Akio Toyoda – scion of the Toyoda family and Chairman Toyota Motor Corporation.
Toyota Motor Corporation* and Toyota Motor East Japan are under investigation since January by Japan’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism for fraudulently certifying that vehicles were complaint with required tests. Today, Akio Toyoda, Chairman said, “As the person responsible for the Toyota Group, I would like to extend my sincere apologies to our customers, car enthusiasts, and all stakeholders for this issue, following Hino, Daihatsu, and Toyota Industries Corporation. I am truly sorry.” AutoInformed here notes that Toyota certifies ~ 50 models per year, but over the years tens of thousands of reports are filed. Toyota stopped production in Japan of the Corolla Fielder, Corolla Axio and Yaris Cross. The issue thus far doesn’t affect off-shore production.
“All the cases are related to certification. The certification system in Japan verifies whether a product meets the established standards mainly in the fields of safety and environment using measurement methods in accordance with rules. Vehicles can only be manufactured and sold after meeting certification test standards. The point of this issue is that the vehicles were mass-produced and sold without going through the correct certification,” Toyoda said.
Click to enlarge.
Shinji Miyamoto, Customer First Promotion Group, Chief Officer, then released details that are now available on some of the specific vehicles involved. Herewith his remarks edited and condensed for clarity:
“First, we believe that certification is the bare minimum and most important process for mass-producing and selling cars to customers and ensuring that they can be used safely and securely. Broadly, there are three ways of conducting certification.
- The first is to have an examiner from a designated technical service witness the test.
- The second is for the automaker to carry out the in-house certification test themselves and submit the data.
- The third is to submit the compatible development test data for certification. Cases were found in the second and third ways.
“Among them, we have found six specific cases.
- During the partial redesign of the Crown and Isis in 2014 and 2015, airbag timer ignition development test data was used for certification application. When a collision occurs, occupants are protected primarily by seat belts and airbags. In the case of Isis, we were working on seat belt development to improve its performance. In this development test, a timer ignition method was used to create more severe collision conditions than those in the certification test. In addition, additional model development was being done for the Crown. The purpose of this development test was to confirm the occupant protection performance of seat belts and airbags. A timer ignition method was used to ensure the deployment of the airbags in the test prototype. The performance of automatic airbag ignition had already been verified in an existing model. In both cases, a certification test should have been conducted again under conditions as close as possible to what would be delivered to the customer, and such data should have been submitted. However, the development test data was used for certification.
- In 2015, during the development of the Corolla, a test was conducted to check the damage to a pedestrian’s head in a collision. Development test data under more severe test conditions were used for certification. the impact angle of 65 degrees is a more severe test condition. The test should have been conducted again with the 50-degree impact angle stipulated by regulations, and this data should have been submitted for certification. However, the development test data was used for certification.
- In 2015, during the development of the Corolla, Sienta, and Crown, a test was conducted to check the damage to a pedestrian’s head and legs in a collision. The data of the opposite side of the applied measuring points was used for certification, and unilateral point data was used for both sides in certification. It was confirmed that the test results for the left and right points of the vehicle show no difference. The test should have been conducted again with the selected measuring points, and this data should have been submitted. There is a process for applying for and obtaining an agreement in advance to determine the measuring points. However, we believe that there was insufficient communication with the technical service about the change of measuring points during the structural changes and the technical verification process during development.
- This is a test to confirm fuel leakage and other issues due to the impact of a rear-end collision during the development of the Crown in 2014 and the Sienta in 2015. The development test data under more severe test conditions with a moving barrier was used for certification. An 1800 kg moving barrier was used for the development test, which is heavier than the regulation standard of 1100 kg; therefore, the test had a greater impact. The test should have been done again using the 1100 kg moving barrier stipulated by regulations, and this data should have been submitted.
- During the development of the Yaris Cross in 2020, a test was carried out to examine the damage caused to the rear seat when luggage placed in the rear space of the vehicle moves due to the impact of a collision. After regulation changes, there was an additional requirement for luggage blocks. However, the development test data using the old blocks was submitted for certification application. The test should have been done again using the new blocks, and that data should have been submitted.
- During the development of the Lexus RX engine in 2015, a certification test was conducted to check the engine power. In this test, the targeted power could not be achieved. When a problem like this occurs, the test should have been stopped, the cause investigated, and measures taken. However, the engine control system was adjusted to achieve the targeted power, and the re-tested data was used for certification. This case is different in nature from cases (1) to (5) in that the results were changed to meet the standards. A subsequent investigation has determined that the cause is the partial collapse of the test muffler.
“The six cases explained can be grouped as:
“Cases (1) to (5) involve development test data applied for certification, and case (6) involves the automaker conducting its own certification test and submitting that data. In terms of the scale involved in the certifications explained today, we certify about 50 models per year and submit about 7000 reports over 10 years.
“The content of one report, for example, in the case of pedestrian protection, includes the results of numerous point collision tests and the results of tests on the left and right sides of the bumper. We do not have the total number of test results at this time, but we have reviewed tens of thousands of test results. Although we are still in the process of reviewing them, we have reported on six cases today,” Shinji Miyamoto, Customer First Promotion Group, Chief Officer.
*AutoInformed on
Toyota Releases More Details on Vehicle Certification Fraud
Akio Toyoda – scion of the Toyoda family and Chairman Toyota Motor Corporation.
Toyota Motor Corporation* and Toyota Motor East Japan are under investigation since January by Japan’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism for fraudulently certifying that vehicles were complaint with required tests. Today, Akio Toyoda, Chairman said, “As the person responsible for the Toyota Group, I would like to extend my sincere apologies to our customers, car enthusiasts, and all stakeholders for this issue, following Hino, Daihatsu, and Toyota Industries Corporation. I am truly sorry.” AutoInformed here notes that Toyota certifies ~ 50 models per year, but over the years tens of thousands of reports are filed. Toyota stopped production in Japan of the Corolla Fielder, Corolla Axio and Yaris Cross. The issue thus far doesn’t affect off-shore production.
“All the cases are related to certification. The certification system in Japan verifies whether a product meets the established standards mainly in the fields of safety and environment using measurement methods in accordance with rules. Vehicles can only be manufactured and sold after meeting certification test standards. The point of this issue is that the vehicles were mass-produced and sold without going through the correct certification,” Toyoda said.
Click to enlarge.
Shinji Miyamoto, Customer First Promotion Group, Chief Officer, then released details that are now available on some of the specific vehicles involved. Herewith his remarks edited and condensed for clarity:
“First, we believe that certification is the bare minimum and most important process for mass-producing and selling cars to customers and ensuring that they can be used safely and securely. Broadly, there are three ways of conducting certification.
“Among them, we have found six specific cases.
“The six cases explained can be grouped as:
“Cases (1) to (5) involve development test data applied for certification, and case (6) involves the automaker conducting its own certification test and submitting that data. In terms of the scale involved in the certifications explained today, we certify about 50 models per year and submit about 7000 reports over 10 years.
“The content of one report, for example, in the case of pedestrian protection, includes the results of numerous point collision tests and the results of tests on the left and right sides of the bumper. We do not have the total number of test results at this time, but we have reviewed tens of thousands of test results. Although we are still in the process of reviewing them, we have reported on six cases today,” Shinji Miyamoto, Customer First Promotion Group, Chief Officer.
*AutoInformed on