What Grinds My Gears about the Recent Developments in Toyota's Unintended Acceleration-Saga

A few things happened in the past 24 hours that grind my gears on the subject of Toyota Motor Corp.'s "unintended acceleration" saga. The first thing that ticked me off were some smart-ass headlines for the findings of NHTSA-NASA study from the same sources that were bashing the Japanese company with Daily Mirror-like titles a little over a year ago. That's something like looking at the mirror and saying who's the dummy now... No need for further explanations on that.

The other is that, Toyota, its PR associates and even some news sites / blogs are focusing on the software-related findings and either leaving outside or playing down the two mechanical defects - a.k.a. the “sticking” accelerator pedals and a design flaw that enabled accelerator pedals to become trapped by floor mats. These defects lead to some 8 million vehicles being recalled in the United States alone.

Yes, the study by NHTSA and NASA found no evidence for electronic-based cause for unintended high-speed acceleration, but that doesn't mean Toyota is innocent for the rest of the sudden acceleration-related issues nor for neglecting to notify the government agency of the sticky pedal defect for more than four months after the company found out about it.

By John Halas

[From NHTSA]

Timeline of Major Events

• March 29, 2007: NHTSA opens a preliminary investigation into pedal entrapment on MY’07 Lexus ES350 models based on five consumer complaints alleging three crashes and seven injuries. The all weather floor mat is identified as the possible cause of these incidents.
• July 26, 2007: A fatal crash occurs in San Jose, CA involving a ‘07 Camry in which the driver suffers serious injuries and the driver of the struck vehicle is killed. The incident also appears to have been caused by a pedal trapped by an all weather floor mat.
• September 13, 2007: After determining the fatal San Jose crash was caused by floor mat entrapment, NHTSA tells Toyota a recall is necessary.
• September 26, 2007: Toyota recalls 55,000 floor mats in ’07 and ‘08 Camrys and ES350s.
• August 28, 2009: A fatal crash occurs in Santee, CA, involving a loaner ’09 ES350. The vehicle is found to have an all weather floor mat from another Lexus vehicle. Investigators find that the vehicle’s previous driver had reported an entrapment incident to the dealership.
• September 25, 2009: NHTSA meets with Toyota and tells the company that the floor mat recall is insufficient and the agency expects a recall for the defect in pedal design. Three days later, Toyota tells NHTSA the company will recall the gas pedals.
• October 5, 2009: Toyota recalls 3.8 million vehicles for pedal entrapment by floor mat and sends an interim letter to consumers telling them to remove floor mats. The defect remedy involves gas pedal reconfiguration, floor pan/carpeting revisions, and ‘brake pedal override’ software for vehicles with keyless ignition.
• December 15, 2009: NHTSA officials meet with Toyota executives in Japan to explain NHTSA’s defect recall process and underscore Toyota’s obligations under U.S. law to find and report defects promptly. Toyota commits to making improvements.
• January 16, 2010: Toyota informs NHTSA that certain CTS-brand pedals may have a dangerous ‘sticking’ defect. NHTSA calls an in-person meeting on January 19.
• January 19, 2010: At the meeting, Toyota provides field reports on sticky pedal incidents, and NHTSA tells Toyota the agency expects prompt action. Toyota informs NHTSA several hours later that the company will issue a recall.
• January 21, 2010: Toyota recalls 2.3 million vehicles for the sticky pedal defect.
• January 27, 2010: At NHTSA’s urging, Toyota expands its pedal entrapment recall to cover an additional 1.1 million vehicles.
• February 16, 2010: NHTSA launches an official probe into the timeliness and scope of the pedal entrapment and sticky pedal Toyota recalls.
• March 30, 2010: At the request of Congress, the U.S. DOT announces two studies into unintended acceleration. One looks at possible electronics causes for unintended acceleration in Toyotas; the other examines unintended acceleration and the safety of vehicle electronics across the automotive industry.
• April 5, 2010: NHTSA demands the maximum, $16.375 million, civil penalty on Toyota for its failure to notify the agency of the sticky pedal defect for more than four months after discovering it. Auto manufacturers are legally obligated to notify NHTSA within five business days of determining that a safety defect exists. Toyota pays the full fine on April 19.
• December 20, 2010: Toyota agrees to pay the maximum $16.375 million civil penalty as the result of another NHTSA investigation into whether their recall of 5.5 million vehicles for pedal entrapment was conducted in a timely manner.

What Grinds My Gears about the Recent Developments in Toyota's Unintended Acceleration-Saga

A few things happened in the past 24 hours that grind my gears on the subject of Toyota Motor Corp.'s "unintended acceleration" saga. The first thing that ticked me off were some smart-ass headlines for the findings of NHTSA-NASA study from the same sources that were bashing the Japanese company with Daily Mirror-like titles a little over a year ago. That's something like looking at the mirror and saying who's the dummy now... No need for further explanations on that.

