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).

--

"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.

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.

"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 ;-)

"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.

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, 4:35*pm, wrote:
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.



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

??? I have 2005 Ford 500. Has the usual (for the past 30 years at
least) LOCK, OFF, RUN,Run Positions (may have another position to run
radio, etc, only). Locks the steering in the LOCK positon with the
key still in it. I'll bet almost all other cars do the same.

Harry K

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

"Harry K" wrote

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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. He
should have his license revoked.

On 3/10/2010 5:55 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


"Harry K" wrote

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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. He
should have his license revoked.

Retroactively...

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.

wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:23:34 -0500, George
wrote:

On 3/10/2010 5:55 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

"Harry K" wrote
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
The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. He
should have his license revoked.
Retroactively...

You guys are pretty hysterical. There are probably BILLIONS of drivers
in the world who aren't aware of how to fix a leaky faucet, or which
way to turn a screw to tighten it.

I'm guessing that you aren't perfect and all knowing, either. You just
have different areas of interest than some other people. This may come
as a shock, but that doesn't make you in any way superior to any of
them.


Well, the world does need poets and English professors. *snicker*

TDD

In article , wrote:
I'm guessing that you aren't perfect and all knowing, either. You just
have different areas of interest than some other people. This may come
as a shock, but that doesn't make you in any way superior to any of
them.

No, but having the good sense to shift a runaway-accelerating auto into
neutral -- as has happened to me twice -- *does* make me superior to those who
lack that good sense. g

FWIW, neither one of those was a Toyota. One was a Buick, the other a GMC
truck.

On Mar 10, 4:53*am, wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:23:34 -0500, George
wrote:





On 3/10/2010 5:55 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

"Harry K" wrote

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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. He
should have his license revoked.

Retroactively...

You guys are pretty hysterical. There are probably BILLIONS of drivers
in the world who aren't aware of how to fix a leaky faucet, or which
way to turn a screw to tighten it.

I'm guessing that you aren't perfect and all knowing, either. You just
have different areas of interest than some other people. This may come
as a shock, but that doesn't make you in any way superior to any of
them.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So, with all the coverage of the problem on the news you think that an
owner of one of those cars _shouldn't_ have known about it _and_ the
solution to how to stop? Turning off the engine does not take a
genius, nor does shifting out of gear. Everyone out there who drives
knows how to do both.

Harry K

On Mar 10, 12:28*am, Harry K wrote:
On Mar 9, 4:35*pm, wrote:





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.

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

??? *I have 2005 Ford 500. *Has the usual (for the past 30 years at
least) LOCK, OFF, RUN,Run Positions (may have another position to run
radio, etc, only). *Locks the steering in the LOCK positon with the
key still in it. *I'll bet almost all other cars do the same.

Harry K- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, here we go again. I may have generalized when I implied all
cars work that way. But apparently you and Doug are over generalizing
too. I have two cars here, a MB and a Porsche and just tried it on
both of them and they work exactly as I described. You can turn the
ignition off, to the lock position, and the steering wheel will not
actually lock until the key is removed. When I remove the key I here
a clunk sound of the spring loaded lock mechanism and at that point,
if you turn the wheel a few degrees either way it seats and the wheel
no longer moves. I previously had a number of Pontiac Gran Prixs and
I'm pretty sure they worked that way as well. I've never encountered
one where the wheel locked without the key removed.

I'd be interested in what others find in their cars. One would think
this would be a basic safety feature, as you would not want the
steering wheel to lock easily in the emergency kind of situation we've
been talking about.

On Mar 10, 5:55*am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"Harry K" wrote



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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: *Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: *NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. *He
should have his license revoked.

Interesting, I heard the replay of the 911 call and I remember it
differently. I heard the 911 operator ask if he tried shifting into
netural and it sounded to me like he avoided the question and
responded saying something about having trouble talking on his cell
phone. I didn't hear him say no and his avoiding the question sounded
suspicious to me. I only heard it once and could have gotten it
wrong.

