Bolt self started/moved, and backed into garage wall/cabinet

[like2bike]

Also, we need to get away from the idea of "shifting".

There is no shifting.

There is no low gear.
There is no reverse gear.
There is no neutral.

The term "shifting" was being misused long before the modern EV. It comes from the unsynchronized manual transmission type. It these early transmissions the shift lever would shift the gears around on shafts to provide the gear settings. This had the problem that if you grind-the-gears you would be damaging the actual gears. Synchromesh manual transmissions select the gears using clutches. In checking my facts on this, I learned that unsynchronized transmissions are still built for heavy trucks and racing.

So I have no problem continuing to misuse "shifting". You are shifting driving mode though, not gears. I was disappointed that chevy uses the L for the high regen mode. Just because it feels a little like an AT, L mode? A driver should understand how it is different. They could have used B like the LEAF. Of course, the Prius has a B mode that is quite a different thing.

 

[SeanNelson]

Also, we need to get away from the idea of "shifting".

There is no shifting.

There is no low gear.
There is no reverse gear.
There is no neutral.

Hello gpsman - I don't agree with this. There obviously is shifting - the car is shifted to D, L, and N.

He is trying to explain that the drivetrain which transfers motor power to the drive wheels cannot be reconfigured by "shifting". It has a fixed gearing which is not changed no matter what you do with the "shift lever". Let's not mix up that message with a semantic argument.

 

[phil0909]

He is trying to explain that the drivetrain which transfers motor power to the drive wheels cannot be reconfigured by "shifting". It has a fixed gearing which is not changed no matter what you do with the "shift lever". Let's not mix up that message with a semantic argument.

No, I don't think so. I don't see where anyone was in need of that explanation. To the contrary, the post was in response to a suggestion that some language is obsolete with respect to EVs, i.e. it was a semantic argument. Some old terms no doubt are becoming obsolete, but shifting is not one of them, and the others will not disappear easily.

 

[LeftieBiker]

The most interesting manual transmissions are constant mesh motorcycle transmissions. I took one apart while I was still in high school, because it wouldn't shift. I put it back together, and it would then shift...but the kickstarter wouldn't work. My friend, who owned the bike, called the operation a success...anyway, all the gears really are always all meshed to each other, with the shafts being hollow, with sliding rods inside, and little "engagement dogs" between the gears and shafts that actually decided where power would be transmitted...

 

[gpsman]

Phil - is wrong.
Sean is on the same track.

Back to the OP.

What I'm saying is: the position you put that joystick whatchamacallit in the center console in - don't mean jack squat in a drive by wire system.

In my 11 year old hybrid with drive by wire - I can shove the "selector" into reverse at 55 mph (or any speed) and NOTHING HAPPENS. The computer realizes that the wheels must be at full stop (or I think technically under 6 mph) to apply reverse torque. Thus my very human request to "shift" to reverse when the car is moving forward is ignored.

I have found cases where going down a grade the drive by wire would ignore a request to go neutral.

If it can (and does) ignore these requests, it can ignore a request to go into park.

After long debates on other message boards I proved that there is no mechanical disconnect, just a pretend "neutral" in Toyota and Ford hybrids. The wheels are allowed to spin the motor when neutral coasting and when being towed. It creates no harm, no heat, no problem.

As soon as my Bolt arrives in a few days, I should be able to prove if this is the case here. Great chance yes. Small chance there is a physical disconnect.

To the OP, the Bolt moving with the "selection" joystick in "P" is entirely plausible. And much more probable in a drive by wire system.

He is trying to explain that the drivetrain which transfers motor power to the drive wheels cannot be reconfigured by "shifting". It has a fixed gearing which is not changed no matter what you do with the "shift lever". Let's not mix up that message with a semantic argument.

No, I don't think so. I don't see where anyone was in need of that explanation. To the contrary, the post was in response to a suggestion that some language is obsolete with respect to EVs, i.e. it was a semantic argument. Some old terms no doubt are becoming obsolete, but shifting is not one of them, and the others will not disappear easily.

 

[gpsman]

See also:

Automated Car Wash Mode

 

[SoCalif]

Last Updates - finally received a final call.

10 days ago, I received a envelope in the mail with a report with total detail called an air bag report. Didn't expect or need it, since it never deployed, and the report means nothing with only pages of diagnostic codes on them.

Today I received a phone call from GM claims department (funny since I never submitted receipts or amounts), and she simply said, the "claim was denied because the car operated as it should have", and that "GM will be sending a letter stating the claim was denied".

I then asked if in the report the letter had any specific details about the diagnostic scans, and the sequence of events that happened, and how and what happened.

She said no, "the only info she has and could send are the reports I already have with the diagnostic codes on them".

So simply put as I see them, GM is simply denying any responsibility and not being open and honest about the sequence of events, probably because there is more to this, and knowing for such a minor non injury issue (thank god), there would be no reason for us or anyone to go to a lawyer and file a lawsuit in order to Subpoena for the detailed records.

So yes, after all this team we basically knew GM would "NEVER" accept any responsibility for anything, nor would they be Open and Honest, because could or might open a can of worms.

So YES, I accept and have paid for and am paying for this mistake of not using the Parking Brake and not having a garage cam. I am now putting it in Park (like it does automatically), using the Parking Brake, and in addition I AM using Wheel Chocks/Blocks. PLUS I now have a garage cam.......

 

[sendler2112]

When I parked it last night, I pressed P, and after the incident and I got home, went into the car and it was still set to P.

No kids here, only my wife at home who heard the loud crash, she has her own car to drive, and I was 30+ miles away all day in a 3rd car (with proof), while the Bolt was parked in the garage since last night.

Isnt there some sort of black box in the memory that could scan to see the series of sequence that could of caused this?

I was backed into the garage, so it had to actually go into reverse, because if it was a Park set issue, it would roll forward into the garage door.

So I thought you said it was uphill into the bench that it hit.

 

[SparkE]

When I parked it last night, I pressed P, and after the incident and I got home, went into the car and it was still set to P.

No kids here, only my wife at home who heard the loud crash, she has her own car to drive, and I was 30+ miles away all day in a 3rd car (with proof), while the Bolt was parked in the garage since last night.

Isnt there some sort of black box in the memory that could scan to see the series of sequence that could of caused this?

I was backed into the garage, so it had to actually go into reverse, because if it was a Park set issue, it would roll forward into the garage door.

So I thought you said it was uphill into the bench that it hit.

Yes, that is exactly what he said.

- he backed into garage
- it would have had to go into reverse to hit the bench

i.e., it would have had to go into reverse BECAUSE it would have simply rolled forward *into the garage door* instead of UPHILL (backwards) into the bench if it didn't go into reverse.

 

[sendler2112]

it would have had to go into reverse BECAUSE it would have simply rolled forward *into the garage door* instead of UPHILL (backwards) into the bench if it didn't go into reverse.

Exactly. So all of this discussion about whether or not the car was in park or if the parking brakes was set is moot. The car was in reverse and drove into the bench under power.

 

[Wookie]

The car was in reverse and drove into the bench under power.

... with a wife at the wheel