In testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Energy and Transportation, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said he was “looking at the possibility of recommending” mandatory brake override systems on all new vehicles sold in the US. Given the congressional hysteria about auto safety in the past few weeks (not to mention the already-expectant MSM headlines), such a requirement would likely face little political opposition. When Toyota first announced that it would be installing the buzz-worthy “failsafe” system on its new cars, we whined that the days of doing burnouts in Mom’s autobox IS350 were over. Which, frankly, was fairly petty of us. At this point it’s become fairly clear that, whether there are unfound defects still lurking in the evil minds of our appliance-mobiles or not, Americans need to feel that they could stop their cars in a worst case demonic possession scenario. So let them eat brake override systems, say I. At least until I hear someone advocating for mandatory manual transmissions.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Is there any evidence that anyone who has experienced one of these unintentional acceleration incidents was actually stepping on the brakes?
IIRC, witnesses reported smoke from the wheels of the Saylor Lexus incident in San Diego before it crashed.
Yes. But pumping the brakes will make it tougher, if not impossible, to stop.
Yes. Smoke from the brakes and melted hub caps have been reported multiple times.
Car and Driver tested brake resistance under full throttle. In a Camry V-6 the stopping distance was 16 feet longer when applying the brake under full throttle as opposed to simply braking without any throttle. 16 feet. Meaning that the unintended acceleration victims were unintentionally stepping on the gas. Maybe there is a problem with the gas pedal. Sure, I can buy that. But there is no problem with the brakes becoming disabled at the same time.
A skilled driver using the proper technique managed to stop the car in only 16 feet longer at 70mph. At 100mph, typical of a full-throttle incident, it was 88 feet.
A typical driver caught unaware of hard acceleration will not match what a professional in a test can do. Brake fade caused by pumping the pedal a couple times throw these full-throttle stopping distances out the window.
Yes, a typical driver can invertantly render the brakes all but useless in a UA incident by multiple or light applications.
I would agree that a person can unintentionally cause brake fade in such a situation. But a simple understanding of driving could prevent that. Perhaps Rhonda Smith did something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eu_kY64gSn4
Point being, minus a car that’s accelerating on its own, some people can’t drive. Period. This driver knew there was an obstacle popping out and had a functioning car….she still could not avoid hitting something. Say brake fade kicks in due to lack of skill/knowledge….brakes are rendered useless. That happened to me once, brakes failed. I killed no one. Start flashing your lights, honk the horn and gently force the car off the road to stop. I had to do that when my parents Ford Explorer’s brakes failed. There is always a way to avoid an accident, even when there are no brakes at 100 km/h. Toyota should be held responsible for faulty pedals. But any aware driver (aka good driver) should be able to avoid an accident by employing emergency maneuvers they should have been taught as teens learning to drive. No gov’t mandate or design change should be required. Enforcing such a change will only lower the bar for driver training.
I once had my gas pedal get stuck under a cheap winter floor mat. I stomped the brakes, slowed it down, pulled to the side of the road, hooked my foot under the gas and pulled it up, then turned the car off, got out and checked to make sure it was all ok. Once I got it home, I checked everything again, and noticed the pedal could get caught in the mat, so I threw it away.
This was on an aged Subaru with pretty weak brakes.
I’m not a professional driver. I don’t even think I’m that skilled. What I am is an aware driver. I pay attention to what is going on with my car, I drive it instead of simply sitting around listening to music.
I have challenged people before, and I still do, to find me a case of unintended acceleration in Europe, where the standards for drivers are much higher, and no one has.
I’m not going to question that there’s a problem with Toyotas. I’m not a fan of everything being electronic these days, but the fact is if people were actually trained to drive a car, let alone paid attention, this would be an even smaller non-issue than it already is.
I also had the brakes downright fail in an old Ford pickup. I was quite poverty-stricken at the time, so I was trying to get away with not changing them as long as I could.
That was a mistake, and it eventually led to the truck blowing the brake line off the caliper. Still, I reacted calmly, shifted the truck down, then applied the emergency brake, and got out to check it.
Then I called a tow truck.
I had a more serious incident than these Toyota owners, but I still handled it because I pay attention. It scares me far more than any stuck gas pedal that I share roads with people who do not do the same.
To do a hill start , you hold the footbrake down with the left side of your right foot , while building up the revs with the right side of your right foot , and gently come off the clutch with your left foot as you lift your right foot off the brake pedal.Doesn’t work if the brakes overide the throttle. Same goes for left-foot braking – keeping your right foot on the gas while gently braking with your left foot , to stop one of the front wheels spinning as you scramble up an icy hill.
