Re: [新聞] 日本車廠「數據造假」- 記者會內容

日本車網 Best Car Web報導
我看的是英文版
https://bestcarweb.jp/feature/column/884364

這次調查是豐田內部調查，自主提供報告

1) Data from airbag timer ignition is used to apply for certification of
minor change vehicles (2014 Crown/2015 Isis).
使用來自安全氣囊點火計時器的數據申請小改款車輛的認證（2014 Crown/2015 Isis）。

2) Pedestrian protection tests are conducted at strict angles different
from regulations (2015 Corolla).
行人保護測試在不同於法規的嚴格角度下進行（2015 Corolla）。

3) The pedestrian protection test was conducted in a different location
from the left and right than the application (2015 Sienta & Crown)
行人保護測試在與申請不同的左右位置進行（2015 Sienta & Crown）。

4) The rear collision test was conducted using a truck 700 kg heavier than
the regulations (2014 Crown/2015 Sienta)
後碰撞測試使用比法規重700公斤的卡車進行（2014 Crown/2015 Sienta）。

5) A test was carried out by loading a baggage test block that was not
certified under the new regulations into the luggage compartment (current
model Yaris Cross)
在行李箱內進行未經新法規認證的行李測試塊測試（現行款 Yaris Cross）。

6) Engine output was lower than the application content,
so a ROM tune was performed (2015 Lexus RX) 。
由於引擎輸出低於申請內容，因此進行了ROM調校（2015 Lexus RX）。

豐田解釋
1) is a minor change vehicle, and it has already been cleared at the time
of new vehicle registration. If that's the case, I don't think there will
be any problems with the safety of commercially available cars, since the
idea is to delay the deployment of the airbags in order to check seatbelt
performance. 2) and 4) are stricter conditions than specified by the Ministryof Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, so there is no need to worry.Regarding 3), they are structurally the same. I should have stayed where I
applied. 5) The weights of the blocks are the same, so there is no
difference. 6) Part of the exhaust pipe of the engine used on the chassis
dynamo was crushed. Commercially available cars have been cleared.

#2 #4 是豐田內部的測試比法規還嚴
#1 車輛小改款時，沿用舊款氣囊的數據沒有重測
#3 受撞行人的位置有左右差異，但因為結構相同所以沒重作
#5 用了新的同重量行李塊，但這行李塊當下還沒有受到認證
#6 送測車因為排氣管有變形數據不對，所以後續調整軟體認證一致

所以，真正算是便宜行事的是#3...
但實際所有項目與駕駛與行車安全都無關

自主調查的結果這六項，各位怎麼看？??

--

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 68.228.69.69 (美國) ※ 編輯: kimisawa (68.228.69.69 美國), 06/05/2024 06:16:43 ※ 編輯: kimisawa (68.228.69.69 美國), 06/05/2024 06:46:55

5) A test was carried out by loading a baggage test block that was not certified under the new regulations into the luggage compartment. 5) The weights of the blocks are the same, so there is no difference 這篇文章我沒看到滾動的部分？

※ 編輯: kimisawa (68.228.69.69 美國), 06/05/2024 08:46:02