal court, as the plaintiffs’ attorney said a new complaint will be drafted to place the suit in the proper jurisdiction. The now-dismissed case was scheduled to be tried in 2013."
 
First Toyota Unintended-Acceleration Lawsuit Dismissed (AutoObserver)

#3556 of 3593 Re: first of many? [steve_] by gagrice

Oct 01, 2011 (7:10 am)

Replying to: steve_ (Oct 01, 2011 7:02 am)
Seems strange they would have filed it in CA to start with. With recent cut backs in the state budget the courts are getting very backed up. The last I read in San Francisco, it could take 3-5 years for a civil case, including divorces.

#3557 of 3593 Re: first of many? [gagrice] by houdini1

Oct 01, 2011 (7:12 am)

Replying to: gagrice (Oct 01, 2011 7:10 am)
My guess is they were trying to take advantage of the more favorable consumer protection laws in California.

#3558 of 3593 Re: first of many? [houdini1] by steve_ HOST

Oct 01, 2011 (7:23 am)

Replying to: houdini1 (Oct 01, 2011 7:12 am)
Well, it was filed in federal court in California, and I don't know how much weight the court would give to state consumer law. Probably a more favorable jury pool than one in Utah but you never know with juries.
 
Toyota is based in California so it makes a little sense to start there where most of the documents and witnesses are.

#3559 of 3593 Re: first of many? [steve_] by houdini1

Oct 01, 2011 (7:34 am)

Replying to: steve_ (Oct 01, 2011 7:23 am)
State consumer laws are all over the board and vary considerably. Things like limits on judgments, length of time to file, etc, etc. I would think it would be impossible for a Fed. Court to ignore a particular state's consumer laws.

#3560 of 3593 Re: first of many? [houdini1] by steve_ HOST

Oct 01, 2011 (7:42 am)

Replying to: houdini1 (Oct 01, 2011 7:34 am)
We can make it even more complicated since the accident happened in Utah. Maybe the court would ignore California and use the Utah laws. Or, say, Kentucky if the SUA car was a Camry that was made there.

Messages Page 356 of 360

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement