Japan Inc. falls on its face

[Bill Glasheen]

I'm still trying to figure out how the driver who killed his family failed to get the car stopped but someone had time to dial a cell phone. Hell, back when I was young and stupid we used to street race and if you had an auto you would floor the car while standing on the breaks. Never broke loose even using old drum breaks.

On the first point, yes, it is a mystery. Apparently, his first instinct was to ride the brakes, which we know that he burned out doing so. As Marcus (Stryke) used to have on his signature line here: more of what does not work will not work. Why his mind never moved on to ignition and transmission systems is hard to say. I assume the answer is panic and preoccupation with immediate obstacles, i.e. a failure to prioritize.

As for the second point, that's just physics. It's the same reason a skier can sit on a slope at 0mph and not slide, whereas if they fall at 80mph on the same butt on the same spot they don't stop for awhile. Possibly he might have been successful if he had slammed on the brakes when they were still cool, but I don't know what the anti-lock braking system will do at 90mph under full-throttle acceleration.

On the "brain fart" thing... Remember that we're dealing with the Survival Stress Response. Much has been written on this by Grossman, Goleman, etc., etc. There's an optimal peak in the cognition vs. autonomic stimulation relationship. Go into condition red and black (when the Grim Reaper is staring at you in the face) and all but the trained (athletes, LEOs, soldiers, etc.) will do stupid things (deer in headlights, lose coordination, visual distortion, auditory distortions, time distortions, etc. etc.).

It's the same old same old, right Van?

On the brake/accelerate while still vs. brake/accelerate while moving... The science behind what mhosea is saying has to do with the fact that the coefficient of static friction is always greater than the coefficient of kinetic friction. An easy way to experience that is to see how hard it is to get a car moving vs. how hard it is to keep it moving. If you've ever tried to push a stalled car, you know what I'm talking about.

- Bill

[Van Canna]

I am following this discussion with real interest because I had a similar problem many years ago, while driving an old 1968 Plymouth Valiant, stick shift, _

It happened on the Mass Pike one late evening while on the way back home from Boston proper…fortunately on an empty road.

I think it was the gas pedal spring that broke.

The car lurched forward at full speed…after a moment of panic; I shifted into neutral and stood on the brakes….the engine racing like hell…

I remember wondering why in hell, even in neutral, and with my foot slamming down on the brake pedal…..

….the damn car kept flying forward…forward…forward…

Almost as though it were still in gear…

It seemed a lifetime before I was finally able to stop and shut off the engine.

Never dawned on me to turn off the ignition until fully stopped.

Later I kept thinking of the movie ‘Somebody Up There Likes Me”

Why did that car keep flying forward with a racing engine in neutral, Bill?

[Bill Glasheen]

I like those RWD Toyotas you speak of, Mike K. So does my son. He's always ranting about how high his friends' Supras' horspower comes out when they measure their WHP in these dynanometer clinics. There are some monster Supras out there.

And RWD is a "driver's" car, as is AWD.

As far as teens and performance...
My son wants my RAV4. 269 HP from it's V6, plenty of head room and after this year's snow he loves the on demand 4WD. Oh, and one other thing, the insurance rates are better than he could get for a WRX. But then he's preparing to go into engineering.

Couple of things...

• I explicitly forbade my son from getting all but several chosen SUVs. Particularly with a vehicle like a RAV4... The combination of the short wheelbase and the high COG makes this type of vehicle particularly prone to rollovers. In fact about a week ago we saw a flipped RAV4 right in the intersection of Nuchols Road and Wyndham Forest Drive (near the Starbucks, Samurai Japanese Restaurant, etc.). Emergency avoidance maneuver because someone ran the light, and... Not a pretty sight.
  
  I rode this type of vehicle professionally when I was a geologist. Several of my colleagues rolled them. One in particular was reading his USGS map while driving, and (believe it or not) a chicken crossed the road. He swerved, and... Ever since then, they called him "Chicken John."
• Insurance rates are often heavily affected by the type of driver typical for the vehicle. The RAV4 is an estrogenmobile. Check out the stats. This is a favorite for women. And women tend not to drive fast or take risks.
  
  Meanwhile, the Subie WRX STI is a testosteronemobile. Young men (the highest risk group) drive these.
  
