I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

1) No, only requires locking to remove key from ignition

2) Far better to have manual braking and no acceleration than burn out
brakes w/ continued acceleration

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Why not, indeed...

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

This seems to be a bone of contention that I've seen no clarification on
other than I think it's Toyota's recommendation (I say "I think" because
the reports I've seen are secondhand, not directly from Toyota--either
testimony or corporate statements. There seem to have been precious few
of those until the "technical presentation" to attempt to discredit the
firmware failure idea.)

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

most home owners have autos??? Plus, it's a current topic of some
interest. If you're not, mark thread for not following in your
newsreader (as I'm getting ready to do).

--

On Mar 9, 10:50*am, dpb wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

1) No, only requires locking to remove key from ignition

To clarify, what he's saying is that if you turn off the ignition the
steering wheel will not lock unless you also remove the key.




2) Far better to have manual braking and no acceleration than burn out
brakes w/ continued acceleration

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Why not, indeed...

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

Some people have claimed that they tried, but could not. Are they
telling the truth? Who knows. But take a look at the other thread
here I just posted. You have a Toyota again in San Diego, with
police involvement for a long time and from the reports so far, it
doesn't appear anyone had sense enough to just put it in neutral. And
it was in San Diego that a highway patrol officer and his family died
in a crash in a Lexus where the car went along long enough for a 911
call to be made. You'd think they surely would have learned
something from that one, but maybe not.




This seems to be a bone of contention that I've seen no clarification on
other than I think it's Toyota's recommendation (I say "I think" because
the reports I've seen are secondhand, not directly from Toyota--either
testimony or corporate statements. *There seem to have been precious few
of those until the "technical presentation" to attempt to discredit the
firmware failure idea.)

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

most home owners have autos??? *Plus, it's a current topic of some
interest. *If you're not, mark thread for not following in your
newsreader (as I'm getting ready to do).

--

In article , wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:50=A0am, dpb wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

1) No, only requires locking to remove key from ignition

To clarify, what he's saying is that if you turn off the ignition the
steering wheel will not lock unless you also remove the key.

Incorrect. The steering wheel locks as soon as the ignition switch is turned
to the position in which the key _can_ be removed, even if the key remains in
the lock cylinder.




2) Far better to have manual braking and no acceleration than burn out
brakes w/ continued acceleration

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Why not, indeed...

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

Some people have claimed that they tried, but could not. Are they
telling the truth? Who knows. But take a look at the other thread
here I just posted. You have a Toyota again in San Diego, with
police involvement for a long time and from the reports so far, it
doesn't appear anyone had sense enough to just put it in neutral. And
it was in San Diego that a highway patrol officer and his family died
in a crash in a Lexus where the car went along long enough for a 911
call to be made. You'd think they surely would have learned
something from that one, but maybe not.




This seems to be a bone of contention that I've seen no clarification on
other than I think it's Toyota's recommendation (I say "I think" because
the reports I've seen are secondhand, not directly from Toyota--either
testimony or corporate statements. =A0There seem to have been precious fe=
w
of those until the "technical presentation" to attempt to discredit the
firmware failure idea.)

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

most home owners have autos??? =A0Plus, it's a current topic of some
interest. =A0If you're not, mark thread for not following in your
newsreader (as I'm getting ready to do).

--

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:21:15 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article , wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:50=A0am, dpb wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

1) No, only requires locking to remove key from ignition

To clarify, what he's saying is that if you turn off the ignition the
steering wheel will not lock unless you also remove the key.

Incorrect. The steering wheel locks as soon as the ignition switch is turned
to the position in which the key _can_ be removed, even if the key remains in
the lock cylinder.

How old is the car you are driving???
For at least the last 10 years or more, the steering lock can NOT
engage without removing the key.

wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:50 am, dpb wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
....

2) Far better to have manual braking and no acceleration than burn out
brakes w/ continued acceleration

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?
Why not, indeed...

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

Some people have claimed that they tried, but could not. Are they
telling the truth? Who knows. But take a look at the other thread
here I just posted. You have a Toyota again in San Diego, with
police involvement for a long time and from the reports so far, it
doesn't appear anyone had sense enough to just put it in neutral. ...

Just saw the driver say he was unfamiliar w/ the gearshift -- okay, so
who's car was it? If it was his as was indicated as he took it to the
dealership earlier for the fix, that's his bad...

