Turning the X5 off in an Emergency
 

All,

I brought this up earlier, prior to the massive Toyota recall, and many complained I was misinformed in that the stuck throttle was the result of floor mats.

We all now know that is not the case, and has resulted in numerous accidents when vehicles have accelerated due drive-by-wire malfunctions and owners who have been too fearful to take action or without knowledge as to how to turn their car off while moving.

Given that our X5s are Drive-by-Wire vehicles and there is a tremendous amount of technology sharing that takes place within the industry, I think it's prudent that each BMW owner knows how to shut his or her vehicle off in an emergency.

There is no official protocol for this, that I've found, so I've experimented on my own.

A) The car can be put into neutral while moving. When I did so, at very slow speed it automatically put itself into park (this was at 1 mph) in a parking lot.

B) I've put the vehicle into neutral at 20 mph. and it has not shifted into park.

C) The X5 will shut off at speed by pressing the start/stop button for the normal amount of time needed to start or stop it. I've attempted this at speeds of 30 to 40 mph. Keep in mind you will quickly lose brake pressure, and power steering with quickly fade.

E) Applying the brakes and the throttle at the same time, will not cut the throttle and the brakes will operate to the point in which they will stop the car (seemingly). I have NOT tested this at any magnitude of speed.

Point being, I recommend everyone at the VERY least practice a shutdown while the car is moving in a parking lot or on a zero-traffic road or industrial park on the weekend.

Things do happen, and malfunctions do take place. This issue with Toyotas and Lexus Brands has been a known problem since 2004. I've followed it for some time. It's not ONLY mechanical in nature, but also electrical.

Toyota has indicated that gas pedals will become stiff over time, or slow to rebound. That may take place, but it appears to be only part of the cause.

Back in 2003 some of us with Nissan 350zs experienced issues that were similar to what's taking place with Toyotas now, but those cars were equipped with keys, that could be manually shut off.

The point is, knowing your vehicle and making sure each person who drives your vehicle is aware of what each switch operates, and specifically how to turn off the vehicle in an emergency is imperative.

One can not assume that an unintended acceleration could only take place on a straight highway. It has, and can, also take place on a windy road. So, please make sure you're aware of how to shut your BMW off, and until BMW releases official guidelines, I'd suggest you all experiment with your own vehicles to make sure they operate in manners that are consistent with what I've found.

It would not surprise me if BMW built in some sort of feature that prevents the vehicle from shutting off at a certain speed, without using some sort of specific combination of ignition switch "pushing," so please take what I've written above with a MAJOR grain of salt and realize that I've only experimented at speeds of 30 miles per hour max, and never to the detriment of the vehicle. Thus, be aware.

And please, let's not turn this into "this will never happen to BMW type of discussion." If you're familiar with servos, servo speed controllers, you'll know that errors can occur, do occur, and just because we haven't heard of them occurring doesn't mean they haven't. It's better to be error on the side of caution, given this new technology that we're seeing in cars.

Good subject to keep in mind.

If you use the stop button is there any danger of the steering lock being accidentally activated. For that matter has the car even got a steering lock ?

The car does have steering lock. This is why my testing has been limited to straight-line driving and abandoned parking lots.

I do not know if the steering wheel lock activates as a result of removing the key, physically from the console or if it is a function of the start/stop button.

It also may work differently for those who have comfort access vs. those who do not.

Thus, it's imperative to act quickly in if you notice an uncontrolled acceleration taking place. Immediately press the stop button and put the vehicle in neutral, and apply the brakes as appropriate.

I have comfort access and I guess the lock must be activated by the stop button, I'll check later and post.

Still waiting for mine (now on truck) so I have no way of testing. Please correct me if wrong, given the electronics involved in the shifter - wouldn't we need to neutral 1st then off switch?

BTW, I applaud your post and admire your "guts" trying "B" given "A":wow:

ABMW - PM me with a way to contact you, may have some cell phone info for you.

I highly doubt the steering wheel would lock simply from turning off the engine. It may be worth a call to BMW NA or maybe a search through your owner's manuals to see at which point it does occur.

Good advice I suppose, but from my memory, no one has reported a stuck gas pedal or, unintended acceleration on this,
or any BMW oriented board.

Imo, people ought to practice hard, hard controlled braking, and avoidance steering. Flying floor mats, faulty accelerator
linkages and drive by wire, seem to be all consuming, these days.

Maybe we have all become overly cautious in our approach to living.

I think it is best to do it in this order.

1. Apply the brakes.
2. Shift to neutral.
3. Pull over to the side of the road where it is safe and stop.
4. Turn off engine.

This way you have power steering and brakes until you stop. The engine in a modern car will not blow when you shift to neutral because they all have rev limiters. It will however make a lot of noise until you shut the engine off.

Chuck

And if that fails, or you are in a rental car, or loaner and cannot figure it out: drive the car into the rear of a semi trailer, off the shoulder into the center divider, up against and into a guardrail, into a field....

People panic and do not react appropriately. I heard a program in which they cited statistics: 80% of the people freeze. 10% act immediately in a way that leads to self-preservation...and 10% do exactly the wrong thing.

:iagree:
Bingo

MD and you know this how,

You're logically going to get me from point A to point B and tell me that this is not an appropriate subject? That's absurd.

We have no idea if any BMW pedals have stuck, especially if there was a fatality. Who would be left to report?

You're factually misrepresenting the fact that multiple people have died, due to faulty accelerators, and drive by wire. Sure the number is small, but so to is the number of individuals killed in plane crashes per year.

Should we stop caring about those as well?

It's not that we've become too cautious in life, it's that life has become very advanced, with technology increases far faster than some of us can keep up with.

For example 5 years ago, most cars came with ignitions that required a turn of a key, and direct throttle linkage between the pedal and throttle through direct mechanical means.

The average individual buying a replacement vehicle today, will be newly introduced to technologies that were only available on luxury cars a few years ago, such as drive-by-wire technology, and push to start/push to stop ignitions.

