Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Toyota 4WD systems explained

1697072747581

Comments

  • 2toyotas2toyotas Posts: 104
    Techinfo.Toyota.com

    I have a subscription, and it clearly states the RX300 came out in 99 with a VC in the center differential. It was redesigned in 04, and the VC was taken out of the center diff., it was an open bevel gear design with a 50/50 split and TRAC to take care of slip. The RX350 was redesigned for 07 and the VC is now back in the center diff. It handles front to back and TRAC handles side to side. The Highlander has followed that pattern until it's redesign for 08, the VC is not back, it uses the same transfer unit as it did in 04 with an open center diff. I am puzzled as to why, because the V6 engine is the same, and the transmission is also the same. I believe the VC makes it a better AWD vehicle, by always keeping power to both axles, whereas the open center with just TRAC, can brake both wheels on one axle, hurting forward motion especially on inclines.

    As for the Sequoia, Wwest is reading the details from 2001 when it came out. In 2005 it got the same transfer case as the 2003 - current V6 4Runner which has a torsen center diff. 40/60 split normal, Up to 53/47 on rear wheel slip, and 29/71 on front wheel slip.

    Now as for your comment on the Denali being the best, and the Sequoia being second I have to disagree. A torsen diff is proactive, and a VC is reactive as far detecting wheel slip. Which means the torsen is better. The Sequoia has ATRAC, and the Denali has an automatic locking rear diff., and TRAC. The locking rear diff only works until 20 mph, and then it is all up to TRAC. The Denali has NO locking center diff, and no low range. The Sequoia has both, along with one of the best Traction Control systems, in line with Land Rover and Mercedes, the Denali couldn't keep up with the Sequoia's 4WD abilities ever. You keep knocking Toyota and their AWD and 4WD systems, are you forgetting the Land Cruiser? I think Toyota knows a little bit about AWD and 4WD.

    Last, as for the Subaru comparison, the Highlander has a Bevel gear center diff, which unlike a planetary center, can only split power 50/50, so when the front wheels started to spin TRAC should have braked them and power would have went to the rear. They definitely shut off TRAC when doing that test. Now when on the rollers, the open center sent all power to the front and TRAC was off and couldn't step in. TRAC just doesn't allow all that wheel spin.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    No, I selected Toyota, Sequoia, 2008 and then searched for:

    4wd

    So the information I "quoted", found, at techinfo.toyota.com is for the 2008 Sequoia.

    2toyotas,

    Go back to the site and search the entire document set for MF2AV for the 2007, '08, and '09 RX350. Then search for MF2A and look at all the hits you get for all years of the RX350.

    For the 2007 introduction year of the RX350 there is documentation indicating that the VC has been re-adopted, changed from the MF2A in the RX330 to the MF2AV, VC "transfer" model for the RX350. When detailed pictorials of both transfers. The pictorial for the MF2AV is an exact replication of the transfer in the original RX300.

    And it isn't just the above. If you read Lexus description of the TC functionality it clearly flys in the face of also having a VC.

    Now I have no idea why GMC would mislead their dealers with regard to the center diff'l of the Denalis, or by default allow them to mislead the public, But it has become pretty clear to me that the direct GMC statements on the matter indicate that the denali series has a simple open center diff'l and uses TC for both LSD and AWD functionality.

    Then there is Lexus. In their case it is clear that Lexus itself is involved in misleading the public, Intentionally or accidentally, who knows at this point. Or maybe they're just being liberal with terms. If they stated that TC was being used to provide the functionality of a VC, quicker responding functionality, that would be much more acceptable in my mind.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    2toyotas: "I believe the VC makes it a better AWD vehicle, by always keeping power to both axles, whereas the open center with just TRAC, can can brake both wheels on one axle, hurting forward motion especially on inclines."

    If the RX series were rear torque biased I would totally agree.

    In 2000 the FWD version of the RX300 had Trac, Traction Control, but the AWD version did not. In 2001 the AWD RX300 become equipped with both traction control and VSC. As I have stated before, the RX series is quite heavily front torque biased, ~95/5 F/R and as high as 75/25 F/R once the VC is given time to "stiffen". I don't really have any idea how the biasing is accomplished. I first verified the front biasing for myself, to my own satisfaction, using shade tree mechanic techniques. But so many posters expressed doubt that I had my testing verified on a 4 wheel dyno. The figures above come from that test.

    The fact that the AWD RX series is so heavily front torque biased forced Lexus, for safety reasons, to adopt Trac in the same way, for the same reasons, as existed on the FWD RX's.

