CR: Lexus SUV "safety risk"

[Glenn]

We're weeni-fying cars these days. If it rains, the wipers come on for you, if you leave your lights on, they shut off for you. Why bother checking your tire pressure? You have a warning light for that too.

As mentioned, vehicles have become soft, they issolate you from the driving experience and are now just a way to get you from point a to point b.

The whole Toyota thing has me puzzled. I'm not an engineer; just a weekend gearhead. There's no way the engine on a regular ol production car can overpower the brakes. Can the pedal stick to the floormat? Sure can! But is this something the driver can overcome with a little level headedness? Yes. Shift into neutral, mash the brakes and pull over as safely as possible. Then shut it down. Granted, it's a bit more stressful when it happens. But if people can compose themselves enough to use their friggin phone......

Kevin Wilson had a great bit about things lately in AutoWeek:

Maybe this train left the station nearly 50 years ago, when Ralph Nader convinced America that if a Corvair crashed, it was General Motors' fault and only GM's fault. If it's your Corvair that just crashed, this can be a comforting illusion. No less so if it's your Toyota. But it's an illusion all the same

It's a great read: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20100409/FREE/304099999

 

[RootDKJ]

We're weeni-fying cars these days. If it rains, the wipers come on for you, if you leave your lights on, they shut off for you. Why bother checking your tire pressure? You have a warning light for that too.

As mentioned, vehicles have become soft, they issolate you from the driving experience and are now just a way to get you from point a to point b.

The whole Toyota thing has me puzzled. I'm not an engineer; just a weekend gearhead. There's no way the engine on a regular ol production car can overpower the brakes. Can the pedal stick to the floormat? Sure can! But is this something the driver can overcome with a little level headedness? Yes. Shift into neutral, mash the brakes and pull over as safely as possible. Then shut it down. Granted, it's a bit more stressful when it happens. But if people can compose themselves enough to use their friggin phone......

Kevin Wilson had a great bit about things lately in AutoWeek:



It's a great read: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20100409/FREE/304099999

We're dumbing down lots of stuff as a whole to the lowest common denominator.

 

[bvibert]

We're dumbing down lots of stuff as a whole to the lowest common denominator.

You mean like grooming the crap out of all the trails on a mountain?

 

[ctenidae]

I turn the stability control in my car off most of the time. The MB engineers were kind enough to put the warning light just out of my line of sight.

I think stability control is mandated standard equipment starting in 2012, or something like that. Kind of like tire pressure sensors already are. Saw a show a while ago where tehy said cars are 40% more efficient today than they were 50 years ago, but they also weigh 40% more (numbers are approximate) because of all the safty equipment, etc. So, the advances in efficiency are negated by the increase in nannification.

Of course, the one time I needed airbags, I'm glad they were standard.

 

[severine]

Stability control? Really?

My Blazer is probably a "safety risk" being that it's top-heavy but I haven't rolled it in the 6 years I've had it. Apparently, that's miraculous! People need to learn to drive. :roll:

Tire pressure sensors? They're mandated? :lol: What a waste... I bet that adds to costs for replacing tires, too, because of these gadgets. I think I'll stick with my used cars, thank-you-very-much.

 

[hammer]

Tire pressure sensors? They're mandated? :lol: What a waste... I bet that adds to costs for replacing tires, too, because of these gadgets. I think I'll stick with my used cars, thank-you-very-much.

When I looked into winter tires, I saw that adding sensors would add over $200 to the cots of a set of tires on my Volvo not including the cost to calibrate to the car's onboard system...it's either that or deal with the warning light for several months. :roll:

I believe that those were mandated after the problems with Ford Explorers rolling over after their tires failed. Let's see...drive a top-heavy SUV at 70+ MPH with visibly low tire pressure and you should be fine, right?

 

[Geoff]

Tire pressure sensors? They're mandated? :lol: What a waste... I bet that adds to costs for replacing tires, too, because of these gadgets. I think I'll stick with my used cars, thank-you-very-much.

I actually think they're a good feature. I like having the big advance warning that I've developed a puncture. Nothing worse than changing a flat on the side of the road at night during a winter monsoon. It doesn't add to the cost of replacing tires. It does add to the cost of getting a winter setup. The Bosch system on my VW is $47.00 per sensor purchased over the internet from Tire Rack.

