All eyes are on Harrison, NY, today. Technicians from Toyota and NHTSA will head to the NYC burbs and pour over a 2005 Toyota Prius that crashed into a stone wall in the tony bedroom town of Harrison. Its driver claimed the hybrid had sped up on its own. Toyota will read out the data recorded in the Prius computer. According to the Associated Press, Toyota techs will “use equipment to determine how many times the driver hit the brakes and gas. It used the same tools earlier this week to cast doubt on a California driver who claimed his Prius sped to 94 mph before a patrol officer helped him stop it.”
Harrison Police so far has no indication of driver error. A 56 year old housekeeper told police the car sped up on its own as she eased forward down her employer’s driveway on March 9 and hit a wall across the street. Nobody was hurt.
Toyota will turn over its findings to the Harrison police, but will not hold a press conference or share the results with the media. Capt. Anthony Marraccini , acting Harrison police chief, will most likely not pass up on the opportunity.
Stay tuned. This will be interesting.
Is Toyota the only entity capable of reading the data logged within the Prius computer?
If so, then any investigation will essentially involve Toyota investigating Toyota.
From Newsweek, 2/12/2010:
Toyota keeps its data secret. Ford, GM, and Chrysler’s black boxes use an open platform that allows law-enforcement officials to download data. But only Toyota is able to download the proprietary data off its devices. In fact, there’s just one laptop in the entire country capable of reading a Toyota data recorder, and Toyota will download one only under court order, or at the request of law enforcement or the NHTSA.
Though Honda and Nissan also use proprietary data recorders, Toyota’s closely guarded system is raising concerns among safety experts. “Every time Toyota downloads these things, they say there’s no indication of a problem,” says Sean Kane, founder of Safety Research & Strategies, Inc., a consumer safety group. “It’s the most opaque system I’ve ever seen.” It’s also causing frustration among accident investigators. “Even when they do perform a download, it’s usually not that useful,” says April Yergin, a Houston-based accident-reconstruction expert. Last month Yergin watched a Toyota rep download data in Southlake, Texas, after a 2009 Avalon hit a tree and landed upside down in a pond, killing all four passengers. A Toyota rep showed up with the special laptop, but it yielded only the car’s speed when it struck the tree: 44mph.
No!No.. Impossible, Toyota the perfect company that builds perfect cars, lying.withholding information?
Its just not the Toyota way.
@ Detroit Todd..Havn’t you heard? Its all a conpirecy cooked up by the UAW and the Democrats.
@Mikey — You forgot the trial lawyers!
Seriously, though, does anyone believe there is only one laptop in the country available to read Toyota’s data? Really? I suppose we have no choice but to take Toyota’s word for it….
@detroit todd:
This is a Prius. You don’t need access to the black box to get data. The Hybrid Synergy Drive has it’s own computer with log storage much bigger than the black box.
March 17, 12:10 pm Carquestions Associated Press should be reporting that given the age of the Prius it is expected that less driver input information will be available according to investigators Carquestions has been in contact with. The EDR system was and is upgraded on a yearly basis to add more recording features, so don’t count on a record of how many times the brake pedal was pushed as in the Sike’s Prius. Also the Sike’s Prius rear brakes were in perfect working order and showed no signs of abuse or excessive use according to investigators who examined the vehicle. Also AP didn’t report the fact that investigators couldn’t get the car up to 93 mph as Sikes claimed.
I’m not sure of the specifics, but the single laptop is related to EDR. The data in this investigation is related to the Prius hybrid controller (previously explained in the Balloon Boy thread). I would guess that the hybrid controller information is closely guarded since it could possibly reveal Toyota’s algorithms for switching drive modes.
Whatever the cause of all these so-called unintended acceleration events, can anyone doubt that Toyota is tone-deaf? Like many other companies facing brand implosion in the past, they compound their problems by being at turns duplicitous, contradictory and opaque. Maybe Audi erred in the other extreme during their similar past troubles, but that template (and Tylenol’s) seems so much more obviously able to elicit sympathy. A lack of full transpareny combined with the internet’s voracious appetite for rumor, scandal and chicanery, real or imagined, can create a toxic brew that eventually is engulfing. Doesn’t anyone there know this?
How about this. How about you tell all of us exactly what Toyota should have done at every stage of this situation. Then, hundreds of internet based experts like yourself can pick apart what you think Toyota should have done and tell you how wrong or duplicitous your ideas are? Tell Toyota what they should do everytime some 80 year old hits the accelerator instead of the break and blames it on SUA. Or tell Toyota what they should do when some 18 year old drives their car into a guardrail at 100 mph and then the kids mother (who wasn’t in the car or at the scene) decides that it was SUA that caused the crash, not her teenage sons need for speed.
Tylenol’s case was much easier, for two reasons:
* One, they knew what the cause was. I don’t think Toyota really knows this, aside from the floor mat entrapment issue.