    With such severe front torque biasing initial wheelspin/slip due to drive torque will normally develop at the front wheels FIRST. As we all already know, if wheelspin/slip at the front "stearing" wheels cannot be quickly abated, alleviated, loss of directional control quickly becomes a distinct threat. Since the VC is reactive, only responds AFTER a sustained period of F/R driveline rotation differences, VC CANNOT be depended on to provide this functionality.

    So, in effect, the AWD RX is really mostly FWD. So just as they did with the actual FWD for SAFETY reasons, Lexus is forced to adopt Trac for AWD and rear LSD fucntionality, engine dethrottling included.

    Side note: Keep in mind that the above is NOT a problem with R/AWD since it is the rear wheels that will normally develop spin/slip initially and that does not represent a direct threat to directional control. So the use of a VC to implement a center LSD is perfectly acceptable for R/AWD vehicles.

    So, as of 2001 Toyota/Lexus had themselves a real connubdrum, what was the VC to be used for, of what purpose did it now serve.

    NONE....!!

    Toyota, in fact, had no problem, no equal problem anyway. Neither the AWD Highlander nor the AWD Sienna had ever been advertised as having a VC. So those vehicles had a virtual duplicate of the RX's F/AWD system, but no VC, EVER.

    As the introduction of the RX330 approached, with the engineers having REMOVED the now uselss and otherwise non-functional VC, I can almost visualize the (heads down) non-argument amongst Lexus's japanese upper management personel.

    So, when the RX330 came to market without the VC, the marketing literature said otherwise. Now, big surprise, here we are again.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "Now as for your comment on the Denali being the best, and the Sequoia being second I have to disagree. A torsen diff is proactive, and a VC is reactive as far detecting wheel slip. Which means the torsen is better. The Sequoia has ATRAC, and the Denali has an automatic locking rear diff., and TRAC. The locking rear diff only works until 20 mph, and then it is all up to TRAC. The Denali has NO locking center diff, and no low range. The Sequoia has both, along with one of the best Traction Control systems, in line with Land Rover and Mercedes, the Denali couldn't keep up with the Sequoia's 4WD abilities ever. You keep knocking Toyota and their AWD and 4WD systems, are you forgetting the Land Cruiser? I think Toyota knows a little bit about AWD and 4WD"

    Let me clarify. I'm not knocking Toyota's 4wd drivetrain. In fact I just bought a new Sequoia with the new drivetrain as one of the features that made it attractive. That does not mean I view the Sequoia Drivetrain as the best on the market for primary on-road conditions and light duty off-roading. I do feel the Denali has a superior drietrain when operating on-road in 4wd (which of course is the only operating mode for the Denali.) The Sequoia has the significant advantage in that it has more flexibilitywith various other modes for different conditions.

    I also agree with you that a mechanical clutch type differential is superior to a viscous LSD. I think the GM engineers also agree with you because as I stated earlier, the Denali transitioned to a clutch type ctr differential in 2004 (I believe). The Denali had the viscous Ctr LSD from 2001 until they changed over. They've had a mechanical rear LSD or locking diff all along. They also now have much of the same stability software used by most SUV manufacturers to use the ABS brakes in reverse to make suvs more stable (GM's is called Stabilitrak). Alot of this stablility software was added as a result of the gov. applying rollover ratings to suvs.

    Since the COG of these vehicles wasn't likely to be lowered much (although ground clearances are definitely lower than they were a decade ago with the Sequoia being one of the highest in the industry at 10"), many manufacturers looked to the software engineers to see if the braking system and engine management computer could be used to keep drivers out of rollover situations..... ie VSC, e-LSD, Stabilitrak and a half dozen other aphabet soup names for this software.

    Does it help traction...yes to a point ...but then instead of improving torque transfer, it moves into "nanny" mode to keep the driver out of a bad situation. My only point is that by placing mech LSDs into the drivetrain (in addition to the software which almost all suvs manufacturers are now using), a vehicle can be designed to have better traction before the "nanny controls" take over.

    Open diffs are likely to have the nanny controls take over sooner which can be a PIA to the driver. I believe that's one of the reasons that Toyota included a Torsen ctr diff to the Sequoia, LC & LX. With the 401 ft lbs torque in the new 5.7 combined with open diffs, you'd have had a recipe for the nanny controls kicking in nearly everytime the driver hit the throttle hard.

    My only knock on Toyota is that with all the available power of the 5.7, they could have put more of it on the road with a mech LSD in the rear than giving it up to the "nanny controls". Which explains why the Sequoia has its best 0-60 times when all the controls are turned off and the vehicle is operated in 4wd hi mode. My guess is that if the Sequoia had a mech rear LSD its fastest 0-60 time would have been in 2wd with all the controls turned off.

