Toyota Runaway Cause: Electronic Throttle/Cruise Control?

I know that a properly engaged parking brake will hold a vehicle against the force of the engine at idle with an automatic transmission in gear.

Kinda like the (perhaps apocryphal) story of the railroad engineer testifying at a trial. "The locomotive then struck the illegally parked car...." The lawyer said, "AHA, you can't possibly KNOW the car was illegaly parked!" "Of course I can," the engineer said, "because the locomotive hit it."

In fact, a properly engaged and adjusted brake will hold the engine when a load is applied FROM idle.

:)

A properly functioning and engaged parking brake has reasonable restraining force. (My old 428 Cobrajet would, however, laugh at parking brakes).

A transmission in Park will probably hold more. I have never had a Ford slip out of Park, but I have darn sure broken a parking pawl in some of the early trannies.

The engine wasn't running. You know nothing of this accident. Why pretend that you do?

How did the car back over the guy if the engine were not running? Please enlighten us.

She parallel parked on a hill in front of a Laundromat. As she was unloading her laundry from the trunk the car rolled back, crushing her into another parked car. A broken bone pierced an artery and she bleed to death. The indicator pointed at Park but the car was not in Park. It was a

That is a real shame, and I am sorry that this happened to your friend. It is hard to guess exactly what may have happened. I was taught to park with the wheels oriented so that the curb (if any) would provide secondary restraint for the car, to use Park, and to set the parking brake as well.

The parking brake is really not much of a restraint on some cars. The transmission Park should be a lot stronger, but the indicator could have been off, the pawl could have snapped, or maybe the transmission jumped out of park as you say.

Did her survivors sue Ford?

Yes. The orphaned children received a modest settlement.

Actually the ultimate holding force of a parking pawl is relatively low. At least on all the automatic transmissions I've had apart. Generally, the pawl is constructed in such a way (usually with a spring on the wedge that presses into gaps between a rotating cog and the case) that it will momentarily disengage when a certain force is exceeded- presumably to prevent damage from someone accidentally engaging park while moving.

I have. The stories aren't fabrications- some Ford shift detents on some models of a certain era were very sloppy and wouldn't hold well. The weight of the column shift lever could drop them into gear when you slammed the door, for example.

I'm certainly not trying to minimize a horrible loss. But if the brake had been properly set, and a front wheel had been properly cramped against the curb (as is REQUIRED by law in some cities - San Diego comes to mind) this might not have happened even without the vehicle being in "park." When parking on a steep hill, I personally don't trust any ONE mechanism ("park," the parking brake, or cramping the wheel, leaving a manual trans in 1st or reverse, etc) to protect me. I use all of them combined.

Steve wrote in news:TqednQ_uQfByO2DXnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@texas.net:

transmission

Generally,

the shift from park problem was ONLY a problem when the driver did not make sure the shift lever was down into the park position on the coloum shift quadrent. every instance that I saw that was a problem was mostly driver error. they threw the lever into park and often it didn`t drop into the notch. so the driver said it was in park, but they didn`t fully engauge the quadrent and so any jar could let it slip out of place. It might not have been the absoult best design but I contend every one was driver error. We never had a second complaint when shown and explained to the customer. problem solved. KB