There is a need for awareness and not everyone is mechanically inclined or all knowing when it comes to what seem obvious to you: remaining calm and shifting into neutral.

There's no one here in this thread, and certainly no one at Toyota overreacting. There is a design flaw, which is factually known. Your thread assumes an air of arrogance, in suggesting that life is not precious and that those who have perished because they didn't know how to turn their car off in an emergency (which requires 3-seconds of holding the start/stop button down) were subpar, and of below average in terms of their responsibility levels to be drivers of cars in the first place.

MD, a modern lexus, almost every model, save for the SUVS accelerates from 0 to 100 in about 14-seconds on average. Assume one is driving along, at 60 mph, floors it to pass a semi-truck, and all of the sudden the throttle is stuck wide open.

By the time one was aware of a real issue, 2 to 3 seconds later, (the average time it takes for the secret service to respond to an attack on a dignitary during a simulated and real assassination attempt) one would be traveling at 80 mph. 5 seconds after that they'd be traveling over 100 mph, smoothly accelerating up to 120 mph.

Tell me, when in those few seconds is the "average" driver, with kids in the background, or a screaming wife by his side, going to realize to press and hold the ignition switch in for 3-seconds, when he's NEVER done so in the past? I repeat, when he's NEVER done so in the past.

The point is, it's prudent to be safe, prepared, and to spread the word.

Your statement, quite honestly, should be self-deleted.

Your insinuation that because it hasn't happened to a BMW, it can't is nonsensical at best. A modern jet liner the size of the Airbus A300 had never been lost over the Atlantic, but just a few months ago one was, with no communication from the crew, despite safeguards with some systems having up to 5-backup systems.

Machinery and specifically programmed or calibrated electronics can, do, and will fail. It's not a matter of if, but a matter of when.

I think your thread is irresponsible and should be removed, out of common decency, if for nothing else, than to honor those who have passed away due to the very defects we're speaking of in this thread(some very recently, hence the massive suspension of production, and the halt of all sales by dealers) mandated by Toyota itself.

Failures will always take place, it's to be expected, and one product can ever be made to by humans that will have zero tolerance of failure, it can probably be safe to say.

But that is not the case here. There is a known, widespread engineering defect, that can be fixed, and lives can be saved. So, the right thing would have been to fix the problem when it first became known. The absolute right thing to do, is to now fix the problem after several years of publicity.

I highly recommend you practice the above, failure to do so, flies in the face of your complaint about this thread, in that drives must practice more.

So tell me MD, when was the last time you practiced shutting your vehicle down during evasive driving at 80 mph.? Never? That's what I thought.

im confident that our x5 will never have the same throttle stick issue as the poo lexus. if u look at the pedal design on bimmers it seems impossible for it to get stuck, unless u stick a pole there and leverage it against the seat.

SpaceGraye,

It's not the pedal actually become stuck in some situations, its the electronic servo that is malfunctioning on some vehicles. It is not connected directly to the pedal.

The issue is not revolving around the pedal actually become stuck, but an electrical malfunction in some instances.

In the case of lexus, some gas pedals have actually moved downward on their own, due to the manner by which artificial resistance is communicated back to the driver.

Read Car and Driver this month. They just did an article on this.

Number 1 advice is to use your brakes. They will stop the car. They did tests for that. They do not recommend turning the car off until it is stopped since it can impact brakes and other things.

Note that Toyota has a flaw in their drive by wire implementation. Most companies will kill the throttle when the brakes are applied. Toyota did not do that. Car and Driver discussed this also, most every other manufacturer does cut the throttle, I'm guessing BMW does.

No BMWs do not kill their throttle when the brakes are applied.

Yes they do.

Smart Gas Pedals May Solve Floor-Mat Problem - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com

Hey, ABMW...
Where did your arm wrestle inducing post to me, go?! :confused:

I was going to respond, after a lil' grilled salmon and a
couple of glasses of '85 Zind Humbrecht Alsace Riesling...:rofl:

Yes, I have turned off the key, while in motion, on several
of my cars and motorcycles I have driven over the past
46+ years.

So it would appear the short answer to this thread, at least for newer BMW models, is to simply put your foot on the brake.

Please tell us more ? I thought it was a spring.

My Audi reduces throttle if you apply the brakes BTW, but its an automated manual rather than an auto.

Yeah, I can't see it as being much of an issue on Motorcycles, since every bike I have ever owned or ridden has had an engine kill switch near the thumb. I even used it once in my teenage years to shut the engine off, after dumping the bike on a rainy night on a dirt detour on Highway 30 in Nebraska.

When the battery got old and a bit weak on my BMW R1100GS, I had to frequently switch the ignition switch off after I got moving, and turn it back on while still rolling, to get the ABS to reset and work. Switching to an Odyssey AGM battery from BMW OE fixed that problem.

I think for a few years around 2003 or thereabouts, some BMW models had "wizzy" power assisted brakes which took a LOT more effort to use if the engine was off.

Just tried it, and I can step on my gas pedal and brake pedal at the same time, and they'll fight each other till the cows come home.

Try it for yourself. Or my car is in need of service :-)....

An article in the WSJ mentions the fact that BMWs and Mercedes are programmed to electronically cut the throttle when "implausible" inputs are given, ie: enough throttle at the same time as enough braking force. If that is so, I imagine it only applies to auto transmissions, since there is no apparent limit in my manual Z4 to how much I can simultaneously press on the gas and brake pedals when downshifting by heel and toe technique.

Here is the basic strategy - PIIN

Put it in neutral. How difficult is that?

What causes the problem is people naturally freak out.

Well not everyone but it did happen to the poor police officer in CA who was killed along with three others.

:iagree: ...And, when I next climb into our manual trans X5 or Vette,
or our pos Honda CR-V automatic, sudden, uncontrolled acceleration,
(from whatever "cause"), will not be on my mind; there is that army of
crummy/incapacitated drivers out there that present the real threat to me,
and others around me, that is my concern.

I am more concerned about lightning strikes than this media driven "plague", imo.
GL,mD

Cliff Notes:

Put the tranny in neutral.