 

[o3jeff]

The TPS sensor are a PITA, especially in the winter when the tire pressure fluctuate quite a bit, ended up giving up and just driving with the light on.

 

[hammer]

The TPS sensor are a PITA, especially in the winter when the tire pressure fluctuate quite a bit, ended up giving up and just driving with the light on.

I didn't have problems during the winter months with mine...

I don't mind having it at all, just don't like the idea that it's mandated because people don't bother to do basic maintenance like check tire pressures or even visually inspect their tires on a regular basis.

 

[deadheadskier]

You mean like grooming the crap out of all the trails on a mountain?

:lol:

 

[bvibert]

:lol:

I was getting worried that one was going to slip by unnoticed. I guess the groomer crowd isn't reading this thread... :lol:

 

[RootDKJ]

You mean like grooming the crap out of all the trails on a mountain?

Nah, that's just for the speed demons.

 

[smitty77]

This news comes as no surprise to me. I just took possession of a 2wd Tacoma as my company vehicle in January, and the first thing I did while driving to work in the snow was give it a goose in the butt as I pulled into the quarry to see what this new-fangled "traction control" was all about. The result: I had that little pickup in a full-on pedal to the floor powerslide for about 4 seconds (a good 50-60 feet or more) before the warning system went off and the computer tried to slow my progress. I concluded that in the event of a real emergency I will be putting ZERO faith in some on-board computer and instead drive the way I was taught.

Consumer reports only flipped a lid so that someone somewhere might still find their work relevant. With so many free online sources available for real opinions on the stuff I buy, I don't even look twice at any link belonging to consumer reports because: a) I'm too cheap to pay and b) most of the time their flat wrong about their recommendations, IMHO.

 

[riverc0il]

The more I think about this, the more I wonder about the journalistic integrity of a media powerhouse like CR labeling something as a "Do Not Buy". CR is so big that their word has caused a car company to stop selling the vehicles and even if they didn't, no one would ever buy one any ways (until, at least, Toyota submits a car for a retest). All because a computer could not correct a bizarre situation that the over overwhelming vast majority of drivers will never find themselves in and most that do find themselves in could probably correct themselves.

Additionally, CR has a vested interest in a big PR piece like this because A) it sells subscriptions and increases ad revenue due to exposure and B) gets more people reading their mag and C) makes them look like they really care about the consumer enhancing their image and reputation. They couldn't just flag "Computer Safety" as having a failing grade lowering the overall grade? But no, a complete absolute DO NOT BUY. Is that responsible? Was their test repeatable by independent sources? Is the incident something that will likely be experienced on the road by more than a small handful of dangerous drivers? Did CR contact Toyota about the issue before throwing out a DO NOT BUY warning? Did CR test multiple cars? Could this be a fluke?

And how about the video in the above link? I have NEVER taken a turn like that, I can't imagine ever needing to either. Toyota reports that no roll overs due to this issue have been reported. HELLO! Lots of questions here, IMO. CR's label on this car should be scrutinized with a high degree of skepticism, it seems an over the top move (especially given this is technology that is not even included on so many cars already on the road, HELLO!).

 

[mondeo]

All because a computer could not correct a bizarre situation that the over overwhelming vast majority of drivers will never find themselves in and most that do find themselves in could probably correct themselves.

I doubt most drivers could correct sudden lift-throttle oversteer themselves. Especially Lexus drivers. They're driving a Toyota, the only time they nail the throttle is when they want to hit the brakes after they've reached retirement age. Yet a healthy dose of throttle is what's needed in that case. As I mentioned earlier, I've lifted suddenly mid-turn once. It's scary as hell. I knew, academically, that what I was doing was wrong, but panicked. I'm lucky I stayed on the road. A Toyota driver is toast.

But it is an unrealistic test, much like the tests for rollovers. I don't know many soccer moms that Finnish Flick their SUVs on a regular basis. You need to be driving pretty close to the limit in the first place for it to be an issue. From experience with many highway ramp incidents waiting behind SUVs to pick up the frickin' pace, their drivers don't come anywhere near the limit

I have NEVER taken a turn like that, I can't imagine ever needing to either.

Need? No, not so much. Want? Hell yes. You should give it a try. It's fun. I agree with jalopnik.com's take on the whole thing:

Consumer Reports issued a rare "Don't Buy" warning for the 2010 Lexus GX 460 for what they claim is an unacceptable tendency to oversteer during in-corner throttle lift in aggressive driving. Sounds like a feature to us.

