Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
My question(s) - what the heck was going on here and is this the way the system is suppose to work? Did I do the right thing in letting off the gas, or should I have continued with the gas lightly pressed until the back wheels entered the garage? Should I have backed down the driveway, put the transfer into L and shifted to L1 or L2, then drove back up the driveway?
I've played around w/the Sequoia this time last year in a snow covered parking lot and had a blast (Posted to this board), ya can't do donuts in the snow with the 4wd activated, system takes over, dethrottles and puts you in a nice controlled turn - works great. But this one threw me with the wheels spinning and antilock kicking in.
In the mode you were using, "open center diff'l" all wheels will recieve equal torque as long as all tires have roughly equal traction.
With an open center differential, as is the Sequoia in this mode, if a tire or tires have greatly differing traction coefficients then ALL engine torque will go to the wheels/tires with the LEAST traction. Note that this circumstance almost always results in severely limiting the engine TORQUE available overall.
Sorta like having the car in neutral and reving the engine.
Your Sequoia AWD mechanicals did exactly what could be expected as did the Trac electronics. The purpose of the electronics braking the rear wheels is to allow the engine to build torque rather than just RPMs.
In your particular circumstance the traction coefficient front vs rear was radically different. The Trac would then use the most extreme measures to overcome that disparity.
Constant "growning" of the rear brakes would undoubtedly persist until the rear wheels also reached solid "ground".
Just as I believe cliffy said earlier, the thing to do is very carefully "feather" the throttle when this circumstance occurs. Or you could back away, shift into 4L and transmission shifter into L and drive slowly intoi you garage.
I was on the Armada board and got into it with them. Has anyone seen the new Nissan? I didn't even have to drive it. It was so cheap I couldn't bring myself to even ask because I knew I would never buy one.
Don't have the owner's manual handy at the moment.
Lexus is touting the new RX hybrid as having the performance of a V8.....
I think the majority of us, those willing to pay extra for a "green" vehicle, would be very satisfied with an I4 ICE and 40HP electric yeilding close to current V6 performance.
But then there's the Cayenne twin turbo SUV, now THAT"S excessive HP.
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/100618/article- .html
It's all good friend and these large SUVs are fun each having strong and weak points. I pull a 24' camper behind my Sequoia and it does just fine as it's within the published weight limits. Anything much heavier though and I'd probably have to consider the Armada.
If so gas pedal position may not directly relate to actual throttle opening. Remember that fuel economy is a big issue for the industry, especially SUVs, and if the numbers can be improved by having non-linear throttle response then so be it would be their attitude.
Also remember that with an e-throttle the rate of depression can be used to determine if a downshift is/will be desired and that may delay actual throttle opening to "soften" the downshift.
Of course if RWD only it will do exactly like the explorer, the rear end will "kick" out. Assuming "kick" out means trying to come around to the front, over-steering.
If in AWD and since all four wheels have roughly equal traction you may never have VSC/Trac activation at all. It may just simply amble up the driveway as does the exporer in 4WD.
But.
If in the process of coming up the driveway one tire hits an especially slippery spot then the VSC/Trac will likely activate and apply moderate braking to that wheel only to prevent it from spinning/slipping and therby limiting the engine torque to the wheels/tires still maintaining traction.
Most Californians would step harder on the gas the instant the vehicle starts to lose forward momentum. In this circumstance that is ALWAYS the wrong thing to do. If that is done in the Sequoia you will quickly find yourself fully dethrottled. When you hear the VSC/Trac activation in this circumstance the correct thing to do is to lift your foot from the gas feed long enough for the tire(s) to regain traction, then reapply the gas "tenderly", "feathering" the gas as some would say.
If you suspect those activaties might lead to an actual heart attack, or even her becoming a nervious wreck then the best thing to do is buy her some "tract time".
Find a large emply parking lot covered with snow and ice. Not let her have the wheel and experience the VSC/Trac activity enough times that she becomes familier with it.
Thinking of it this way, with the brakes being used to apportion torque let's say you "gun" it and start the wheels spinning. The instance a tire, or tires, gain traction the brakes would be quickly applied to the wheels still spinning. How long do you think it might take to over-heat those brakes, and maybe warp the rotors to boot, in this circumstance?
I don't even drive in 2WD anymore. No problems. Your brakes will only activate if you are spinning a wheel. If you have half decent tires you won't do much spinning anyway.
most other SUV's have 3.73 or 'higher' gears ( like 3.42 etc)... the average driver who never goes off road or pulls a trailer doesn't need it.. so why does Toyota saddle the Sequoia with it.. hampers gas mileage by at least 10%.. or at least that's what we see on our two alike 'burbans with different rear end gears..
but then again I guess it could have been worse.. they could have made it to use High test..
is that the reason for the low gearing??.. more ooomph... if it is.. it's a poor one.. but that's another one of my pet peeves for another time.. if they can get 345 hp out of a 6.0 liter GM motor in the Escalade with regular gas why can't they do a bit better in the Sequoia's motor and still use regular fuel..
HOST..maybe I missed it.. but Edwards doesn't list the rear end ratio gears under new car specs.. had to get them from the other guy--as in 'BlueBook'
Consider using the Feedback Form.
tidester, host
mea culpa.. mea culpa.. will do on the feedback..
thanx
Overall the Sequoia has a slightly quieter ride than the Sub. But the GAP is very close between the two. Nowhere near what I thought I would experience. However, with new 2003 4X4 Subs being discounted $12K to the $35K range it seems like the edge goes to the Sub....unless I can get a real steal on a low mileage 2003 Sequoia. As far as resale goes. Again the gap has closed. 2 year old Subs retain a very large percent of their TRUE original purchase price value. Nobody ever pays even close to MSRP for Subs.