… and you should always carry around a little can of gas in your trunk incase your fuel gauge malfunctions, and a signalling mirror incase your care breaks down in the wilderness…
Please consider that any reasonable car equipped with ABS and ESC (stability control for yaw and roll) will already have the majority, if not all, of the hardware necessary for a “hill-holder” feature, as well as ASR (traction control.)
What you are suggesting is only necessary in old or primative cars.
Brake override is a very excellent thing and long overdue; and as I understand it, there are many excellent european sporting cars that already feature it.
From a technical side, for those sporting vehicles that need a Launch Stability Control feature, this already state of the art. (And some cars already have, or do still, feature switches to temporarily defeat abs and esc.)
So few people are competent using heel-toe that they are really irrelevant to the issue of making cars safe against themselves.
btw, attached is a nice litte LDR-black-box video of brake-override employed for a different kind of vehicle (notice the little sparks coming from the brakes as the vehicle decelerates):
Exactly, Uncle Mellow.
The interlock needs to allow for starting on a hill when the driver behind you pulls within one foot of your rear bumper. You bring the speed up enough to hold the car then release the brake.
Rolling back into the car that pulled up far too close to you is still your fault.
Install the interlock but allow this functionality. Using the parking brake, this is the correct terminology, for starting on a hill is far too clumbsy in most cars.
Here on the west coast we have what are called hills. Many of our cities have very steep streets where you stop on a 24% slope, although they are only labeled 20% because some laws kick in that the cities want to avoid so they under-identify the grade.
Driving east-west in Seattle you will aggressively prevent roll-back at nearly every intersection. Bringing up the throttle before releasing the brake is typical and successful.
@Robert.Walter
What you are suggesting is only necessary in old or primative cars.
Is a 2007 Honda Accord “old or primative” in your view?
I do not hold the car on a slope with the engine. I use the brake. I have to throttle-up before releasing the brake to prevent roll-back. I was taught this in High School Driving School and have used it since.
Those of us who have turned away from pumping and rowing through traffic still need this capability.
Hi CarP,
In this aspect yes. You and I learned to do this because that was all the available technology allowed. But paradigms are made to be broken and improved upon.
With ABS in a vehicle, the old method is no longer necessary. With hill-holder, you still keep the left foot on the clutch, and the right foot on the brake, and when you go, you move the rt foot to the accl and go, and in the meantime, the hill-holder keeps you from rolling back, any you never need to use the handbrake (you still can if you want to)…
The sequencing of the feet is different than what we learned, but no more difficult, and is easy enough to learn. And because your foot is not on the accl and the brake at the same time, there is no logical conflict for a brake-over-ride to see.
And there really isn’t any difference from today, except for the few with manual cars, without handbrake, who like to bridge the brake-accl gap with the right foot, and, probably not here, but in the wider-world, are in the vast minority.)
On my car, if the clutch is in I can apply brake and fuel at the same time. On hills I use the handbrake if I’m having a lazy day. Otherwise I just try not to suck at driving. And I’ve driven extensively in Pittsburgh.
umm NO! you learn how to drive with a manual transmission! First off there is a delay before your brakes fully release, the calipers are forced apart by the minute wobble in the disk, (substitute shoes and drum when apropriate) this is enough to hold you from rolling backwards when doing a start on a hill. Aparently I’ve been driving a manual a lot longer than you, possibly longer than you have been alive, as the first I drove was a 62 ford… This comes back to both Frizzlefry and my own earlier comments, People Simply do Not Know How To Drive!
So what are they going to do when that doesn’t cure the problem?
My air shifted Power Glide will be useless at the drag strip. At 70, I am seriously considering a manual transmission for my next car.
The manual you get will be rather annoying with the ability to heel-toe taken away…
You can still heel-toe with brake override.
When you make something idiot-proof, God invents a bigger idiot.
Brake overrides won’t solve the problem, they’ll just raise the bar.
In a country with a sane liability system, you’d be able to sign a release allowing you to buy a car without this feature. But legal releases today aren’t worth their legal weight in toilet paper.
Simultaneous use of the accelerator and brake will go away like diving boards at the neighborhood pool.
A brake over-ride will monitor both pedals.
If full-throttle is commanded and some level of brake is commanded, it will cut the throttle back to idle or prevent it from going above some value, such as 25%.
Where we have to do some thoughtful engineering is the algorithm used to compare the two commands. I’d really prefer it only monitor conditions where the throttle is 40% or higher so I can still prevent roll-back when starting on hills.
Quite the post-burnout wrap up. I’d say they fuckin’ covered it.
