volvo corp puts profits over safety >> more ETM problems

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by ~^ beancounter ~^, Sep 2, 2005.

  1. what can volvo corp be thinking? don't they realize what their whole
    corp "vision" is based upon??.....

    -----------------snip----------------------------

    "I'm writing this to ask any and everyone that has experienced an ETM
    (electronic throttle module) failure report it to the NHTSA as a
    complaint so that Volvo can be forced to recall/repair these dangerous
    vehicles. Just search on the NHTSA website and log in a complaint with
    the description "Vehicle Speed Control" so that it will be considered
    in the current NHTSA investigation PE05041. Please hurry as complaints
    will probably be taken only until Volvo submits its response due 15
    September 2005."

    If you have not filed a complaint with NHTSA please honor the request
    and do so immediately. The following was the complaint filed with
    NHTSA.

    Don Willson

    Make : VOLVO Model : V70XC Year : 2001
    Manufacturer : VOLVO CARS OF N.A. LLC.
    Crash : Yes Fire : No Number of Injuries: 1
    ODI ID Number : 10134909 Number of Deaths: 1
    Date of Failure: July 18, 2005
    VIN : YV1SZ58D811...
    Component: VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL
    Summary:

    MY DAUGHTER WAS KILLED WHILE DRIVING MY VOLVO WHEN IT MALFUNCTIONED AND
    SHE LOST CONTROL. PER THE ACCIDENT REPORT, SHE WAS CHANGING LANES FROM
    THE FAR RIGHT TO MIDDLE LANE WHEN SHE ACCELERATED INTO THE LEFTMOST
    LANE, HIT AND BOUNDED OFF THE LEFMOST GUARDRAIL, COLLIDED WITH A CAR IN
    THE CENTER LANE,
    PROCEEDED OVER THE RIGHTMOST GUARDRAIL OF A BRIDGE, THROUGH A TREETOP,
    DROPPED 30 FEET, LANDED UPSIDE DOWN, AND ROLLED REPEATEDLY, EVENTUALLY
    STOPPING IN A CONCRETE CREEKBANK. SHE WAS WEARING HER SEATBELT BUT
    KILLED INSTANTLY UPON IMPACT. IT APPEARS SHE WAS NOT SPEEDING
    SIGNIFICANTLY PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT BUT UNEXPECTEDLY BEGAN ACCELERATING
    AS SHE WAS CHANGING LANES AND LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. I HAVE HAD
    SIMILAR PROBLEMS WITH THE
    CAR PREVIOUSLY BUT BELIEVED THEY HAD BEEN CORRECTED BY VOLVO WHEN THEY
    REPLACED THE ELECTRONIC THROTTLE MODULE. THERE WERE NO OTHER
    CONTRIBUTING FACTORS IN THE ACCIDENT -- WEATHER WAS CLEAR, VISIBILITY
    WAS GOOD, ROADS WERE DRY, TRAFFIC WAS MODERATE AND FLOWING WELL, AND IT
    WAS EARLY AFTERNOON AND MY DAUGHTER WAS FINE PRIOR TO THE ACCIDENT. I
    HAVE HAD AN ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTION EXPERT LOOK AT THE ACCIDENT REPORT
    AND AVAILABLE EVIDENCE AND
    HE BELIEVES IT WAS CAUSED BY MECHANICAL FAILURE.

    (also on Edmonds)

    I have had an accident reconstruction expert investigate the accident
    and he believes mechanical failure, most likely the ETM module, caused
    the crash. Unfortunately, since very few complaints have alleged
    acceleration due to ETM failure (either as a direct result of the
    failure or in overcompensation for reduced performance caused by the
    failure), this is a hard case to prove. However, we've been unable to
    come up with any other reasonable explanation, and the ETM had failed
    and been replaced on my car before.
     
    ~^ beancounter ~^, Sep 2, 2005
    #1
  2. bump...
     
    ~^ beancounter ~^, Sep 4, 2005
    #2
  3. ~^ beancounter ~^

    Lucas Tam Guest

    2005 S40's have a wonky passenger airbag sensor...

    Perhaps with dwindling sales, Volvo is cutting corners : (
     
    Lucas Tam, Sep 4, 2005
    #3
  4. Lucas...yea, something fundamantally "weird" is going
    on @ volvo...The next 5 years will be interesting to
    watch....
     
    ~^ beancounter ~^, Sep 4, 2005
    #4
  5. ~^ beancounter ~^

    John Horner Guest

    Volvo has for quite some time made it obvious that customer satisfaction
    and customer safety are "one of their interests" but not their
    overriding prime concern.

    For instance, they promote ABS and TRACS as safety devices, yet refuse
    to do anything about the absurdly high post-warranty failure rates of
    the controllers for these on the 850 and justify it as 'not a safety
    related failure'.

    Of course they also put a lot of marginal V-6 and diesel engines into
    the hands of unsuspecting consumers in the 1970s and 80s, so this isn't
    all something we can put on Ford.

    John
     
    John Horner, Sep 11, 2005
    #5
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.