Toyota Faux Pas

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
K

Kevin Lang

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
3,717
Reaction score
0
Location
Pasadena, MD
Saw a commercial for Toyota, where it is claimed that "Electromagnetic Interference" does not induce sudden acceleration. (Which is not saying much of anything)



Then, Mrs. Kristen Tabar--General Manager, Electrical Systems 2, Toyota Technical Center goes on to say that Electronic Throttle Control is used on "virtually every vehicle".



Huh. Seems to me that there are tons of vehicles that do not use it.



(Then the commercial goes on to say how she puts her children in the car, a pathetic argument in both senses of the term...IMO they should have stuck to her ethos as a general manager. The kids argument always feels cheap to me.)



Hey, at least she looks "like an American"...



 
could have been worse.

she could have looked non-american.



btw, what does an american look like?

waht does a criminal look like?

what does someone who gets a traffic ticket look like?



side note: watch the cogress hearings
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gary S, it's part of their plan to make the ad effective, hence my quotes on the phrase.



She's a blonde, white, middle aged mother...something the "average American" can relate to, making her argument, with its blatantly wrong all-encompassing statement, more effective in reducing the damage this does to Toyota's perception.



Speaking of perception, if they had had your stereotypical Indian engineer (or asian, since it is electrical engineering), the commercial would not have been as effective.



Though it is nice to see that there are still white people in Engineering actively. Won't be much longer now :(



The congressional hearings? Why do I need to watch them? I don't want to see government getting its hands in something it has no business touching.
 
KL,

Actually, she is correct. Nearly all if not all passenger vehicles manufactured in America, or made overseas for the American market use electronic throttle systems (fly by wire throttle).



That started nearly twenty years ago with a few models and has been gradually expanding each year till now where nearly all new Amercian market vehicels have them. So she is right as assuming she is talking about vehicles made within the past 5 years.



I would be hard pressed to name any new vehicle that does not have use and electronic throttle control. So I challenge you to name "A ton of them"...That would imply that most new vehicles do not have electronic throttle.



...Rich
 
She is wrong. She says that they are used on virtually every vehicle, with NO time period given, so don't interject one. She says nothing about "new" vehicles, so do not interject that either. You are arguing based on your biased assumptions on her meaning, which is invalid. I argue on the fact of what she said, verbatim.



There are hundreds of thousands of Sport Tracs with mechanically actuated throttles. Not to mention all the other cars since the inception of the automobile that predate or were not equipped with the technology.



If you're going to play a Sophist on the internet, please play the part properly. My post was nit-picking with toyota, so expect greater nit-picking in response, especially when you're going on your own incorrect tangent, based ultimately on an assumption that cannot be corroborated.



 
OK,we get it. not EVERY vehicle, but as rich states ETC have been used in virtually all vehicles recently.

are you sure you are not related to cayman? :grin:
 
Caymen asks:
I wonder if it is possible to retrofit the TBW to a reliable TBC system?
Click to expand...



I wonder if the belief that TBC is more reliable than TBW has any merit?



Seems like there were stuck accellerators back in the TBC days.



Who knows, maybe the rate of incident (rate per total cars) of stuck accellerators on TBC cars is the same, or even higher than in TBW cars.



I'm not saying that is the fact.



I'm just saying if it were it wouldn't surprise me. There are more cars on the road, and per person today than ever before, and I know communication, media coverage and awareness of defects in the auto industry (and our societies habit to make issues of them, sue, etc) is certainly HIGHER today than ever before.



So, I wonder if this perception that TBC is more reliable than TBW is true? Or if it can even be proven, or if it, like Toyota quality is "just a feeling."



TJR
 
KL,

gary is correct that Not EVERY vechile uses Electronic Throttle controls, but most of the cars made in the last 10 years do have them and that probably makes up the majority of the vehicles on the road today.



Yes, she misspoke, but I say that she is MORE right than she is wrong.



I think it so moronic for people to take one word from her statement and make such a issue out of it, when we all know exactly what she meant. You can remain in denial, but the fact is that her statement is more correct than yours.



You are arguing based on your biased assumptions on her meaning, which is invalid
Click to expand...



Not sure how you derived that I was biased? Perhaps you are reading something into my statement that was not there, which is pretty much what you are accusing me of doing.



...Rich

 
Or if it can even be proven
Click to expand...
I'm sure it can be.



Part of TBW's charm is in making a vehicle seem more "powerful" than a TBC vehicle as a slight press of the pedal on TBW can = slamming it down on TBC.



