Toytoa Prius that couldn't stop? It's probably a hoax.

[Alyeska]

The Push Button Start issue is being addressed at least. I've heard rumors that a Kill Switch is going to become more or less mandatory in the future.

[Ma Deuce]

As an avowed Pedestrian And Mass Transitter, my knowledge of yanking it into neutral on this situation is limited. It'd halt the engine's push on it, I know that.. I also vaguely remember this is a way to wreck your transmission, which is also an excellent way to ensure a stop, when bits start grinding together.

That's what would happen if the transmission shifted into Reverse or Park while moving forward, but many modern automatics have interlocks to prevent that from happening. They actually did this on Mythbusters a while back, using an early '90s Ford Crown Victoria. Even though the shifter was in the 'R' position, nothing happened; the car just coasted along as if it were in neutral, and was apparently undamaged afterward. Mind you, I have no inclination to test the efficacy of this interlock on my car.

[Dahak]

But being too scared to shift while doing only 94mph (that's, what, around 150km/h?)... When driving on the motorway I regularly shifted from 5th to 6th around those speeds without having any problem at all. I just don't get this fear.

[Alyeska]

I've had my parents old Minivan at 99 miles an hour. Speedometer capped at 100 and I just couldn't push it the whole way. 90+ MPH just isn't that fast when your on a real highway.

[Surlethe]

In the US, 94 mph is 25-30% faster than typical interstate speeds, and it's 15-20% faster than reckless interstate speeds. People are not used to handling that kind of speed at all, and I don't believe the interstates are designed to support cars going at those speeds.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Problem. It's a lot harder to do this in the newer cars which use a pushbutton to start & stop the engine. You can't just turn the key to instantly shut off the engine, you need to press and hold the button for several seconds to get the engine to turn off when the car is moving.

Who came up with this design feature and why did they think it was a good idea?

Which design feature? The push-button on/off switch? Or the requirement that the button be held in for several seconds to shut off the engine? The push-button is part convenience feature, and mostly security feature; as you must have the key fob and its little wireless transmitter/RFID tag with you to start the vehicle. The computerized keyless ignition actually makes a certain amount of sense, as does the requirement that it be held in while the vehicle is running . . . since we wouldn't want the vehicle to abruptly lose power if its idiot driver were to accidentally bump the switch while driving (or shaving, applying mascara, reading the newspaper, and all the other stupid shit that I've seen drivers attempt to do while driving.)

Problem #2 has to do with automatic transmissions. Some of the newer ones won't let you shift into neutral under load, which means if the gas pedal is floored the transmission isn't going into neutral thanks to the electronic controls.

Who came up with this design feature and why did they think it was a good idea?

Seriously, why did they do this? Was there an actual reason, beyond "gee, whiz, that's cool! Why the hell not?" that they came up with this?

Presumably it's to prevent the engine from damaging itself through over-revving. Or to prevent someone from damaging the transmission by accidentally popping it into neutral, realizing what they've done, and then re-engaging the transmission while the engine is at high revs. Or simply because it's assumed that if you're actively applying power to the wheels, any move to put the transmission into neutral on your part was accidental and the vehicle shouldn't let you do that.

[aerius]

Problem. It's a lot harder to do this in the newer cars which use a pushbutton to start & stop the engine. You can't just turn the key to instantly shut off the engine, you need to press and hold the button for several seconds to get the engine to turn off when the car is moving.

Who came up with this design feature and why did they think it was a good idea?

I think it was either the Germans or Italians, the pushbutton ignition first showed up in their sports cars and then it spread to everything else. Apparently, it "looks cool". The reason the button needs to be pressed & held to turn off the engine when the car is moving is so that engine doesn't shut off if the button accidentally gets pushed.

Problem #2 has to do with automatic transmissions. Some of the newer ones won't let you shift into neutral under load, which means if the gas pedal is floored the transmission isn't going into neutral thanks to the electronic controls.

Who came up with this design feature and why did they think it was a good idea?

I don't know who came up with this one, but apparently it's supposed to keep the engine from getting over-rev'd and damaged if the shifter is accidentally knocked into neutral.

Then you have problem #3, or the proper method of braking a runaway car which few people are going to know about unless they've taken high performance driving courses. The proper method is to slam the brake pedal down as hard as you can and keep it down until the car comes to a complete stop. And you'll need to step on the brake pedal a lot harder than usual since the brake assist comes from engine vacuum, under full throttle there's not much engine vacuum and thus there's less brake assist.