Then, he followed that up w/ the astounding statement he thought (or
"didn't know if" may have been the actual words, I don't recall
precisely just now?) the car would flip if he did shift to
neutral...what in the world would possibly make one think something like
that? And, he eventually turned it off -- why wouldn't one think of
that before on one's own long before reaching 90 mph????

One good thing in this incident other than the doofus did escape is that
Toyota and DOT engineers are going to examine the particular vehicle
that did malfunction. Hopefully Toyota won't have a chance to clean it
up before independent parties are there for a real forensic examination.

--

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:21:05 -0600, dpb wrote:

Then, he followed that up w/ the astounding statement he thought (or
"didn't know if" may have been the actual words, I don't recall
precisely just now?) the car would flip if he did shift to
neutral...what in the world would possibly make one think something like
that? And, he eventually turned it off -- why wouldn't one think of
that before on one's own long before reaching 90 mph????

San Francisco got first vote. San Diego ended up with all the lawyers.

On Mar 9, 5:21*pm, dpb wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:50 am, dpb wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
...

2) Far better to have manual braking and no acceleration than burn out
brakes w/ continued acceleration

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?
Why not, indeed...

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

Some people have claimed that they tried, but could not. Are they
telling the truth? *Who knows. * * But take a look at the other thread
here I just posted. * You have a Toyota again in San Diego, with
police involvement for a long time and from the reports so far, it
doesn't appear anyone had sense enough to just put it in neutral. *....

Just saw the driver say he was unfamiliar w/ the gearshift -- okay, so
who's car was it? *If it was his as was indicated as he took it to the
dealership earlier for the fix, that's his bad...

Then, he followed that up w/ the astounding statement he thought (or
"didn't know if" may have been the actual words, I don't recall
precisely just now?) the car would flip if he did shift to
neutral...what in the world would possibly make one think something like
that? *And, he eventually turned it off -- why wouldn't one think of
that before on one's own long before reaching 90 mph????

One good thing in this incident other than the doofus did escape is that
Toyota and DOT engineers are going to examine the particular vehicle
that did malfunction. *Hopefully Toyota won't have a chance to clean it
up before independent parties are there for a real forensic examination.

--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Near as I could follow the clips, he wasn't told, and didn't try, to
turn it off before slowing way down.

This is the second car that Toyota has had for a good exam. First one
was sitting in its lot with smoking brakes. Never heard what they
found on that one.

Harry k

"Gordon Shumway" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Was I drunk or absent the day you were put in charge?

Steve B wrote:
"Gordon Shumway" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away
with power brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car,
and then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Was I drunk or absent the day you were put in charge?

No reason you couldn't have been both. I often am.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
news
Steve B wrote:
"Gordon Shumway" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away
with power brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car,
and then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Was I drunk or absent the day you were put in charge?

No reason you couldn't have been both. I often am.

Was that YOU I was with. I really don't remember.

Steve ;-)

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 08:20:10 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Gordon Shumway" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Was I drunk or absent the day you were put in charge?


Both.

"Gordon Shumway" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 08:20:10 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Gordon Shumway" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Was I drunk or absent the day you were put in charge?


Both.

Buhbye.

On Mar 9, 9:38*am, Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

WTF does this have to do with home repair?

Home Owners Repair, got it.

Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away
with power brakes.

I have never owned a car that could not be turned off without locking the
steering wheel, or that the power brakes would not stop you at least once after
turning off the engine. Turning off the engine while moving merely removes the
power and the power steering. So the car takes a little more force to steer.
Even after exhausting the power brake vacuum reservoir, the brakes still work,
just not as strongly.

Bob F wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:11:24 -0500, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away
with power brakes.

I have never owned a car that could not be turned off without locking the
steering wheel, or that the power brakes would not stop you at least once after
turning off the engine. Turning off the engine while moving merely removes the
power and the power steering. So the car takes a little more force to steer.
Even after exhausting the power brake vacuum reservoir, the brakes still work,
just not as strongly.


Hi,
Driving a car with manual shift has an advantage.
In olden days we all had brakes w/o powe(vacuum) boost.

On Mar 9, 10:11*am, (Jack) wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.



Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!

Essentially, the cars are death traps straight out of a Stephen King
novel.