    I'm not saying that 0-60 time is the best measure of performance for an suv but simply to demostrate the advanatges of mech LSDs with electronics versus open diffs with engine management and brake application to control wheel slippage.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "I have a subscription, and it clearly states the RX300 came out in 99 with a VC in the center differential. It was redesigned in 04, and the VC was taken out of the center diff., it was an open bevel gear design with a 50/50 split and TRAC to take care of slip. The RX350 was redesigned for 07 and the VC is now back in the center diff. It handles front to back and TRAC handles side to side. The Highlander has followed that pattern until it's redesign for 08, the VC is not back, it uses the same transfer unit as it did in 04 with an open center diff. I am puzzled as to why, because the V6 engine is the same, and the transmission is also the same. I believe the VC makes it a better AWD vehicle, by always keeping power to both axles, whereas the open center with just TRAC, can brake both wheels on one axle, hurting forward motion especially on inclines."

    I have no facts to backup the following guess on why the RX would have the viscous ctr LSD and the Highlander wouldn't...for what its worth.

    The RX is made in the US. The manufacturing costs are measured in $s. The Highlander is made in Japan. The manufacturing costs are measured in Yen. Toyota is probably losing their shirt on the vehicles made in Japan and sold in the US due to the $ - Yen exchange rate. Keeping costs as low as possible on the Highlander given the current economic cycle is key to profitability.

    The RX OTOH has more room to work with and a higher end image to maintain. Maintaining or improving the RX drivetrain is "cost effective" because its made in the US.

    Just one opinion on why the RX might have a better drivetrain than the Highlander.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "The fact that the AWD RX series is so heavily front torque biased forced Lexus, for safety reasons, to adopt Trac in the same way, for the same reasons, as existed on the FWD RX's."

    The 08 RX AWD is not fwd biased...at least not as Toyota describes it or promotes it. In fact Toyota describes the Torque distrbution in the 08 RX AWD as split 50/50 until wheel slippage occurs

    "The all-wheel drive RX 350 uses a viscous limited-slip center differential to enhance drivability in all types of driving conditions. The full-time AWD system works with TRAC to evenly distribute power to both axles with a constant 50/50 front-to-rear power split. If slippage occurs, the viscous coupling differential directs torque to the wheels with the most traction."
    http://pressroom.toyota.com/Releases/View?id=TYT2007082898955

    BTW here's the Toyota official Product features sheet for the 08 RX 350. You'll note it states " Center Differential (AWD)....Viscous coupling type limited slip differential"
    http://pressroom.toyota.com/presstxt/2008lexuskit/2008RX350_sf.pdf

    I thought you all might find this quote from the "Lexus Technology round-up" of interest. You'll note that it specifically references the torque transfer advantages of a mech LSD over "speed-sensing" e-LSDs (I interpret that to be electronic or "virtual" LSDs). This is exactly what I have been saying all along...that mech LSDs are superior in torque transfer over any type of software approach, as evidenced by their statement below about the LS600h Torsen ctr differential.

    "All-Wheel-Drive Passenger Cars

    The 2008 GS 350 and IS 250 models offer all-wheel-drive as an option. A planetary-gear center differential and a wet-type multi-disc clutch control power distribution. The system normally sends 70 percent of the power to the rear wheels to provide the traditional performance advantages of a rear-drive vehicle, but it will vary the torque split ratio from 30:70 to 50:50 in response to driving conditions and driver input. The system's electronic control strategy takes inputs from steering and throttle angle, combined with vehicle signals from wheel speed and yaw rate sensors.

    Power in the all-new LS 600h L flagship model is distributed by a newly developed full-time AWD system that delivers secure handling and traction in various driving and road conditions. A Torsen® planetary gear-type limited-slip differential (LSD) distributes torque 40:60 under most straight-line driving situations. The compact new Torsen® differential is 30 percent smaller and 11 lb lighter than previous Torsen® systems.

    Unlike speed-sensing LSDs used in some AWD vehicles, the TORSEN unit in the LS 600h L L is a full-time torque sensing, torque biasing system. Torque and differentiation are continuously managed between the front and rear wheels and biased instantaneously according to varying road conditions. As a result, power is automatically shifted to the wheel or wheels with the most traction even before wheel slip can"

    http://pressroom.toyota.com/Releases/View?id=TYT2007082869358
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Here's the thing...

    Anyone buying a FWD or F/AWD vehicle, especially an SUV, very likely isn't wise enough, hasn't bothered to do enough research to fully understand just what capabilities, poor safety factors, are being purchased.

    So why shouldn't the manufacturers take advantage of this customer "class", haven't they been doing exactly that for YEARS..??

    Buyer Beware...!!