And someone explain to me what that is NOT something discussed in driver's ed? For that matter, why don't we have routine re-testing where a driver would have to demonstrate knowledge of how to handle emergencies?

Tell me about it, the only reason I know about this is because 1) I took auto mechanics in high school and 2) I've taken several high performance driving courses at the racetrack. In our regular driver's ed we never learned anything about emergency situations, we didn't cover skids, stuck gas pedals, flat tires, brake failures, power steering failures, or any one of the other common problems which can happen to drivers. Our driver training just pumps a bunch of incompetent idiots out onto our roads, personally I want to see the standards set as high as the ones required for a pilot's license. It would likely have a 90% fail rate and cost a small fortune, but it would save countless lives every year.

[Netko]

She literally couldn't understand it - I had to explain to her how automatics function, and then that you can actually get a license in the US on only an automatic without any real understanding of how a car functions.

Not entirely sure what you mean by that. In the US there is a single license for general use of cars. It covers both Automatics and Manuals. So there is no "only automatic" license. That said, the person who gets the license could have only ever driven an automatic.

Automatic-only licences (for people without disabilities) were only approved around here two years ago - before, they weren't allowed precisely do to concerns about the type of driver ignorance that has gotten much play in this thread. If you do pass your driving exam on an automatic its marked as a "requirement" on your driver's licence, meaning you aren't allowed to drive a car which isn't automatic. Very few people even consider the option because the market for cars is heavily geared towards manuals - automatics are a very high end option (as in the model with the nearly double the price of the basic model), so, aside from the stupid(ly) rich, people want the flexibility of a "regular" license. So the assumption is that you pass the driving exam on a manual. I had to explain to her that a lot of people in the US actually take the exam on an automatic and never in their lives drive a manual.

[FSTargetDrone]

My Mini has a Push-Button start. The car's key actually slides into a remote transmitter and normally it stays that way. You insert the remote key fob into a small dock next to the start button. Then you press the start. You cannot remove the transmitter while the car is running--it becomes locked to the dock. The only way (that I know of) to kill the engine is to press the start button again to shutdown. You can start and/or remove the physical key itself from the keyfob/transmitter while the device is docked, but it has no effect on the car's operation (the mechanical key itself never need be used on the car, other than to lock the glove box or manually unlock the driver's door).

As a wanna-be hypermiler in general, I routinely slip into neutral (when safe and prudent) and it isn't a problem. I have accidentally shifted to reverse (once, when I first got the car) while the car was rolling forward (but not under acceleration) and nothing happened. The car didn't suddenly lurch to a halt, nor flip over.

[Alyeska]

Automatic-only licences (for people without disabilities) were only approved around here two years ago - before, they weren't allowed precisely do to concerns about the type of driver ignorance that has gotten much play in this thread. If you do pass your driving exam on an automatic its marked as a "requirement" on your driver's licence, meaning you aren't allowed to drive a car which isn't automatic. Very few people even consider the option because the market for cars is heavily geared towards manuals - automatics are a very high end option (as in the model with the nearly double the price of the basic model), so, aside from the stupid(ly) rich, people want the flexibility of a "regular" license. So the assumption is that you pass the driving exam on a manual. I had to explain to her that a lot of people in the US actually take the exam on an automatic and never in their lives drive a manual.

The US has no such type of license. And while a fair portion only drive Automatics, plenty of people still drive manual. The problem you describe is more than just the US. The US is just a country that doesn't require separate training for manual transmissions. I am somewhat lucky in that my parents had two stick shift vehicles in addition to an automatic. So when I was going through drivers ed, I was familiar with both types. Stick shift is for the pleasure of driving, automatic is for mundane tasks.

[Ma Deuce]

Which design feature? The push-button on/off switch? Or the requirement that the button be held in for several seconds to shut off the engine? The push-button is part convenience feature, and mostly security feature; as you must have the key fob and its little wireless transmitter/RFID tag with you to start the vehicle.

How is it a security feature? Most cars these days have keys with built-in RFID chips coded to an immobilizer in the car's ignition system (in fact, they've been mandatory on all new cars sold in Canada for about a decade), so that you cannot start the car except with a key coded for it. I actually tried this once; I have a buddy who drives the same model van I do, and though his key fit into my ignition and allowed it to turn, it not only failed to start my car, it left it completely disabled for several minutes, and during that time failed to start even when I used my key! Interestingly, when I used my buddy's key to open my doors, it succeeded in opening the door it was inserted into, but did not trigger the central locking system into opening the other doors. While that does seem a bit pointless, I'm told that if my vehicle had the optional alarm system, that using an incorrectly coded key in any of the doors would trigger it.

