Re: Unintended Acceleration

[dmiller@iea.com (Doug Miller)]

>i thought the pedal misapplication problem only existed in the auto
>tranny pedal layout.  didn't know there were any quattros with auto
>tranny in mid 80's...
>frank
>

Hmm,I think you're right about that.  At the Proving Grounds, GM has
hundreds of vehicles running around from all over the world. They are
brought in on EPA waivers.  I'm pretty sure you're right that it was a
manual transmission model, as I seem to recall this being called out in my
report as a handicap in traction on the artificial ice we were using.  The
direct application of power through mechanical gears (versus the automatics
in the tests which had torque converters) made it easier to break the tires
loose and hobbled it slightly.  The best was a model with fluid couplings
that gently got the power down.  Of course, a sensitive foot would close
the gap, but the point was to evaluate them for Joe Citizen, not
enthusiasts (typical GM requirement).

At any rate, he drove the car right through the a fiberglass industrial
sized garage door, gouging the roof panels and removing both mirrors in the
process.

My understanding of the acceleration situation from an insider's report was
that the accelerator pedal-to-steering wheel alignment was unusual, with
the accelerator being more in line with the steering wheel than the
industry average (and thus closer to where you'd expect to find a brake
pedal in a panic).  Even in a manual transmission model, this would cause
problems if you were not used to driving manual transmissions.  At the time
this happened, VERY few GM vehicles were available with manuals and the guy
probably drove a hundred automatics for each manual.  That may have
contributed also.

Doug Miller
dmiller@iea.com
97A6Q Wagon, 93 LandCruiser w/diff locks (and well used skidplates), 71
LeMans Sport V8 Convertible. 23 foot 1997 Rinker with 330hp 454 V8.
Cannondale Super V 900 Comp.