Brake override software won’t help if it’s pedal misapplication. That said, the installation of the automatic shift lock and brake override software was the absolute end of Audi UA.
My prediction is that by the time NHTSA gets around to a rulemaking, everyone will have installed brake override, so it’s a moot question. So many OEMs already have it that it is the state of the engineering art; anyone without it can be found negligent. Honestly I was shocked to learn that Toyota was so behind the times on this.
It’s like anything else that is fun or good in this country. Many suffer for the sins of the few. The government tends to go overboard in any situation. I think we all can agree that we just want our cars to accelerate when we want them to. There are many situations where I want to be able to accelerate slightly while I have my foot on the brake, like when I’m putting my car up on ramps for exanple. I don’t want to overshoot the ramp and crush my rocker panels. And just think of all those stores that won’t be able to get remodeled for free when old folks having a senior moment come crashing through the front door unexpectedly.
And just think of all those stores that won’t be able to get remodeled for free when old folks having a senior moment come crashing through the front door unexpectedly.
Not to worry. Brake override won’t do anything when they try to stop the car with the accelerator pedal instead of the brake.
Hi fan! (I hope you are well and all is back to normal with the Lexus.)
I know what you mean with the ramp game … the need to do this is not incompatible with brake-override … the programming just has to take into consideration that partial throttle application with very low equal wheel speeds (i.e. on all wheels) probably means someone is doing what you suggest. In addition, full throttle application with unequal speeds probably means someone is doing their bleach burn-out (or getting ready to shock the greeter at Wal-Mart!)
Heel-toe, left-foot braking, parallel-parking on the hills of San Francisco…
I vow to hack this software.
Where is the technical evidence to support these new claims that sudden acceleration is due to mechanical or electrical failure? No matter how heart-wrenching the telling, a series of “my Toyota ran out of control” stories does NOT constitute the evidence upon which to base regulation!
Many thoughtful people in government, industry and consumer affairs believe that the evidence concerning historical cases of sudden acceleration (dating back many years) points to driver error as the predominant cause. But it’s simply politically incorrect (not to mention commercial suicide) for them to say that now, so they are keeping quiet.
And now politicians want to regulate based on stories and early/incomplete investigations. Didn’t we learn anything from the vaccine/autism and cellphone/radiation episodes? Don’t base regulation and legislation on anecdotes, particularly during a feeding frenzy that is being driven by lawyers bent on beating each other to the deepest pockets. Get some solid evidence first!
In the Senate today, they showed a chart of Toyota Camry UA. In 2002 it was 35 as it was about that for the previous three years. In 2003 with the new electronic throttle it went up to 210.
Are your ready to believe that in 2003 drivers suddenly got stupid? NHTSA was ripped for saying “Gee, we don’t have any data there is a problem.”
We have many years of smoke; we’re now on the hunt for the fire.
CarP: Great independent clause in your last sentence! It would seem a Jim Press memo from 2006 has the potential to bring the smoldering embers into an oxygen-rich environment!!
Ed, this is also something for you!
Link Detroit News:
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20100302/AUTO01/3020398/Ex-Toyota-exec-warned-of-safety–quality-problems-in–06
Auto News (sub):
Top U.S. exec warned of Toyota safety slide in 2006
4:36 pm U.S. ET | March 2
Toyota Motor Corp. disregarded warnings in 2006 from North American chief Jim Press that the safety of the company’s vehicles was slipping and that its problems with U.S. regulators were growing, the Senate Commerce Committee chairman said today. “Toyota had plenty of warning signs that something was changing,” Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said at a hearing today. “But it doesn’t seem like this message was heard in Japan. … Toyota Motor North America President Yoshimi Inaba, who is Press’s successor, responded to Rockefeller’s questions today by XXpainfully conceding the horse had long ago left the barnXX reiterating that the company was forming a new committee for global quality with an American representative.”
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100302/OEM02/100309967/1143
Brake override may make sense with an automatic transmission, especially for a car with drive-by-wire throttle. A car with a manual transmission doesn’t need it. It has a clutch. Of course, I’m assuming that clutches will remain mechanical or hydraulic, not electronic.
> assuming that clutches will remain mechanical or hydraulic, not electronic
Unless it’s run through the same computer, or on the same (CAN) data bus, I don’t see why an electronic clutch would be any less reliable than a mechanical or hydraulic one. Electrical circuits are very durable, esp since there is no cycling of pressure or mechanical tension. They are susceptible to electrical failures, but hydraulic pressure and broken cables are also possible. Arguably, it’s easier to provide electrical backup.