That said, I can still appreciate the convenience of a keyless ignition system. I just don't see any reason other than aesthetics why it has to be button rather than a knob that's operated the same way you would an ignition key cylinder.

My Mini has a Push-Button start. The car's key actually slides into a remote transmitter and normally it stays that way. You insert the remote key fob into a small dock next to the start button. Then you press the start. You cannot remove the transmitter while the car is running--it becomes locked to the dock. The only way (that I know of) to kill the engine is to press the start button again to shutdown. You can start and/or remove the physical key itself from the keyfob/transmitter while the device is docked, but it has no effect on the car's operation (the mechanical key itself never need be used on the car, other than to lock the glove box or manually unlock the driver's door).

That seems to defeat the point of having a keyless ignition. Leave it to BMW to come up with something like that.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Constantly shifting an automatic up and down will increase wear on an automatic transmission, and depending on how old it is, increase the shocks to the CV joints or the drive shaft. Newer transmissions will probably have less of an issue with that, but those have more computer control anyway so you might as well let the car handle that for you.

Manuals have fewer parts and are designed to be constantly shifted by hand, so they're a bit tougher. Either way, unless you're on a mountain road, or facing an uncontrolled acceleration issue (a real one), it's not really worth it to fuck around with your gears. Especially if you're driving an older car, particularly if it's an American car. Chrysler's minivans may be the most popular vehicle in N America since the model T, but they have poor transmission lifetimes.

Oh goddess no, it's a relatively modern (2000s) Toyota--an Echo two door coupe, one of the models not covered by any of the recalls since it was competently built in Japan. Am I increasing transmission wear? Certainly, but I also can't really afford new brake pads in the next two years and the likelihood of needing those replaced is much higher than the torque converter if I don't rely a fair bit on engine braking. Also I keep downshifts to 2/3rds the rated tolerance of the gear in question (59mph for second and 29mph for first are the rated tolerances) in normal operation to further reduce wear, and the car's operating manual in fact specifically allows for downshifting the torque converter for braking purposes. It's truly not a big deal, though, and regardless of the details like that, won't wreck your car if done in an emergency.

[Broomstick]

Problem. It's a lot harder to do this in the newer cars which use a pushbutton to start & stop the engine. You can't just turn the key to instantly shut off the engine, you need to press and hold the button for several seconds to get the engine to turn off when the car is moving.

Who came up with this design feature and why did they think it was a good idea?

Which design feature? The push-button on/off switch? Or the requirement that the button be held in for several seconds to shut off the engine? The push-button is part convenience feature, and mostly security feature; as you must have the key fob and its little wireless transmitter/RFID tag with you to start the vehicle. The computerized keyless ignition actually makes a certain amount of sense, as does the requirement that it be held in while the vehicle is running . . .

So this security features makes it harder to turn the car off quickly? Is this another case of security trumping safety or common sense?

I've been in some very old airplanes that used a push-start button, and some ultralights that do so, but for the most part aviation moved away from push-starts decades ago. Why does the auto industry suddenly feel a need to adopt this gimmick?

Of course, I'm the fuddy-duddy that still has manual door lock and crank-operated windows, so what do I know?

The bit preventing accidental bumps shutting down the engine actually does make sense... except that is NEVER a problem with keys, is it? I can bump my key while it's in the ignition all I want, doesn't have an effect on the engine.

[Broomstick]

Automatic-only licences (for people without disabilities) were only approved around here two years ago - before, they weren't allowed precisely do to concerns about the type of driver ignorance that has gotten much play in this thread. If you do pass your driving exam on an automatic its marked as a "requirement" on your driver's licence, meaning you aren't allowed to drive a car which isn't automatic. Very few people even consider the option because the market for cars is heavily geared towards manuals - automatics are a very high end option (as in the model with the nearly double the price of the basic model), so, aside from the stupid(ly) rich, people want the flexibility of a "regular" license. So the assumption is that you pass the driving exam on a manual. I had to explain to her that a lot of people in the US actually take the exam on an automatic and never in their lives drive a manual.