Why is there no mass hysteria over this?

Why do we not hear ANYTHING about shifting into neutral on the news?

Who the hell at Toyota allowed a car with an infinite death loop in
the programming to get out to the public?

The computer thinks you want to go fast, and you're flooring the gas
pedal. To protect itself, it won't let you shift out of drive. You
can't shut the engine off either because there's no "accessory"
position on the ignition switch anymore; it's either ON or LOCK.

These are the kinds of oversights a high-school level computer
programmer would make.

On Mar 10, 10:08*am, wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:11*am, (Jack) wrote:

I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.
Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!

Essentially, the cars are death traps straight out of a Stephen King
novel.

Why is there no mass hysteria over this?

Why do we not hear ANYTHING about shifting into neutral on the news?

Who the hell at Toyota allowed a car with an infinite death loop in
the programming to get out to the public?

The computer thinks you want to go fast, and you're flooring the gas
pedal. To protect itself, it won't let you shift out of drive. You
can't shut the engine off either because there's no "accessory"
position on the ignition switch anymore; it's either ON or LOCK.

These are the kinds of oversights a high-school level computer
programmer would make.

The "according to some people" are only those that are speculating.
There have been abzero reliable cites to that.

Harry K

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:08:48 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Mar 9, 10:11Â*am, (Jack) wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.



Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!

Not true of Toyota or any car I've ever driven -or worked on. The ONLY
car in history that I am aware of that could NOT be shifted into
neutral at speed was Packhard with Ultramatic transmission in the
early-mid fifties.

Essentially, the cars are death traps straight out of a Stephen King
novel.

Why is there no mass hysteria over this?

Why do we not hear ANYTHING about shifting into neutral on the news?

Who the hell at Toyota allowed a car with an infinite death loop in
the programming to get out to the public?

The computer thinks you want to go fast, and you're flooring the gas
pedal. To protect itself, it won't let you shift out of drive. You
can't shut the engine off either because there's no "accessory"
position on the ignition switch anymore; it's either ON or LOCK.

These are the kinds of oversights a high-school level computer
programmer would make.


If it was true - which id most definitely is NOT.

On Mar 10, 6:39*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:08:48 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Mar 9, 10:11*am, (Jack) wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!

Not true of Toyota or any car I've ever driven -or worked on. The ONLY
car in history that I am aware of that could NOT be shifted into
neutral at speed was Packhard with Ultramatic transmission in the
early-mid fifties.







Essentially, the cars are death traps straight out of a Stephen King
novel.

Why is there no mass hysteria over this?

Why do we not hear ANYTHING about shifting into neutral on the news?

Who the hell at Toyota allowed a car with an infinite death loop in
the programming to get out to the public?

The computer thinks you want to go fast, and you're flooring the gas
pedal. To protect itself, it won't let you shift out of drive. You
can't shut the engine off either because there's no "accessory"
position on the ignition switch anymore; it's either ON or LOCK.

These are the kinds of oversights a high-school level computer
programmer would make.

If it was true - which id most definitely is NOT.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Yeah, from everything I've heard so far, no one is saying that any of
the Toyotas are built so that they can't be shifted into neutral while
moving. I still think you need a full investigation that includes
knowing how the particular transmissions are designed, what interlocks
they have, looking at the actual remains of the cars, etc. But
clearly in this latest incident, the guy is NOT claiming that he tried
to put it in neutral, but couldn't.

On another note, there was an AP story today that says Toyota, like
other manufacturers, has a black box type system built into the air
bag system. In the event of air bag deployment it captures key data
from a few seconds before the crash until a couple seconds after the
crash. While the other manufacturers have been open about their
system and make it known how to access it, Toyota has continually
stone-walled anyone getting access to it. Even in court cases over
the years, Toyota has responded to requests with sheets of data with
most fields blank, etc. They have also given different accounts of
what info the system actually captures. For example at one time they
said it didn't capture braking info, then later did, etc. It
appears the system does capture a lot of info though which could be
useful in figuring out what is going on, like throttle position,
brake, speed, acceleration, etc. The story also said that as of now,
there is only one notebook PC in the US capable of accessing the
information from the cars.

wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:39 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:08:48 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Mar 9, 10:11 am, (Jack) wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.
Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?
Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?
According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!
Not true of Toyota or any car I've ever driven -or worked on. The ONLY
car in history that I am aware of that could NOT be shifted into
neutral at speed was Packhard with Ultramatic transmission in the
early-mid fifties.







