Toyota, one of the most renowned auto company started having a problem around in 1998 when it failed o store its new brand product Lexus’s data’s ineffectively. Though all it did not happen on purpose, but accidentally the Lexus Company could not fulfil the requirement and satisfaction of its customer in its early trail of database maintenance. Lexus the Toyotas high end luxury system had implemented a Corporate Customer information System in which there were some problems seen regarding the recording of customer information and override of wrong information of the customer data.
Though the company had best tried to save that customer information in a appropriate manner but due to the system deficiency the company was having a massive data quality problem. This problem aroused because the company failed to maintain and implement a central database system where all he customer information would be stored in a central database, which when required would display the multi branches customer information.
The company had 15 different databases stored in 15 different parts of the company, where the individual company would only access their local data stored by the local branch. In words of Management we can correlate this problem as lack of centralised authority to data control, storing, maintenance and update of recent transactions.
The world of Information Technology as compared to the Management is quite controversial. Controversial in a sense that, in proper management Decentralization and Delegation of authority is required to achieve the best results in efficient management performances while as in terms of Information Technology, it requires the access, storage, support and maintenance of centralised database system in order to keep the up to date records of every activities performed everyday to track down the right solution to the problem.
An efficient Information System demands the availability of information and resources however and whenever demanded at any point of request. The database Toyota Lexus ha designed was to store all its customer info which would help when the system was asked to provide the customer details of the owner for organizational purpose.
The objective LEXUS had established to serve its customer via maintaining a customer dataset could not be fulfilled as the purpose of developing a database could no be fulfilled as it resulted to various problems in miscommunication of information all around. The ownership of the vehicles had been transferred to the people who did not even had the ownership license, the cheques were paid to the person who were even not entitled to receive and the legitimate information were passed where there had been frequent problems of fake customer identity.
The customer details failed to validate the right owners of the vehicles which as a result led to a problem of data loss. Because of the problem, Toyota would return the owners car fixed, washed filled with fuel. Cheques were made payable to the people whom it did not even belonged to.
APR 17, 1998 | Recall ID# 50473 Hide Details|Recall Reason |SUSPENSION:AUTOMATIC STABILITY CONTROL (ASC) | |Recall Date |APR 17, 1998 | |Model Affected |GS400 | |Potential Units Affected |14855 |
|Recall Summary | |VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. DUE TO A MANUFACTURING DEFECT OF THE YAW RATE SENSOR FOR THE VEHICLE STABILITY | |CONTROL (VSC), THE VSC CAN OPERATE IMPROPERLY IF THE SENSOR IS AFFECTED BY CERTAIN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES, SUCH AS FROM A | |CELLULAR PHONE. | |Consequence | |SHOULD THIS OCCUR, THE BRAKE MAY OPERATE UNEXPECTEDLY, AFFECTING STEERING AND SPEED CONTROL, INCREASING THE RISK OF A | |VEHICLE CRASH.| |Remedy | |DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE YAW RATE SENSOR. | |Notes | |TOYOTA MOTOR CO., LTD. |
I have a 1998 Lexus ES300, I Have had problems with the gas pedals sticking on three occasions but paid no attention to it until I read about this problem on new cars. Have there been other cases reported with this model? What should I do about it?
Submitted: 11 days and 23 hours ago.Category: LexusValue: £7Status: CLOSED+Read More
Year: 1998Make: LexusModel: ES300
Already Tried:I have a 1998 Lexus ES300, I Have had problems with the gas pedals sticking on three occasions but paid no attention to it until I read about this problem on new cars. Have there been other cases reported with this model?What should I do about it?
Your particular vehicle uses a mechanical, cable connection from the gas pedal to the throttle body as opposed to the electrical servo type throttles involved in the numerous recall related problems. Because of that, there would be no directly correlation between the two vehicles.
That being said, there are 3 typical causes for sticking throttle in your vehicle.
