Comments on: Video – Toyota Prius Driver Needed Help From Police To Stop His Car

By: Maggie

Maggie — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 16:57:53 +0000

I think this guy clearly wanted to drive recklessly and have a reason to sue Toyota. As they told him his car wasn’t in the recall. And if there is no recall on it…….. and it doesn’t have the faulty parts, how can anything go wrong….. If they examine the car and nothing is broken, missing or stuck, how on earth did it go speeding out of control…. for 10 minutes and this guy clearly wasn’t smart enough to put the darn thing in neutral. unless he just wants money and an excuse to drive like crazy, maybe get in the news, too. He’s just attention crazy.

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 01:13:35 +0000

This is all a scam. Toyota did this on purpose so GM can get back on its feet. Why else do you think it happen. Toyota never had problems before this and all of a sudden they do right as there number 1 compeditor GM cloese plants and loses money. It was all Planned. Come on get smart people.

By: sargasso

sargasso — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 04:55:25 +0000

Prius owners are watching this, and producing vast amounts of ruminant green house gas.

By: Sister Mary Hand Grenade of Quiet Reflection

Sister Mary Hand Grenade of Quiet Reflection — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:28:39 +0000

It’s a fake folks! Don’t be so fucking gullible!!

http://5z8.info/asian-brides_x7d9j_mydick

By: Skeptic of the AOBCCS

Skeptic of the AOBCCS — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:14:14 +0000

Re: Steve S, #80, “Officer Todd Neibert told Sikes to try and put the vehicle in neutral and try to shut it off. Sikes shook his head in response which Neibert took to indicate that that was not successful.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35769069/ns/local_news-san_diego_ca/

So it appears he did try after all and it wouldn’t disengage.

As for the your less that 1000:1 nothing happening, you would have to look into all the Prius reported incidents, separate all those who tried to get it into neutral at high speed and succeeded, and see if successfully getting the thing in neutral caused a lockup and subsequent crash or if the driver remained in control. Do you have that data? Otherwise, your 1000:1 claim of risk is simply meaningless.

By: Steve S

Steve S — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:37:19 +0000

Skeptic of the AOBCCS said,
“Regardless of the extremeness of the failure, are you suggesting that when that happens you would just coast to a stop? Nothing seizes up? Steering guaranteed not to be affected? You wont lose control and hit another car? I wouldn’t take that chance on the safety of others on the road.”
.
Given the circumstances, if nothing else worked to slow down the car, I would much rather take the minuscule chance that shifting into neutral *might* slightly reduce my control of the car than to continue swerving around obstacles at high speed. The difference in risk is easily better than 1000:1.

By: Skeptic of the AOBCCS

Skeptic of the AOBCCS — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:09:16 +0000

re#78, “uh. exploding engine? hehe. you’ve been reading too many comic books, dude. overrevving engines fail internally and just stop running, they don’t “explode”.

That’s the term usually used when an engine destroys itself by flying apart (internally or otherwise) due to mechanical failure. I’ve seen firsthand what can happen to a VW Bug’s engine when it was over revved. There was a serious dent under the hood where a piston struck it, dude.

Regardless of the extremeness of the failure, are you suggesting that when that happens you would just coast to a stop? Nothing seizes up? Steering guaranteed not to be affected? You wont lose control and hit another car? I wouldn’t take that chance on the safety of others on the road.

By: ubiquitous talking head

ubiquitous talking head — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:35:55 +0000

uh. exploding engine? hehe. you’ve been reading too many comic books, dude. overrevving engines fail internally and just stop running, they don’t “explode”. Maybe you’re thinking of dragster engines, which sometimes have exploding clutches because they rev to 10,000 rpm or more during the few seconds of their intended lifespan.

From the articles I read, the guy never claimed to have tried putting it in neutral; in fact he specifically said that he did NOT try that because he was afraid it would “make the car flip.” hahahhaha. seriously. Not even my grandmother would be that ignorant.

I think the guy is changing his story now that he has come under national scrutiny.

By: Ed

Ed — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:05:28 +0000

Those of you who don’t own a Prius, don’t know what you are talking about. I own two. A 2006 and a 2010. I know the 2010 has been recalled (got my notice yesterday) but try braking a 2010, while hitting a pot hole. KNOW WHAT? The brakes cut out completely, and the car lurches ahead. Just for a second, but it does. If the computer can do it for a second, it can interfere with the brakes longer.
The gear shift is COMPLETELY electronic. No linkage. If the computer is ignoring those inputs, no luck with neutral. Same for the power switch.
Yes if your car stalls, you can still steer. But show me a modern car that doesn’t lock the wheel when you switch it off. Remember there is no multi-position switch with a key, where you can switch off the car, but leave the wheel unlocked. One button, the car is either on or off. Period.
I will agree with the emergency brake, but given how warn brake pads were afterwords (as described in accounts), I am not sure how much that might have helped.
Is this a scam, possibly yes. But don’t say things like “why not just put it in neutral”, cause he claims he tried.
Do I love the Prius, YES. If I knew in November, what I know now, would I have bought the second one. NO, not at least until this was all resolved.

By: Gopher

Gopher — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:29:28 +0000

#67 Or some young punk with no job looking for a way to bleed the system more. “You go down to the social security office and apply for your disability benefits, I’ll go down and pick up our free food stamps, then we will meet up at the unemployment office and pick up our extended benefits, then travel over to the social service office and check on our free health benefits, and then finally we will meet up at the capitol building and protest on this rotten stinking society”

By: amodedoma

amodedoma — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:28:54 +0000

Engineering’s most important precept – the KISS principle. Keep It Simple Stupid. I don’t see the advantages of electronic control over so many systems. Sure a modern fighter jet’s got fly by wire as do commercial airliners, but they get A LOT more maintenance than a domestic vehicle. They also have backup and error checking systems, this degree of sophistication is obviously unsafe without them. On the other hand a lot of testing and experience has already been had on the simpler mechanical systems. Between you and your carb you don’t need but a few levers, springs, pulleys and cable, you want to put a sensor on that, go ahead, but it better be unobtrusive.

By: misterhappy

misterhappy — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 05:54:59 +0000

# 16, can you cite your source on the three “interesting issues” at the end of your post? Frankly, I think they’re bogus and they need to called out. Much like the guy in the story.

By: deowll

deowll — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 05:44:42 +0000

I think the Woz said all you had to do was pat the gas peddle which isn’t something most of us would think to do with a car trying to go faster than we want to go.

By: chris

chris — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 05:18:35 +0000

#69 Attempt explaining to somebody trapped behind the wheel of an out of control car that “Instant Kill!” is a good idea.

By: Skeptic of the AOBCCS

Skeptic of the AOBCCS — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:41:18 +0000

#64, Steve S., It’s what should happen… but I wouldn’t trust the maximum rpm limiter when the acceleration circuit is malfunctioning (same circuit? who knows?). Too risky. An exploding engine at 95 mph would most likely result in a fatality.