The other is that, Toyota, its PR associates and even some news sites / blogs are focusing on the software-related findings and either leaving outside or playing down the two mechanical defects - a.k.a. the “sticking” accelerator pedals and a design flaw that enabled accelerator pedals to become trapped by floor mats. These defects lead to some 8 million vehicles being recalled in the United States alone.

Yes, the study by NHTSA and NASA found no evidence for electronic-based cause for unintended high-speed acceleration, but that doesn't mean Toyota is innocent for the rest of the sudden acceleration-related issues nor for neglecting to notify the government agency of the sticky pedal defect for more than four months after the company found out about it.

By John Halas

[From NHTSA]

Timeline of Major Events

• March 29, 2007: NHTSA opens a preliminary investigation into pedal entrapment on MY’07 Lexus ES350 models based on five consumer complaints alleging three crashes and seven injuries. The all weather floor mat is identified as the possible cause of these incidents.
• July 26, 2007: A fatal crash occurs in San Jose, CA involving a ‘07 Camry in which the driver suffers serious injuries and the driver of the struck vehicle is killed. The incident also appears to have been caused by a pedal trapped by an all weather floor mat.
• September 13, 2007: After determining the fatal San Jose crash was caused by floor mat entrapment, NHTSA tells Toyota a recall is necessary.
• September 26, 2007: Toyota recalls 55,000 floor mats in ’07 and ‘08 Camrys and ES350s.
• August 28, 2009: A fatal crash occurs in Santee, CA, involving a loaner ’09 ES350. The vehicle is found to have an all weather floor mat from another Lexus vehicle. Investigators find that the vehicle’s previous driver had reported an entrapment incident to the dealership.
• September 25, 2009: NHTSA meets with Toyota and tells the company that the floor mat recall is insufficient and the agency expects a recall for the defect in pedal design. Three days later, Toyota tells NHTSA the company will recall the gas pedals.
• October 5, 2009: Toyota recalls 3.8 million vehicles for pedal entrapment by floor mat and sends an interim letter to consumers telling them to remove floor mats. The defect remedy involves gas pedal reconfiguration, floor pan/carpeting revisions, and ‘brake pedal override’ software for vehicles with keyless ignition.
• December 15, 2009: NHTSA officials meet with Toyota executives in Japan to explain NHTSA’s defect recall process and underscore Toyota’s obligations under U.S. law to find and report defects promptly. Toyota commits to making improvements.
• January 16, 2010: Toyota informs NHTSA that certain CTS-brand pedals may have a dangerous ‘sticking’ defect. NHTSA calls an in-person meeting on January 19.
• January 19, 2010: At the meeting, Toyota provides field reports on sticky pedal incidents, and NHTSA tells Toyota the agency expects prompt action. Toyota informs NHTSA several hours later that the company will issue a recall.
• January 21, 2010: Toyota recalls 2.3 million vehicles for the sticky pedal defect.
• January 27, 2010: At NHTSA’s urging, Toyota expands its pedal entrapment recall to cover an additional 1.1 million vehicles.
• February 16, 2010: NHTSA launches an official probe into the timeliness and scope of the pedal entrapment and sticky pedal Toyota recalls.
• March 30, 2010: At the request of Congress, the U.S. DOT announces two studies into unintended acceleration. One looks at possible electronics causes for unintended acceleration in Toyotas; the other examines unintended acceleration and the safety of vehicle electronics across the automotive industry.
• April 5, 2010: NHTSA demands the maximum, $16.375 million, civil penalty on Toyota for its failure to notify the agency of the sticky pedal defect for more than four months after discovering it. Auto manufacturers are legally obligated to notify NHTSA within five business days of determining that a safety defect exists. Toyota pays the full fine on April 19.
• December 20, 2010: Toyota agrees to pay the maximum $16.375 million civil penalty as the result of another NHTSA investigation into whether their recall of 5.5 million vehicles for pedal entrapment was conducted in a timely manner.

The Audi A8 Says, "Long Live the T-Shifter!"

When Hyundai launched the i30 small car on the Australian market, it marked the end of not only the Excel/Accent lineage down under but also the end of the automatic T-shifter. The Accent, a subcompact design available in either a four door sedan or five door hatchback body style, was the last car sold here to feature the venerable (if archaic) T-shaped automatic gear stick.

The T-shifter was born in the 1960s, as American automakers moved away from the steering column mounted automatic and towards a system that reduced complexity and design differentiation between its automatic and manual models. As the ‘80s moved into the ‘90s, automakers - for whatever reason - moved away from the T-shift and toward the semi-ubiquitous, upright “drumstick” shifter.

