Sorry, I didn’t get that at all from the link. Where does it say that can happen?
Obviously not, since he drove for 125 miles with the car in that condition. It’s inconceivable to me that he drove for 125 miles, all the while trying to stop the car, then “finally” was able to stop it simply by applying the brakes. What exactly prevented him from doing so in the first place? My bet is that the only problem with that car was the nut behind the wheel.
Me too.
Yeah I caught this on slashdot.
I can’t wait for the investigation to finish. Seems like an interesting problem if there is one.
As for putting the car in neutral etc. If this car had a key card starter it probably also had all sorts of “computer control” components. Computers regularly override driver input (traction control anyone?). I remember being both amazed and frightened that the new 300M track test I went to “showed off” this feature (brake assist traction control). Sure, for a bad driver it might save their ass but as an autox driver it felt really really weird having the computer do all the work. If the computer crapped out (or rather, if the computer determined I needed “help” when I didn’t) I could see a problem like this.
Granted, it’s not in the link but that’s the general reson behind the recall.
He didn’t simply apply the brakes, he stomped on them as hard as he could. If he’s being truthful, he probably tried applying the brakes several times during that hour but only felt the need to stomp them when that toll booth came in sight. By that time, it’s likely that the police were able to clear the highway so he wouldn’t pose a danger to anyone.
Hehe! Great minds think alike 
[hijack] :: reads post :: :: looks up at the mentioned poster’s name ::
Holy shit! :eek: It ISN’T spring ears! [/hijack]
No, it isn’t Spring Ears; I noticed this a while back, but it still catches me out now and again.
[QUOTE=Lute Skywatcher]
That didn’t take long.
first off you are reading more into this quote than is there. A throttle that does not return to idle does not mean that the throttle suddenly opens wider, it means that when you lift your foot (or in this case disengage the cruise by hitting the brake) the throttle stays at the same opening that it has been. This is not what I would call sudden acceleration, just a serious lack of decelleration. (there is a difference!) Real world examples:
I used to own an old Plymouth Fury. Driving it in the snow entailed using a set throttle opening for long periods of time. After 10 minutes or so the throttle linkage would freeze, and when I took my foot off the gas the car would continue at the same speed as before. This is a failure to return to idle. Since the car did not increase its speed in any way I cannot describe this as acceleration intended or otherwise. Compare that to a TR-7 I got to work on once with a complaint of a sticking throttle. I pulled the car into my stall and cheked the throttle linkage (cable) from end to end. All was OK. I took the car for a test drive. I did a full throttle takeoff when I went to shift, and lifted my right foot, the revs kept climbing. :eek: This of course kept the speed increasing. since I was driving a stick, and my left foot was over the clutch, there was no doubt that this was not pedal mis-application. Anyway to make a long story short, the last guy that worked on the car left some debris (poppet valve of the air meter) in the intake trunk. :wally During a full throttle run this debris would get sucked into the throttle and jam it wide open causing the car to accelerate.
Furthermore if the corooded cruise on the ford in question caused the idle to stick 50 RPM higher than normal it can be described as “not returning to idle”.
Lastly about this guys website, you do realize that he is a hired gun (ex-spurt witness) for trial lawyers don’t you?
Now back to the OP. I also have my BS meter stuck firmly in the red zone. Again I don’t work on Renaults (thank OG!) but every cruise system I have ever seen has two or three different way to disengage the damn thing PLUS the power switch!
Let me describe the operation of one of the cruise system I work on
When you step on the brake the following happens:
Power to the cruise unit is interupted (One switch)
Ground to the cruise unit is interupted (different switch, this one is the brake light switch)
Vacuum to the servo is vented seperate part of the first switch
And if somehow all three of those actions failed, you could turn off the power at the turn signal switch. Or kick it into netural and the same thing would happen.
On the newer full electronic system there are even MORE safeguards. (At least on my cars)
I think this guy wanted to drive real fast and not get a ticket. I guarentee that right about now his car is being looked at by more engineers that most of us have ever seen.
Again I am no expert on Chrysler traction systems, but on the one on the cars I teach on I can say without contridiction that the computer can handle the traction/suspension/stability far better than you can. Unless of course your name is Michael Shumacher.
The shocks revalve themselves once every 500 times a second. How long does it take you to change 4 shocks? 
