Not exactly.
Could something have caused the transmission to get stuck between sequential and automatic?
You were the ONLY person in this thread to keep insisting that it was mechanical failure, and that Renault is evil for saying it wasn’t. Did you forget all the links you posted about unintended acceleration? And you’re the only one who’s a big enough jackass to make a picayune quibble about what “virtually impossible” means. But go ahead and pretend you’re on our side now, if it makes you feel better.
You castigate me for supposedly not taking them into consideration, THEN for supposedly taking them at face value.
Dude, I think you whooshed yourself. :rolleyes:
The ONLY thing I’ve been insisting is that it MAY HAVE BEEN a mecahnical failure - I never said it WAS. Try reading instead of arguing.
You’re combining two statements. The issue is that you are evidently taking two sources at face value while ignoring all the others.
I’ve found something else to take into consideration:
I couldn’t find a good pic of the Vel Satis gear selector, but I suppose it is similar to this one: http://www.hyundai.co.uk/showroom/images/interior/santafe_3.jpg
When the selector is in D, you can push it sideways. Then, if you push it towards the + symbol it shifts up and if you pull it to the - it shifts down.
What the article you quoted says, is that even in sequential mode, the system can still change gears automatically. For example, say you are in fourth gear, the RPM is 4000 and you start braking. When the RPM reach about 1000, the tranny will shift down in order to protect the engine from stalling.
Similarly, say you are accelerating hard in second gear. The tranny will automatically shift up when the RPM approach the redline.
There’s no way the car could get stuck to sequential mode. You simply push the lever sideways to D and then upwards to N.
BTW, an auto tranny with sequential mode has nothing to do with a real sequential gearbox like those on racecars.
Thanks, but that’s not quite what I was asking. I was wondering if these transmissions could get caught between modes, thus not being in either one.
Oh, and if it is possible, would the driver not be able to shift into neutral?
Quick answers: no and no. 
Well, there goes that theory.
And they have speed cameras in England, and in Charlotte, NC, and probably lots of other places.
Maybe I’m not being clear enough. Only the sources which qoute La Parisien say anything about Dequiedt stopping by stomping on the brakes. With all other sources - Reuters, for example - saying that he cut the engine but mention nothing else about how he stopped, it should cast doubt on La Parisien and those who quote it. It might even explain why Renault didn’t find any abnormal brake wear. blowero, however, continues to ignore those points for whatever reason.
Dog80 - the poster who started this thread - has now suggested that there might indeed have been a problem, one which was caused by the drive-by-wire system. Now, ask yourselves if this is a likely scenario. Guy accelerates to pass a truck, finds he can’t slow down, panics, calls the cops for assistance, they make a path for him, tell him how to cut the engine, and he coasts to a stop. End of story. Did it happen this way? Hell if I know, I’m just tossing out a theory.
No I’m not. I said:
Those two things are not combined. They are contrasted.
No, that’s the strawman that you made up. I have done nothing of the kind. Try reading the real thread, not the one in your head.
There are so many things wrong with what you’re saying, I don’t even know where to begin:
First of all, who gives a flying fuck if he “stomped on the brakes”, or pulled out the keycard. The point is that he should have been able to stop the car, ergo his story is bullshit.
Second, the part about stomping on the brakes is a QUOTE of Dequiedt. Of course the other papers that picked up the story got it from the La Parisien article, because THEY’RE PROBABLY THE ONES WHO INTERVIEWED Dequiedt. Dumbass.
Third, the argument that Dequiedt is full of shit does NOT hinge on whether he stomped on the brakes or not. That point notwithstanding, the more likely explanation for the quote appearing in La Parisien and not in other sources is that DEQUIEDT WAS LYING WHEN HE SAID IT. Either that, or he was having such an intense panic attack that he didn’t really remember WHAT he did.
Fourth, not that it matters, but at least THREE sources have been linked to here that say he used the brakes to stop the car, not TWO, as you claim. The ones that don’t mention it are the ones that don’t quote Dequiedt. Again, not that it matters. I almost didn’t want to bring this up, because you will undoubtedly believe I am trying to engage you in your stupid argument and try to seize on it.
Fifth, if you actually read your own article that you posted, you’d know that Renault said he SHOULD have braked, and that it is therefore suspicious that the brakes showed no wear. What you fail to understand is that not trying the brakes would make Dequeidt MORE of a dumbass, not less.
Sixth, you need to stop obsessing about this “brakes” thing. You’re obviously getting a big boner about it because in your delusional mind, you believe you have scored some big point in the argument. I assure you nothing could be further from the truth.
Seventh, fuck you.
Correct taht he should have been able to stop the car. I reserve the right to hear more from him before I decide his story is bullshit or not.
Yes, but is the quote or the translation is accurate?
Both are equally possible.
So I missed one, big deal. Again, how do we know the quote or the translation is accurate?
There you go again, assuming what I understand and what I don’t. Besides, is level of dumbassness has no bearing.
The only reason this got on the brakes subject is because I thought you you put it there. My apologies.
Thanks for clarifying your position. We should have done this 50 posts ago.
I only mentioned that because you seemed to think it was a big deal. Remember how I didn’t even respond to your little “article tally” at first, and how you insisted that I respond, and then kept harping on the point, even though I repeatedly said it was a non-issue?
Anyway, there’s no point in going on here, because we’re obviously in agreement about this guy.
There is an issue here, not the numbers but the fact that the only other source of Dequiedt quotes seems to be The Mirror. We have nothing reliable to compare against the quotes from La Parisien.
'Bout time you noticed.
And apparently you still want to harp on it. :rolleyes:
Yeah, I noticed you changed your story. 
[/quote]
I think you just like to have the last word, so, pending any further information coming out, and since I’m bored with this discussion now, have at it. The last word is yours. Enjoy…
Look, all I’m asking is for you to pay attention to what I’ve been saying instead of pelting me with straw. If I’m asking the impossible then fuck you, too.
Could someone please tell me why I’ve been arguing with a horse?