Essentially, the cars are death traps straight out of a Stephen King
novel.
Why is there no mass hysteria over this?
Why do we not hear ANYTHING about shifting into neutral on the news?
Who the hell at Toyota allowed a car with an infinite death loop in
the programming to get out to the public?
The computer thinks you want to go fast, and you're flooring the gas
pedal. To protect itself, it won't let you shift out of drive. You
can't shut the engine off either because there's no "accessory"
position on the ignition switch anymore; it's either ON or LOCK.
These are the kinds of oversights a high-school level computer
programmer would make.
If it was true - which id most definitely is NOT.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Yeah, from everything I've heard so far, no one is saying that any of
the Toyotas are built so that they can't be shifted into neutral while
moving. I still think you need a full investigation that includes
knowing how the particular transmissions are designed, what interlocks
they have, looking at the actual remains of the cars, etc. But
clearly in this latest incident, the guy is NOT claiming that he tried
to put it in neutral, but couldn't.

On another note, there was an AP story today that says Toyota, like
other manufacturers, has a black box type system built into the air
bag system. In the event of air bag deployment it captures key data
from a few seconds before the crash until a couple seconds after the
crash. While the other manufacturers have been open about their
system and make it known how to access it, Toyota has continually
stone-walled anyone getting access to it. Even in court cases over
the years, Toyota has responded to requests with sheets of data with
most fields blank, etc. They have also given different accounts of
what info the system actually captures. For example at one time they
said it didn't capture braking info, then later did, etc. It
appears the system does capture a lot of info though which could be
useful in figuring out what is going on, like throttle position,
brake, speed, acceleration, etc. The story also said that as of now,
there is only one notebook PC in the US capable of accessing the
information from the cars.

If people knew that a certain brand of automobile was spying on them,
I'm sure many people would avoid that brand. I'm very distrustful of
the GM OnStar system especially after the government has gotten its
hands on GM. I know it's already being used to track certain owners.
Certain governments don't want their diplomats driving such cars.

TDD

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:26:05 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Mar 10, 6:39Â*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:08:48 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Mar 9, 10:11Â*am, (Jack) wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!

Not true of Toyota or any car I've ever driven -or worked on. The ONLY
car in history that I am aware of that could NOT be shifted into
neutral at speed was Packhard with Ultramatic transmission in the
early-mid fifties.







Essentially, the cars are death traps straight out of a Stephen King
novel.

Why is there no mass hysteria over this?

Why do we not hear ANYTHING about shifting into neutral on the news?

Who the hell at Toyota allowed a car with an infinite death loop in
the programming to get out to the public?

The computer thinks you want to go fast, and you're flooring the gas
pedal. To protect itself, it won't let you shift out of drive. You
can't shut the engine off either because there's no "accessory"
position on the ignition switch anymore; it's either ON or LOCK.

These are the kinds of oversights a high-school level computer
programmer would make.

If it was true - which id most definitely is NOT.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Yeah, from everything I've heard so far, no one is saying that any of
the Toyotas are built so that they can't be shifted into neutral while
moving. I still think you need a full investigation that includes
knowing how the particular transmissions are designed, what interlocks
they have, looking at the actual remains of the cars, etc. But
clearly in this latest incident, the guy is NOT claiming that he tried
to put it in neutral, but couldn't.

The law REQUIRES they can be put into neutral

On another note, there was an AP story today that says Toyota, like
other manufacturers, has a black box type system built into the air
bag system. In the event of air bag deployment it captures key data
from a few seconds before the crash until a couple seconds after the
crash. While the other manufacturers have been open about their
system and make it known how to access it, Toyota has continually
stone-walled anyone getting access to it. Even in court cases over
the years, Toyota has responded to requests with sheets of data with
most fields blank, etc. They have also given different accounts of
what info the system actually captures. For example at one time they
said it didn't capture braking info, then later did, etc. It
appears the system does capture a lot of info though which could be
useful in figuring out what is going on, like throttle position,
brake, speed, acceleration, etc. The story also said that as of now,
there is only one notebook PC in the US capable of accessing the
information from the cars.