The stability control system makes a decision every 7 milliseconds after looking at the steering input, brake input, throttle input, yaw of the car, lateral G force, Roll G force and calculates if the car is going where the driver has it pointed. A good race driver has maybe a .1oo second reaction time. The computer has already gone through 14 decision cycles and implemented action on them by the time the driver does one.
So what happens if it breaks? Any fault in any sensor, or subsytem turns the entire system off, and sets warning lights off all over the dash along with messages. At worst you would be no worse off than if the system were not there.
Actually, there’s more to the story that what’s at that site.
Granted that’s pre-1995 models but the potential may exist elsewhere.
That site mentions another possiblity: stuck throttles. According to The Center for Auto Safety, the National Highway Traffic Administration has been investigating claims of sudden acceleration due to defective electronic throttles in Lexus cars and Toyotas.
Man get out , and stop touting your mangy skin disease
Well I am highly relieved that I’m not the only one who can’t read his name right. What annoys me most is, after the first few times I saw it (in various car-related threads) I realized what it really said, but I still read it as Sping Ears.
No-no-no.
“Spring Ears”.
Like a cross between a bunny & a Slinkee.
You know, in France they have cameras that take your picture if you’re speeding. I bet the guy got his picture taken and decided to make this story up.
He slowed down when he got to a tollbooth. HA HA.
Sorry, Lute - I’m still skeptical.
It sounds like what we’ve got is one guy who was quoted in some articles (that mysteriously don’t exist any more), saying that theoretically, one particular model of Ford could have the throttle get stuck, and that theoretically, if the brake switch just happened to fail at the same time, you wouldn’t be able to disengage the cruise control. Except he never explains why you couldn’t simply turn off the cruise control switch (usually located on the turn signal stalk).
I’m sure it’s possible that this is a real case of unintended acceleration, but I seriously doubt it. It’s extremely rare for that to happen. It’s more likely that it’s one of the vast majority of such cases that turn out to be driver error, or deception. Like the woman who bought a shitty car and couldn’t get out of her lease, so she placed a fake 911 call pretending that her car was out of control. Apparently she thought she would get the company to take the car back. What a moron.
I don’t get it. If the car really was out of control at 120 mph, you don’t think he would have “felt the need” to try as hard as he could to stop it?
No problem. So am I, I’m just saying that it’s possible that Monsieur Dequiedt isn’t just a speed demon looking for an excuse. Or maybe he’s just a good actor.
Of course, Renault doesn’t buy his story; Forbes reports the manufacturer found nothing wrong with the car and that they do not “not rule out suing him to seek compensation for damage to its brand reputation.”
I never said he was out of control. What I was getting at is slamming on the brakes would have resulted in losing the ability to steer, which certainly wouldn’t be a good thing in the middle of a busy highway.
The article said he was out of control.
If braking would have caused loss of steering ability, how is it that he succesfully did so at the toll booth, which arguably requires even more precise steering? I think you’re really reaching now.
I think we’re using different definitions of “out of control” here. He still had the ability to steer.
He stopped before the toll booth and the area had been evacuated.
The definition I meant was simply that he supposedly couldn’t stop the car, and it was going 120 mph. By definition, that’s out of control.
I don’t see anywhere in the article where it says he was waiting for te area to be evacuated. All it says is this:
There’s nothing in there about his waiting for the police to evacuate anyone. It only says he “finally” managed to stop the car, which implies that he had been trying all along. Did I miss the part where it says he didn’t want to stop because he would lose steering control?
blowero, we’re arguing past each other. Put yourself in his place, what would you do if you suddenly found yourself rocketing down a busy highway at 120 MPH? You’d try to stop. What if you couldn’t stop without presenting a greater danger to everyone else around you (front, side, and behind)? Would you try to stop anyway or wait until you were sure it was safe to do so?
I don’t see that that was the case. He drove 125 MILES before he stopped. If it were me, I would have tried to stop as soon as possible; I wouldn’t wait until a toll booth came up and then all of a sudden decide to stop.
You’re only assuming that he thought it unsafe to stop. It doesn’t say that in the article at all. This is too much speculation. Why don’t we wait until more information comes out? Until then, my bet is that there was nothing wrong with the car.