It seems that the T-shifter is back, at least for one car. The new Audi A8’s ergonomically friendly, chunky automatic gear shift has that distinct T-shaped that many of knew and loved from the pre-‘90s. Some bloggers believe that the automotive behemoth’s unique choice of shifter will influence other carmakers to return to the classic T. Personally, I’m not convinced. Feel free to leave your comments below if you disagree, or have some fond T-shifter memories to share.

The Audi A8 Says, "Long Live the T-Shifter!"

When Hyundai launched the i30 small car on the Australian market, it marked the end of not only the Excel/Accent lineage down under but also the end of the automatic T-shifter. The Accent, a subcompact design available in either a four door sedan or five door hatchback body style, was the last car sold here to feature the venerable (if archaic) T-shaped automatic gear stick.

The T-shifter was born in the 1960s, as American automakers moved away from the steering column mounted automatic and towards a system that reduced complexity and design differentiation between its automatic and manual models. As the ‘80s moved into the ‘90s, automakers - for whatever reason - moved away from the T-shift and toward the semi-ubiquitous, upright “drumstick” shifter.

It seems that the T-shifter is back, at least for one car. The new Audi A8’s ergonomically friendly, chunky automatic gear shift has that distinct T-shaped that many of knew and loved from the pre-‘90s. Some bloggers believe that the automotive behemoth’s unique choice of shifter will influence other carmakers to return to the classic T. Personally, I’m not convinced. Feel free to leave your comments below if you disagree, or have some fond T-shifter memories to share.

De Tomaso Lives! Italian Brand to Re-Launch in Geneva with a Premium Crossover Concept

Just like Pagani, De Tomaso is another Italy-based sports car manufacturer founded by an Argentinean, more exactly by former racing driver Alejandro De Tomaso. Known for its quirky models of the 1960s and 1970s like the Pantera, the company eventually went under the radar and ended up filing for bankruptcy in 2004.

Fortunately, it was bought five years later by ex-Fiat marketing executive and Lancia CEO Gian Mario Rossignolo, who decided to revive the iconic brand. Now, it seems that the Italian businessman’s efforts have come to fruition, as the revitalized automaker is planning to unveil a Pininfarina-designed premium crossover concept at the Geneva Motor Show.

Codenamed SLC (Sport Luxury Car), the design study is said to rival the likes of the BMW 5-Series GT and Lexus RX-450h.

According to reports, the SLC will have an aluminum body, four-wheel drive and three engine choices: 550HP V8 and 300HP V6 gasoline engines, plus a 250-horsepower diesel unit.

De Tomaso plans to build some 3,000 units of the crossover annually, and if everything goes according to plan, it will be followed by a luxury sedan and a coupe, also built from aluminum. Projected sales for these two models are 3,000 and 2,000 units respectively.

The Italians are going to invest €116 million (US $172 million) into the project, with the cars being manufactured at a former Pininfarina plant, using an innovative technology called Univis said to considerably simplify the manufacturing process.

De Tomaso Lives! Italian Brand to Re-Launch in Geneva with a Premium Crossover Concept

Just like Pagani, De Tomaso is another Italy-based sports car manufacturer founded by an Argentinean, more exactly by former racing driver Alejandro De Tomaso. Known for its quirky models of the 1960s and 1970s like the Pantera, the company eventually went under the radar and ended up filing for bankruptcy in 2004.

Fortunately, it was bought five years later by ex-Fiat marketing executive and Lancia CEO Gian Mario Rossignolo, who decided to revive the iconic brand. Now, it seems that the Italian businessman’s efforts have come to fruition, as the revitalized automaker is planning to unveil a Pininfarina-designed premium crossover concept at the Geneva Motor Show.

Codenamed SLC (Sport Luxury Car), the design study is said to rival the likes of the BMW 5-Series GT and Lexus RX-450h.

According to reports, the SLC will have an aluminum body, four-wheel drive and three engine choices: 550HP V8 and 300HP V6 gasoline engines, plus a 250-horsepower diesel unit.

De Tomaso plans to build some 3,000 units of the crossover annually, and if everything goes according to plan, it will be followed by a luxury sedan and a coupe, also built from aluminum. Projected sales for these two models are 3,000 and 2,000 units respectively.

The Italians are going to invest €116 million (US $172 million) into the project, with the cars being manufactured at a former Pininfarina plant, using an innovative technology called Univis said to considerably simplify the manufacturing process.

Ford Sues Ferrari Over F150 Formula 1 Car Moniker, the Italians Hastily Change it to the F150th Italia

In order to celebrate the 150 years that have passed since the unification of Italy, Ferrari recently chose to name its newest Formula 1 car the “F150”. It seems that Ford wasn’t too impressed with the patriotic gesture and sued the Italian maker over the race car's moniker. The Blue Oval claimed that it closely resembled its own F-150 nameplate, thus causing “irreparable harm” to the trademark.

