7 ms·

Your two point list is silly. Consumer cars & SUVs can go 0-60 in under 10 seconds in almost all cases, and the fact that the brake can overcome that accelerati

Your two point list is silly. Consumer cars & SUVs can go 0-60 in under 10 seconds in almost all cases, and the fact that the brake can overcome that acceleration is great, except it takes time, and within the time between unexpected acceleration and stopping damage/injuries/death can occur. I had a water bottle fall onto my right leg while turning, this caused a sudden but short lived acceleration (e.g. 10 MpH of unexpected acceleration for less than 1 second), this was enough to cause me to mount the curb, and do some decent property/car damage (thank god nobody was on the curb). The brakes worked perfectly, and stopped the car, but it does show how much damage even a tiny burst of unexpected acceleration can do (the entire incident was under 5-10 seconds). It honestly boggles my mind that someone can dismiss any length of unexpected acceleration because "cars [aren't] 700 hp Supras." Consumer cars are plenty powerful enough to cause injury and death due to any length (even 1 second) of unexpected acceleration at the wrong moment. Sure, if you're going straight on the freeway then you aren't going to even notice, but in a car park, while turning, or stopped at a school crossing, the brake's ability to overcome the engine are largely irrelevant since you won't be expecting it.

alistairSH 11y ago
Agreed. Modern cars, even the modest ones, are fast enough that they can get out of control very quickly. While the brakes certainly can slow a vehicle with its throttle stuck open, the real question is what impact does that stuck throttle have on the average driver? When the brake doesn't work as expected, does the average driver continue to brake? Do they pump the brake pedal? Something else altogether? How long does it take them to regain composure and act sensibly (in this case, putting the car in neutral while continuing to brake aggressively)? If that slowed reaction is more than some fraction of a second, accidents will happen.
- mikeash 11y ago
  It's likely that drivers won't immediately react well to unintended acceleration. However, immediate reactions are unlikely to cause major accidents here. Yeah, you might bump someone or mount a curb or something, but it's likely to be an injury-free accident. Toyota's unintended acceleration is notorious because of incidents where the car accelerated up to extremely high speeds, was driven down the highway in this state for an extended time, then finally crashed. At least one involved a panicked 911 call from the driver. This is a scenario drivers should be able to bring to a safe conclusion, because they have time to work things out. Some drivers will panic in such a scenario and be unable to work on the problem. Those people should not be driving. That they are speaks to the woefully inadequate state of driver training in this country. None of this absolves Toyota of blame, though. If an equipment malfunction due to a design defect results in death even if the human should have recovered, that's still the fault of the manufacturer, as well as the driver.
- kps 11y ago
  > Do they pump the brake pedal? A comment below mentions this, and it's one factor that can be age-related without invoking ‘dumb old people pressed the accelerator by mistake’. People who learned to drive before ABS were taught to pump the brakes.
  - alistairSH 11y ago
    I hadn't even thought of pre-ABS drivers being taught to pump the pedal to avoid skidding. I was thinking of my old race car days, where a low pedal (boiled fluid or worse) could be temporarily reversed by a few pedal pumps to bring up the line pressure.
kllrnohj 11y ago
> Consumer cars & SUVs can go 0-60 in under 10 seconds in almost all cases, and the fact that the brake can overcome that acceleration is great, except it takes time The actual data paints a different picture: http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/braking-results-photo-319716-s-original.jpg http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/braking-result... That said people don't do well with surprises so while the car mechanically would have no trouble at all stopping very nearly as fast due to a wide open throttle, the driver is probably freaking out instead of just slamming on the brakes. Also people suck at actually slamming on the brakes, regardless of the situation. It's not something people want to ever do. They'll hit the brakes, they just won't go anywhere close to really pushing that pedal to the floor.
- UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
  > The actual data paints a different picture To what? That doesn't contradict what I said at all.
  - drbawb 11y ago
    All the cars added a marginal [ O(10ft) ] amount of braking distance at wide open throttle; with the exception of a very powerful, heavily tuned sports car which was the only one able to overwhelm its brakes. If we convert MPH to FPS we can look at the data as follows: 70 MPH: 102.667 fps 100 MPH: 146.667 fps CAMRY, V6, 70-0: delta 16 feet, .15sec CAMRY, V6, 100-0: delta 88 feet, .60sec INFINITY 70-0: delta 9 feet, .08sec INFINITY 100-0: delta 6 feet, .04sec We're talking tenths or hundredths of a second of unintended acceleration. A cursory search tells me reaction time to visual stimuli is about ~250ms.[1][2] This means that in all but the Camry 100-0 case your reaction time is a larger factor in braking distance than the presence of wide open throttle. [1]: http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics [2]: http://www.jneurosci.org/content/26/15/3981.full.pdf http://www.jneurosci.org/content/26/15/3981.full.pdf
- jdietrich 11y ago
  I'd wager that a large proportion of elderly drivers lack the strength to make a full brake application.
drdeca 11y ago
Do you mean that over 1 second, the speed increased by 10 mph ?
ebbv 11y ago
Who is responsible for the property damage in the example you gave? The car manufacturer? No. The water bottle manufacturer? No. You. You were the driver behind the wheel. It's still the driver's fault for not reacting properly. You could have unexpected acceleration or deceleration (which is just as dangerous in some circumstances) due to a lot of different problems; throttle stuck open, O2 Sensor goes wonky and tells the ECU to adjust the fuel mixture in a way that makes your car run rich and stall out, tire blows out causing your car to swerve severely to the right. In all of these cases it is up to the driver to react properly. NOW, if they had proven that there was a design/manufacturing defect in these cars that Toyota knew about and did nothing about (like in the GM faulty ignition switch case), that's a different story. That would mean the manufacturer put customers at risk deliberately and not only should they pay financial penalties for that, but there should be jail time involved. However, in the Toyota unintended acceleration case, not only was it very few drivers, they were never even able to establish a cause for the unintended acceleration. The software "experts" that testified for the plaintiffs only said that basically the software is badly written. It was never demonstrated that a specific piece of code caused unintended acceleration. Instead, what is the obvious answer is that panicking drivers hit the throttle when they meant to hit the brakes. Especially since at least one of the drivers testified that they hit the brakes and it was unable to stop the car, which is total baloney. EDIT: Also let me just state as a disclaimer I do not work for Toyota, never have, don't know anybody who does, I don't own any Toyota cars and never have. I just can't deal with people spreading bullshit.
- UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
  > It's still the driver's fault for not reacting properly. But in the scenario I gave the driver DID react properly. The break was applied and the car brought to a halt. It didn't stop damage being done or a dangerous situation from occurring. Same thing with sudden acceleration. A driver can react appropriately and the condition can still be incredibly dangerous or even deadly. > Instead, what is the obvious answer is that panicking drivers hit the throttle when they meant to hit the brakes. Saying something is "obvious" when it is disputed just makes you sound arrogant and dismissive. Many experts don't agree with your "obvious" conclusions. > Especially since at least one of the drivers testified that they hit the brakes and it was unable to stop the car, which is total baloney. You're again contradicting the experts. They said that it is possible for the car to ignore brake input, but were unable to determine how corruption could have occurred to cause it. I'm not saying I know for a fact that unintended acceleration occurred and that the brake was ignored, I do not, nobody does. But I think the way you're dismissing it and stomping all over a dozen or more experts is absurd. You cannot know it didn't occur any more or less than they know it did. You certainly don't have the expertise for your "obvious" conclusions to be meaningful. > EDIT: Also let me just state as a disclaimer I do not work for Toyota, never have, don't know anybody who does, I don't own any Toyota cars and never have. I just can't deal with people spreading bullshit. Right... And you essentially saying that the conclusions of experts in the field is wrong without any proof, cite, or good explanation definitely isn't "bullshit." The fact you need a disclaimer saying "I am not a shill" (paraphrasing) means you yourself must know how absurd you're sounding here.