* Two, they sell a lot-controlled product. Lot-control, especially for drugs, makes recalls exceedingly simple to do.
I don’t envy Toyota their problem. How do you track down the cause of something that a) happens with about 0.0003% of your product, b) you’re not sure of the cause of and c) is usually caused by operator error to start with.
How do you handle that?
I am not sure we can totally trust the log data either. Are they sure that every input is being translated correctly and logged correctly?
As in the Sikes case where there is evidence that he pressed the gas 250 plus times, what if an UAE is being logged as a pedal press in the computer?
I work in computers and see false positives all the time.
Just a thought..
To all those who are pleading for Toyota to supply “data” to solve these events:
Where is the law that requires it?
These computers may still being under development and the data collected may not be reliable, calibrated, certified or complete.
As has been pointed out, the computer can only supply data from the sensors reporting. These values may or may not help with the determination of the blame. Where’s the “steering wheel is positioned wrong” sensor? Where’s the “floormat is jammed under the accelerator” sensor?
As for the GM, Ford, and Chrysler systems being open…where can I download the software?
No download; you’ll need to step up and buy the CDR tool from Vetronix/Bosch IIRC.
That doesn’t meet my definition of “open”. I have to buy a program from selected vendors. Sounds somewhat proprietary to me. Are the specifications of the messages, timings ,pin-outs, voltages published?
Billy, in that case, GM/Ford isn’t any better. You have to pay for the data.
With Toyota, if you pay $100B to buy more than 50% of Toyota stocks, you would get all the data too.
The only difference is that with GM/Ford, it’s a retail sale. With Toyota, it’s bundled wholesale.
I find it interesting that the driver of the car that struck the wall was likely not familiar with the car’s operation. She said it was her employer’s car.
Assuming, for purposes of argument, that there was no failure in the vehicle, this and some of the other Prius incidents (and the original “runaway Lexus” incident, also by a driver unfamiliar with the car) strongly suggest the need for a uniform “driver/car interface.”
While I’m as much for innovation as the next guy, it really is a mistake to keep blaming drivers for the effects of unusual control configurations, at least for mainstream cars. “Sports cars” and exotics, by long tradition, are entitled to their own quirks. Their buyers should assume the duty of learning those quirks and dealing with them . . . and keeping everyone else out of the driver’s seat.
Either that or ban automatic transmissions! ;-)
I didn’t realize Toyota vehicles lacked a steering wheel, brake pedal, and accelerator…
If you can’t take the five minutes to acclimate yourself with an automobile…then you shouldn’t drive it…end of discussion.
Push button start isn’t that difficult to figure out…neither is the Prius’s gear shift…she was able to start the car and put it into drive, so she should be able to turn it off and use the brake pedal as well..this isn’t rocket science.
This is just another case of someone stepping on the gas instead of the brake.
I weep for this country…
“Either that or ban automatic transmissions! ;-)”
That is the first sane comment I have read today?
I’ll keep saying it, but my personal experience with SUA (my mother’s actually) was most certainly not operator error. Both occasions she was already stopped and the engine began to race. Due to the different travel lengths of the brake and gas pedal, there is no way to depress both at the same time and get the engine much over 3000 RPM (I tried) and even that was only possible by placing my foot at an unnatural angle.
Both occasions she was already stopped and the engine began to race.
She’s was in park at the time I assume?
I am not fully engaged with Toyota bashing for the simple reason that design flaws etc. happen. especially when a problem is occurring on such a low percentage of product.
working with computers as well I know just how hard in can be to narrow down an intermittent problem that they are looking at.
as well I know we are imperfect beings making objects out of imperfect materials made by imperfect beings, the product is not going to be perfect.
I do however feel that modern vehicles in their design to make them more idiot proof(I am sorry the world just makes better idiots) is removing the vast amount the person “driving” they nearly drive themselves.
when you sit in a vehicle press a button to start it, press another button or move a stick to 1 out of 4 or 5 positions hang onto the wheel press this pedal to go and this pedal to hopefully stop. most people now days are incompetent of even using the turn signal.
manual transmissions on the hand require you to pay attention to the automobile at all times, especially in cities or towns where rowing through the gears is necessary, at that point a person needs to concentrate more on driving just to get it to go. you can no longer mindlessly press pedals while texting your friend or applying makeup. and you are actually required to drive. (might be a problem for those that can’t walk and chew bubblegum at the same time).
Down with the Auto Transmission.
I deal with user issues every day and I never underestimate the power of an oblivious user.
At least for VW/Audi products you can use VCDS/VAG-COM. You can spend the money for the complete Ross-Tech version, or if you want to go cheap you can just buy a $15 cable off Ebay and use the shareware version to read codes on older models. And it works with any laptop that has a USB or serial port, which is pretty much every laptop.