    Why would any manufacturer put a Torsen, Torque Sensing Differential, in what is basically a FWD vehicle to begin with??

    No, these customers are much better served via the use of TC for implementing AWD and rear LSD functionality. Absent the quick dethrottling of FWD and F/AWD modern day vehicles our insurance rates would likely be extraordinary.

    Oh, is there any such thing as a rear locking diff'l for this market segment. Drag racing or maybe other racing venues of maybe even serious off-road, but road going.

    NOT...!!!

    And anyone who believes the RX330 or RX350 F/AWD drive systems differ in any way other than firmware with those in teh Highlander and Sienna should go to the dealer's parts department and buy a spare VC "canister" immediately as I understand they are scarce as hen's teeth.

    Otherwise when yours fail Lexus will be scouring the earth trying to find a replacement.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    From techinfo.toyota.com:

    2.Traction Control Operation
    The traction control system controls the engine torque, the hydraulic pressure of the driving wheel cylinders, slipping of the wheels which may occur at start or acceleration of the vehicle, to ensure an optimal driving power and vehicle stability corresponding to the road conditions.


    Anyone knowing, understanding, the operation of a viscous clutch or coupling would immediately see the conflict in the above operation of the RX350's Traction Control system were it to have a VC as described. Were the RX350 to actually have a VC mounted "across" the otherwise fully open center diff'l (as was the VC in the RX300) it could NEVER be functional given the apparently INSTANT intervention of TC (as SAFE operation of any FWD or F/awd REQUIRES) at any initial detection of wheelspin/slip due to engine torque.

    Now, when I purchased the 2000 AWD RX300, and then subsequently the 2001 AWD RX300 in order to get HID & VSC. Actually having read the 2001's shop/repair manual prior to purchase I was fairly certain TC was to be used to implement AWD and rear LSD, and quite possibly front LSD.

    At the time the Lexus sales persons seemed to be well aware that these RX300s were heavily front biased, and often touted same thinking it was an asset, a good sales point.

    With regards to the validity, trustworthiness, and truthfulness, of the documentation found at techinfo.toyota.com.

    I have the COMPLETE hardcopy versions of the shop/repair manuals for the '00 RX300, the '01 RX300, the 90, 91, & 92 LS400, the 2003 Prius, the RX400h, and the 05 RX330. These are the exact same manuals you will find at any Toyota or Lexus dealer for reference use of the shop technicians/mechanics.

    To my knowledge and experience the documentation at techinfo,toyota.com is exacting in replication of the actual hardcopy manuals. So, who, which do I trust to me the more truthful, Toyota/Lexus Press Releases or these documents.

    THE DOCUMENTS.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    From techinfo.toyota.com:

    4WD SYSTEM

    DESCRIPTION

    * The 4WD model of the '04 RX330 has adopted a full-time system that constantly distributes torque at a ratio of 50:50 to the front and rear axles.

    * This system, which has adopted front and center differentials with bevel gears, employs TRAC control in order to ensure the proper drive when a wheel slips, with the use of an LSD (Limited Slip Differential) mechanism in the center differential. Thus, a lightweight system that offers high levels of driving stability and drivability. has been realized.


    I think the above is where the Lexus dealer sales persons got the idea that the RX330 had 50/50 F/R torque distribution vs 70/30 F/R for the RX300 series. In thoroughly reviewing all of the pertinent documentation for the center & front diff'l and the "transfer" across the RX300 product series vs the RX300 there is NO different other than the VC is not used in the RX330 transfer.

    And I certainly do not disagree that a simple open diff'l, as seems to be used throughout the years, all RX F/AWD models, will ALWAYS distribute torque equally to the two output drives just as long as both represent roughly the same level of torque loading, Large or small.

    I have no idea how the 95/5 F/R rear biasing ratio is accomplished other than the possibility of differing final drive ratios for the front axle vs the rear as is done on teh Honda/Acura SH-AWD system. On the SH-AWD system the rear driveline is overdriven (13%?/) (analogy: rear in 3rd gear vs 2nd in front). Until the rear left and right clutches are engaged the rear is just free-wheeling, with them engaged at a moderate level the SH-AWD system most definitely goes into rear torque biasing.

    If the RX's rear driveline is overdriven vs teh front then the front will receive the majority of the engine torque absent VC stiffening ('99-'00), or ('01-XX) if TC activates to prevent front wheelspin/slip.

    Oh, it appears that in order to prevent a severe level of torque stear with only left or right TC activation due to front wheelspin/slip BOTH front brakes are activated.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    How front torque biasing is accomplished on the RX, HL, and Sienna.