The NHTSA might reasonably consider mandating separation between safety critical systems like acceleration, transmission, and braking (steering assist?). Obviously the systems need to communicate, but if one starts to misbehave, the others should continue to offer gracefully degraded operation.
Since much of the “American Way of Life” comes down to inexpensive mobility – defined by the cost of fuel, vehicles, and licensing – there will probably be resistance to making expensive changes.
Honestly, I’m not worried about brake overrides. I cannot think of any situation where I would have said, “damn, I could have avoided that situation if only I had done a nice tire shredding burnout…”
Truthfully, if this override does become mandatory, there will be three distinct groupings of vehicles…
1) Vehicles designed (down to the last nut and bolt) to be track cars. These cars will have an override from the factory… even if it means adding a well marked fuse and a “wink-wink-nudge-nudge” comment in the owner’s manual relating to the legality of removing said fuse.
2) Cars capable but not sold as track specific or enthusiast vehicles. For some reason I always think of the Neon as a prime member of this category, but depending on the law of the land, Miata’s might also slot into here. These vehicles would be well documented on the interwebs on what it takes to do the “fix”.
3) Cars nobody cares that there isn’t a workaround… Prius et al.
Sanity check, does anybody thing that the following things are bad, or worth taking out of cars:
– tetraethyl lead?
– side-marker lights?
– safety glass?
– reliable wipers, washers, defrosters?
– energy absorbing steering columns?
– head restraints?
– safety belts? shoulder straps? front SRS? side SRS?
– side intrusion beams?
– non-collapsable roofs (compared to pre-1970’s standards – this could yet be improved)
– adaptive airbags? adaptive energy absorbing steering columns and seat belts?
– key-shift interlock? shift-key interlock? (these are not the same.)
– brake-shift interlock?
At one time, each of these was new, naysayed and fought against … but they are now just part of safe-motoring landscape and very, very, very few people would want to give these up (btw, I interpreted LaHood’s goal, as testified before congress, of 100% cars not to be the theoretical 100%, but rather 100% compliance of production vehicles with FMVSS and DOT regs – he was just too inarticulate to, well, articulate this…)
One day, brake-override should join this list, and if properly implemented, the enthusiasts won’t be given cause to whine.
Did you mean to imply that tetraethyl lead should be in cars? Because that’s the way I’m reading it…I think that tetraethyl lead has a high potential for being a bad thing, and can be left out of cars. In addition to being no longer necessary, I don’t think it’s particularly good for the health of those who must work with it; this opinion is based upon the experience of growing up in the shadow of one of Ethyl’s largest plants and seeing what happened to too many workers. I’m also happy to not have to replace parts of my exhaust system every 30,000 miles or so, as was typical in the leaded gasoline days.
I’m on the fence with regard to roof strength standards. A big reason for that is because I like convertibles, but I also think that that the huge pillars required by stronger roofs both diminish vision and raise the center of gravity, with the latter increasing the chance of a rollover. It’s a noble endeavor, but it also requires some happy middle ground.
The rest of the things on your list I either embrace, or I can live with.
Thank you for mentioning the brake-shift interlock, which requires a foot on the brake to shift out of Park.
Prior to that, driver error led to deaths, injuries, and property damage. After that, which I remember a 1985 car had it, driver error did not lead to deaths, injuries, and property damage.
Brake-Throttle pedal interlocks will also slow if not stop driver error ending up in deaths, injuries, and property damage. I pray they put some thought behind the algorithm so I can still prevent roll-back when starting on a grade with an automatic transmission without using the engine to hold it on the grade.
Hi Buzz,
Sorry, a coding-error (typographical mistake) on my part … despite the very cool architecture of the (long-abandoned) Ethyl Research Labs on 8-mile in Detroit, nix on bringing back the Pb in gas … (I can’t reflash my note above to correct it because the edit window has expired.)
Re. roof-crush, I’m quite a fan of rag-tops too, so these would have to be dealt with differently and probably partially exempted… but for the others, it is a matter of better materials and designs … Boron-steel has done a lot to improve front crash, and as it becomes more commonplace, the price comes down (and if every OEM has to meet such a reg, and does it efficiently, then it is cost-competitive neutral) and there is no significant weight penalty, the biggest issue is if one goes for the larger sections needed, visibility past the A-pillar is reduced.
Hi CarP, Regarding the BSI, this is exactly my point … nobody minds this feature, it just as normal a part of getting underway as putting the key in the lock and turning it is (soon to be was). And to steal a line from Matthew 26:11, “For you will always have the poor [drivers] amongst you”, and, since everybody makes mistakes, everybody, under the right conditions, has the potential to be a poor driver, with some, as is common to mankind, having more potential than others.