/thread

Driver, daughter OK after SUV slams into Alamo house, garage.

ALAMO — A woman and her daughter escaped serious injury Thursday after a stuck accelerator sent their SUV barreling backward across the street and through a neighbor's living room, then charging forward into their own garage, authorities said.
The twin crashes occurred about 10 a.m. in the 1400 block of Entrada Verde. The woman driving the BMW vehicle and her daughter were taken to a hospital with minor injuries. No one was home at the house across the street, which fire officials said was rendered uninhabitable.

Edit: OOps I forgot the link...Driver, daughter OK after SUV slams into Alamo house, garage - Inside Bay Area

How did the stuck accelerator enable the car to CHANGE DIRECTIONS!?!?!?

"barreling backward across the street and through a neighbor's living room, then charging forward"

Seems explainable. Woman trying to shift into neutral and goes into drive, etc.

I'm sure the woman was in complete and total shock. The car accelerator could have become unstuck, and she attempted to drive it out from the neighbors house, thus allowing it to become stuck again.

There are likely some late night BMWNA exec meetings taking place this weekend. Sorry guys and gals, say what you will, but this has been taking place with drive-by-wire vehicles from several companies for some time.

There's most certainly some work to be done with this technology, obviously.

Fly-by-wire airplanes have been a source of contention with safety advocates and pilot associations for years. Some planes have up to 5 redundant systems that come into play when a primary system fails, then when a secondary system fails, and so on.

Guess what? There have been multiple instances of all redundant systems failing, despite electronics that put the most advanced automobile systems to shame, and have been tested to degrees that should theoretically provide fail proof systems, but they've failed nonetheless, despite the odds, and people have perished as a result.

BMWNA, Toyota, Nissan, etc., do they have redundancy systems for their drive-by-wire?

I think we all know the answer.

I was in a parking lot, seated in the back, driven by someone who's not very familiar with the vehicle and a passenger who's no better than the driver with the car. We were going at a parking-lot-cruising speed. Suddenly, a passenger pressed the engine start/stop button thinking it was an emergency blinker button...:rolleyes: I got upset but oh well, the irony... I got something to post here... the car seems fine.

Anyway, what happened; the engine actually got turned right off and the transmission went immediately into park but the car still rolled like it was cruising in Neutral. I'm not sure if the steering was still powered or the brake was as effective, since I wasn't driving.

Can you post a link to info about just one instance where all redundant systems failed in an aircraft ? :popcorn:

This is far more likely to be the woman hitting the accelerator instead of the gas and then panicking.

On a modern BMW auto box the park pawl is on a ratchet so that if park is engaged accidentally with the car moving it will not just be snapped off in the gearbox but instead only drops into place as the car comes to a halt.

I had a situation in the last X5 model where I had to emergency brake from about 70mph to avoid an accident which was taking place in front of me.

As I braked an insecure cooler box flew from the back of the car, through the gap between the front seats, and hit the auto gear selector which was smashed from drive all the way forward (breaking the interlocks) into park.

At about 60mph with the selector in park and still braking hard, I was expecting the gearbox to lock and start a skid. I was tempted to move the selector back to drive but that would have meant passing through reverse so I just kept braking to a halt on the hard shoulder. As the car came to a halt the park pawl engaged hard with a jerk.

Amazingly the only damage was the broken plastic lockout device in the gear selector!!!

No, they don't. Any they didn't have redundant systems for mechanical linkages used for the past 90 years or so, when the biggest danger was friction in the linkage, or floormat interference.

However, they do have a driver. And the driver has a brake pedal. Any automobile brakes, by design, are 3-4 times as powerful as automobile engines. That isn't true on a continuous basis (brakes will overheat and fade) but you have several stopping cycles available to you before that happens.

Simple steps if the accelerator sticks:
1) Don't lean down and try to unstick it.
2) Apply the brakes
3) Steer out of traffic, ie to the side of the road
4) Then, and only then, put it in neutral
5) Turn off the vehicle

Doing (4) or (5) before (2) and (3) risks incorrect gear selection (as noted in the example above) and a further loss of power steering and brakes if you do (5) before you are safely stopped.

It all comes down to untrained drivers, going into panic mode.

Putting a safety interlock into the system to make the brakes shut down the throttle is only useful if the driver is applying the brakes. Since the brakes can overpower the accelerator anyways, it is there for product liability/lawyer issues, and not as a practical benefit in most cases.

Planes have redundant systems because of the obvious difficulty in pulling over to the side and parking, and because they typically use automated inflight controls such as autopilot.

Let's design a redundant system for a gas pedal. What would it look like? Would it be a second gas pedal, so that you had to be telling the car to accelerate via two separate systems, simultaneously? Would it be a failsafe that allowed the car to decide that it would rather not accelerate right now, that things just don't feel right? No thanks. Would it involve the brakes being a no-go signal that caused the accelerator to go to idle? Brakes can already overpower the accelerator, so that isn't a step forward except for the lawyers.

Where is the failsafe for the drivers who are in control (or not) of these vehicles? Maybe we could have two driving positions, for two separate individuals, and the car could calculate the average of the inputs. God help us all.

I saw a mechanical linkage fail on a 60's Corvette Stingray fail once when the throttle return spring broke. It was at full throttle when it rammed into a concrete post holding up a light pole in a parking lot. Luckily he was going slow when it happened and he did not accelerate very long before hitting the post. He did hit it at about 45 MPH. He was banged up and had some facial lacerations but otherwise was OK. The Corvette was however a mess.

So the old mechanical throttle linkages were not totally trouble free either.

Chuck

This feature is in deed documented in the 2010 MY manual (x5). If you pull the hand brake and hold it, the car will apply the brakes forcefully, only engaging park at 2 mph.