    No input is needed/required if you believe the torque biasing is 50/50, we already understand the reasons for your position, understanding.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "No input is needed/required if you believe the torque biasing is 50/50, we already understand the reasons for your position, understanding."

    And what would you say are the "reasons for my position"? Seems like you are really struggling with Toyota, not me. I don't have a position. To be honest, I really don't care whether a Highlander or RX, does or doesn't have a viscous ctr LSD. I have no interest in either of these vehicles from a personal perspective.

    I'm simply sharing the readily accessible information that Toyota makes available to the public. The readers can decide for themselves based on the sources I shared as to whether Toyota's formal press releases and product information brochures are more or less accurate than the source of the information you're basing your view on.... that's not available to the public (without a fee).

    For my money, I would go with the publicly available information from Toyota because I am very confident that these documents (particularly press releases) go through an extensive copy control process and legal review to avoid lawsuits. I also think that the tech files are likely to be somewhat behind the launch of a new product as all these vehicles are.

    If you're frustrated, and it sounds like you are, its not with me. It must be with Toyota. You seem to keep referring back to documents that concern 7 & 8 year old Toyota vehicles. All of my posts have been about 2008 Toyota and Lexus vehicles.

    Based on the information from Toyota's own publicly accessible website here's the facts as I read them. These facts apply to 2008 vehicles and 2008 only (although they may also be true for previous model years as well).

    08 RX AWD has a mechanical viscous center LSD combined with TRAC that delivers 50/50 fr/rr torque distribution that moves torque from this starting point to wheels with greater traction as needed.

    08 Sequoia, Land Cruiser and LX570 have a mechanical Torsen LSD differential that maintains a minimum of 40fr/60rr torque distribution until slippage occurs at which point power can be moved from the rear wheels to the front "instantaneously" (Toyota's words, not mine). Each of these vehicles also has a mechanically open rear differential.

    Toyota engineers view a mechanical Torsen LSD as superior to a "speed sensing" LSD (ie. e-LSD using electronic engine and brake management to simulate a mechanical LSD).

    These are simply statements of fact from Toyota's own publicly available and highly promoted documents (since much of the same information is in the promotional brochures for these vehicles). To the extent you disagree with these facts you're not disagreeing with me.... but with Toyota.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "Why would any manufacturer put a Torsen, Torque Sensing Differential, in what is basically a FWD vehicle to begin with?? "

    I'm not aware of any manufacturer that has applied a Torsen mech LSD to an AWD drivetrain for a vehicle that would otherwise have been a FWD vehicle. What manufacturer and vehicle are you talking about?

    "Oh, is there any such thing as a rear locking diff'l for this market segment. Drag racing or maybe other racing venues of maybe even serious off-road, but road going."

    What "segment" are you talking about? SUVs in general? Many of the GM full-size suvs have locking rear differentials standard (including the new Hybrid Tahoe) or offer them as an optional upgrade. If you're talking about smaller suvs, then the Porsche Cayenne is worth noting since it has a auto-locking rear differential.

    If you're referring to lower and mid-level SUVs (both size and cost) I'm not aware of any suvs that would have a locking rear differential since they aren't likely to have the power and torque to need or benefit from such a differential.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Techinfo.toyota.com NCF (New Car Features) documentation for the initial year for the RX350, 2007, indicates the VC was adopted (re-adopted??) in that model year by switching from the MF2A "transfer" used in the previous RX330 series, to the MF2AV for the new RX350. Addition of the "V" apparently meaning the incorporation of a VC.

    That is the SOLE and ONLY reference made to either viscous or MF2AV throughout the ENTIRE documentation set for the 2007, 2008, and 2009 model years of the RX350.

    On the other hand, when I searched for MF2A in the RX350 files for all of these model years, '07, '08, and '09, I had "hits" throughout the documentation sets indicating the continued use of the RX330's MF2A transfer, non-VC transfer system.

    And if you were Lexus, which group would you wish(***1) to "fool", the mechanics and technicians who are called upon to work on these vehicles on a daily basis, and more importantly understand, completely, the operational aspects of same.

    Or customers, apparently like yourself, that unquestioningly, or even not knowing or even being interested otherwise, follow the marketing "line".

    ***1: Over-stepping on my part, at least I like to think so. Just as quite clearly happened during the marketing rollout of the RX330, someone, somehow, mistakenly conveyed the idea that the RX330 had a VC. That was subsequently corrected for the marketing material for the subsequent years of the RX330's market availability.

    Methinks that somehow that same mistake was repeated for the marketing introduction of the RX350 and Japanese "culture" being what it is, no one is willing to step up and take on the responsibility for either admitting the mistake, nor correcting same. Everyone is in "heads down" mode.