  If it was MY insurance company, I'd age-sex adjust the risk estimates. Check out that Ken Block video again, Mike. You could NEVER do that track in a tricked-up RAV4. It would flip on the first maneuver.
• All Subarus have a unique COG advantage. Their boxer engine design yields a vehicle with a very low center of gravity. It's very much like the opposing piston design BMW motorcycles.

This is a Subaru Forester engine.



This is a Toyota RAV4 engine.



Throw in a short wheelbase and higher ground clearance. You've got trouble with the RAV4.

You almost cannot flip a WRX, a Forester, or an Outback. It's a reason why the Forester is the only SUV I've ever bought.

There's a lot written about allowing teens to drive SUVs and trucks. Generally it's not a smart idea. The smaller ones are the most dangerous.

A Subaru is the exception to that rule.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

Why did that car keep flying forward with a racing engine in neutral, Bill?

It's tempting to make quick conclusions, but I'll refrain. We weren't there. We don't know if the transmission was stuck in gear, if there was a brain fart, or what.

If you've had experience with transmissions with an attitude (such as an old truck) then you know the trick of double-clutching. I think one thing that helps people who are good at handling misbehaving vehicles is to try to make them misbehave when conditions are safe and you are of a right mind. It is for this reason that I'll often intentionally spin my tires or cause a skidding stop when coming out of a parking lot when it first snows. I want to know where that boundary is, what it feels like, and how it feels to work with a loss of control.

It was probably for that reason that I was able calmly to handle my van doing a 360 with all my family aboard at the beginning of a snowstorm on Christmas day. The only one not panicking (other than yours truly) was my youngest son, who thought the whole experience was pretty cool. Meanwhile, my wife about schit her pants. I still remember the screaming. Funny as hell!

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

From Edmunds. Choosing the Safest Car for Your Teen Driver.

Big, yes, but SUVs are generally not a good idea for teens, most safety experts say. Although these light trucks have low death rates as a group, they can also be difficult for anyone to handle in emergencies — they are required to carry a label on the visor warning that "abrupt maneuvers" should be avoided. "As a general rule I don't think SUVs are a great idea when learning to drive — and certainly not an older SUV that doesn't have ESC (electronic stability control) and tends to roll over," says Kissinger.

- Bill

[Glenn]

Why did that car keep flying forward with a racing engine in neutral, Bill?

Myth Busters tested this a while back. They tried stopping a car by changing gears. Even putting it in reverse or park did not stop it, apparently a feature built in to prevent damage to the transmission if the gear is accidentally changed while the vehicle is in motion. I think they said the car had to be stopped before gears could be changed.

Here is a poor quality copy of the episode on YouTube, although I have not watched more than a couple seconds to see if it is all there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hakNxO5pME4

[Glenn]

Regarding the suggestion mentioned several times on here about turning off the ignition to stop a car with a racing engine, note the cautions about that strategy listed on a link Mike K posted

Turn It Off

Switching off the ignition is a sure way to silence an engine, but it’s probably the least desirable action because it will also make the car more difficult to maneuver. It causes a loss of power-steering assist, plus it will cut off vacuum boost for the brakes. The new wrinkle here: the keyless, push-button start-and-stop systems in many vehicles. Owners need to be aware that these systems require a long press of the button to shut off power when the car is moving (so that an inadvertent touch of the button by the driver doesn’t kill the engine). Here, too, the Toyota was slightly behind the curve; the Infiniti’s engine shut down after a 2.5-second press of the button versus 3.3 seconds for the Camry. In an emergency, that would probably feel like an eternity. For some perspective, if a V-6 Camry’s throttle became stuck at 60 mph, the car would accelerate to nearly 80 mph before the engine would surrender.

Furthermore, short, frantic pressing of the Toyota’s start/stop button—the probable response in an emergency—does nothing, whereas the Infiniti kills the engine after three rapid-fire presses.

They do note that while changing the gear to neutral will not stop the car, it will disengage the transmission enabling you to stop with the brakes even though the engine is racing.