Toyota halts Lexus GX 460 sales. One man's feature? Another man's safety problem.

 

[smitty77]

I don't know many soccer moms that Finnish Flick their SUVs on a regular basis. You need to be driving pretty close to the limit in the first place for it to be an issue.

Add 2"of snow on the ground and the scenario becomes very likely. And in that scenario MOST drivers will panic and lift the throttle because they have received no training on how to handle a car during a slide. Watch the news during an ice storm and you'll see tons of idiots lock up the brakes and just let the car slide for 685 feet or so and then plow into something. For a long time I've been a proponent of mandating 10 hours of skid-pad training for all new drivers. But this will never happen.

I think the issue at hand should be: Why does it take so long before Toyota's so-called "traction control" is triggered and starts wrestling control of the wayward vehicle? My wife's AWD Dodge Journey will give me an indicator that it's senses slippery conditions even before I've felt anything to suggest wheel slip. Yet I can do a very intentional Finnish Flick in my 'yota pickup and have it swing left AND right before the warning chime even goes off.

One can debate the need for such safety devices (I am one who believes a driver should not need nor rely on such intervention), but the fact that they are there means they should work as intended. Toyota's does not and this is more dangerous than not having it at all as it gives a false sense of security.

 

[hammer]

Add 2"of snow on the ground and the scenario becomes very likely. And in that scenario MOST drivers will panic and lift the throttle because they have received no training on how to handle a car during a slide. Watch the news during an ice storm and you'll see tons of idiots lock up the brakes and just let the car slide for 685 feet or so and then plow into something. For a long time I've been a proponent of mandating 10 hours of skid-pad training for all new drivers. But this will never happen.

I think the issue at hand should be: Why does it take so long before Toyota's so-called "traction control" is triggered and starts wrestling control of the wayward vehicle? My wife's AWD Dodge Journey will give me an indicator that it's senses slippery conditions even before I've felt anything to suggest wheel slip. Yet I can do a very intentional Finnish Flick in my 'yota pickup and have it swing left AND right before the warning chime even goes off.

One can debate the need for such safety devices (I am one who believes a driver should not need nor rely on such intervention), but the fact that they are there means they should work as intended. Toyota's does not and this is more dangerous than not having it at all as it gives a false sense of security.

On thing I'm curious about...if you have a car with traction control, is there anything different you need to do? For example, with ABS, one doesn't pump brakes anymore.

 

[mondeo]

Add 2"of snow on the ground and the scenario becomes very likely. And in that scenario MOST drivers will panic and lift the throttle because they have received no training on how to handle a car during a slide. Watch the news during an ice storm and you'll see tons of idiots lock up the brakes and just let the car slide for 685 feet or so and then plow into something. For a long time I've been a proponent of mandating 10 hours of skid-pad training for all new drivers. But this will never happen.

Snowy or wet-weather conditions won't result in that type of vehicle response, though. You need serious weight transfer to get the type of oversteer that's shown in the video. Low traction just results in slides, not pitching the car sideways like that. The occasional fishtail, but that's a different beast again. Traction control, not stability. There's a difference.

 

[mondeo]

On thing I'm curious about...if you have a car with traction control, is there anything different you need to do? For example, with ABS, one doesn't pump brakes anymore.

Well, you have to hit the "off" button to have any fun. Hopefully that doesn't get regulated away.

 

[bigbog]

Not that I care one way or the other, but how long ago was it that no vehicles had any sort of electronic stability controls? Were they all considered unsafe? How about if people learn how to drive, and not rely on electronic band-aides. Ever hear of counter-steering?? :roll:

To me a vehicles inability to prevent it's driver from doing stupid stuff does not make it unsafe..

Always good to have some sort of testing....but I have to agree with you Brian, the media's just waiting for the feeding frenzy 24x7. I've test driven Priuses up the ying-yang for a few years now....over railroad tracks...etc..., not anykind of problem once enunciated for the media to fall over. To carefully listen to the stories of the people whose ordeals that have been made public...leaves one to wonder just how the hell they lived having done nothing to counteract the issues in the initial few seconds...:-? I mean, how the hell does someone maintain control over a vehicle going 60mph while in reverse..while on a cell-phone..?;-)...and around corners on a "winding road" at what was it?..90mph? That's less risky than simply pushing a button to shut the engine off...

Only in America....