It's not a matter of "choosing" an automatic - I've yet to see a driver's education school that even offers manual transmissions around here. They probably exist somewhere, but in both my high school driver's ed and in talking to people who went to driving "schools" there was no choice, all that was available was automatics. The only people who learn to drive automatic transmissions in the US while learning to drive are those that have one in the family already, or those that make a special effort to do so. The default in the US is automatic transmission.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

You're supposed to just shift to neutral, get the vehicle off the road safely, and shut the motor off in that order so you still have power steering and brakes. The governor is supposed to stop the engine from damaging itself by overrevving. Just like the Duchess said, if people knew what the hell they were driving they wouldn't have these "problems".

Shit, leaving the engine on isn't even necessary with proper knowledge of the vehicle's handling characteristics and functionality. I recently drove this old 1981 Volvo that was stalling out whenever it came to a stop, and in trying to get it home I just turned it off on the freeway on-ramp (heavy traffic with entry governing signals) and steered with my left hand and braked with my right hand on the emergency brake--that's also how I stopped my car the time all the warning lights came on on the freeway. You get a bit of yawing from the effect of the rear brakes being applied, but even without power steering no vehicle in the weight class of an Echo to a 240 would present the slightest problem for a reasonably average individual to control in physical terms--my upper body strength is so pathetic I strain half the muscles in a wrist trying to open a jar and I was easily able to manhandle both the wheel and the emergency brake in both vehicles with the power off and no power steering. Granted I did have plenty of roll room on a very broad shoulder or else I might have risked the engine to come to a stop safely. Anyway, nobody even noticed there was anything wrong until I came to the light signal, punched the emergency lights on for a moment, fired up the engine, and got her going on the interstate--our total delay to the traffic around us was less than thirty seconds and nobody even had enough time to get pissed off enough to honk.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

In the US, 94 mph is 25-30% faster than typical interstate speeds, and it's 15-20% faster than reckless interstate speeds. People are not used to handling that kind of speed at all, and I don't believe the interstates are designed to support cars going at those speeds.

True, but no, they are designed for that speed. It's only 4mph over the maximum safe speed calculated by the Montana Highway Patrol in the 1990s when the Federal Speed Limit was dropped and they suddenly for a few years had no speed limit again. They did a study which concluded that on Montana interstates the maximum safe speed in technical construction terms was 90mph and therefore anything over that could be considered reckless driving. And remember that Montana includes some insane mountain curvature in the west, so it has a fairly average distribution of interstate curves. If we had properly trained drivers the interstate speed in the US could easily be 140km/h with yellow temporary speed reduction zone signs around certain curves and congested exchanges.

[Havok]

In the US, 94 mph is 25-30% faster than typical interstate speeds, and it's 15-20% faster than reckless interstate speeds. People are not used to handling that kind of speed at all, and I don't believe the interstates are designed to support cars going at those speeds.

Dude. Where do you do your driving? If I want to be in anything but the slow/merge lane, I need to be going at least 85 or I am going to get trucked. Maybe it is just a California thing.

This guy not being able to shift because he is going 94 is complete and utter bullshit.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

This is really what makes driving in America a miserable experience. 90% of the people on the road would fail a driving test by a European country, and the speed limit is accordingly half to 2/3rds of what the actual safe speed for the road in question is, at which you and other competent people could be driving at legally if you didn't have to slow down to spend all of your time monitoring what the drooling retards around you are doing with their wheeled death machines. And of course it results in universal violations of the speed limit, literally--I have been driving in California and Havok is maybe exagerrating a bit, but the average interstate speed is 15mph over the posted speed limit, and is followed or exceeded (say, 85 instead of 70) by at least 2/3rds of vehicles on the road.

[Simon_Jester]

Then you have problem #3, or the proper method of braking a runaway car which few people are going to know about unless they've taken high performance driving courses. The proper method is to slam the brake pedal down as hard as you can and keep it down until the car comes to a complete stop. And you'll need to step on the brake pedal a lot harder than usual since the brake assist comes from engine vacuum, under full throttle there's not much engine vacuum and thus there's less brake assist.

And someone explain to me what that is NOT something discussed in driver's ed? For that matter, why don't we have routine re-testing where a driver would have to demonstrate knowledge of how to handle emergencies?

This is something my driver's ed course covered in Maryland; I may just have had a damn good driving instructor, though.

In the US, 94 mph is 25-30% faster than typical interstate speeds, and it's 15-20% faster than reckless interstate speeds. People are not used to handling that kind of speed at all, and I don't believe the interstates are designed to support cars going at those speeds.

No, but if there isn't much traffic, and depending on the interstate in question... I think it'd be doable; you wouldn't go catapulting off the turns. There are people who speed at those speeds or higher on the Interstate, and the flow of traffic can sometimes go up to 75 mph on interstates near where I live (again, when traffic is light).