I doubt THAT is true. Any forensic computer tech could get the data
out of the box. Might not be able to make sense of it though--. It's
likely encoded - but if an enterprising hacker WANTED to know badly
enough, a couple days work would crack the code -guaranteed.

"According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!"

This is what I was hopping someone could tell me. YOU CAN NOT PUT IT IN
NEUTRAL!!!

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.

Jack wrote:
"According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!"

This is what I was hopping someone could tell me. YOU CAN NOT PUT IT IN
NEUTRAL!!!

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.

Damn, he said he would not be back.

knock knock
who's there?
Orange.
Orange who?
Orange you glad I use black text!

On Mar 11, 7:55*am, Tony wrote:
Jack wrote:
"According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!"

This is what I was hopping someone could tell me. YOU CAN NOT PUT IT IN
NEUTRAL!!!

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.

Damn, he said he would not be back.

knock knock
who's there?
Orange.
Orange who?
Orange you glad I use black text!

And still ignoring the FACT that no one has cited anything showing
they _cannot_ be shifted to reverse - only speculation.

I guess when you are stupid, it is easier to remain that way rather
than trying to learn... at least it seems so in his case.

Harry K

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:22:10 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Mar 11, 7:55Â*am, Tony wrote:
Jack wrote:
"According to some replies I have seen, the car WILL NOT shift into
neutral, even though you put the shift lever there. The computer is
programmed to leave the car in gear to prevent damage to the engine!!!"

This is what I was hopping someone could tell me. YOU CAN NOT PUT IT IN
NEUTRAL!!!

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.

Damn, he said he would not be back.

knock knock
who's there?
Orange.
Orange who?
Orange you glad I use black text!

And still ignoring the FACT that no one has cited anything showing
they _cannot_ be shifted to reverse - only speculation.

I guess when you are stupid, it is easier to remain that way rather
than trying to learn... at least it seems so in his case.

Harry K


Only two things are infinite. The universe, and stupid.

"Jack" wrote

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.


Two comments:
1. Newsgroups are supposed to be plain text as it eliminates a lot of
problems between news readers
2. You say "Don't read it" but in fact, many can't read it because of the
light color. You may think it look snazzy, but it hurts the eyes of others.

OK, one ore comment.
We come hear to learn and to help. If you want to be treaded special, it is
not going to happen. You are very welcome to join the discussions and
start new ones but to have a combative attitude you'll spoil your own fun.
Learn how to do plain text on Web TV. It can be done.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
"Jack" wrote

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.


Two comments:
1. Newsgroups are supposed to be plain text as it eliminates a lot of
problems between news readers
2. You say "Don't read it" but in fact, many can't read it because of
the light color. You may think it look snazzy, but it hurts the eyes of
others.

OK, one ore comment.
We come hear to learn and to help. If you want to be treaded special,
it is not going to happen. You are very welcome to join the
discussions and start new ones but to have a combative attitude you'll
spoil your own fun. Learn how to do plain text on Web TV. It can be done.

I suppose he could be reported to web TV for using other than plain text
where it is not allowed, but it's much easier if the offender simply
complies with the rules.

Tony wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
"Jack" wrote

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.


Two comments:
1. Newsgroups are supposed to be plain text as it eliminates a lot of
problems between news readers
2. You say "Don't read it" but in fact, many can't read it because of
the light color. You may think it look snazzy, but it hurts the eyes
of others.

OK, one ore comment.
We come hear to learn and to help. If you want to be treaded special,
it is not going to happen. You are very welcome to join the
discussions and start new ones but to have a combative attitude you'll
spoil your own fun. Learn how to do plain text on Web TV. It can be done.

I suppose he could be reported to web TV for using other than plain text
where it is not allowed, but it's much easier if the offender simply
complies with the rules.

RULES?! WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING RULES!!

TDD

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
"Jack" wrote

You do not like the color of my print ... Don't read it.


Two comments:
1. Newsgroups are supposed to be plain text as it eliminates a lot of
problems between news readers
2. You say "Don't read it" but in fact, many can't read it because
of the light color. You may think it look snazzy, but it hurts the
eyes of others.
OK, one ore comment.
We come hear to learn and to help. If you want to be treaded
special, it is not going to happen. You are very welcome to join
the discussions and start new ones but to have a combative attitude
you'll spoil your own fun. Learn how to do plain text on Web TV. It
can be done.