Shift to Neutral or Park

This is your best option in an emergency. Neither the Camry’s nor the Infiniti’s automatic transmission showed any hesitancy to shift into neutral or park when accelerating at full tilt. (Automatics have a piece of hardware called a park pawl, which prevents the transmission from actually engaging park and locking the wheels at speed—it creates a disturbing grinding sound, but the car essentially coasts freely.) The Roush had a manual, so you’d simply depress the clutch. In either case, power is effectively kept from the wheels and the car will be able to brake with its usual undiminished vigor, engine racing or not.

[IJ]

I'm making sense, Bill; I don't have an emotional issue with Toyota. You may? And maybe I do in your mind. It's perfectly obvious that Toyota has a safety problem with their vehicles. It's perfectly obvious that this is a big misstep for them. I am merely saying that the risk of me getting in my Prius now due to those problems is negligible and probably outweighed by all the positive safety features, compared to my last vehicle (a Honda, which actually led Toyota in reliability but wasn't as good with the marketing evidently).

Do I know what I want? Yeah. Dur. I want a reliable car that let's me get the best mileage possible, is comfortable, has decent sound, is easy to take care of, handles a 6'3" driver, and then I drive it cautiously and courteously. I have no plans to sell my Prius but if I did I'd be very annoyed with recent snafus as they likely kill the resale. My suspicion is that Toyota will iron out these problems, catch some well deserved hell, and remain a major player in the future.

I have already indicated my wholehearted support for the success of reliable and fuel saving diesels.

Re: Bimmers (Beamers? Beemers? The car isn't a Bim-mer. Side issue), I'm glad Van's car is running nicely. Of all the BMW's I've known owners of, many had major mechanical problems and their maintenance was very costly. Of all the Toyotas I've known owners of, almost none have had issues. Now many are in for recall. I'm not disputing that. But that doesn't change the aggregate experience that they had substantially poorer reliability, and perhaps still do. I'm never going to get a BMW-or a Jetta--because it is my continuous experience on the roads here that almost everyone who cuts me off, swerves across three lanes to exit, or lane changes 2 seconds before exit despite road signs 3 miles back, or who swoops around me inches before the red light I am coasting to is driving a BMW or Jetta. I'm sure present company is excepted, and or would complain that the guys they hate on the road are driving at 60 (in the slow lane), and accelerating gently. Guilty as charged.

Re: your son: your anecdote was not clear. It made sense to you because you know what your son's car preference is (with your longer post now I do too). They way you said he didn't understand you don't maximize performance and reliability simultaneously, I thought you could have been suggesting he preferred reliable cars (or other meanings, hence my response asking you what you meant). In any case, I have known (have you known?) that we are totally different when it comes to cars. I will never buy a fancy or muscle car. I will never race one. I do not care in the slightest that others do. I have no idea why anyone would watch cars waste fuel racing in circles and occasionally crashing when they could be doing anything else. I look at that whole car fascination thing the way I look at professional wrestling. I just do not get it at all.

You are welcome to love it. I think about cars as a means to get from A - B until the USA figures out that it'd be much better off with legitimate public transportation.

Your son is right about Honda reliability though. #1 last time I saw a review in CR.

[Van Canna]

I think that it is true that German cars are not as reliable, generally, as Japanese cars…but they are not as bad as one may think. The new generations BMW are nothing like the older ones.

http://www.bmwblog.com/2009/11/08/uk-to ... two-spots/

Fleet News UK has just published their latest vehicle reliability survey and not to our surprise, BMW Group is very well represented. Despite falling one spot behind the Honda Civic, BMW occupies three of the ten spots in this survey, same as the Japanese automaker.

The survey, which quizzed the country’s largest fleet operators who between them run more than a million vehicles, saw the popular and high-seller 3 Series taking the second position, followed closely by the 5 Series (5th) and the MINI (8th).

The UK’s 50 largest fleet companies were asked to rate their most reliable vehicles and manufacturers among their combined fleet of 840,000 cars and 183,000 light commercials.

While Honda took the crown in the Top 10 Most Reliable Cars, BMW Group wins in the Top 10 Most Reliable Car Manufacturers, a great recognition of their efforts to produce highly reliable cars, but still fun to drive.

