NHTSA To Toyota: Do The Shimmy

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt

The Obama administration either decided that Toyota has been sufficiently maimed and weakened to give its wards of the state some breathing room (a theory rising in popularity amongst some conspiracy buffs), or Toyota has definitely found the definitive cure for UAS (unintended acceleration syndrome). Be it as it may, the NHTSA has approved the shim fix, says Reuters. If the Wall Street Journal got it right, recalled Toyotas may also get a re-flash, and a feature amiss in most American cars.

Toyota said in a statement late on Saturday that it had reviewed the pedal fix with NHTSA and was finalizing details. According to Reuters, “the remedy being readied by Toyota and its accelerator supplier, CTS Corp, involves a shim, also called a spacer that will be placed in the accelerator to keep it from sticking.”

Also, “approved” may be too strong a word. NHTSA regulators don’t “approve” a fix (which would mean they would be responsible for it), but they can reject the approach if they consider it inadequate.

NHTSA did not reject the approach. Our in-house teardown staff and the B&B mostly think the shim is a placebo measure.

In the meantime, UAS spreads faster than the swine flu. Toyotas are recalled in Israel, China, and points east. PSA recalls 100,000 Peugeot 107 and Citroen C1 models made at a factory in the Czech Republic where the French group and Toyota jointly make cars. Ford halted production of some full-sized commercial vehicles in China because they contain the same CTS pedal. UAS seems to be contagious.

Injuryboard.com, home of ambulance chasers, asks an inconvenient question: Why does Toyota “not utilize cheap and effective ‘smart pedal’ technology in its vehicles?” Smart is actually a bit of a reach. With this technology, which shouldn’t cost much more than a bunch of lines of code in the ECU, the engine goes to idle if the brake pedal and gas pedal are pushed at the same time. Which corrects the most common cause for UAS: Pilot error.

Lo and behold, that feature might come: “In its most recent recall, Toyota further proposes a software change to allow a foot on the brake to close the throttle of runaway cars,” writes the Wall Street Journal. Does your car have such a feature? According to Injuryboard, if it’s a recent Mercedes-Benz, a BMW, a Nissan, an Infiniti, an Audi, or a Volkswagen, it most likely does. If it’s a U.S. car, a Volvo, or a Honda, most likely it does not. Wait, some Chryslers have it, say the ambulance chasers.

Expect recalls of all cars without that feature. Finally: Jobs!


Bertel Schmitt
Bertel Schmitt

Bertel Schmitt comes back to journalism after taking a 35 year break in advertising and marketing. He ran and owned advertising agencies in Duesseldorf, Germany, and New York City. Volkswagen A.G. was Bertel's most important corporate account. Schmitt's advertising and marketing career touched many corners of the industry with a special focus on automotive products and services. Since 2004, he lives in Japan and China with his wife <a href="http://www.tomokoandbertel.com"> Tomoko </a>. Bertel Schmitt is a founding board member of the <a href="http://www.offshoresuperseries.com"> Offshore Super Series </a>, an American offshore powerboat racing organization. He is co-owner of the racing team Typhoon.

More by Bertel Schmitt

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 36 comments
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I own my house 100% paid for at age 52. the answer is still NO.-28k (realistically) would take 8 years to offset my gas truck even with its constant repair bills (thanks chevy)-Still takes too long to charge UNTIL solidsate batteries are a thing and 80% in 15 minutes becomes a reality (for ME anyways, i get others are willing to wait)For the rest of the market, especially people in dense cityscape, apartments dens rentals it just isnt feasible yet IMO.
  • ToolGuy I do like the fuel economy of a 6-cylinder engine. 😉
  • Carson D I'd go with the RAV4. It will last forever, and someone will pay you for it if you ever lose your survival instincts.
  • THX1136 A less expensive EV would make it more attractive. For the record, I've never purchased a brand new vehicle as I have never been able to afford anything but used. I think the same would apply to an EV. I also tend to keep a vehicle way longer than most folks do - 10+ years. If there was a more affordable one right now then other things come to bear. There are currently no chargers in my immediate area (town of 16K). I don't know if I can afford to install the necessary electrical service to put one in my car port right now either. Other than all that, I would want to buy what I like from a cosmetic standpoint. That would be a Charger EV which, right now, doesn't exist and I couldn't afford anyway. I would not buy an EV just to be buying an EV. Nothing against them either. Most of my constraints are purely financial being 71 with a disabled wife and on a fixed income.
  • ToolGuy Two more thoughts, ok three:a) Will this affordable EV have expressive C/D pillars, detailing on the rocker panels and many many things happening around the headlamps? Asking for a friend.b) Will this affordable EV have interior soft touch plastics and materials lifted directly from a European luxury sedan? Because if it does not, the automotive journalists are going to mention it and that will definitely spoil my purchase decision.c) Whatever the nominal range is, I need it to be 2 miles more, otherwise no deal. (+2 rule is iterative)
Next