alistairSH 11y ago

Agreed. Modern cars, even the modest ones, are fast enough that they can get out of control very quickly. While the brakes certainly can slow a vehicle with its throttle stuck open, the real question is what impact does that stuck throttle have on the average driver? When the brake doesn't work as expected, does the average driver continue to brake? Do they pump the brake pedal? Something else altogether? How long does it take them to regain composure and act sensibly (in this case, putting the car in neutral while continuing to brake aggressively)? If that slowed reaction is more than some fraction of a second, accidents will happen.

mikeash 11y ago
It's likely that drivers won't immediately react well to unintended acceleration. However, immediate reactions are unlikely to cause major accidents here. Yeah, you might bump someone or mount a curb or something, but it's likely to be an injury-free accident. Toyota's unintended acceleration is notorious because of incidents where the car accelerated up to extremely high speeds, was driven down the highway in this state for an extended time, then finally crashed. At least one involved a panicked 911 call from the driver. This is a scenario drivers should be able to bring to a safe conclusion, because they have time to work things out. Some drivers will panic in such a scenario and be unable to work on the problem. Those people should not be driving. That they are speaks to the woefully inadequate state of driver training in this country. None of this absolves Toyota of blame, though. If an equipment malfunction due to a design defect results in death even if the human should have recovered, that's still the fault of the manufacturer, as well as the driver.
kps 11y ago
> Do they pump the brake pedal? A comment below mentions this, and it's one factor that can be age-related without invoking ‘dumb old people pressed the accelerator by mistake’. People who learned to drive before ABS were taught to pump the brakes.
- alistairSH 11y ago
  I hadn't even thought of pre-ABS drivers being taught to pump the pedal to avoid skidding. I was thinking of my old race car days, where a low pedal (boiled fluid or worse) could be temporarily reversed by a few pedal pumps to bring up the line pressure.

kllrnohj 11y ago

> Consumer cars & SUVs can go 0-60 in under 10 seconds in almost all cases, and the fact that the brake can overcome that acceleration is great, except it takes time The actual data paints a different picture: http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/braking-results-photo-319716-s-original.jpg http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/braking-result... That said people don't do well with surprises so while the car mechanically would have no trouble at all stopping very nearly as fast due to a wide open throttle, the driver is probably freaking out instead of just slamming on the brakes. Also people suck at actually slamming on the brakes, regardless of the situation. It's not something people want to ever do. They'll hit the brakes, they just won't go anywhere close to really pushing that pedal to the floor.

UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
> The actual data paints a different picture To what? That doesn't contradict what I said at all.
- drbawb 11y ago
  All the cars added a marginal [ O(10ft) ] amount of braking distance at wide open throttle; with the exception of a very powerful, heavily tuned sports car which was the only one able to overwhelm its brakes. If we convert MPH to FPS we can look at the data as follows: 70 MPH: 102.667 fps 100 MPH: 146.667 fps CAMRY, V6, 70-0: delta 16 feet, .15sec CAMRY, V6, 100-0: delta 88 feet, .60sec INFINITY 70-0: delta 9 feet, .08sec INFINITY 100-0: delta 6 feet, .04sec We're talking tenths or hundredths of a second of unintended acceleration. A cursory search tells me reaction time to visual stimuli is about ~250ms.[1][2] This means that in all but the Camry 100-0 case your reaction time is a larger factor in braking distance than the presence of wide open throttle. [1]: http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics [2]: http://www.jneurosci.org/content/26/15/3981.full.pdf http://www.jneurosci.org/content/26/15/3981.full.pdf
jdietrich 11y ago
I'd wager that a large proportion of elderly drivers lack the strength to make a full brake application.

drdeca 11y ago

Do you mean that over 1 second, the speed increased by 10 mph ?

ebbv 11y ago

Who is responsible for the property damage in the example you gave? The car manufacturer? No. The water bottle manufacturer? No. You. You were the driver behind the wheel. It's still the driver's fault for not reacting properly. You could have unexpected acceleration or deceleration (which is just as dangerous in some circumstances) due to a lot of different problems; throttle stuck open, O2 Sensor goes wonky and tells the ECU to adjust the fuel mixture in a way that makes your car run rich and stall out, tire blows out causing your car to swerve severely to the right. In all of these cases it is up to the driver to react properly. NOW, if they had proven that there was a design/manufacturing defect in these cars that Toyota knew about and did nothing about (like in the GM faulty ignition switch case), that's a different story. That would mean the manufacturer put customers at risk deliberately and not only should they pay financial penalties for that, but there should be jail time involved. However, in the Toyota unintended acceleration case, not only was it very few drivers, they were never even able to establish a cause for the unintended acceleration. The software "experts" that testified for the plaintiffs only said that basically the software is badly written. It was never demonstrated that a specific piece of code caused unintended acceleration. Instead, what is the obvious answer is that panicking drivers hit the throttle when they meant to hit the brakes. Especially since at least one of the drivers testified that they hit the brakes and it was unable to stop the car, which is total baloney. EDIT: Also let me just state as a disclaimer I do not work for Toyota, never have, don't know anybody who does, I don't own any Toyota cars and never have. I just can't deal with people spreading bullshit.

UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
> It's still the driver's fault for not reacting properly. But in the scenario I gave the driver DID react properly. The break was applied and the car brought to a halt. It didn't stop damage being done or a dangerous situation from occurring. Same thing with sudden acceleration. A driver can react appropriately and the condition can still be incredibly dangerous or even deadly. > Instead, what is the obvious answer is that panicking drivers hit the throttle when they meant to hit the brakes. Saying something is "obvious" when it is disputed just makes you sound arrogant and dismissive. Many experts don't agree with your "obvious" conclusions. > Especially since at least one of the drivers testified that they hit the brakes and it was unable to stop the car, which is total baloney. You're again contradicting the experts. They said that it is possible for the car to ignore brake input, but were unable to determine how corruption could have occurred to cause it. I'm not saying I know for a fact that unintended acceleration occurred and that the brake was ignored, I do not, nobody does. But I think the way you're dismissing it and stomping all over a dozen or more experts is absurd. You cannot know it didn't occur any more or less than they know it did. You certainly don't have the expertise for your "obvious" conclusions to be meaningful. > EDIT: Also let me just state as a disclaimer I do not work for Toyota, never have, don't know anybody who does, I don't own any Toyota cars and never have. I just can't deal with people spreading bullshit. Right... And you essentially saying that the conclusions of experts in the field is wrong without any proof, cite, or good explanation definitely isn't "bullshit." The fact you need a disclaimer saying "I am not a shill" (paraphrasing) means you yourself must know how absurd you're sounding here.