Top 10 Most Reliable Cars

1. Honda Civic
2. BMW 3 Series
3. Honda Jazz
4. Honda Accord
5. BMW 5 Series
6. Audi A4
7. Mercedes Benz C-Class
8. Mini
9. Toyota Avensis
10. Volkswagen Golf

Top 10 Most Reliable Car Manufacturers
1. BMW
2. Honda
3. Audi
4. Toyota
5. Volkswagen
6. Mercedes-Benz
7. Ford
8. Mazda
9. Nissan
10. Skoda

[Van Canna]

http://donnyb.posterous.com/train-runni ... -a-tornado

[IJ]

Van, scary video. I was surprised to see BMW at the top of that list, but good for them. I wonder about the methodology, for example, is this initial quality? Is it distorted because we're talking fleet companies only? Or is the distribution different in the UK?

I found this but it's a bit old, still interesting with many Honda and Toyota among the best and none among the worst:

http://autos.msn.com/advice/crart.aspx? ... id=4023544

This is from the 07 survey and has toyota and honda brands claiming all top 5 spots:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17385761/

The 09 results still had asia leading:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/200 ... king_N.htm

This is interesting, comparing perceived reliability against actual, and shows (wait for it) Asia owning all top ten spots:

http://consumerist.com/2009/01/the-10-m ... tions.html

Now of course, this is before Toyotas started killing people in runaway accidents, so 2010 will be a different story. At the moment, mine isn't recalled for acceleration issues and the Prius has excellent reliability.

[Bill Glasheen]

I actually think it's heartening to see auto manufacturers leapfrogging each other on quality, value, affordability, performance, and features. Competition is a good thing, and the consumer benefits. And consumers SHOULD be critical and raise the bar every year.

God knows that vehicles are becoming more complicated every year. The more complex they become, the greater the chance for bad things to happen.

This is how/why I find diesel and electrics to be appealing. Those speak to the value of simplicity, while still dealing with issues such as energy independence, performance (low-end torque in particular), flexibility, and even safety.

- Bill

[Van Canna]

I was surprised to see BMW at the top of that list, but good for them. I wonder about the methodology, for example, is this initial quality? Is it distorted because we're talking fleet companies only? Or is the distribution different in the UK?

Good question...though I am not sure fleet cars would be subjected to stricter quality controls during manufacture.

Mercedes is for a fact not any longer a reliable car as per many of my friends who own one.

As to the BMW...what is interesting to notice is that modern/current models are all sold with free maintenance for 4 years/50 K miles.

And the required maintenance seems to be minimal...

If BMW were to build 'dogs' imagine the money they would lose on free maintenance...and warranty repairs.

Yet, overall, I agree that asian models are more reliable overall.

But then again, most BMW owners do not keep their cars any longer than 4 years, anyway.

Many will trade in every two years...if not every year.

I also enjoy driving a fine car...I have test driven most of the luxury brands...none approach the road feel and handling of a BMW...

[Joe Bellone]

Toyota's position of secrecy dosen't suprise me. I've been to Japan for work on several different occasions and have had to deal with the Japanese mindset of a "quality problem" addressing new innovative technology potholes.

The Japanese mindset has a double standard.

If "YOU" (your company) has a perceived issue, YOU are expected to give everything to what the design Engineer had eaten for breakfast that day, to QA and DVT testing scripts showing all failures - even though they were caught in the quality testing - to them, so they can completely understand your thinking. Then they challenge you on why you did the things the way you did them.

I'm not embellishing in the least. Personal experience. They make you squirm.

Now, on the other hand, if "THEY" have an issue with quality, it's purely an internal Company matter. Period. The only reason why Toyoda is coming to Washington NOW is because he's looking at his balance sheet. He didn't want to come, that's why he WAS going to send his number two guy. But, quickly Toyota recognized that this was a marketing mistake. They know where the biggest market is located and they know this is going to hurt his pocket book, if Toyoda dosen't come and smooze with Congressional lobbyists.

The Japanese took advantage of a over confident, arrogant big three car industry years ago. They stole market share on price/quality. It's easier to do "me too" Engineering. That's what Japanese excel in - still do. That's what Toyota took advantage of to capture marketshare. It's a whole lot harder to be innovative on so many different levels; technically, anticipating market trends, etc.

Personally, I own a Toyota now - I will never buy another one ever again. I will drive this one into the ground and when it is dead and buried, I will look elsewhere for quality and innovation.

Joe

[Van Canna]

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/6934 ... 1266765202