I posted here because of the great number of posters, some of whom might
have an opinion. I was right !!

Why people take the time to reply to a post to say that "they personally
do not care to reply" is beyond me.

My cars are 2000 and 2003 GM products and the keys are on the steering
wheel and when you turn the key off it locks the steering. Maybe if the
key is in the dash it does not lock the steering just by turning it off.

The guy in CA said he was afraid to take his hands off the steering
wheel (I think).

Sorry to have bothered the group, I will not be back.

On 03/10/2010 05:55 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


"Harry K" wrote

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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip.
He should have his license revoked.

How can somebody be too STUPID to shut the switch off.

--
LSFT

On 03/10/2010 09:33 AM, wrote:
On Mar 10, 5:55 am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"Harry K" wrote



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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. He
should have his license revoked.

Interesting, I heard the replay of the 911 call and I remember it
differently. I heard the 911 operator ask if he tried shifting into
netural and it sounded to me like he avoided the question and
responded saying something about having trouble talking on his cell
phone. I didn't hear him say no and his avoiding the question sounded
suspicious to me. I only heard it once and could have gotten it
wrong.

He was paid by GM to smear Toyota.

--
LSFT

On Mar 10, 9:59*am, LSMFT wrote:
On 03/10/2010 09:33 AM, wrote:





On Mar 10, 5:55 am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"Harry K" wrote

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

The news tonight had the recording of part of the 911 call:
Operator: *Did you try shifting to neutral?
Driver: *NO

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. *He
should have his license revoked.

Interesting, I heard the replay of the 911 call and I remember it
differently. * I heard the 911 operator ask if he tried shifting into
netural and it sounded to me like he avoided the question and
responded saying something about having trouble talking on his cell
phone. *I didn't hear him say no and his avoiding the question sounded
suspicious to me. * I only heard it once and could have gotten it
wrong.

He was paid by GM to smear Toyota.

--
LSFT- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This guy is just trying to cash in. Nothing wrong with his car.

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.

In article , wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:59:35 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
I'm guessing that you aren't perfect and all knowing, either. You just
have different areas of interest than some other people. This may come
as a shock, but that doesn't make you in any way superior to any of
them.

No, but having the good sense to shift a runaway-accelerating auto into
neutral -- as has happened to me twice -- *does* make me superior to those who
lack that good sense. g


This clearly indicates you are no where near as smart as you think.

Smarter than you, apparently, and obviously smarter than the knothead that
drove 30 miles -- THIRTY MILES -- with the throttle wide open. Each time it
happened to me, it took much less than a hundred yards to get the vehicle to a
full stop.

FWIW, neither one of those was a Toyota. One was a Buick, the other a GMC
truck.

So, you aren't very smart when buying vehicles, either. Okay.

Did you take an extra dose of dumbass this morning?

In article , wrote:
On Mar 10, 5:55=A0am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:

He later said he was afraid to because he thought the car might flip. He
should have his license revoked.

Interesting, I heard the replay of the 911 call and I remember it
differently. I heard the 911 operator ask if he tried shifting into
netural and it sounded to me like he avoided the question and
responded saying something about having trouble talking on his cell
phone. I didn't hear him say no and his avoiding the question sounded
suspicious to me. I only heard it once and could have gotten it
wrong.

Article in the paper this morning said the guy didn't shift into neutral
because he was afraid it "might slip into reverse".

Either way, he's a total idiot. How frigging stupid do you have to be to drive
for THIRTY F**KING MILES with a wide-open throttle, and not try shutting the
ignition off or shifting into neutral? And how is it that after thirty miles
of -- as he told the 911 operator -- "standing on the brakes" while the car
still continues accelerating, once the cop pulls up next to him and tells him
to stand on the brakes and apply the parking brake too, suddenly he's able to
get the car stopped quickly?

On Mar 10, 9:44*am, (Jack) wrote:
I posted here because of the great number of posters, some of whom might
have an opinion. I was right !!

Why people take the time to reply to a post to say that "they personally
do not care to reply" is beyond me.