According to the paperwork filed in Detroit, the lawsuit also referred to Ferrari’s www.ferrarif150.com website and accused the Italian company of cyber theft and trademark infringement.

Ford aimed to prevent the use of the F150 name in the United States, and expected Ferrari to give up any revenue and profits earned through the disputed nameplate in the States.

Furthermore, under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which protects against trademark infringement due to the use of confusing Internet domain names, Ford wanted $100,000 in damages.

However, Ferrari reacted quickly and today changed the F1 car's name to the “F150th Italia”, which was first used in a routine Formula 1 test report posted on the Ferrari website.

The report stated that “the first day of testing for Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro got off on the right foot at the Cheste circuit, near Valencia. Before the lunch break, Fernando Alonso completed just over 200 kilometers at the wheel of the Ferrari F150th Italia”.

Later on, Ferrari released an official statement as well, available below.

By Csaba Daradics

[Ferrari Press Release] The name of the new Ferrari Formula 1 car

Maranello, 10th February - On the subject of the name of the new Ferrari Formula 1 car, the Maranello company wishes to point out that it has sent a letter of reply to Ford, underlining the fact that the F150 designation (used as the abbreviated version of the complete name, which is Ferrari F150th Italia) never has, nor ever will be used as the name of a commercially available product – indeed there will definitely not be a production run of single-seaters. In fact, it has always been the case in the history of Scuderia names, that they represent the nomenclature of a racing car project and are linked to a chronological order with a technical basis, or in exceptional cases, to special occasions. This year, the decision was taken to dedicate the car name to a particularly significant event, the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy, an event of such great importance that the Italian government has declared, for this year only, a national holiday.

For these reasons, Ferrari believes that its own contender in the forthcoming F1 championship cannot be confused with other types of commercially available vehicle of any sort whatsoever, nor can it give the impression that there is a link to another brand of road-going vehicle. Therefore it is very difficult to understand Ford’s viewpoint on the matter.

Despite this and to further prove it is acting in good faith and that it operates in a completely correct manner, Ferrari has decided to ensure that in all areas of operation, the abbreviated version will be replaced at all times with the full version, Ferrari F150th Italia.

Sources: Ferrari, Detnews & Autoweek

Ford Sues Ferrari Over F150 Formula 1 Car Moniker, the Italians Hastily Change it to the F150th Italia

In order to celebrate the 150 years that have passed since the unification of Italy, Ferrari recently chose to name its newest Formula 1 car the “F150”. It seems that Ford wasn’t too impressed with the patriotic gesture and sued the Italian maker over the race car's moniker. The Blue Oval claimed that it closely resembled its own F-150 nameplate, thus causing “irreparable harm” to the trademark.

According to the paperwork filed in Detroit, the lawsuit also referred to Ferrari’s www.ferrarif150.com website and accused the Italian company of cyber theft and trademark infringement.

Ford aimed to prevent the use of the F150 name in the United States, and expected Ferrari to give up any revenue and profits earned through the disputed nameplate in the States.

Furthermore, under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which protects against trademark infringement due to the use of confusing Internet domain names, Ford wanted $100,000 in damages.

However, Ferrari reacted quickly and today changed the F1 car's name to the “F150th Italia”, which was first used in a routine Formula 1 test report posted on the Ferrari website.

The report stated that “the first day of testing for Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro got off on the right foot at the Cheste circuit, near Valencia. Before the lunch break, Fernando Alonso completed just over 200 kilometers at the wheel of the Ferrari F150th Italia”.

Later on, Ferrari released an official statement as well, available below.

By Csaba Daradics

[Ferrari Press Release] The name of the new Ferrari Formula 1 car

Maranello, 10th February - On the subject of the name of the new Ferrari Formula 1 car, the Maranello company wishes to point out that it has sent a letter of reply to Ford, underlining the fact that the F150 designation (used as the abbreviated version of the complete name, which is Ferrari F150th Italia) never has, nor ever will be used as the name of a commercially available product – indeed there will definitely not be a production run of single-seaters. In fact, it has always been the case in the history of Scuderia names, that they represent the nomenclature of a racing car project and are linked to a chronological order with a technical basis, or in exceptional cases, to special occasions. This year, the decision was taken to dedicate the car name to a particularly significant event, the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy, an event of such great importance that the Italian government has declared, for this year only, a national holiday.

For these reasons, Ferrari believes that its own contender in the forthcoming F1 championship cannot be confused with other types of commercially available vehicle of any sort whatsoever, nor can it give the impression that there is a link to another brand of road-going vehicle. Therefore it is very difficult to understand Ford’s viewpoint on the matter.

Despite this and to further prove it is acting in good faith and that it operates in a completely correct manner, Ferrari has decided to ensure that in all areas of operation, the abbreviated version will be replaced at all times with the full version, Ferrari F150th Italia.

Sources: Ferrari, Detnews & Autoweek