I'd argue that predictable, guaranteed linear response is superior to the mercurial throttle response of TBW which can be different based on engine load conditions.



Can we prove it? Probably, but its more fun to sit by the pool and debate the problems of the universe like the Greek sophists of yore. Proof is work :( :banana:



(Though my TBW experience is with the Fit, which does these things...and sadly is not that powerful...and apparently comes in a 4wd version which has less power)
 
KL,



My question moreso was can we prove that today's pervasive use of TBW in cars provides accelleration that is more or less reliable than when TBC was pervasive during days gone by?



I don't think we can prove or disprove that, because we simply don't have the ability to get into a time machine and go back in time and gather the same data 20 or 30 years ago that we can and do readily gather today.



My assumption is that we probably didn't have the same level of incident analysis and tracking then as we do now.



Sure, we can test and analyze TBW and TBC systems in use today, in the lab and in the field, but that's not really what I was trying to get to.



To make my question more specific, consider this:



Q1: In 1970, in the US, what was the rate of incident (x per y cars on the road) of stuck accellerators?



Q2: What is that same rate of incident for cars in 2010?



If we COULD get those numbers, we might find that the rate of incident in 2010, where TBW is pervasive is LESS.



I assert we simply don't have the data, and in the absence of it, people assume that TBW is less reliable.



TJR
 
TJR, a Toyota commercial claims that the majority of Toyotas on the road 20 years ago are still on there today. Those guys used TBC....while there are many TBW Toyotas thar are not on the road at all today :banana:

(Which isn't a proof but it might as well be)



TBC with carburation is sufficiently different from TBC with fuel injection, which is also used by TBW that I propose that anything pre-fuel injection is not a valid comparison due to different hardware.



So if we advance to the 80s where FI became the rage, is the data not present?
 
My beef with TBW is this. If I choose to mash the throttle on my vehicle, the throttle gets mashed. With a TBW system, the computer (government, insurance companies, auto manufacturers) can tell us, "No, you are only going to get 50% throttle".



Be it for safety, fuel economy, or control, I don't like it.



On top of this, any time you have more electronic devices on a vehicle, you raise the cost, increase the chance of something breaking, and make it more complex than it needs to be.



We allow others to have control over us. I do not like it.





Tom
 
Caymen, that's a better complaint than mine about deception of the car's abilities.



The KISS principle should be in play here...why do we need all this technology obfuscating something that works?



Despite all the vaunted claims of higher fuel efficiency and a feeling of more power from TBW, the Honda Fit has not delivered....it can't save itself from a 12 year old ZX2 in any category.



TJR, not having the "statisticals" to support an argument here, I'll defer this one to you.

 
TJR, neither do I, so I'll defer this one since I'd have to be a real sophist to argue that. I don't really believe it is less reliable, I'm siding with that the obfuscation is stupid, the benefits aren't really valid, and control is bad, especially when it involves passing higher costs onto me, the consumer.
 
With a TBW system, the computer (government, insurance companies, auto manufacturers) can tell us, "No, you are only going to get 50% throttle".



Caymen, that's a better complaint than mine about deception of the car's abilities.



The KISS principle should be in play here...why do we need all this technology obfuscating something that works?
Click to expand...



Funny you all should mention this. I heard a discussion the other day on G. Gordon Liddy's show between the G-man and automotive guru Pat Goodman on this very topic. Pat said that the main reason that TBW came about was because of increasing and ever restricting gov't regulations on fuel economy, and emissions. I wish I could find a transcript of the conversation, because Mr. Goodman made some very significant points to support this claim.
 
KL,



What's the deal with "sophist"...is it your new favorite word?



Did you get "Word of the Day" toilet paper for Christmas or something?



:banana:



TJR
 
TJR, my new favorite word is actually Loquacious. :grin: Just FYI.



Sophistry isn't well known, I'm on my crusade to change that. Mis-used words tend to annoy me, Decimate being an easy example. It means 10% killed...yet in the vernacular it means destroyed, routed, crushed :(

("Sophisticated" has been abused by the vernacular as well. It's not simply a synonym for "complicated". Maybe knowing the root would prevent misuse? Same with Stoicism and "stoic".)



Studies show that Americans are using 10,000 words or less, esepcially those under 25 :(



I've read way too much, forcing me to keep up with the vocab joneses.



 
The principal reason manufactures went to Electronic Throttle Control was for fuel savings, because it was more expensive to install in vehicles. Why did they need to save fuel? Because of government mandates. Thus you can blame our wonderful government for every Toyota crash involving sudden acceleration.

:bwahaha:
 

Latest posts

Top