Another Fiat/Chrysler Recall--Cruise Control

a heavy application of the brakes should be enough to stop the vehicle, with or without shifting into neutral, which will also mitigate the problem.

Fiat Chrysler said that no accidents or injuries have been linked to the issue, and that the system can be cancelled by shifting into park when the vehicle is stationary. ..

my mind boggles ..
 
beat_truck said:
Yes, somewhat compensated.:D
Just because you lose power assist, doesn't mean that you loose steering and brakes. It just requires more effort. Not long ago, that fact was stated right in many (all?) owner's manuals. Whether they still tell you that, I don't know. Most folks don't read the manual and aren't "car guys", so they are more likely to panic and wreck.
Click to expand...


Yes I know that, I've driven a few non-power vehicles back in the old days. You can stop or turn with no power on P/B, P/S, but it's hard and especially when you're not expecting it in a dangerous situation.

Also most steering wheels will go into the lock position if turned a bit when the key is off. By the time you figure out what's happened and switch the key back on you could be dead.
 
usedto said:
Any time there is an issue with an auto, that rumor comes out of the woodwork.
Click to expand...


IIRC it wasn't a rumor. I think Ralph Nader and/or one of the advocate groups had it posted on their websites; also was on alt media shows being discussed.
 
usedto said:
I believe most cars can be turned "off" without going to the lock position.
Click to expand...
auxiliary position we call it ..no engine but radio is on and maybe other things will work . Chrysler had strange wiring years ago .. start engine . turn signal on . hazards on. wipers on ..turn key to off . engine runs when hazards flash on and stops when they are off . like an engine running low on fuel .
 
Last edited:
I'm not too sure about all of the newer cars, but back in earlier days you couldn't turn the key to the lock position unless it was in "park". Things may have changed. I drive a 97.
 
petehall347 said:
...

Fiat Chrysler said that no accidents or injuries have been linked to the issue, and that the system can be cancelled by shifting into park when the vehicle is stationary. ..

my mind boggles ..
Click to expand...

I'd speculate that means it shuts off each instance of doing that.

If you want to re-engage thereafter, despite the warning, that's your call. There isn't any way for them to stop you from using the vehicle or the cruise control so a warning is given.
 
whoaru99 said:
I'd speculate that means it shuts off each instance of doing that. If you want to re-engage thereafter, despite the warning, that's your call.
Click to expand...
i read it as put in park and do not touch until its been updated .
shifting into park when the vehicle is stationary .is an odd thing to say .... shifting into park whilst moving is not right in my book ...
 
petehall347 said:
i read it as put in park and do not touch until its been updated .
shifting into park when the vehicle is stationary .is an odd thing to say .... shifting into park whilst moving is not right in my book ...
Click to expand...

There is nothing that says shift into park while moving.

Once again, shift into park while stationary, the system disengages. Your call to engage it again...
 
usedto said:
I believe most cars can be turned "off" without going to the lock position.
Click to expand...

So what is your point with all of this contrary talk? Are you trying to infer that the ignition issue with GM was OK or acceptable, or wasn't as dangerous as it really was?

I guess I'll have to provide the links to get some of you to quit defending these asshole corporations.
 
whoaru99 said:
There is nothing that says shift into park while moving.

Once again, shift into park while stationary, the system disengages. Your call to engage it again...
Click to expand...
i must have been overthinking from them making it too easy for me again .. i see it as a sequence of events that locks the ecm until reset by the park switch ..they call it a short .. another case of getting things out too early .. things need to slow down a bit ..:D
 
usedto said:
I'm not too sure about all of the newer cars, but back in earlier days you couldn't turn the key to the lock position unless it was in "park". Things may have changed. I drive a 97.
Click to expand...
With some older cars, the ignition switch and shifter didn't have any type of interlock. My dad had a '91 Dodge Shadow, and I always though it odd that you could put the shifter in any position with the key completely out of it. I figured it was a fluke or just something broken, but from what I gathered, a lot of Chrysler vehicles of the '80s and '90s were that way. Later on, I briefly owned an '86 Lebaron, and it was the same way.

But, these were Chrysler products, after all.:biggrin:
 
petehall347 said:
i must have been overthinking from them making it too easy for me again .. i see it as a sequence of events that locks the ecm until reset by the park switch ..they call it a short .. another case of getting things out too early .. things need to slow down a bit ..:D
Click to expand...

Well, of course, 100% of everything should be 100% perfect and just in case not it should be 100% fail safe.

But, new discoveries happen and things are not perfect so companies warn when something comes up. Heed the warnings, or not, your call.
 
whoaru99 said:
Well, you know, 100% of everything should be 100% perfect and just in case not it should be 100% fail safe.

But, things are not, so companies warn when something comes up. Heed the warnings, or not, your call.
Click to expand...
i heed the warnings for sure . thats why i wait a few years before having the latest trend .
 
AudioGeek said:
So what is your point with all of this contrary talk? Are you trying to infer that the ignition issue with GM was OK or acceptable, or wasn't as dangerous as it really was?

I guess I'll have to provide the links to get some of you to quit defending these asshole corporations.
Click to expand...
You're the one who said "Also most steering wheels will go into the lock position if turned a bit when the key is off."

That is incorrect, and has nothing to do with whether or not GMs switch was dangerous.
 
gadget73 said:
One of Ford's better ideas in the 80s was the vacuum dump valve that worked as a backup to the BOO. It mounted to the top of the brake pedal assembly and would release vacuum between the servo and the control solenoids. I doubt anyone has done vacuum cruise controls in 10+ years though.
Click to expand...

I think the Merkur had that. On the couple of them I owned with cruise control, there were fittings with vacuum connections to them at the top of the brake and clutch pedals.

Lee.
 
yeah they also had a switch on the clutch to drop it out. I think that was electrical though. That was mostly intended to keep the engine from going wide open if you stepped on the clutch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

thedelihaus
Mickey Thompson Murder, Mike Goodwin trial, part 1
Replies
0
Views
1K
thedelihaus
thedelihaus
thedelihaus
mickey Thompson Murder, Mike Goodwin trial, part 2
Replies
0
Views
2K
thedelihaus
thedelihaus
MikE
Shunyata Research Viper v2 power cord review
Replies
2
Views
8K
claud
C
Back
Top Bottom