Then again, since I only read plain text, I had no problem reading hisa text.

Jack wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?



Well, it can on MY car. I routinely shift into neutral many times a day,
sometimes at speeds over 50 MPH!

'Course I have a manual, 5-speed, transmission...

HeyBub wrote:
Jack wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?



Well, it can on MY car. I routinely shift into neutral many times a day,
sometimes at speeds over 50 MPH!

'Course I have a manual, 5-speed, transmission...

I do it all the time on my 2000 chevy 3500 van, with an automatic
transmission and my 2002 Saturn SL2, also automatic. There are a couple
mile long declines I drive on and often take it out of gear and coast.

Tony wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Jack wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with
power brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car,
and then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?



Well, it can on MY car. I routinely shift into neutral many times a
day, sometimes at speeds over 50 MPH!

'Course I have a manual, 5-speed, transmission...

I do it all the time on my 2000 chevy 3500 van, with an automatic
transmission and my 2002 Saturn SL2, also automatic. There are a
couple mile long declines I drive on and often take it out of gear
and coast.

My '94 Caravan with an electronically controlled automatic does the same.

On Mar 11, 11:59*am, "Bob F" wrote:
My '94 Caravan with an electronically controlled automatic does the same.

What, we don't have any readers here with a toyota prius?

I know a couple of prius owners and they're not willing to do a full-
throttle shift-to-neutral test on their cars.

I really want to see if the stuff I've been reading about the computer
not letting the transmission shift into neutral to protect the engine
are true.

On Mar 11, 9:43*am, wrote:
On Mar 11, 11:59*am, "Bob F" wrote:

My '94 Caravan with an electronically controlled automatic does the same.

What, we don't have any readers here with a toyota prius?

I know a couple of prius owners and they're not willing to do a full-
throttle shift-to-neutral test on their cars.

I really want to see if the stuff I've been reading about the computer
not letting the transmission shift into neutral to protect the engine
are true.

Almosst certainly _not_ true but it would be nice to have an official
source.

No need for the Prius owners to do a full throttle test, just driving
normally is good enough. The claim from the "speculators" is that
they cannot be shifted while moving.

Of course when it is proven that they can be shifted while moving they
will then claim "but can it be done on the 5th Tuesday of a month"

Harry K

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:43:37 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Mar 11, 11:59Â*am, "Bob F" wrote:
My '94 Caravan with an electronically controlled automatic does the same.

What, we don't have any readers here with a toyota prius?

I know a couple of prius owners and they're not willing to do a full-
throttle shift-to-neutral test on their cars.

I really want to see if the stuff I've been reading about the computer
not letting the transmission shift into neutral to protect the engine
are true.

Not true. The engine protects itself with a "rev limitter" which
selectively miss-fires the engine to limit speed to a "safe" level by
cutting out fuel injection (not spark)

On 3/11/10 9:43 AM, wrote:
On Mar 11, 11:59 am, "Bob wrote:
My '94 Caravan with an electronically controlled automatic does the same.

What, we don't have any readers here with a toyota prius?

I know a couple of prius owners and they're not willing to do a full-
throttle shift-to-neutral test on their cars.

I really want to see if the stuff I've been reading about the computer
not letting the transmission shift into neutral to protect the engine
are true.

My 2008 Saturn is drive by wire and the computer does not complain or
prevent me from putting it into neutral at any speed.

On Mar 11, 7:59*am, Tony wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Jack wrote:
I do not have one of the key-less cars with the start button so
turning
off the car would 1)lock the steering wheel and 2)do away with power
brakes.

Why not put the car in neutral, and the brake would stop the car, and
then you could shut it off?

Can the problem cars not be shifted into neutral when this happens?

Well, it can on MY car. I routinely shift into neutral many times a day,
sometimes at speeds over 50 MPH!

'Course I have a manual, 5-speed, transmission...

I do it all the time on my 2000 chevy 3500 van, with an automatic
transmission and my 2002 Saturn SL2, also automatic. *There are a couple
mile long declines I drive on and often take it out of gear and coast.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

2005 Ford 500 - shiftable into neutral, key turns off (doesn't lock
wheel), etc.

Harry K