This is an interesting thread. I personally am not going to try any of the funky techniques such as turning off the engine or shifting gear into neutral just for the sake of experiencing it. At the first sign of trouble, I will hit the brake with both feet as hard as I can - if you like to pull the hand brake, go for it. The car will most likely slow to a manageable speed. Is it possible that it might not? Sure but I am not going to lose sleep over it. We bought one of the best cars money can buy. We have a great chance of avoiding the worst case scenario. Just watch out for the Toyotas and Lexuses out there!

An interesting point about the diesel engines... Since the maximum torque occurs at low rev, you may have a better chance of overcoming uncontrolled acceleration.

It's the audi thing all over again.

The article I quoted says the stuck accelerator caused both the forward and backwards.... probably sloppy writing.

Lots of times people panic and stomp on the accelerator THINKING they are on the brake. At 14 years of age I was a passenger in a car when this happened- My dad was towing me in a dune buggy, grandfather driving the dune buggy, me in the passenger seat, no belts... as we descended a slight hill and began to gain on the wagon, grandfather was stomping the accelerator pedal!!! .. to no effect- as we gained on my dads station wagon my grandfather decided to pass the wagon. Unfortunately the 30 foot chain halted that process when he got into my father's vision out the drivers door. To this day the last thing I recall (before being catapulted into the windshield and then to the hospital) was my father's horror looking at the dune buggy next to him. I digress..

But my grandfather swore the brakes didn't work.... I was driving by then and knew better.

Back to the argument at hand- how does a mfg separate issues like this, from floor mats to stuck assemblies to software bugs????

A

In one of the recent Toyota fatal incidents the floor mats had been put in the trunk because of the previous recall. I think they know that that one wasn't due to the floor mats.

Chuck

Right. We got that one figured out.

My comment was rhetorical in a sense that failure analysis of field failures/complaints extraordinarily difficult.

I don't think we are far away from black boxes in cars that store data for the previous few minutes on a rolling basis. In fact we may already have them. For instance Audi know if you have over revved a car during the running in period and the max speed it has travelled at and when.

Already in place....... Page 245 of the owners manual has a disclosure in it right now.

"Drive-by-wire" is nothing new, it is already a couple of years old and millions of cars worldwide are using this. One of Toyota's suppliers apparently messed things up, so I wouldn't worry too much.
Never heard of a problem with a BMW regarding this.

Pre 2000 quite a few cars were 'drive by wire'. A lot had an accelerator with a cable to the engine compartment where it operated a potentiometer and not the throttle body.

Up until a few months ago, nobody heard of a problem with toyota regarding this. Had you posited a scenario of "Toyota will fail to fully validate a component they use in 50% of their cars and be forced to recall them" the response would have been..... ???

I think this is good advice but I don't agree with the order you have, I think delaying putting it into neutral could cause the driver to crash.

Attempting to hit the brakes (some engines can easily over power the brakes or the brakes might not be in top order, they are hot already, or substantially worn) and steer to the side of the road could make you lose control. You might be approaching other vehicles in front of you and by not slowing down (or enough because the brakes are not nearly as effective or not at all in some cases) the likelihood of hitting something is much higher. I think keeping it in gear un-necessarily increases the speed at which the car is traveling and the pace of decisions needed by the driver. Lastly, some drivers might even get into a bigger panic because they can't stop using the brakes or they can't slow the car down enough.

Shifting to neutral puts control back in the hands of the driver and doesn't require as forceful use of the brakes either as the car will begin to slow down on it's own, even if going down all but the steepest of hills.

Using neutral gives the driver additional time to bring the vehicle to a less panic based stop, they are not fighting the brakes and trying to steer a car that is on the verge of going out of control.

Removing the engine from the equation eliminates the immediate threat.

The easiest solution?

Sell the X5 and buy a S1000RR instead, as it has an engine kill switch:

http://brammofan.files.wordpress.com...w-s1000rra.jpg

I don't, personally, believe there was ever a floor mat issue with any of their vehicles. You can read more about the debate herehttp://Autocoverup.com/#STS=g55gpc21.22jh, there are some interesting recordings made.

These recordings were made before Toyota recalled vehicles or admitted there was a drive-by-wire issue, as one owner's attempt to get Toyota to take notice.

They did not. A few months after this was posted, there was the off-duty, police officer incident in September, 09. Toyota still took no action.

It wasn't until now, many months later that they figured out what was going on.

I don't believe there was any coverup. On the other hand, I fully believe Toyota was aware of isolated instances of unintended accelerations. So, perhaps there was a "numbers" game going on.

In realty there are complaints dating back to 2004, with individuals here and there making as much noise as they could. For some, it must have been tough to make noise when they were dead. But the dead do speak, and there are going to be a lot of reinvestigations into every Toyota fatality that's taken place over the past few years, rightfully so.

I'm not a litigation hound, nor am I pounding the tables for attorneys to get involved. There are others will will do that. But, I do believe Toyota has liability there. They outsourced a main component to a Canadian company, which is fine.

Canada makes fantastic parts, when they want to and when they're monitored. The same goes for any company for that matter. If we were to start making parts for Airbus Planes, I would certainly hope the French would come to the U.S. to monitor our operations.

This monitoring, or quality control, was apparently lax.

BMW is also outsourcing some of its parts, and although I'm not familiar enough with the X70 (yet) to know which parts BMW makes and which parts they farm out, I'm going to guess that every automobile company is going to take a close look at their operations.

Financially this is going to be an ugly time for Toyota. I don't believe there were any coverups (at least I hope not), rather I believe there were individuals within Toyota who were "scratching their heads." Maybe they pondered too long, and there were needless deaths. Maybe.

Point being, the same thing could be going on with BMWs. To my knowledge it is not. But 6-months ago, to my knowledge Toyota built the most reliable vehicles in the world. 1.5 years ago, to my knowledge Honda also had the high build quality (until I purchased a Civic, and realized that the quality was several magnitudes lower than earlier Hondas I owned).

The point of this thread was not to get into a debate about which car company is good or which is bad.

They're all large entities with good people and a bad people, but overall I believe they're all concerned with human safety and the overwhelming majority of autoworkers put an overwhelming amount of effort into making sure the vehicles they produce protect the lives of their occupants at all times.

Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, and testing, parts fail. In particular electronics fail. In 1990, I would have never dreamed we would have the level of electronics in vehicles that we do today. With any rapid rise comes trials and tribulations.

I'm not suggesting that there is a problem with BMW X5s. The purpose of this thread, to reframe it, is simply to suggest that it's important to know what to do, when and if, you ever experience unintended accelerations.

The consensus I'm getting is

1) DRIVE THE VEHICLE, DRIVE THE VEHICLE, DRIVE THE VEHICLE!
2) Put it into neutral
3) Safely apply the brakes
4) safely pull over to the side of the road
5) Shut off the vehicle
6) Call road side assistance
7) DO NOT DRIVE the vehicle, until it's repaired period.

This advice should work for most, if not all vehicles on the road today.

From what I've read in the Wall Street Journal, heard on NPR and experienced myself, putting the vehicle into neutral is the easiest and safest course of action.

Personally, I am comfortable with that. I am also comfortable with shutting the vehicle off.

But, our vehicles accelerate quite quickly. Given that many of us cruise at 80 on the freeway (especially those of us in the West) where speed limits are 75 mph in many places, it takes but a few seconds to reach 100.

Assuming it takes a moment or two to figure out what's going on, one has seconds to react.

So, while some of you have suggested you have no intention of practicing this with your own vehicles, I would ask that you reconsider.

At the very least, when it's appropriate and safe, I would suggest that you at least practice the hand movements required to take your hand off the wheel, and move the vehicle shift-lever into neutral, WHILE STILL MAINTAINING FULL EYE CONTACT WITH THE ROAD.

You can do this while parked in your garage. The car need not be moving.

The more you practice, the safer you'll be, in the VERY RARE CHANCE that you experience an unintended acceleration in your X5 or in a rental car for that matter.

It's always wise to be prepared, especially given the rapid rise of electronics within our vehicles, which in 15 years are going to appear archaic, unreliable, and downright goofy. We'll wonder why we did things the way we did (the way we're doing things now). But that's the way the world works, and it's wise to be aware in my opinion, especially when operating a motor vehicle of any brand.

My $0.02 - continued.

The vast majority of all vehicle parts are outsourced by auto manufacturers, e.g., With BMW most, if not all, transmissions are outsourced, and some of their engines are also outsourced. Seat assemblies, alternators, radiators, hoses, injectors, fuel pumps, gauges, radios, glass, carpets, wheels, tires, brakes, etc. Heck, even the assembly of the X3 itself was outsourced.

On the X5, the entire front fender assemblies are apparently outsourced and shipped to the factory as a painted assembly (Page 17 of the attached link):

http://www.bharatbook.com/upload/aut...ufacturers.pdf

Why all the nationalistic fervour? Hasn't it been clearly established that the throttle component was built by CTS, an American company? In this case, the CTS plant it came from was in Canada. Regardless, the design was a Toyota design, not a CTS design. It would appear to be a design issue, not a manufacturing issue. CTS also makes these parts for many other vehicle manufacturers. I would be surprised if any automobile manufacturer made their own throttle pedal assemblies.

Now, to make it interesting, the CTS part has an apparent issue with a slow return, which is very different than a throttle application. CTS has a press release out which further clarifies the situation.

It is obvious that we still don't know what the cause is.

CTS News Release

I think it is up to the driver in any case. The problem with shifting while driving is you might not get neutral (see the example in this thread of the BMW that drove into a house, and then drove out of it. That was shifter confusion on the part of the driver).

Engines can not easily over power the brakes, if the brakes are functioning. We are talking about braking systems that are three to four times as powerful as engines. Simple check: How many seconds to stop from 60 mph? How much hp would you need to accelerate that quickly to 60? We have 1000 - 1200 hp braking systems, until they overheat. Yes, if the brakes fail at the same time as the accelerator fails, then all bets are off. I would agree that if you are travelling at 80+ mph, then the brakes may overheat so putting it in neutral first would be a good idea. But in traffic, or close quarters, the fastest way to get control is to apply the brakes.

My '96 850Ci is drive by wire; all the 8 series have been, since they were first developed in 1989. So were all the V12 seven series cars (-1988 on). Not a single incidence of unintended acceleration in any of them, that I've ever heard of.

You said "that I've ever heard of" in your remarks above. That's a key statement.

You never heard of unintended Toyota accelerations until August when floor mats were recalled, despite rumblings about it since 2004.

Single individuals can only make so much noise, and "investigative reporters" on the nightly news are usually local in nature.

It took 400 complaints before Toyota informed the world there was an issue.

I don't know if 1989 model cars were Drive-by-wire (DBW) equipped, but things like the Internet have sped communication drastically. If there was a problem in 1989, one would have had to write the NHTSA a type written letter, on a type writer or by hand, look up the mailing address at a library or call information and document their complaint.

That's quite a bit of effort. How then would the next person who had such an incident know about it, back in 1989? They would likely have had to make a formal request for information, and would have had information send back to them via snail mail. Point being, times have changed.

Many similar issues may have taken place, without the knowledge of the public due to issues with the dissemination of information.

There's no nationalistic favorism taking place. I clearly stated that if Airbus was having its parts made in the U.S., I would expect the French to monitor American workers.

It's obvious, there was no intent to show malice, but to demonstrate a point: when a company outsources a part, they have a duty to monitor the quality of that component. It appears that duty was violated.

I mentioned China, due to the fact that NPR reported last week the part was made in China and also used in one Ford Product.

If the gentleman who I listened to on NPR was incorrect, so be it, and I retract my statement about the country. Simply delete China and replace it with Canada. It makes no material difference to the meaning of my thread.

That's quite obvious, and it is beyond refute that I was not attempting to be nationalistic given that I mentioned Airbus monitoring American workers.

So, in all fairness, and respect, your question is out of line. But I will correct my thread, once I confirm the part was made in China and not Canada.

China is capable of making some of the most technologically advanced products in the world. I happen to be typing on one right now: My Macbook Pro.