    The way the material reads, and marketing being what it is(***2), it even seems like there is a possibility that Lexus at one time during the design phase of the RX350 intended to put the VC into the RX350. But undoubtedly some bright young engineer later pointed out that all that would do is add weight and cost to the product since the way TC operated the VC would never be functional.

    ***2: Product marketing materials must be made available for distribution months before the products reach the dealer showrooms. Clearly, even just days prior to actual production began for the RX350, the initial decision to incorporate the Mf2AV in teh design could have been revised to the MF2A. Since both the Highlander and Sienna continue to use the MF2A inventoried parts availability would not have been an insurmountable issue.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    I think you're over-reaching to satisfy your personal belief. Is it possible that the RX manufactured in the US for the US market has a viscous ctr LSD and the RX made in Japan is made without the ctr diff for the ROW market?

    "And if you were Lexus, which group would you wish(***1) to "fool", the mechanics and technicians who are called upon to work on these vehicles on a daily basis, and more importantly understand, completely, the operational aspects of same. "

    I doubt that the website you're accessing is the only reference used by Lexus and Toyota mechanics for making repairs. IMO the site you're accessing is just another nice money making venture for Toyota to tap into a market of overly enthusiastic Toyota fans willing to pay $10/day to access a technical site that they probably only update a couple times a year at best. Do they even give you a "revision date" on the website your paying Toyota to access?

    "Or customers, apparently like yourself, that unquestioningly, or even not knowing or even being interested otherwise, follow the marketing "line". "

    My bet is that the information provided to the public is significantly more accurate then the website you're paying to access. Mechanics can't sue for false technical information. OTOH Consumers and State Attorney Generals are ALWAYS looking for a new deep pocket to go after. Whether its for personal wealth gain or media headlines, attorneys would chase a purposeful false advertising by a large corporation like Toyota like wolves chasing a lone sheep. A false claim on a high $ purchase like a vehicle would have either been addressed by an external attorney for a headline/$ or an internal attorney for a correction.

    You aren't by chance one of those "conspiracy theory" guys that think the US landing on the moon was all a hoax by the gov. ...are you? Sounds to me like an attempt to justify all the money you've spent accessing the Toyota technical site (aka Toyota's little "moneymaker"...I think they probably refer to it internally as their "100% profit margin" product with next to no upkeep or capital cost:))
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    http://www.4x4abc.com/4WD101/locking.html

    You aren't by chance...

    No, but I am quite quite thoroughly convinced that just as Harrison Ford says, he could do a STELLAR job as US President vs the IDIOT we now have.

    But I really do have to go now...

    This discussion has now become totally useless, even bordering on the nonsensical.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    "The '08 Sequoia has a Torsen center differential with the power distributed 40/60."

    You might want to have a more thorough looksee at the 2008 Sequoia "Vehicle Inquiry Report" you posted at Carspace.

    It quite clearly states that your Sequoia has:

    A-TRAC

    Auto Lmtd Slip Diff,...

    Yes, "Auto Lmtd Slip Diff" does leave the door open to the possibility of that being a Torsen diff'l. But certainly that wording is not explicit enough to refute the information I have access to indicating that in H4F mode it is a simple open diff'l using A-TRAC for torque distribution. And if you are in of the firm belief that a simple open diff'l results in 50/50 F/R rear torque distribution how do you get that your Sequoia is 40/60..??

    Obviously in H4L or L4L there will be no "split" as the front and rear drivelines are mechanically "hard" coupled.

    Since you seemingly put more faith in marketing materials than actual facts here's one that supports your description of the '08 Sequoia 4WD but then goes on to say that the '08 also includes A-TRAC.

    http://www.jdpower.com/autos/articles/2008-Toyota-Sequoia-Preview

    Toyota's own definition of A-TRAC, ACTIVE-TRAC:

    http://www.toyota.com/help/glossary.html#a
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Strange, now entering the TWILIGHT ZONE.

    The Traction Control documentation, A-TRAC, etc, at techinfo.toyota. com quite clearly indicates that in 2WD mode it is the front wheels that are being driven.

    I have always assumed the Sequoia to be RWD in 2WD mode.

    But.

    Why not FWD..? (I guess)
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "You might want to have a more thorough looksee at the 2008 Sequoia "Vehicle Inquiry Report" you posted at Carspace."

    What on earth on you talking about? I've never made a post in the "Vehicle Inquiry Report".

    "It quite clearly states that your Sequoia has:

    A-TRAC"


    When did I ever say the Sequoia didn't have A-TRAC? It definitely has A-TRAC. As does the LC and LX570. A-TRAC is entirely compatibale and in fact functions better with a Torsen than with an open differential. A-TRAC is nothing more than the Toyota traction control software designed for 4wd vehicles. I'm familiar with the function as it's on my new Sequoia.

