By on March 7, 2010

In the TTAC Pedal Series “Toyota Gas Pedal Fix Simulated: Friction Reduced, But By Too Much”, I anticipated that the crude shim fix for the recalled CTS “sticky pedals” would result in an uncomfortable pedal feel at the least and  quite possibly unsafe characteristics at worst. A quick refresher: a carefully controlled degree of friction (hysteresis) is essential in an e-pedal, otherwise smooth changes and maintaining steady states in throttle position become difficult if not impossible. I wrote: “Undoubtedly, Toyota’s intended degree of friction will be compromised by this fix, to one degree or another. And drivers may find the fix unpleasant or uncomfortable, also to some degree or another. Clearly, this fix is a band aid to fix the intrinsic limitations of this design.”

I’ve been counting the days until someone complained about the results of the pedal fix. Yesterday it came, from TTAC reader JAQUEBAUER:

My daughter took her 2009 Camry in to the dealer today for the Gas Pedal recall, and were very surprised and disjointedness with the “fix” that Toyota has chosen for this problem. We picked the car up, getting the keys and a copy of the repair order from the cashier. We were not told about any precautions to take or be aware of changes in the operation of the car. The Repair order indicated that the cars computer was reprogrammed, and some work was done on the gas pedal. I asked her to test drive the car in the dealers parking lot before she went home, to check for any problems.

There were 2 issues she found unacceptable, that I want to talk about here. (Read More…)

Recent Comments

  • Re: 2015 Lincoln MKC 2.3 Ecoboost Review (With Video)

    VolandoBajo - OUCH! Though think of these conspicuous consumption points that can be amassed when sitting in Starbucks complaining about how you had to...
  • Re: QOTD: Which Manufacturer Has Most Lost Its Way?

    VolandoBajo - I just wrote a lengthy discussion of why FoMoCo lost its way only because it killed Mercury and kept Lincoln, and then when I went to post it,...
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - The Mercedes 190E of the era had one logical feature I wish Volvo engineers had thought of: an electrically adjustable outside mirror; on the passenger side...
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - Plenty of room in the engine bay. You can actually change the oil filter from above. Sadly, the oil that drools out when you change the filter has the...
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - The great aerodynamic scare of the 90s left both Volvo and Mercedes vainly pointing out that aerodynamics aren’t going to solve our fuel mileage...
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - Fluky point of failure, although I don’t know why it isn’t more frequent; caught the very corner of the rear bumper on a wooden stake one day....
  • Re: QOTD: Which Manufacturer Has Most Lost Its Way?

    Giltibo - Funny. I drive a 2008 Accord Coupe (K24 5MT) and work with a few people who own 3-series BMWs. At similar mileages (about 140K – 80M), their...
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - I see a parallel evolution in the 240, the Checker cab, and the 55/56 Chevies
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - the early manuals were a 4 speed with electric OD; not sure when they switched to proper 5 speed. Lots of malfunctioning ODs out there. Typical Volvo fashion,...
  • Re: Capsule Review: Volvo 240GL Estate

    gzuckier - The steel parts are pretty durable; the electricals not so much, on the early models. No worse than most other cars, just that they would be the point of...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, United States
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States