Yes London Lad, this has been in place for some time. Chevy was the first, I believe. They installed a device that measured the last 7-seconds of a vehicle's speed, throttle position, and brake pedal position, prior the deployment of airbags.

It's protection against unnecessary litigation. I'm sure there will be case law over the next few years, that clearly defines what car company's can use and what they can't, in the case of such systems. It's a unique situation, in that the system is owned by the operator of the vehicle.

Legally, what takes place if he refuses to hand over the part of the vehicle? What if he destroys it instead? It's a question for another thread, but it's technology that is clearly on its way, in the not too distant future.

I believe that is called destroying evidence. If person "A" stabs person "B" with a knife you own while in your house, I think you'd be in a lot of trouble if you destroyed the knife, since you "owned it."

While a car accident typically is not that extreme (although they often involve deaths), ownership does not give you a license to destroy relevant evidence.

I didn't say 'favourism', meaning special treatment. I said 'fervour', meaning ardour or zeal. Favourism puts a value judgement into the discussion, when I was simply asking why it mattered where the part was made.

I asked partly because the parts for most vehicles are made globally, and partly because we simply don't know what the problem is at this point.

Although one might point out that it isn't 'evidence' until there is a 'crime'. And pressing a button to erase your on board data recorders after you have an accident might or might not be destroying evidence of a crime. Indeed the data you destroy might be what is needed to establish a crime occurred.

What if one purchased a 'flash' that actually re-wrote the software to eliminate any history recording? (Or at least the relevant portions) Surely we can decide how our own cars work, no? (Provided of course that said programing doesn't increase emissions.:wow:)

A

I did qualify my remarks with "that I have heard of" because I cannot claim to be familiar with ever single car BMW has produced -- except that with regard to the 8ers, I've been actively involved in the 8 series world for the past nine years. Really actively involved, to include membership on the Board of Directors of the 8-Fest organization. Believe me, if there was ONE incident of unintended acceleration involving an 8 series car, I'd have heard of it.

And, yes, 1989 model BMWs were drive by wire equipped -- the V12 models. The 1988 750il was, as were all 8 series cars that came after beginning in 1990 (1991 in the US). In fact, BMW is the largest producer of V12 powered cars in the world (did you know that?), and they have all been drive by wire.

This internet thing, it just might catch on, you know? I know I've been using it to interact with other interested enthusiasts since at least 1989. While forums such as this one have gained in popularity and numbers in more recent years, the internet has been around a lot longer. Before these forums, there were email digests, and usenet groups. Information was available for those who sought it. The simple fact is that BMW drive by wire systems work as intended, without problems, and have for many, many years.

Ahh...usenet.. :-) Those were the days

Collection of private information without consent is criminal if not inadmissable.

Semi-interesting, if long thread...
Back at the Cars Have a Mind of Their Own Ranch,

I still have not found any reports of any kind of unintended
acceleration/uncontrolled throttle, on any X5. Not saying it
won't/can't happen; just haven't found any "reports".

As for the Toy drivers, all good advice, amongst the written monologues.
Common sense remains: drive the sumbitch, or don't; if you do, and have
a problem, stick it in Neutral, hit the brakes and steer it to a safe spot.

For all of us X5 drivers, I would be more concerned about what to do
with all those millions when one hits Powerball. ;)
GL, mD

LOL! :iagree:

Nearly all states require informed consent to have their actions or words recorded. There in no informed consent that takes place when one purchases an Audi or BMW. Do they have you sign a form that clearly informs you that your vehicle has a "black box," of sorts?

If not, I don't know how they'll be able to prove the legality of this. There have been several high profile cases in which GM has attempted to submit such evidence to the courts from their Corvette models, which have had such devices for about 10-years. Those efforts have largely failed due on the face of their legal merit.

There may be a few cases that have slipped through the cracks or cases, I'm not aware of, but this is a very new area of the law, and one that faces many constitutional challenges.

I'll be happy to do more research on the matter, and but I'd prefer to stick on topic and save that for another thread, unless someone can tell me that our BMW X5s have "black boxes."

1. They are not recording your words or actions- just the operating parameters of the car.

2. They are not "collecting it".. YOU ARE. It is in your car.

3. They've disclosed it- they do not yet need "informed consent". These two terms are worlds apart, legally.


Be interesting to move this to another thread. I suspect you will not be able to definitively find out much.

A

Disclosing it, where? Hidden in the back of the manual? I'd disagree with your assessment and would argue that without informed consent the driver does not know his actions are being recorded, unless he reads the fine print in the back of his manual, and fully understands what the legal ease is telling the reader.

I'm aware that the "black boxes" in question do not record sound, YET, at least not that we're aware. Of course, it took some clever journalists asking some tough questions before GM admitted it had installed such devices in their cars in the first place. One must admit automobile companies are not known for their integrity. The Toyota debacle and this very thread is a result of that claim.

Most drivers are not aware that their vehicles have such devices, and as of now, apparently most vehicles do not, but many do.

Disclosure is fine and appropriate, but the manner by which an issue is disclosed is not always legally adequate to meet a given test, and is also very material as to whether or not disclosure was ever issued. Hence, if these companies were smart they'd have owners initial a section, in the sales contract, and explain to them that the boxes are there.

For the moment, the companies claim they use the boxes for their own research only. However, we all know they're there to limit liability. What's curious, as I've stated above, is that they (GM) have attempted to have information obtained from such devices submitted as evidence, with extremely mixed results.

Anyway, this is a completely academic debate, but one that will become more material as the years go by. The fiasco with Toyota, if they survive, the onslaught of lawsuit and punitive damages that are going to set historical records, if I had to guess, are going to be all the incentive automobile companies need in order to install such devices in their vehicles moving forward.

Rightfully so, a company that is being sued for a wrongful death, should know whether or not the driver committed suicide, for example, or whether the accelerator stuck wide-open. The point is, that if "black boxes" are installed, owners should be properly informed, and consent should be given. Consent, of course can be given by purchasing the vehicle.