If my car were doing that, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't freeze... but then again, I had a damn good driving instructor, like I said. Maybe I'm just wrong about that, too.

How is it a security feature? Most cars these days have keys with built-in RFID chips coded to an immobilizer in the car's ignition system... While that does seem a bit pointless, I'm told that if my vehicle had the optional alarm system, that using an incorrectly coded key in any of the doors would trigger it.

Ooh. Good thing I don't have that. I've got absent-minded professor syndrome, and I keep a mechanical copy of my key (no chip) in my pocket just to make sure I can open the damn door if I lock my keys inside. It's a lot cheaper than getting a copy complete with RFID chip.

[CaptainChewbacca]

In the US, 94 mph is 25-30% faster than typical interstate speeds, and it's 15-20% faster than reckless interstate speeds. People are not used to handling that kind of speed at all, and I don't believe the interstates are designed to support cars going at those speeds.

Dude. Where do you do your driving? If I want to be in anything but the slow/merge lane, I need to be going at least 85 or I am going to get trucked. Maybe it is just a California thing.

In California if you're going over 80 mph and you're within 25 miles of a town, someone is going to spot you and pull you over. I personally keep it to 75 or under when I'm distance-driving out here.

Oh, also you can put me in the 'never driven a manual' category. I've never had the need.

[Havok]

In the US, 94 mph is 25-30% faster than typical interstate speeds, and it's 15-20% faster than reckless interstate speeds. People are not used to handling that kind of speed at all, and I don't believe the interstates are designed to support cars going at those speeds.

Dude. Where do you do your driving? If I want to be in anything but the slow/merge lane, I need to be going at least 85 or I am going to get trucked. Maybe it is just a California thing.

In California if you're going over 80 mph and you're within 25 miles of a town, someone is going to spot you and pull you over. I personally keep it to 75 or under when I'm distance-driving out here.

*snikers* OK.

Oh, also you can put me in the 'never driven a manual' category. I've never had the need.

Never a manual car for me. Obviously a manual bike. Also, I guess I am old or something because I never had to take drivers ed either.

[LadyTevar]

Nitram, there's not much yanking or grinding involved. You put it in neutral, your drive axle is no longer engaged with the engine. This means no power to the wheels, so the throttle can be wide-open and the engine can redline all it likes, it won't accelerate your car. Car is coasting. It's like riding your bike once you've got some speed built up, you can stop pedalling.

Thank you, for increasing my sum total knowledge. This is why I'm avowed pedestrian(That, and my mind can never get a good handle on how far the car extends from me in every direction..).

this is why I need to buy Nitram a "SmartCar".

OT: I had been suspicious of Sike's claims from the moment I heard about the 'car out of control'. The timing alone screamed "opportunatism" to me. The more I hear of Sike's story, the less I believe him.

I do find the information in that Op-ed interesting. If the majority of those experiencing 'stuck acceleration' is true, 'human error' is a big possibility.

[Havok]

Based on the second article, it seems to be 'Old human error'.

[Broomstick]

I just don't buy the idea that simply making everyone drive manual transmissions (barring those who can't due to disability) is going to automatically make everyone a better driver, because I know some real dumbfucks who drive "sticks" (as we call them around here) or that automatic transmissions are somehow generating bad drivers. You can be a good or bad driver with either sort of transmission, the root of the problem is fucking idiots driving cars around. That should be remedied by education and by withdrawing driving privileges from those too stubborn or stupid to safely operate a motor vehicle.

[Dahak]

My Mini has a Push-Button start. The car's key actually slides into a remote transmitter and normally it stays that way. You insert the remote key fob into a small dock next to the start button. Then you press the start. You cannot remove the transmitter while the car is running--it becomes locked to the dock. The only way (that I know of) to kill the engine is to press the start button again to shutdown. You can start and/or remove the physical key itself from the keyfob/transmitter while the device is docked, but it has no effect on the car's operation (the mechanical key itself never need be used on the car, other than to lock the glove box or manually unlock the driver's door).

That seems to defeat the point of having a keyless ignition. Leave it to BMW to come up with something like that.

That's not the keyless system. It just functions as a "normal" system, but instead of turning the key, you press the button. In the real keyless system from BMW, you just need the key in your pocket to unlock the car and start it - you just sit inside and push the start button. Of course, it's an extra (700€), but I liked it a lot.