    You seem to be somewhat confused on the difference between the purpose of Traction and stability control software in the 08 4wd SUVs (A-TRAC & VSC) and the purpose of a mechanical LSD such as a viscous unit or a Torsen unit. The software is entirely complimentary to a drivetrain with a mechanical LSD. Have you not read any of the earlier posts? Subaru, GM, Audi, Porsche all use mechanical LSD combined with stability and traction control software.

    Toyota also includes mechanical ctr differentials on their 08 4wd 4Runner, 08 RX AWD, 08 4wd Sequoia, 08 4wd Land Cruiser, 08 LX570, 08 LS600h. Why would you think A-Trac couldn't be used with a mechanical LSD? Many manufacturers have combined the 2 technologies (Braking/engine management software + mech LSDs) for nearly a decade.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "Strange, now entering the TWILIGHT ZONE.

    The Traction Control documentation, A-TRAC, etc, at techinfo.toyota. com quite clearly indicates that in 2WD mode it is the front wheels that are being driven.

    I have always assumed the Sequoia to be RWD in 2WD mode.

    But.

    Why not FWD..? (I guess)"


    You're kidding ....right? I would definitely cease using the techinfo source as a reputable source if it shows the 2wd mode of a 4wd Sequoia operating as FWD.

    For the record, the 08 Sequoia is undeniably a RWD vehicle when operating in 2wd mode (identical to the LC and LX). Even you couldn't possibly think the Sequoia is a fwd vehicle. Just look at the driveshaft in a 2wd model for crying out loud and the available tow rating.

    If it were me, I would ask for my money back for accessing techinfo.toyota. You're definitely getting ripped off based on the very innacurate information you're posting.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    "Why would you think A-Trac couldn't be used with a mechanical LSD...?"

    Maybe just because I'm NOT an IDIOT...??

    Certainly not on the scale of Shrub.

    With a Torsen center diff'l, say 30/70 F/R what additional capabilities would be added by including A-Trac....??

    And think back...

    It was with the introduction of the RX330 in 2004 equipped with "A-Trac" that the realization came, finally, that the VC was now useless, just added weight and was therefore a needless expense.

    And the last documenation I can find that indicates the 4runner, the LX470, and the Sequoia have, had, a Torsen center diff'l, just happens to be the 2003 model year.

    Why continue to purchase Torsen Diff'ls from Zetel, or even pay them a license fee, once you come to the realization that A-Trac will do the job at an acceptable level for the public at large...?

    And are you STILL of the mind that the GMC Denali series has a center mechainical LSD? You haven't had much to say on that front lately.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    "..the '08 Sequoia is undeniably a RWD..."

    Are you certain sure..?? How, where does it say..??

    And just what general public owner would EVER notice, know, or care...??

    As you have said yourself, for only 2 wheels driving then FWD is better than RWD.

    If both drivelines are already in place just why would RWD be selected over FWD...??

    I grant you this is a really weird development....

    But...

    From techinfo.toyota.com '08 Sequoia:

    Active Traction Control (4WD)

    While driving in the 4WD mode, the active TRAC system helps control any wheel spinning which may occur when accelerating on a snowy road or during severe off-road driving, by controlling the brake fluid pressure of each wheel. The system distributes the traction which is lost to slipping to the other wheels, which produces a strong LSD effect. When the active TRAC is in use, the ABS and traction actuator assembly sends a signal and the slip Indicator in the instrumental cluster will flash to notify the driver.

    Active Traction Control Operation (2WD)

    The vehicle speed is estimated by taking the rear wheel speed, comparing it with the front, driving wheel speed and then judging the grip condition of the driving wheels. From this estimated vehicle speed, the target speed for the driving speed will be set. When the front, driving wheel speed exceeds the control starting speed, it judges that a tire slip is occurring and enacts the electronic throttle control and brake control and then attempts to make the rear wheel speed become the traction control target speed. The traction control will finish either when the vehicle moves onto a surface where the driving wheels do not slip or when the driver decelerates the vehicle.
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    "Why would you think A-Trac couldn't be used with a mechanical LSD...?"

    Maybe just because I'm NOT an IDIOT...??

    Certainly not on the scale of Shrub.

    With a Torsen center diff'l, say 30/70 F/R what additional capabilities would be added by including A-Trac....??

    And think back... "


    WWest...with all due respect....I have absolutely no idea what you're even talking about. Maybe others understand you but you seem to be alittle too off kilter for me to respond since you're not really making much sense. Maybe its just me...but I don't think so. Are you OK?