But, where it can be argued that improper disclosure was given, is in the fact that one rarely has an opportunity to read an owner's manual prior to purchasing a vehicle. It is only after they take delivery, does such a disclosure become apparent. Point, being, there are many ways in which these black boxes will not pass evidence submission tests, in most states, due to lack of "proper" disclosure and/or "informed consent." Again, it's a debate for another thread.

I'm not trying to be offensive, so please don't take it that way -- but you are clearly not a lawyer, are you? Because your statements are both factually and legally incorrect. "Informed consent" has nothing to do with admission of evidence, it has to do with medical procedures. What generally drives the admission of information like this is a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. Do you have a reasonable expectation that your actions driving on a public street in view of others are private matters? I don't think so. That's why evidence 'in plain view' is always admissible. That's why police don't need a search warrant to take your clothes, or scrape under your fingernails. And, contrary to your earlier statement, evidence from black boxes has been routinely admitted in trials all across America for at least the past five years.

The problem with this type of evidence isn't really its admissibility, but the weight which juries give it. Clearly an electronic device must be more accurate and truthful than an eyewitness, right? Except that it isn't; these devices may be faulty or inaccurate, or the information they recored may still need to be interpreted by a person, which then injects some subjective value into the equation -- but that's not generally discussed or admitted.

However, notwithstanding all that, I do believe that car manufacturers will be required to disclose the fact that their vehicles contain some sort of data recording device beginning next year, unless that has been changed (I haven't followed up on that). However, I'm sure you can expect something buried in an owner's manual, not an 'informed consent' type of disclosure.

Drivers could get confused if they were in a panic and miss neutral, I agree. Also agree on brakes will overpower engines if they are in good working order. It would also probably be 2nd nature to get on the brakes - I guess I'd try neutral first but my un-planned reaction would be brakes too. Hard to argue with your logic but I still think Neutral is the best first step.

How about, if when you and I are each driving our new Toyotas, and we both have an unintended acceleration incident, we both go for neutral and the brakes, simultaneously? We can both agree that both actions would help. :thumbup:

Now all I need is a Toyota, with an automatic transmission (since my fictional Toyota would have had a manual so I would have just gone for the clutch in any case) :D

Many vehicles have black boxes, or Event Data Recorders (EDRs) now, and have had for year, but we probably need to define black box. If we are talking about the automotive equivalent of a cockpit flight recorder, then it is primarily GM who is publicly in the forefront. The boxes have existed since 1994 on GM vehicles. Many are made by Bosch. Even without this relatively recent technology, vehicles have been logging data for years. The difference is that the vehicle often logs incidents and peak data, as opposed to recent (time-stamped) data. My 1994 3 Series BMW had such a device. When I took it in to the dealer for a minor problem, soon after I bought it, the technician said to me "so, you went over the Coquihala pass last weekend?" The car was only two weeks old. The vehicle had logged the peak altitude, and the technician knew that the only mountain road at that altitude nearby was this particular pass. He was correct (but he didn't know when I went, just that it had been in the last two weeks). Similar logging shows maximum and minimum values for many vehicle parameters. BMW has used this data to deny engine warranty when it is obvious that turbocharged vehicles have been 'chipped', since there are tell-tale markers left in the logs. This is not the same as a full EDR, but it is a form of the technology. If I had said "no sir, the engine blew up in the first few days, and no, I did not over-rev it at any time" they likely could have argued the point, and rightly so.


I can't comment on the legal aspects raised above, since I have no legal significant legal training and I am unfamiliar with US constitutional law, but a quick web search gives a few counter points, some substantiated and others not:

• The NHTSA reported in 2006 that 64% of new vehicles had an EDR in the US
• Mercedes says they don't use EDRs, and cites Germany's privacy laws. If that is a factor, it would likely impact BMW and Audi equally.
• In the US, it appears to be a state issue re data, not a federal one, with the data being owned by the vehicle owner. That said, courts can subpoena data, and state accident investigation laws come into play.
• EDR data has been accepted in over 100 US cases. Seems to be a precedent there.
• The presence of the EDR devices have been disclosed in owner's manuals since 2006, as required by NHTSA
• NHTSA doesn't mandate that vehicles have the EDR devices, but they now mandate that if they do have them, they follow common data formats in the interest of standardization
• Starting in September 2010, NHTSA is further mandating that if an EDR is installed, it include a minimum number of data types.

Here is a good basic graphic presentation on EDRs. I remembered seeing this a few years ago, and managed to find it again. Recommended.

Black Box of Secrets: Automotive EDRs Revealed

Yes, we are off topic, but since many of us don't have Toyotas this at least brings us back to a BMW discussion.

This site needs a "Thanks" button on each post....

Man, I'm exhausted! Phew!

Can we take a break, now? :)

Thank you, everyone!

Juan

You guys really hate a detailed debate don't you :-)

Interesting detailed debates? No.
Ridiculous hypothetical debates that have carried on way too long? Yes.
:bustingup:bustingup

Must be an American thing :-)

LL,
Ah, yes...we Colonists are argumentative, arbitrary and crazy. :D

Back at the Debate Ranch, the thread vis a vis its original title was
debated ad nauseum, imo, and was in some aspects, a "solution"
in search of a not yet reported "problem", or occurrence, imo, Like
most threads, after some good points were offered, by all sides, it got a
little sideways.

I'm going to bookmark the thread and resurrect it, when we start reading
of BMWs and, X5s in particular, exhibiting some unintended acceleration/
unintended throttle response. ;)
BR, mD

I don't see the point in wasting time figuring out a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. If others enjoy that, then have at it, enjoy yourselves, sorry for the interruption :)

Considering my heritage is Irish and Italian, you would think that I would enjoy talking endlessly about nothing. ;)

I agree 100% the OP was addressing a problem that does not appear to exist.

It was the way that a lot of US dominated forums seem to like to 'end' discussions that 'go on forever' where as the UK ones seem to prefer to let these discussions either mature or die of their own accord.

I have no strong feelings either way :thumbup:

Wow, now there are two nations that know how to have a debate for sure.