My cars are 2000 and 2003 GM products and the keys are on the steering
wheel and when you turn the key off it locks the steering. Maybe if the
key is in the dash it does not lock the steering just by turning it off.

Go take a look and tell us which it is. Either it only locks the
steering wheel when you remove the key or else it locks it when you
turn it to the lock position. All of the cars I've had that I can
recall required the key to be removed to lock.



The guy in CA said he was afraid to take his hands off the steering
wheel (I think).

Sorry to have bothered the group, I will not be back.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

On Mar 10, 12:36*pm, wrote:
On Mar 10, 9:44*am, (Jack) wrote:

I posted here because of the great number of posters, some of whom might
have an opinion. I was right !!

Why people take the time to reply to a post to say that "they personally
do not care to reply" is beyond me.

My cars are 2000 and 2003 GM products and the keys are on the steering
wheel and when you turn the key off it locks the steering. Maybe if the
key is in the dash it does not lock the steering just by turning it off..

Go take a look and tell us which it is. *Either it only locks the
steering wheel when you remove the key or else it locks it when you
turn it to the lock position. * All of the cars I've had that I can
recall required the key to be removed to lock.





The guy in CA said he was afraid to take his hands off the steering
wheel (I think).

Sorry to have bothered the group, I will not be back.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


It most likely will not lock unless the shifter is in park.

On 3/10/2010 9:44 AM, Jack wrote:
I posted here because of the great number of posters, some of whom might
have an opinion. I was right !!

Why people take the time to reply to a post to say that "they personally
do not care to reply" is beyond me.

My cars are 2000 and 2003 GM products and the keys are on the steering
wheel and when you turn the key off it locks the steering. Maybe if the
key is in the dash it does not lock the steering just by turning it off.

The guy in CA said he was afraid to take his hands off the steering
wheel (I think).

Sorry to have bothered the group, I will not be back.

Please turn off the orange HTML stuff,
it's almost impossible to read.

Ok, I got up off my can and went 17
stairs to the garage where there are 2
GMs ... well, only one today, the other
is presently out. But, I then had to
hike back upstairs to get the keys. I
always leave the keys in the ignition
when the car is in the garage, but for
some reason they came upstairs and got
put on the table. Anyway, the 2002
Trailblazer column mounted key has 4
positions in this order.
1. Off and key removable
2. Accessory position .. key not removable
3. On
4. Spring return start
I started the car 4 then 3 and then put
it in drive. I then turned the key to 2
.... engine off, key not removable, but
accessories on.

A lot can depend on whether you have a
column mounted gear selector or console
mounted. The Trailblazer has a console
selector. BTW, the gear selector also
locks under some conditions, but I
didn't "test" that. It actually locks
the little button that allows the
selector to be moved.

Now, many of the newer cars have a
pushbutton to start turn on and start
the car. It detects the presence of you
electronic key which doesn't have to be
touching the car .... obviously, some
electronics in this type of switch.
Seeing the Toyota problems would make be
scared to have one of these pushbutton
things. It also makes me wonder how
much of the gear selector is done
electronically, even though we move that
big lever.

Also, I just heard the noon news and the
911 tape from CA. The guy said, "My
breaks are burnt and I'm trying to shut
it off." The Asheville news person said
that the car finally lost power
(whatever that means) and the car rolled
into the squad car.

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.

Jack wrote:
I posted here because of the great number of posters, some of whom might
have an opinion. I was right !!

Why people take the time to reply to a post to say that "they personally
do not care to reply" is beyond me.

My cars are 2000 and 2003 GM products and the keys are on the steering
wheel and when you turn the key off it locks the steering. Maybe if the
key is in the dash it does not lock the steering just by turning it off.

The guy in CA said he was afraid to take his hands off the steering
wheel (I think).

Sorry to have bothered the group, I will not be back.

Oh, OK. Then I won't bother to tell you to post in plain text.. BLACK
not orange! And you don't need to include that attached file, your sig
file already shows up.