I think brake override is a good thing when done independently by automakers, but would be a mistake if enforced through regulation. If you want to see heel toeing etc…survive you need to have someone who will listen designing the system, and that would be the automaker. On the other hand government regulation will probably include little wiggle room for parameters of the system, such that it cannot be temporarily disabled in programming or by owner choice. Apparently (I think I read it in the comments here actually) you can already find cars whose brake-overide is compatible with heel-toeing, and I wouldn’t be suprised to see a blanket rule screw that up.
@ Robert.Walter
I am good Robert, and I hope you are as well. I have not done anything with the Avalon as of yet, as we are waiting for this entire thing to shake out. No sense getting a recall done if it is not the entire cause, or if the previously mentioned fix does not work. I am seeking a one stop solution, and our car seems to be working fine. I agree with your above post, but I fear that we soon will need a “pre-drive” checklist, much as pilots preform a pre flight checklist currently. While I agree that all of these new safety feature are a good thing, I shall miss the days of care free, inexpensive, and some consequences for my actions motoring.The days of wrapping ourselves in a bubble wrap suit before driving can not be far off.
Fan: Am well, Thx.
Re. bundling service trips, I know what you mean and for normal warranty work have done the same, but here I council you to make, if necessary, step-wise visits an get the fixes as they become available.
If your Avalon is one of the cars covered by the pedal shim fix, take Jim Lentz’s words to heart and demand a new pedal instead of the shim (I would do this given that, according to the testimony in congress, a mechanic has to measure the CTS pedal for wear and then, depending on what he reads, insert the correct, one of 7, size shim. Gage R&R discipline would suggest no two mechanics will get the same measurement on the same pedal … you may have to really be pushy, but I would demand the new pedal, given TMC’s slow sales right now, they should have quite a supply of the new pedals available… and in reality, the shim fix has to cost more in labor than the new pedal which, IIRC, costs Toyota something like 15-bucks!)
Brake override is a good idea and will undoubtedly be implemented across the board, but the real question is how far back will a retrofit be required.
In a world filled with unintended consequences, the idea of a “simple re-flash” ain’t necessarily so simple. Validation of the fix will be a real challenge.
All of this hysteria over Toyota SUA begs the public policy question is whether those dollars would be better spent on other problems or implementing countermeasures for this one.
It should have been common sense for manufacturers to override the throttle during heavy brake application. If they will not make the programming smart on their own, then yes the government should step in and require it.
There will always be people who moan and groan about any regulation, but I don’t see many people who actually want to move to the few places on the planet which are largely unregulated.
“until I hear someone advocating for mandatory manual transmissions”
I wonder if that would make our roads more trecherous or less?
This is a great recommendation. Glad to see TTAC support it.
In spite of all the discussions in the car magazines, I was never co-ordinated enough to heel and toe.
@ Robert.Walter,
Robert, If you read the story at this link, you will see why I am waiting for the “fix” to shake out. This recall is being performed under stress, and I for one do not think it was well thought out. I will wait for cooler heads to prevail.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-toyota3-2010mar03,0,2270669.story
The vast majority of drivers simply want a car that takes them reliably and safely from A to B. They are not would be racers who like to play with their cars. They drive automatics and expect the brakes to work at all times with the effectiveness they are used to.
This why brake power assist must be guaranteed at all times, regardless of engine throttle setting.
Faced with unintended acceleration, most drivers would try the brakes a few times, thus losing all vacuum brake boost. They would become terrified as the brakes appeared to fail
This is why car manufacturers must idle the engine when brakes are applied, to maintain brake power assist and to ensure that the average driver can safely bring the car to a stop.
Neil, if pumping your brakes is bleeding off the vacuum in your booster, even at full throttle you have a mechanical problem you need to deal with. the booster is a closed chamber and the vacuum is set as long as the intake plenum is not under a positive pressure. And that is even becoming a moot point as new vehicles are switching over to an mechanical rather than vacuum driven power brake system.
The real issue here isn’t the vehicle equipment even though that is what is causing the problem. The real issue IS the lack of education as the school systems across the country are cutting driver education from high school curriculum. 30 plus years back when I took drivers ed I was taught about how the ignition switch functions as a KILL SWITCH, something that “sears easy method” simply does not do. It’s all about the dumbing down of the masses. Just look at how many people are driving down the road on what adds up to a flat tire and either don’t care or simply do not know…
I know this is odd….
But who takes a 5-10yr old LS out for a burnout.. and is excited?