We could make a race out of it - shortest stopping distance wins. :thumbup:

My brain hurts. :eeps:

I think it is a function of the technical background of the participants in the forums.

Forums with technical readers tend to stay focussed- side arguments do arise, but they get discussed and then naturally prune back to the main discussion....

A

Lots of arrogance on this page. Very interesting. I suppose you had already given this hypothetical so much consideration that this thread is beneath you.

Maybe, we should ignore the issue all together and not waste the server space.

After all, this could never happen to a BMW, a brand known the world over for having reliable electronics that are the envy of the industry.

Sorry, I forgot BMW's commitment to quality for a moment. I guess, I was just to busy trying to figure out why my 1-month old 35d's Nav Screen won't illuminate, and why my front passenger side airbag light won't turn on when no passenger is present, or why my driver's side passenger door won't open when I unlock the vehicle, or....

Personally I think your original point warranted discussion but you dilute your credibility when you make inaccurate statements and don't correct or defend them when challenged.

Yes, I did give it consideration for about 3 seconds, realized that it's not an issue with BMW's and if it did happen I would simply put the tranny in neutral (or the manual guys could simply push in the clutch), and I moved on with my life.

Eezy peezy.

So yes, there is some arrogance in this thread, some might say it started with the original post and subject line.

Looking again at the forums I frequent regularly, you may well be right.

Dude you rock ;pervert;:fight::rant::wavey::lmao::loco:!ouch::gu n::beerchug::flame::smokin::rofl::rofl: :bustingup: :bustingup: :bustingup:niceshoes::jealous::wahwah: :lurking: :plane::chopper::cheer::noadd:

THE SUBJECT LINE WAS CHANGED BY A MODERATOR to include my name. It is not mine, whatsoever. I'm sure there are only a handful of moderators, so confirm with one of them, if you're in doubt

The fact that you've given it 3-seconds thought is great and was the intent. I'm glad you're now aware of the fact the vehicle can possibly be put into neutral while moving at freeway speeds.

I don't read anyone suggesting you spend your life, paranoid, about the issue. However, hindsight knowledge is 20/20, so I'm glad you now know what to do having read the thread, or parts of it.

If you already did know what to do, even before reading this, fantastic. Though, I can guarantee there are those who read this thread who had no clue as to what action to take.

Though I would caution, that it's not been confirmed that the vehicle will allow itself to be put into neutral at speed.

There is dispute over whether or not the vehicle can accelerate if the brakes are depressed, and there is confusion over whether or not pushing the start/stop button can incite a locking of the steering mechanism.

The above are all material issues, that have yet to be answered, beyond simple conjecture.

We all know this is going to change the way in which drive-by-wire systems are designed, and could even lead to cut-off switches in vehicles moving forward, similar to what motorcycles have had for decades.

So, Thunder if you're set, fantastic. My question to you then would be, why even participate at all?

Allow the thread to stay on-topic as was the intent, that is unless another moderator feels it necessary to meddle with a relevant issue.

I guess the original thread title was changed as it had the word 'OFFICIAL' in it which could have been misleading.

I'm aware that it was changed, it was the original thread subject including "OFFICIAL" that I was referring to.

My original statement stands, you're trying to find a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, and if you're interested in that, have fun. What you don't take into consideration, is that this is an internet forum for discussion where people express their opinions, mine and others included, if you don't like that other people are exercising this right and disagreeing with you, then maybe the internet isn't for you. :guinness:

:iagree:

:thumbup: winna winna chicken dinna.

The word "official" in forums like these, generally conveys that it's the forum's official thread where the subject should be discussed and confined to, which then allows a large database of information to build up over time.

That was the intent. To be clear, I do not claim to have ownership over this thread. For the record, I'm going to take my name off of the subject line, to resolve the issue, however.

[B]BACK ON TOPIC MOVING FORWARD. PLEASE CONFINE YOUR POSTS TO INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT LINE OR REFRAIN FROM POSTING TO THIS THREAD. [/B]

Why you yelling bro? :stickpoke

:popcorn:

So, let's make a few things clear:

1. Yes, your thread's title was changed because, well... it's not "official."

2. Yes, you're trying to offer a solution to a problem that does not exist. (This is indeed a fact.) We appreciate, encourage, and support debate; unfounded diatribes, however, will always receive responses like you've seen in this thread. We do not even object to your rant nearly as much as we do to your overly-defensive reaction of others' disagreement or opinions. Let's face it, this is YOUR opinion; it's not backed by facts.

3. This thread is not what I would call "relevant issue," unless this were a Toyota forum. (And, yes, I'm a mod. And I'm meddling.)

4. No need to yell. No need to get so defensive. As Thunder mentioned, if you cannot handle others' rebuttals, maybe the internet is not for you.

5. We do not censor, unless personal attacks are involved (or when other obvious lines are crossed -- pornography, for example). We do ask, however, that we maintain a civil posture -- something that is quickly fading in this thread.

Juan

OK...ok...back to the main topic here. What if there were a bomb on board and you couldn't drop below 50mph or it will explode?

I would be friggin ecstatic, I love Sandra Bullock mmmmmm tasty.

Pray that the bomb was built by Toyota and is defective?

Given a fault that is apparent in mine and other X5's at the moment you would do well to be prepared for this ... it won't happen overnight but it will happen !

mmmm ... wildcats ... :thumbup:

What this thread needs is a good thread saver.... enjoy.


http://www.walhello.com/sandra+bullock.jpg

I can only see her better half ?:nanana:

I'm a Selma Hayek fan myself... :drool:

Is ABMW just a total dcik or what?

Ah, the new Politburo member must have been re-writing the history in this thread, too.
Hard to understand...then again, maybe not hard.

The Mona Lisa is taking a beating. ;)

It's understandable. Haven't there been times you wished you could erase your prior embarrassing behavior? Well, in this case, ABMW can... at least partially.

I have no regrets in life... well... that's not 100% true, there was that girl back in '86, but let's not go there ;)