TFL just broke their Tacoma

I hate the feeling of getting back in a vehicle after a major repair... I'm just waiting for something to go wrong. It's why I don't trust Dodge/RAM products to this day.
 
And if you actually want to get more info on what happened, though it isn't much, you have watch the towing video I shared in the other thread. That is where the added that information.
 
testerdahl said:
Milking that cow.
Click to expand...
Yep, they stretched that one out for as much as they could. Good job, lost a drone though...lol. Without every YouTuber who bought a Tacoma in the last month breaking theirs, you'll never hear about it again. And if Toyota doesn't find anything interesting or substandard, they won't mention it again either.

But it was covered under warranty!!
 
Dusdaddy said:
Yep, they stretched that one out for as much as they could. Good job, lost a drone though...lol. Without every YouTuber who bought a Tacoma in the last month breaking theirs, you'll never hear about it again. And if Toyota doesn't find anything interesting or substandard, they won't mention it again either.

But it was covered under warranty!!
Click to expand...
Then they brought the salesman who helped them at Toyota out to give his name and contact number because he was so great. (In the cheap full size truck video)

(I think this was a normal warranty repair so I don't understand this move, all it's going to do is fan the flames.)
 
Fightnfire said:
Then they brought the salesman who helped them at Toyota out to give his name and contact number because he was so great. (In the cheap full size truck video)

(I think this was a normal warranty repair so I don't understand this move, all it's going to do is fan the flames.)
Click to expand...
Have they ever had a sales rep from any dealer on any of their other videos? I can't remember.
 
Dusdaddy said:
Have they ever had a sales rep from any dealer on any of their other videos? I can't remember.
Click to expand...
I know there are lots of dealership mentions, specifically the Johnson dealerships when they trade in and buy new trucks but I can't remember a sales person getting screen time before.
 
Fightnfire said:
I know there are lots of dealership mentions, specifically the Johnson dealerships when they trade in and buy new trucks but I can't remember a sales person getting screen time before.
Click to expand...
yeah, just wondering if they had to do that to get access to those trucks.
 
I just watched the TFL video with Sheldon explaining what happened. One thing that stood out to me immediately in his explanation was the amount of excessive torque that cause the ADD to fail being only 1.7%. That tells me that during the design process they've fine tuned things so much there is almost no factor of safety. I know he says all the stars aligned for this to happen, but I am betting it won't be the last if the tolerances are that tight. Sheldon obviously knows what he's talking about. There's got to be pressure behind the scenes from bean counters on him and the other engineers to design these trucks to the limit for cost savings these days.

 
duggydo said:
I just watched the TFL video with Sheldon explaining what happened. One thing that stood out to me immediately in his explanation was the amount of excessive torque that cause the ADD to fail being only 1.7%. That tells me that during the design process they've fine tuned things so much there is almost no factor of safety. I know he says all the stars aligned for this to happen, but I am betting it won't be the last if the tolerances are that tight. Sheldon obviously knows what he's talking about. There's got to be pressure behind the scenes from bean counters on him and the other engineers to design these trucks to the limit for cost savings these days.

Click to expand...
I wonder if the Savage Geese interview inspired this follow-up from TFL.
 
duggydo said:
One thing that stood out to me immediately in his explanation was the amount of excessive torque that cause the ADD to fail being only 1.7%. That tells me that during the design process they've fine tuned things so much there is almost no factor of safety.
Click to expand...
Could be, but I don't think that's what he meant. (I used to interpret for lots of engineers.) Every component will be designed for a max of xxx amount of torque. Then they add a margin of xx%. Say the margin was 20%, then this exceeded the max design torque by 21.7%. Much greater. Like he said, shit happens when the stars align. I think they have very large margins overall. Like their payload. They just won't put it in writing.

It's suspect to me that they are incorporating a fix over just one instance. Seems a bit over blown. Unless they realize that the "fuse" is too weak for the system, they want to dial down the system instead of redesigning a component.

I do know that dealing with slick conditions like ice is the worst scenario. I think I've broken more things dealing with that than any surface. Going from zero friction then max friction puts such a shock on components.
 
Dusdaddy said:
Could be, but I don't think that's what he meant. (I used to interpret for lots of engineers.) Every component will be designed for a max of xxx amount of torque. Then they add a margin of xx%. Say the margin was 20%, then this exceeded the max design torque by 21.7%. Much greater. Like he said, shit happens when the stars align. I think they have very large margins overall. Like their payload. They just won't put it in writing.

It's suspect to me that they are incorporating a fix over just one instance. Seems a bit over blown. Unless they realize that the "fuse" is too weak for the system, they want to dial down the system instead of redesigning a component.

I do know that dealing with slick conditions like ice is the worst scenario. I think I've broken more things dealing with that than any surface. Going from zero friction then max friction puts such a shock on components.
Click to expand...
If it went 21.7% over the design, then the problem is even worse than he let on. Being an engineer myself, I would have specifically made sure to mention it exceeded the factor of safety and not the design limit if I was explaining it.

As far as the fix, changing software is multiple orders of magnitude cheaper than changing a part like that. The fix will have to be some sort of torque deration or limit of braking applied intended to prevent slippage when those conditions are detected. In future models, a slightly beefer part would almost certainly be better. The aftermarket will probably be coming up with something if there are many more failures.
 
duggydo said:
If it went 21.7% over the design, then the problem is even worse than he let on. Being an engineer myself, I would have specifically made sure to mention it exceeded the factor of safety and not the design limit if I was explaining it.

As far as the fix, changing software is multiple orders of magnitude cheaper than changing a part like that. The fix will have to be some sort of torque deration or limit of braking applied intended to prevent slippage when those conditions are detected. In future models, a slightly beefer part would almost certainly be better. The aftermarket will probably be coming up with something if there are many more failures.
Click to expand...
He did. He said the "margin" was exceeded.

And without a doubt, a software fix is the obvious way to go. No way are they going to redesign a part just for that rare occurrence. My point is that it's interesting that they even want to do a software change if it is the only case and such a rare situation. Not that I think it's a conspiracy or cover-up of a bigger problem, just odd that they would actively address a one-time thing. They had to of looked at it and agreed they didn't like the odds of it happening more often which is only gonna cost them in warranty fixes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top