On Mar 10, 12:25*pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
Article in the paper this morning said the guy didn't shift into neutral
because he was afraid it "might slip into reverse".

UNBELEIVABLE!! This is a LIFE and DEATH situation we're talking about
here.

Who gives a rat's ass about blowing up the engine or tearing out the
transmission when the alternative is DYING or KILLING
someone???!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?

People who place more importance on the condition of their car over
their lives and the lives of others, deserve what they get.

If they didn't stop their car because they were afraid of damaging it,
kill someone, and live to tell about it, they deserve to go to jail
like any other murderer.

wrote in message
...
On Mar 10, 12:25 pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
Article in the paper this morning said the guy didn't shift into neutral
because he was afraid it "might slip into reverse".

UNBELEIVABLE!! This is a LIFE and DEATH situation we're talking about
here.

Who gives a rat's ass about blowing up the engine or tearing out the
transmission when the alternative is DYING or KILLING
someone???!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?

People who place more importance on the condition of their car over
their lives and the lives of others, deserve what they get.

If they didn't stop their car because they were afraid of damaging it,
kill someone, and live to tell about it, they deserve to go to jail
like any other murderer.

===========

I didn't believe him then, and I don't believe him now.

Cheri

On Mar 10, 1:27*pm, "Cheri" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Mar 10, 12:25 pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:

Article in the paper this morning said the guy didn't shift into neutral
because he was afraid it "might slip into reverse".

UNBELEIVABLE!! *This is a LIFE and DEATH situation we're talking about
here.

Who gives a rat's ass about blowing up the engine or tearing out the
transmission when the alternative is DYING or KILLING
someone???!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?

People who place more importance on the condition of their car over
their lives and the lives of others, deserve what they get.

If they didn't stop their car because they were afraid of damaging it,
kill someone, and live to tell about it, they deserve to go to jail
like any other murderer.

===========

I didn't believe him then, and I don't believe him now.

Cheri

I think maybe you give a lot of these people credit for having more
brains than they do. Like how about he wasn't thinking that putting
it into reverse would blow out the drivetrain. He could think that
the car would go instantly to 94mph in reverse and he'd be killed by
the sudden g force. LOL

I agree a lot about this story stinks. One of the most interesting
being the car was apparently on the recall list, but when he took it
to the dealer they said it wasn't and turned him away. Then suddenly
this happens. Could be the guy knew it was on the recall list and
figured this was a good way to try to make a case or at least be a
media star.

On Mar 10, 6:28*am, wrote:
On Mar 10, 12:28*am, Harry K wrote:





On Mar 9, 4:35*pm, wrote:

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.

- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

??? *I have 2005 Ford 500. *Has the usual (for the past 30 years at
least) LOCK, OFF, RUN,Run Positions (may have another position to run
radio, etc, only). *Locks the steering in the LOCK positon with the
key still in it. *I'll bet almost all other cars do the same.

Harry K- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, here we go again. * I may have generalized when I implied all
cars work that way. *But apparently you and Doug are over generalizing
too. *I have two cars here, a MB and a Porsche and just tried it on
both of them and they work exactly as I described. *You can turn the
ignition off, to the lock position, and the steering wheel will not
actually lock until the key is removed. * When I remove the key I here
a clunk sound of the spring loaded lock mechanism and at that point,
if you turn the wheel a few degrees either way it seats and the wheel
no longer moves. *I previously had a number of Pontiac Gran Prixs and
I'm pretty sure they worked that way as well. *I've never encountered
one where the wheel locked without the key removed.

I'd be interested in what others find in their cars. * One would think
this would be a basic safety feature, as you would not want the
steering wheel to lock easily in the emergency kind of situation we've
been talking about.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hmmm...now you have me wondering. Gonna check it the next time I am
in either vehicle.

Things you know all your life and then find they are wrong...won't be
the first time.

In any case the point is moot as it is never necessary (AFAIK) to go
all the way to the lock position to turn the engine off. I wonder if
it can be done while moving. Gonna try that as well.

Harry K