If Toyota can give the next Sequoia a 4Runner quality interior than it will be first rate. I also expect more HP in a 5.5L+ engine with the excellent 4.7 as the standard motor.
My ActiveTRAC system (you call ABS) almost never activates. Heck, I'm still running the original tires. I don't know where you are, but maybe you will need a set of dedicated snow tires during your winters. Our winters in south central PA aren't that severe.
I'm not sure why people want to disengage it. If they are having some kind of problem, I believe it's related to the VSC.
As the Ronco guy says, "Just set it and forget it".
To those of you that do own the Sequoias,here are some issues which I have noticed from other owners on several discussion boards elswhere. Look....I am biased for this vehicle but do have serious reservations about spending hard earned money and then be disappointed given my HIGH expectations after having owned Landcrusiers. So if anyone can shed some light on these items I would be grateful.
1) A/C Issues: many complaints
2) Rotten Egg Smell: Cat Coverter issue
3) Vibration at 35-45mph under floor: Many comments
4) Faulty Brakes:
5) Stiff Brakes:
6) Misc rattles
7) Wheel Balancing
8) Differential Issue on some 2003's
9) U.S. Build quality: No way around it
2)No smell in my vehicle, though a common issue with many new cars.
3)Vibration - seems a 2003 issue, my 02 has none
4)Again, no issue. But, it seems like many new vehicles have brake issues. Since late 2002 Toyota has upgraded all front brakes in Sequoias
5)Brakes are not over-boosted and may take some getting used to depending what your familiar with. Regardless, stopping distance is good.
6)No rattles in mine at 17,000 miles. If you want to hear rattles go to the Ford Expedition forum
7)Every SUV I've owned was a pain to balance right. Get a road force balance and no problem
8)Differential - see vibration
9)US build quality - not an issue, I've found the Sequoia to be comparable to all the other Japanese vehicles I've owned. Just as good.
I was considering the 4Runner but it is just too small for me. The Sequoia is big enough but it doesn't have that "manly" appearance that the Z71 Tahoe does. Since I'm single and this SUV will be my day-to-day driving vehicle I wanted something that had all the features, power, room, and presence that suit my needs.
While the Sequoia is an excellent vehicle it is also a "soccer mom" SUV. The Z71 Tahoe is far more masculine in appearance.
It has good resale and reliability. I currently drive a 1996 Blazer that has been great. Since this vehicle will be used for far more than basic transportation I wanted something that made a statement.
Sorry if I offended anyone.
I have no problem with my identity.
I'm a big black man and I need a big black truck. And a "black chevrolet" works for me. As I also said, I've got a chevy blazer now and I like them. Add to that I'm getting an awesome deal because of the company I work for and the choice was even clearer.
This vehicle WILL be a statement. At $40,000+ I decided to get something that performed AND looked exactly like I want. The Sequoia is a fine SUV and I'm sure it does great on those hazardous trips to the supermarket.
:-)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year everyone.
Seriously, Happy Holidays and enjoy your new Tahoe. Just don't run over any yellow S2000's, please!
Seq is wider then Expy and Tahoe (66.1/65.5/66.0)
====================
As for safety features, does the Sequoia have both side air bags and curtain bags?
Yes
======================
Is the curtain bag even available at this time in any great numbers?
I got it at my dealer
========================
It wasn't on any of the Sequ's at the dealers near me.
Your dealer made a bad purchasing order.
===========================
Doesn't the Chevy have side air bags and seat belt pretensioners?
Chevy does not have head airbags. Ouch.
==========================
Isn't the Chevy considered to be one of the safest vehicles on the road?
Yes when you consider how resistant to rollover it is when it is broken down in your driveway.
==========================
How about trying some objectivity there, third SUV, or at least a swig of some alcohol.
Gulp..Gulp...Gulp....Buuuuurp
===========================
The people on the Tundra Solutions board are a lot more objective and accurate.
I count my accuracy at around 6 out of 7
Yours about 1 for 7
I never promised to be objective. But after owning an Explorer and Expedition for the past 8 years I'll give my opinions
========================
Cheers
I took my 2001 Sequoia into the dealership yesterday for a lube and oil change and the service writer said that Toyota was recommending a brake fluid flush and change at 20k which I hadn't had done yet. He said it was only recommended for the 2001 MY.
Is he feeding me a line or is this a needed service?
As always, thanks.
I would ask the dealer just what was done wrong at the factory for the MY2001 that causes the brake fluid to be compromised at 20k (vs "others"). Seems to me the factory should be paying....
1. I wondered if anybody knew about Toyota oil quality vs Mobil 1?
2. I will do all service, was surprised to see 6 month oil change interval mandate in service guide- any experience with dealer not supporting warranty work if oil wasn't changed on 6 month interval (if < 5k miles driven)? Seems like environmental irresponsibility to throw out good oil...
3. The owners manual doesn't describe the Service engine lite well- does that come on every 5k miles or just when there's a problem.
Thanks all- have a happy new year!
People keep saying the SR5 is a better option. The limitted was $2377 more that the SR5 for which you get alluminum rims, retractable mirrors and a sharper looking interior. If you don't need that so be it but "much better value" it's not.