I can’t believe that Toyota claims there’s only 1 laptop to pull data. I guess that enables Toyota to require dealer service though if a DIYer or independent shop can’t access the car’s electronics easily.
What you’re referring to is an OBD II port, which of course the Toyotas would have as well. But this data recording facility is not part of the OBD system.
An Infinity went into an office building in Peabody MA. today. It’s not a Toyota, so you can bet it won’t make the national news.
http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO137936/
http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/03/car_crashes_int_4.html
Perhaps the driver installed a TRD floormat in his Infiniti?
It was an Infinity G35x. Apparently it suddenly accelerated into the building in Peabody MA while the 69 year old driver was parking it.
Maybe Toyota hired the driver to run into the building to direct attention elsewhere. Of course, it could not have been the drivers fault. It has to be Toyota’s fault somehow. Maybe EMI radiating from a Toyota caused the Infinity to accelerate. Try and prove it wasn’t.
I haven’t seen it on the national news yet. If had been a Toyota, NHTSA and the press would have been all over it. I think it’s time to start blaming the drivers.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/03/car_crashes_int_4.html
It’s truly amazing how so many Gen 2 Prius vehicles have coincidentally experienced electronic or mechanical failures over the past few months, yet didn’t during their first 6 years of production and usage. I guess that they just don’t make them like they used to, considering that the newer the model year, the less years it took for it to fail (housekeeper’s 2005 car took 5 years to fail, Balloon Boy’s 2008 car took 2 years to fail, etc.). This reminds me of the charts on TTAC a couple weeks back correlating vehicle MY and date of SUA reporting on NHTSA’s website for Camry — the Camries had the same intriguing reduction of reliability by exactly one year for each successive MY.
/sarcasm
Toyota is now trapped in the Audi vortex — every accident involving one of their cars is assumed to be caused by some ghost in the machine. Guilty until proven innocent. This incident is reminiscent of a common Audi scenario, where the driver is not the primary driver of the car and s/he zooms straight ahead into an obvious nearby obstacle when attempting to move off from a parked position.
Will one of the post-mortems to Toyota’s descent into UA hell be that Toyota did NOT blame the drivers soon enough and often enough?
Two more observations about lessons to be drawn from Audi:
1. It took a while, but Audi did eventually get control of the message and shift the balance of opinion to understanding the problem was largely NOT with the cars.
2. Audi’s sales slide after its UA controversy was only partially related to UA. At the same time, all the early adopters of Audi were coming to realize they were very unreliable cars. Way too many owners didn’t get too many chances to experience acceleration, intended or otherwise, because the cars were constantly in the shop.
Relevance of those to Toyota: First, Toyota is still known as a car that is NOT in the shop constantly, and that will keep the bottom of the sales plunge from being so deep. Already GM is finding that UA scares are not enough to persuade lots of people to buy Cobalts instead of Corollas.
Second, Toyota ought to be able to use the Lake Wobegon effect to its advantage. Ninety percent (at least) of Americans think they are above average drivers. They KNOW they would not be so stupid as to hit the gas pedal a bit too hard coming out of the driveway and then push down harder on the same pedal until they ran into a stone wall.
I just finished reading Exponent’s “Evaluation of the Gilbert Demonstration”. Summary: It is my opinion I’m reading 43 pages of highly suspect material that really calls into question how much Exponent can be trusted.
It would seem to me anyone with a moderate amount of engineering and critical reasoning skills would have serious questions about what Toyota and Exponent are trying to foster off as scientifically sound research.
If the past is any indication, it appears that Toyota (and Exponent Failure Analysis Associates if they are involved) will do nothing to advance the understanding of the problem. The entire effort will be to throw the focus off Toyota if it is anything like this effort.
I believe if Toyota or Exponent really intended to clear some of this up, they would acquire 250 2002 Toyota Camry throttle pedals and ECMs from accross the nation and examine the circuit boards for “tin whiskers” using the proper technology. Either them or NHTSA.
I am unconvinced Toyota is interested in anything other than finger-pointing elsewhere.
Every time someone has a wreck in a Toyota, they’re going to blame it on the demon car.
Tin whiskers if I recall correctly are a product of non-lead solders. The elimination of lead from solder didn’t start until well after the 2002 MY and should not be a factor is this issue. Also, conformal coating prevents tin whiskers. All of these automotive electronic components use conformal coating as protection from the harsh automotive environments. So what’s your next suggestion after they study 250 circuit boards and find no evidence of tin whiskers?
Some (presumably) good circuit board characteristics with an inference of a positive association to the Toyota product, speculation as to the outcome of some specific testing, then asking for a speculation on a speculative outcome.
Rather than more speculation, what is needed most is actual testing to put an end to the speculation.
In my humble opinion, Exponent Failure Analysis Associates was long on the un-tested speculation and very short on the testing. What little they did do confirmed what Professor Gilbert said would happen.