    "Why continue to purchase Torsen Diff'ls from Zetel, or even pay them a license fee, once you come to the realization that A-Trac will do the job at an acceptable level for the public at large...? "

    Clearly the engineers at some pretty reputable manufacturers like Audi, Subaru, GM and Toyota disagree with your POV, since they have combined mechanical LSDs with electronic traction systems. For me, its a great combination of technologies that puts more power on the road and still protects consumer from themselves. Sounds like you might consider a Highlander since you've already stated that it combines an open ctr differential with traction control software.

    By getting a Highlander you save money on buying a vehicle with a Torsen CTR and can use the savings for more access to Techinfo.toyota.

    "And are you STILL of the mind that the GMC Denali series has a center mechainical LSD? You haven't had much to say on that front lately."

    I think your memory is struggling abit as I referenced a number of times that the 2001 Denali XL sitting in my driveway has a mechanical ctr LSD (viscous) combined with a mech rear LSD.

    Here's Edmunds summary of the 2008 Denali XL which includes a "mechanical center differential " and a "rear locking differential". http://www.edmunds.com/new/2008/gmc/yukonxl/100894098/standard.html

    Here's Edmunds summary of a 2001 Denali XL (which matches the information in my manual and all the literature I have on the vehicle, but no...I'm not going to disassemble the differental in my driveway and take pictures so that you'll "believe"): "Limited Slip Differential (Center)" and a "Locking Differential (Rear)". http://www.edmunds.com/used/2001/gmc/yukonxl/100001202/standard.html

    Trust me....the US government really did really put a man on the moon.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    " I have absolutely no idea what you're even talking about.."

    Yeah, I have noticed that.

    I'm in Seattle, you are...??
  • hdfatboyhdfatboy Posts: 324
    ""..the '09 Sienna is undeniably a RWD..."

    Are you certain sure..?? How, where does it say..??"

    Why are you posting false quotes? I did not make make the quote above. The Sienna is a FWD minivan. You either have me confused with someone else or you are purposefully fabricating false quotes.

    I'll leave it to the moderator to address if appropriate, however you are losing what little credibility you might have had with your inaccurate information and now fabricating quotes of others
    .
  • 2toyotas2toyotas Posts: 104
    hdfatboy

    If I were you I would stop answering him, for your own sanity. Believe me, Techinfo.toyota has all the right info, and it is nothing like what Wwest is posting. I think he is trying to egg you on. Good Luck!!
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    I just finished a brief review of the Edmunds threads, posts, concerning the GMC Denali 4WD implemenation. By about July of '03 the number of posts discussing the pros and cons of the OLD Denali LSD 4WD system vs the NEWER open center diff'l Traction Controlled 4WD systems are clearly available.

    Some of those posts are expressing concern about the rear mechanical LSD not being available as an option with the new braking implemented 4WD system.

    July of '03, now why does that seem to ring a bell...??

    Sorry about the '09 Sienna slip-up, I have corrected it.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Would you be so kind as to tell me, advise me, as to where I have quoted from techinfo.toyota.com something that is not there or is not true...??
  • 2toyotas2toyotas Posts: 104
    4WD SYSTEM
    1. General
     The 4WD model of the ’04 Highlander has discontinued the viscous coupling in the center differential.
     This system, which has adopted front and center differentials with bevel gears, employs TRAC control
    in order to ensure the proper drive when a wheel slips, without the use of an LSD (Limited Slip
    Differential) mechanism in the center differential. Thus, a lightweight system that offers high levels of
    driving stability and drivability has been realized

    This is the real 2004 Highlander New Car Features.
  • 2toyotas2toyotas Posts: 104
    4WD SYSTEM
    DESCRIPTION
     The 4WD model of the ’04 RX330 has adopted a full-time 4WD system that constantly distributes torque
    at a ratio of 50:50 to the front and rear axles.
     This system, which has adopted front and center differentials with bevel gears, employs TRAC control
    in order to ensure the proper drive when a wheel slips, without the use of an LSD (Limited Slip
    Differential) mechanism in the center differential. Thus, a lightweight system that offers high levels of
    driving stability and drivability has been realized

    This is the real 2004 RX330
  • 2toyotas2toyotas Posts: 104
    4. Transfer
    The engine type is changed from 3MZ-FE to 2GR-FE. Because of this change, an MF2AV transfer is adopted.
    The MF2AV transfer is similar to the conventional MF2A transfer, however, the MF2AV transfer contains
    a viscous coupling type LSD (Limited Slip Differential).
     The MF2AV transfer uses a viscous coupling to achieve the slip limiting effect for the center differential.

    This is for the 2007 RX350
Sign In or Register to comment.