Least likely, but easiest to check is the infamous “floor mat obstruction”. This is typically noticeable while driving if your floor mat is interfering with the cable, but worth checking regardless.
Second, is a worn out throttle cable. This is the cable that connects the gas pedal to the throttle body. Vehicles in northern states that have more issues with rust/corrosion are more likely to see a problem here. The cable is a thin metal wire sheathed in a plastic coating. As the exposed area of metal wire corrodes from environmental elements, it widens the cable making it more difficult to travel inside the cable sheath, often sticking. You can check this condition by operating the throttle body by hand an monitoring the cable to see if there is any resistance going into the sheath or if it travels smoothly.
Lastly, and most common, is buildup of carbon/oil elements in the throttle body. Because of the ventilation system required by law, the throttle body is exposed to oil vapor from inside the engine via breathing hoses in the intake. Over time this builds up into a layer of hardened, baked-on oil inside the throttle body, right where the throttle plate needs to move. Due to it being softer than the metal throttle plate, the throttle plate always wins when it gets stuck, but the oil buildup does create resistance that will intermittently stick the throttle in position.
Having the throttle body cleaned to prevent this should be done every 15k miles on this car for full assurance, or 30k miles at minimum for normal operation. Typical cost for cleaning is 1/2 hour labor (normal “minimum charge” at many shops), about $45 depending on the shops labor rate.
[pic]|Expert: |Doug Cleland ||Pos. Feedback: |100.0 % ||Accepts: |12 ||Answered: |2/16/2010 |
ASE Certified TechnicianToyota Factory training and worked for a heavily Lexus trafficked Toyota store
Read more: http://www.justanswer.com/questions/35ik7-i-have-a-1998-lexus-es300-i-have-had-problems-with-the-gas#ixzz0grgbynyy
Featured 1998 Recalls
|[pic] | |1998 Lexus LX470 | |Before you purchase a used car, make sure you check our comprehensive auto recall information to see if there are any | |problems that have been reported by the NHTSA. You can get detailed information on how and where to fix the car defect. | |Recall: EXTERIOR LIGHTING : HEADLIGHTS | | | || | | | | | |
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/used_cars/07/1998/lexus/recalls/index.html#ixzz0grjp1yvD Take a noteworthy case in 1998. Toyota Motor Sales USA (TMS) responded to a recurring service problem with its Lexus vehicles by contacting owners, then picking up their vehicles, taking them in for repairs and leaving loaner cars as replacements. When done, the owners’ cars were returned—fixed, washed and tanked up. That level of service was made possible by TMS’s Corporate Customer Information System, an application used by the company’s call center in Iowa to help handle warranty, roadside assistance, prepaid maintenance and other service requests.
But 1998 didn’t go altogether smoothly. Relying on data in that system, TMS began to mail checks to Lexus owners to replace troublesome tires. The checks, for more than $400 each, in some cases went to people who didn’t even own a Lexus. One errant check even found its way to a Toyota auditor, for a vehicle he hadn’t owned for a while. “You can imagine the repercussions of that,” says John Gonzales, data quality manager at TMS. “We can’t afford to be giving money away to people who shouldn’t be getting it.” The glitch was symptomatic of a bigger problem. The system depended on customer data stored in “roughly 15 databases in different parts of company,” says Gonzales.
Just to get to all the data about a customer, call center employees would have to navigate through four or five mainframe applications, while customers waited. The glitch resulted in a mandate from Toyota’s office of the president for a centralized, single customer database. And Gonzales was tagged to make it happen. “The main goal was to service customers’ calls quicker,” he says.
But also, “as the volume of calls went up, we didn’t want to increase the number of people in the call center.” Finding a way to pull off the consolidation turned out to be no mean feat. Gonzales and his team looked at a procession of products purportedly offering business intelligence,” but none fit the bill. Then, a solution was nearly dropped into his lap. While attending a conference, Gonzales saw a presentation on